Loading...
PC 2021/06/21.pdf 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: June 21, 2021 SUBJECT: MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 LOCATION: 110 West Midway Drive; 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard (southwest corner of Midway Drive and Anaheim Boulevard). APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Alexa Washburn of National Community Renaissance of California, and the property owner is the Anaheim Housing Authority. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of the following land use entitlements: 1. Miscellaneous Permit for a multi-family residential project consisting of 86 attached dwelling units (apartments) in a four-story building including 85 units affordable to households earning less than 60 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI), a density bonus of 5 units, and three Tier Two Development Incentives for reduced floor area minimums reduced interior lot line landscape setbacks and reduced street frontage setbacks*; and *The public notice for this item indicated that one Tier One incentive and two Tier Two incentives were requested as part of this application. Staff subsequently determined that a Tier One incentive is not required for the project; rather, three Tier Two incentives are required as discussed in this report and noted on the agenda for this meeting. 2. A Tentative Parcel Map to merge existing lots into one parcel. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolutions, determining that a streamlined review pursuant to Section 15183.3 (Streamlining for Infill Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines is the appropriate environmental review for this request under CEQA; and, that the proposed project would not have any significant effect that either have not already been analyzed in a prior environmental impact report or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate, and approving Miscellaneous Permit No. 2021-00767, and Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123. MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 2 of 11 BACKGROUND: The subject property is 2.36 acres in size and is designated for Medium Density Residential land use in the General Plan. The site is located in the Industrial (“I”) and Transitional (“T”) Zones. In addition, the site is located within the Residential Opportunity (“RO”) and the South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (“SABC”) Overlay Zones. The site is surrounded by West Midway Drive and Paul Revere Elementary School to the north; South Anaheim Boulevard and a parking lot for the Anaheim Marketplace to the east; a liquor store and Golden Skies Mobile Home Park to the south; and the former Midway Recreational Vehicle Park proposed to the west. Encore Capital Management has proposed a 156 unit townhome development west of the project site on the former recreational vehicle property (the “Encore Site”) which is currently under review by the City. The majority of the project site is vacant. A 1-story, 4,590-square-foot office structure is located on northwest corner of the site. The applicant is requesting to include Zeyn Street, located along the project’s western boundary (see Site Plan below), as part of the project site which would require street abandonment. Pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code (AMC) Section 18.90.050, a street that is abandoned takes on the General Plan land use designation and zoning of the adjacent property which, in this instance, is the Medium Density Residential General Plan land use designation and the I Zone with the corresponding RO and SABC Overlays. The applicant intends to develop the proposed project in accordance with the RO Overlay Zone. The RO Overlay Zone provides “by-right” housing development opportunities consistent with a property’s residential General Plan land use designation. The RO Overlay Zone typically applies to properties currently zoned and/or developed with non-residential uses, but that are designated for multiple-family residential uses by the City’s General Plan. Examples of non- residential zones to which the RO Overlay Zone may be applied include, but are not limited to, the General Commercial (C-G), Transitional (T), and Industrial (I) zones. The RO Overlay Zone serves as an implementation tool of the City’s Housing Element of the General Plan by facilitating residential development on identified “housing opportunity sites.” As indicated in subparagraph 18.34.030.010.0101 of Chapter 18.34 (Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone) of the AMC: “Parcels designated as Medium Density Residential in the General Plan Land Use Element shall be subject to the (RM-4) Multiple-Family zoning designation.” Therefore, by applying the RO Overlay Zone, the proposed project would be subject to the development standards of the RM-4 Zone. A portion of the project site was acquired by the Anaheim Housing Authority (the “Authority”) in 2000. In September 2019, Encore Anaheim, LLC (“Encore”) acquired the 5.48-acre Encore Site which is adjacent to the subject project site. The Encore acquisition included a non-contiguous 0.13 acre parcel at 110 West Midway Drive adjacent to the Authority site at the northwest corner of Midway Drive and Zeyn Street. Working together, the Authority and Encore entered into an Agreement for Exchange of Real Property. The agreement provided for the Authority to exchange two parcels along Zeyn Street for Encore’s property at the northwest corner of the subject project site. This exchange allowed both Encore and the Housing Authority to consolidate their individual sites and advance their respective development proposals. In May 2020, the Governing Board of the Housing Authority approved an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with National Community Renaissance of California (“National CORE”) to formulate an affordable housing development proposal on the Authority site. National CORE is a national non-profit affordable housing developer with over 60 developments in California totaling 6,650 MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 3 of 11 units. Subsequent to land use entitlement consideration, the Governing Board of the Housing Authority will consider a Preliminary Funding Award Letter to assist with the construction of the approved project. The applicant, the owners of the Golden Skies Mobile Home Park located to the south of the project site, and the Encore site owners continue to negotiate a proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) outlining a shared private drive easement from Anaheim Boulevard, a new mobile home park access from Midway Drive via the private drive aisle on the vacated Zeyn Street, and provisions for pedestrian access from the mobile home park property to Midway Drive and Anaheim Boulevard through the project site. A condition of this project approval requires that the MOU be executed prior to the abandonment of Zeyn Street. The City Council is scheduled to review the abandonment of Zeyn Street at their June 22, 2021 meeting. PROPOSAL: Site Plan: The proposed project would include the demolition of all existing structures on the project site and the development of 86 housing units in one four-story building. The proposed project would include 29 one-bedroom units, 35 two-bedroom units, and 22 three-bedroom units. The proposed project would also provide amenities including a pool, a playground, a dog park, a community room, a public flex space, and a leasing office. Landscaping consisting of trees, shrubs, and groundcover would be included throughout the proposed project and along each side of the project site. All plants would be compliant with California Green Building requirements for water conservation and the California Invasive Plant Council requirements for non-invasive plants. MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 4 of 11 Site Plan Parking: The proposed project would include 128 parking spaces including 18 garages spaces, 12 carport spaces, 21 tandem spaces, and 77 open spaces. Surface parking for the public would be located along the driveway from Anaheim Boulevard and on the private driveway from Midway Drive. A vehicular gate would be installed at the entrance to the residents’ parking court to secure this parking area from the public parking area. The proposed project would also include 92 bicycle parking spaces. Access and Circulation: Vehicle access to the project site would be via entryways from Midway Drive and Anaheim Boulevard. These entryways would be separate from a gated, private drive aisle in the southern portion of the site leading to the residential parking area. The entrance from Anaheim Boulevard would also provide vehicular and pedestrian access service for Golden Skies Mobile Home Park (through a shared private drive easement) located to the south of the project site. Pedestrian circulation would be via a walkway along Midway Drive, the proposed private drive to the west (on the vacated Zeyn Street), and the courtyard, which would connect to the existing City sidewalk along Anaheim Boulevard. A bicycle entry would also be located on Midway Drive. MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 5 of 11 Recreational-Leisure and Community Area: The proposed project would provide 1,700 square feet of public flex space on the ground floor that could provide space for a range of uses or community services. The ground floor would also contain a 3,300 square foot community center which would include a clubroom for Boy and Girl Scouts and YMCA programs, as well as a leasing office where for supportive services and programs, such as economic mobility programs, health and wellness, and child after school care programs. The proposed project would include an outdoor recreational courtyard with a tot lot, community gardens, a swimming pool, an outdoor fireplace lounge area, restrooms, and a dog park. In addition, the project also would include a community roof deck on the fourth floor for residents. In total, the proposed project would include 22,220 square feet of common open spaces and 6,172 square feet of private open space. Landscape Plan Building Design: The proposed building would be four stories tall with a maximum height of 50 feet. The ground floor of the proposed building would include 13 residential units, public flex space, community center, and recreational courtyard. The second floor would contain 21 units, the third floor would contain 27 units, and the fourth floor would contain 25 units. Each of the 86 units would have a private deck or patio ranging in size from 45 square feet to 84 square feet. Building exteriors would incorporate white and grey stucco bodies, taupe fiber cement panels, black fiber cement siding, ash and white brick veneer, bright accent colors, and vinyl windows. MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 6 of 11 Corner of Midway Drive and Anaheim Boulevard looking southeast Aerial View of Courtyard FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: As noted above, The RO Overlay Zone provides “by-right” housing development opportunities consistent with a property’s residential General Plan land use designation and as such the proposed project would be subject to the development standards of the RM-4 Zone. As outlined in the Development Summary (Attachment 4), the proposed project would meet the applicable RM-4 development standards with the exception of density, building height, unit size, and certain setback requirements. Below is staff’s analysis of the requested density bonus and housing incentives, applicable findings, and recommendation for each requested entitlement action: MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 7 of 11 Density: The proposed project meets the density permitted within the RM-4 Zone, with the application of a 50 percent density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915. The RM-4 zone permits a maximum of up to 36 dwelling units per gross acre (du/ac), which equates to 81 dwelling units allowed by right on the 2.36-acre project site. The proposed project is providing 32 percent of the 81 units for extremely-low income households (28 dwelling units), 36 percent for very-low income households (29 dwelling units), and 32 percent for low income households (28 dwelling units). Based on the proposed level of affordability, the proposed project would qualify for a 50 percent density bonus per Section 65915 of the California Government Code, which equates to an additional 41 dwelling units. However, the proposed project is only requesting approval of an additional five dwelling units (86 total dwelling units), which would reflect a 6 percent density bonus. Housing Incentives: Pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.52.090 (Development Incentives), development incentives for affordable housing development are categorized as “Tier One” and “Tier Two” incentives. Tier One incentives are not subject to discretionary review or denial. Tier Two incentives are subject to public hearing review procedures of the Anaheim Municipal Code. A total of three Tier Two incentives are required for the subject project. Per State law, the Commission shall approve the request for the three Tier Two Incentives pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 18.52.120 (Findings), unless it makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of either of the following: 1) That the Density Bonus, Incentives or Reduced Parking Ratio does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for an Affordable Housing Cost or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in California Government Code Section 65915(c); or 2) That the Density Bonus or Incentive would have a specific adverse impact upon public health and safety or on the physical environment, or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to Very Low, Low, Lower, or Moderate Income Households. In addition, if a housing project is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, the project shall also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet. State law permits the allowed height increase and is not be counted towards the allowed number of incentives. The applicant is requesting the following development incentives: • Approval of a Tier Two Housing incentive related to minimum interior lot line landscape setbacks. • Approval of a Tier Two Housing incentive related to minimum street frontage landscape setbacks. • Approval of a Tier Two Housing incentive related to minimum unit size. MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 8 of 11 Tier Two Incentives: The RM-4 zone requires an interior lot line landscape setback of 10 feet. The proposed project would have a three foot landscaped setback along the southern property line. A Tier 1 incentive would permit a reduction in the interior landscaped setback to five feet, but, because a three foot setback is requested, a Tier Two incentive is required. The RM-4 zone requires a project located adjacent to an arterial highway to have a landscape setback of not less than 20 feet and not less than 15 feet abutting any public street other than an arterial highway. The Applicant requests a landscape setback of two feet from South Anaheim Boulevard (arterial highway) and 5.5 feet from West Midway Avenue. The Tier One development incentives allows an applicant for an affordable housing development on a lot with multiple street frontages to request a reduced landscape setback of not less than 15 feet in depth along any arterial highway and a reduced landscaped setback of not less than 10 feet in depth on all other streets. As the applicant is requesting setback reductions less than 20 feet and 15 feet respectively, a Tier Two incentive is required for the reduced street frontage landscape setback. The RM-4 zone minimum size for 1-bedroom units is 700 square feet and 825 square feet for 2-bedroom units. The Applicant is requesting a reduced unit size for one and two bedroom units, with one bedroom units between 569 square feet and 610 square feet, and two bedroom units between 810 square feet and 896 square feet. As the applicant is smaller unit sizes that required in the RM-4 Zone, a Tier Two incentive is required for minimum unit size. The City is required to grant the requested Tier Two incentives unless it makes the above-noted findings for denial. Staff finds that the project is consistent with Housing Incentives Ordinance requirements to grant the requested incentives. Specifically, the proposal was reviewed by Community and Economic Development staff and its consultants who found that the reduced landscape setbacks and unit sizes are necessary to achieve the required Affordable Housing Cost and maintain project viability. Further, planning staff believes that the reduced landscape setbacks and unit sizes would not have a specific adverse impact upon public health and safety or the physical environment because the project would still achieve a high quality design and living environment for its future residents and would not adversely impact surrounding properties. Height: The RM-4 zone allows for a maximum height of 40 feet or three stories. The Applicant requests approval of a four-story development with a maximum height of 50 feet. Pursuant to the City’s development incentives and State law, if housing project is located within one-half mile of a Major Transit Stop, the project shall also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet. Bus route 47 and 47A on Anaheim Boulevard are located within one-half mile of the project site and operate more than eight times per day. The allowed height increase does not count towards the allowed number of incentives and is not subject to discretionary review or denial. Parking: State law and the City’s Housing Incentives Ordinance allow reduced parking ratios for qualifying developments. In accordance with California Government Code Section 65915 Subdivision (P), the proposed project is required to provide 0.5 parking space per non-special needs affordable unit. California Government Code Section 65915(P)(4) states that there are no parking requirements for special needs units if the housing development is located within 0.5 mile of a fixed bus route that operates at least eight times per day. The project site is within 0.5 mile of bus routes 47 and 47A, which operate more the eight times per day. Manager, flex space, and community center parking ratios are pursuant to Section 18.42 of the Anaheim Municipal MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 9 of 11 Code. The table below compares the amount of parking required and the proposed number of parking spaces provided. Uses Unit/Size Parking Ratio Required Parking Special Needs Units 8 units No minimum parking requirement 0 Affordable Housing Units 77 units 0.5 space/unit 38.5 2-Bedroom Manager Unit 1 unit 2.25 spaces/unit 2.25 Community Center 3,300 square feet 1 space/250 square feet 13.2 Flex Space 1,700 square feet 1 space/250 square feet 6.8 Total Parking Required 61 Total Parking Provided 128 Affordable Housing: The City Council has adopted a policy emphasizing the importance of affordable housing, and the applicant has proposed a 100 percent affordable housing project. The proposed project is providing 32 percent of the 81 units for extremely-low income households (28 dwelling units), 36 percent for very-low income households (29 dwelling units), and 32 percent for low income households (28 dwelling units). Accordingly, the applicant has executed a Memorandum of Understanding with City staff (Attachment 7), and the project would be conditioned to require the applicant to enter into a Density Bonus Housing Agreement with the City. Tentative Parcel Map: Pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 17.08.100 – Advisory Agency Duties, before the Planning Commission may approve the tentative parcel map, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the proposed map is consistent with the General Plan and applicable specific plan; 2) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and applicable specific plan; 3) That the site is physically suitable for the type of development; 4) That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; 5) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; 6) That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; and 7) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 10 of 11 Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123 is proposed to create a one lot subdivision by merging the existing eight parcels and vacated streets which make up the project site (see Attachment 3). The proposed density of 38 dwelling units per acre for the affordable housing apartment project would be permitted with the proposed density bonus as described above. The project would comply with applicable development standards (except for the Tier Two Incentives described above), would not cause any environmental impacts (discussed below), would not create any public health impacts, and would not conflict with easements acquired by the public. The project complies with all subdivision requirements, and staff recommends approval of the tentative parcel map request. Environmental Impact Analysis: Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15367, the City has discretionary authority over the proposed project and is the Lead Agency in the preparation of the Appendix N: Infill Environmental Checklist (Attachment 5) and any additional environmental documentation required for the proposed project. The Appendix N Checklist utilizes analysis from the previously-certified Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) No. 330 for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update, which was certified by the Anaheim City Council on May 25, 2004. In addition, the Appendix N Checklist also utilizes analysis from the certified Supplemental EIR No. 346 to Program EIR No. 330 for the City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project, which was certified by the City of Anaheim on September 24, 2013. The Appendix N Checklist collectively refers to Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 as the “Certified EIR”. The Appendix N Checklist compares the proposed project's effects with the analysis in the Certified EIR and assists the Lead Agency in the evaluation of potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies (PPPs), and mitigation measures from the Certified EIR that are applicable to the proposed project are included in the Appendix N Checklist. Based on the analysis in the Appendix N Checklist, staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine that a streamlined review pursuant to Section 15183.3 (Streamlining for Infill Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines is the appropriate environmental review for this request under CEQA; and, that the proposed project would not cause any new specific effects or more significant effect that require additional review under CEQA, or that uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. The draft resolutions for the proposed project include all applicable mitigation measures from the Appendix N Checklist as conditions of approval. CONCLUSION: Staff has carefully considered the proposed project and believes that it is compatible with surrounding land uses and designed in a manner to provide a quality living environment for its future residents and valuable amenities and resources for the surrounding community. In addition, the proposed project meets the goals of the General Plan to continue to provide a variety of quality housing opportunities to address the City’s diverse housing needs, would provide affordable housing in furtherance of the City’s Housing Element, and is consistent with the City Council’s policy identifying affordable housing as a priority. MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 June 21, 2021 Page 11 of 11 Prepared by, Submitted by, Thomas Gorham Niki Wetzel, AICP Contract Planner Deputy Planning and Building Director Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution Miscellaneous Permit 2. Draft Tentative Tract Map Resolution 3. Project Plans and Tentative Parcel Map 4. Development Summary 5. CEQA Appendix N Checklist 6. Letter of Request 7. Density Bonus Memorandum of Understanding S A N A H E I M B L V D E CERRITOS AVE W MIDWAY DR E PALAIS RD W GUINIDA LN S Z E Y N S T S I R I S S T S L E M O N S T W CERRITOS AVE E. BALL RDW. BALL RD S . W A L N U T S T S . L E W I S S T S . A N A H E I M B L V D E. KATELLA AVEW. KATELLA AVE S . H A R B O R B L V D E. CERRITOS AVE S .D I S N E Y L A N D D R W. DISNEY WAY 110 West Midway Drive; 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard DEV No. 2021-00059 Subject Property APN: 082-185-59 082-185-01082-185-53082-185-48 082-185-52082-185-47 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2020 I (SABC)DEV 2021-00059INDUSTRIAL RM-4 (SABC)GUINIDA PALMSAPTS40 DU C-G (SABC)RESTAURANT T (MHP)GOLDEN SKIESMOBILE HOME PARK T (SABC)REVERE ELEMENTARYSCHOOL RM-3.5 (SABC)ANAHEIM BUSINESS PARK C-G (SABC)ANAHEIM MARKETPLACEINDOOR SWAP MEET C-G (SABC)RESTAURANT TANAHEIM RESORT RV PARK I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL I (SABC)COLLEGE EDUCATIONSERVICES I (SABC)RETAIL I (SABC)OFFICES C-G (SABC)OFFICES C-G (SABC)OFFICES C-G (SABC)AUTO DEALERSHIP TANAHEIM RESORT RV PARK TANAHEIM RESORT RV PARK I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL RM-4 (SABC)REVERE ELEMENTARYSCHOOL T (SABC)RETAIL S A N A H E I M B L V D E CERRITOS AVE W MIDWAY DR E PALAIS RD W GUINIDA LN S Z E Y N S T S I R I S S T S L E M O N S T W CERRITOS AVE E. BALL RDW. BALL RD S . W A L N U T S T S . L E W I S S T S . A N A H E I M B L V D E. KATELLA AVEW. KATELLA AVE S . H A R B O R B L V D E. CERRITOS AVE S .D I S N E Y L A N D D R W. DISNEY WAY 110 West Midway Drive; 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard DEV No. 2021-00059 Subject Property APN: 082-185-59 082-185-01082-185-53082-185-48 082-185-52082-185-47 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2020 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 - 1 - PC2021-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2021-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767, AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2021-00059) (110 WEST MIDWAY DRIVE; 1441, 1445, AND 1455 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition for a Miscellaneous Permit for a multi-family residential project consisting of 86 attached dwelling units (apartments) in a four-story building including 85 affordable units to households earning less than 60 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI), a density bonus of 5 units, and three Tier Two Development Incentives for reduced floor area minimums, reduced interior lot line landscape setbacks, and reduced street frontage setbacks for that certain real property located on the southwest corner of West Midway Drive Avenue and South Anaheim Boulevard, and commonly referred to as 110 West Midway Drive; 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2021-00767, is proposed in conjunction with a tentative parcel map to create a one lot subdivision by merging the existing eight parcels and vacated streets, which is designated as Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123. Miscellaneous Permit No. 2021-00767, and Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123 shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Proposed Project"; and WHEREAS, in consideration for providing housing affordable to extremely low, very low, and low income tenants, the applicant has requested certain development concessions and incentives, including waivers or reductions of development standards, which the applicant has represented are necessary to provide affordable housing costs for the Affordable Units; and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 2.36 acres in size and the majority of the project site is vacant and is occasionally used as storage. A 1-story, 4,590-square-foot office structure is located on northwest corner of the site, and is zoned “I” Industrial and “T” Transitional and is within the “RO” Residential Opportunity Overlay Zond and the “SABC” South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Overlay Zone. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Medium Density Residential land uses; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19. On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 (superseding the Brown Act-related provisions of Executive Order N- 25-20 issued on March 12, 2020), which allows a local legislative body to hold public meetings via teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body; and - 2 - PC2021-*** WHEREAS, pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 the Planning Commission did hold a teleconferencing and in-person public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 21, 2021, at 5:00 p.m.; notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, to hear and consider evidence and testimony for and against the Proposed Project and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Section 15000 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedures, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15367, the City has discretionary authority over the proposed project and is the Lead Agency in the preparation of the Appendix N: Infill Environmental Checklist (Attachment 5) and any additional environmental documentation required for the Proposed Project. The Appendix N Checklist utilizes analysis from the previously- certified Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) No. 330 for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update, which was certified by the Anaheim City Council on May 25, 2004. In addition, the Appendix N Checklist also utilizes analysis from the certified Supplemental EIR No. 346 to Program EIR No. 330 for the City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project, which was certified by the City of Anaheim on September 24, 2013. The Appendix N Checklist collectively refers to Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 as the “Certified EIR”. The Appendix N Checklist compares the Proposed Project's effects with the analysis in the Certified EIR and assists the Lead Agency in the evaluation of potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies (PPPs), and mitigation measures from the Certified EIR that are applicable to the Proposed Project are included in the Appendix N Checklist; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds and determines that a streamlined review pursuant to Section 15183.3 (Streamlining for Infill Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines is the appropriate environmental review for this request under CEQA; and, that the Proposed Project would not cause any new specific effects or more significant effects that either have not already been analyzed in a prior environmental impact report or that uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the density bonus and the following Tier Two incentives are necessary to provide 100 percent of the apartment units within the Project for rent at an affordable cost to extremely low, very low, and low income households and maintain project viability under Section 18.52.090 of Chapter 18.52 (Housing Incentives) of the Code: a reduction in the minimum interior landscape setback from 10 feet to 3 feet; a reduction in the street frontage setbacks from 15 feet to 2 feet along Anaheim Boulevard and from 10 feet to 5.5 feet along Midway Drive; and a reduction in the - 3 - PC2021-*** minimum unit size for 1-bedroom units from 700 square feet to between 569 square feet and 610 square feet and a reduction in the minimum size for 2-bedromm units from 825 square feet to 810 square feet. 2. That granting of the density bonus and incentives will not have a specific adverse impact upon public health and safety or on the physical environment, or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to extremely low, very low, and low income households; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that negate the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim does approve and adopt Miscellaneous Permit No. 2021-00767 contingent upon and subject to: (1) the adoption of a resolution approving and Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123 now pending; (2) the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. - 4 - PC2021-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 21, 2021. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRPERSON, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2021-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Simonne Fannin, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on June 21, 2021, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 21st day of June, 2021. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 6 - PC2021-*** - 7 - PC2021-*** EXHIBIT “B” MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2021-00767 (DEV2021--00059) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT 1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit (with the exception of demolition grading without building pads), Sewer Improvement plans to mitigate the deficiency on the segments on the North Katella Sewer as identified on the Sewer Study dated May 6, 2021 and further detailed in the South Central Anaheim Sewer Study (SCASS), shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by Public Works. Public Works, Development Services 2 Prepare and submit a final grading plan showing building footprints, pad elevations, finished grades, drainage routes, retaining walls, erosion control, slope easements and other pertinent information in accordance with Anaheim Municipal Code and the California Building Code, latest edition. Public Works, Development Services 3 Prepare and submit a final drainage study, including supporting hydraulic and hydrological data to the City of Anaheim for review and approval. The study shall confirm or recommend changes to the City's adopted Master Drainage Plan by identifying off-site and on-site storm water runoff impacts resulting from build-out of permitted General Plan land uses. In addition, the study shall identify the project's contribution and shall provide locations and sizes of catchments and system connection points and all downstream drainage-mitigating measures including but not limited to offsite storm drains and interim detention facilities. Public Works, Development Services 4 All required plans and studies shall be prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer. Public Works, Development Services 5 The legal property owner shall obtain the required coverage under California’s General Permit for Stormwater Discharges associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number. Public Works, Development Services 6 The legal property owner shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for Public Works Development Services Division review upon request. Public Works, Development Services - 8 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 7 Submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City for review and approval. The WQMP shall be consistent with the requirements of Section 7 and Exhibit 7.II of the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) for New Development/ Significant Redevelopment projects. identify potential sources of pollutants during the long-term on-going maintenance and use of the proposed project that could affect the quality of the stormwater runoff from the project site; define Source Control, Site Design, and Treatment Control best management practices (BMPs) to control or eliminate the discharge of pollutants into the surface water runoff; and provide a monitoring program to address the long-term implementation of and compliance with the defined BMPs. The Final WQMP shall be subject to the following additional conditions, which have resulted from the review of the Preliminary WQMP for this project: a. Right of Way improvements shall be described in detail and the Right of Way significant redevelopment exhibit shall be required to be included as part of the Final WQMP. Implementation of these BMPs may result in conflicts in the right of way which shall be resolved by the design engineer prior to Final WQMP approval. b. Trash provisions full capture BMPs shall be designed accordingly to meet 1-year, 1-hour tributary area sizing requirements with supporting calculations shall be included in the Final WQMP. c. Additional infiltration testing shall be required based on the varying infiltration rates used in the preliminary design and once final infiltrations BMP locations are established in the Final WQMP. This may result in a significant increase in the size of the infiltration system which could impact the existing infrastructure design onsite. These impacts shall be accommodated by the design team in order to ensure the requirements of the Final WMQP are met. d. Pre-treatment design shall meet all City requirements once area drain system is finalized. Public Works, Development Services 8 Submit a Geotechnical Report to the Public Works Development Services Division for review and approval. The report shall address any proposed infiltration features of the WQMP. Public Works, Development Services 9 Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit the City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities or the Proposed Project, with peak flows provided by the property owner, will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line. If the City Engineer determines that either condition exists, the property owner/developer shall conduct a sanitary sewer study to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. If the proposed project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the proposed project currently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. The property owner/developer shall Public Works, Development Services - 9 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the applicable sewer deficiency study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the project area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. MMP No. 122 MM 5.13-4 10 The Owner/Developer shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval in determining the conditions necessary for providing water service to the project. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 11 Prior to the issuance of any Grading and Building Permits for the Affordable Housing Developments, the Developer shall execute and record against the development site a Density Bonus Housing Agreement that sets forth the terms and conditions of approval of said Density Bonus. The Density Bonus Housing Agreement shall be binding on the Developer and all future owners and successors in interest thereof. Community and Economic Development Department 12 If construction activity is timed to occur during the nesting season (typically between March 1 and July 1), developers will be required to provide focused surveys for nesting birds pursuant to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) requirements. Such surveys shall identify avoidance measures taken to protect active nests. MMP No. 122 MM 5.3-3 Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 13 All archaeological resources shall be subject to the provisions of CEQA (Public Resources Code) Section 21083.2. MMP No. 122 MM 5.4-3 Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 14 Prior to issuance of demolition, grading and/or building permits, a note shall be provided on plans for grading, demolition, and construction activities, indicating that the Project Applicant shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction- related noise: 1. Construction activity is limited to the daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., as prescribed in the City’s Municipal Code (Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works or Building Official). 2. All internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers. 3. Stationary equipment such as generators, air compressors shall be located as far as feasible from nearby noise-sensitive uses. 4. Stockpiling is located as far as feasible from nearby noise-sensitive receptors 5. Construction traffic shall be limited to the established haul routes. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division - 10 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 15 Prior to the issuance of grading permits the Project Applicant shall prepare a construction management plan that shall be approved by the City of Anaheim Public Works. The construction management plan shall: 1. Establish truck haul routes on the appropriate transportation facilities. Truck routes that avoid congested streets and sensitive land uses shall be considered. 2. Provide Traffic Control Plans (for detours and temporary road closures) that meet the minimum City criteria. Traffic control plans shall determine if dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction truck and equipment on and offsite are available. 3. Minimize offsite road closures during the peak hours. 4. Keep all construction-related traffic onsite at all times. 5. Provide temporary traffic controls, such as a flag person, during all phases of construction to maintain smooth traffic flow. Public Works, Traffic Engineering PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 16 To reduce potential traffic noise impacts that conflict with land use compatibility, the following project design features shall be implemented for the project: • Mechanical ventilation systems such as air conditioning are required for all residential dwelling units so that windows can remain closed for a prolonged period of time. • The exterior wall assembly of all units facing and within 100-feet of the nearest travel lane of South Anaheim Boulevard shall meet or exceed an assumed exterior wall assembly that includes fiber cement board siding or three‐coat cement plaster, one layer of 0.5‐inch‐thick plywood or OSB, 2‐inch x 4‐inch wood stud wall channels spaced at 16 inches and a minimum of R‐19 fiberglass insulation, and one layer of 5/8‐inch‐thick Type X gypsum board. All windows for residential dwelling units in noise‐sensitive rooms directly facing South Anaheim Boulevard shall have a minimum STC rating of 31. All other windows for residential dwelling units in noise‐sensitive rooms shall have a minimum STC rating of 28. The Applicant shall provide the information necessary for Planning and Building Department staff to determine compliance. Planning and Building Department, Building Division 17 Prior to issuance of each building permit, appropriate Traffic Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees shall be paid by the property owner/developer to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the Property Owner/Developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. MMP No. 122 MM 5.15-5 Public Works, Traffic Engineering 18 Prior to issuance of the first building permit and subject to nexus requirements, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for Public Works, Traffic Engineering - 11 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate right(s)-of-way as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan adjacent to their property. MMP No. 122 MM 5.15-6 19 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, street improvement plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department – Traffic Engineering for review and approval of proposed signing and/or red curb painting on the south side of Midway Drive adjacent to the project access. Signage and curb painting modifications shall be installed per the approved plans and shall be completed prior to the first final building and zoning inspection. Public Works, Traffic Engineering 20 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, plans shall be submitted showing stop control for northbound traffic direction at Zeyn Street/Midway Drive intersection and at the project driveway exit on Anaheim Boulevard. STOP signs, STOP bars, and STOP pavement legends shall be located within the subject property and be installed prior to the first final building and zoning inspection. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. Public Works, Traffic Engineering 21 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, plans shall be submitted to replace the existing street name signs with private street name signs at Zeyn Street/Midway Drive intersection. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, private street name sign shall be installed per City of Anaheim Engineering Standard Details 425 and 426 and be located outside of the public right-of-way. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. Public Works, Traffic Engineering 22 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit draft Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) that are prepared by an authorized professional for review and approval by the City Engineer, Planning Director, and City Attorney, which will generally provide for the following: a. A requirement that residents shall use designated parking area, including garages, only for the parking of vehicles. b. A provision that parking garages are subject to inspection by the Association or City of Anaheim staff. c. A provision requiring that proposed amendments to the CC&Rs shall be submitted for review to the City Engineer, Planning Director or designee, and shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to the amendment being valid. d. A provision that the City is a third-party beneficiary to the CC&Rs and has the right, but not the obligation, to enforce any of the provisions of the CC&Rs relative to common area and utility maintenance, Water Quality Management Plan, and internal parking. Public Works, Traffic Engineering - 12 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 23 The project driveway on Anaheim Boulevard shall be a right-turn in/out only driveway. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, plans shall be submitted showing R3-5(R) (RIGHT-TURN-ONLY) sign, R1-1 STOP sign, STOP pavement legend, and right-turn arrow pavement legend at the project driveway. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. Public Works, Traffic Engineering 24 Record Parcel Map No. 2021-123 pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act and in accordance with City Code. Provide a duplicate photo Mylar of the recorded map to the City Engineer's office. Public Works, Development Services 25 Public Sewer Improvements to mitigate the deficiency on the segments on the North Katella Sewer as identified on the Sewer Study dated May 6, 2021 and further detailed in the South Central Anaheim Sewer Study (SCASS), shall be constructed, completed and operational prior to building permit issuance. Public Works, Development Services 26 Provide a pad and line & grade certification from a Registered Civil Engineer, certifying that the building pad has been graded and compacted in accordance with the City approved grading plan. Public Works, Development Services 27 Submit an interim soils report indicating pad compaction and site stability prepared by the project's Geotechnical Engineer of Record. The pad compaction report needs to include a site plan showing the compaction testing locations. Public Works, Development Services 28 Provide a certificate, from a Registered Civil Engineer, certifying that the finished grading has been completed in accordance with the City approved grading plan. Public Works, Development Services 29 A Right of Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Development Services Division for all work performed in the public right-of-way. Public Works, Development Services 30 All Landscape plans shall comply with the City of Anaheim adopted Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines. This ordinance is in compliance with the State of California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881). Public Works, Development Services 31 Prior to issuance of building permits, future projects shall demonstrate compliance with the following water conservation measures to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department: • Install a separate irrigation meter when the total landscaped area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation systems and automatic systems that include moisture sensors. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in the irrigation system. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of water-conservation landscape plant materials, wherever feasible. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment including low flush Public Utilities, Water Engineering Planning and Building Department, Building Division - 13 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT toilets and urinals. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of cooling tower and waterway recirculation systems. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of water efficient ice machines, dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water using appliances. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures). MMP No. 122 MM 5.13-1 32 All backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault will have to be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 33 All requests for new water services, backflow equipment, or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonments of existing water services, backflow equipment, and fire lines, shall be coordinated and permitted through Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 34 All existing water services and fire services shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specifications. Any water service and/or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The Owner/Developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 35 The Owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim (i) an easement for all large domestic above-ground water meters and fire hydrants, including a five (5)-foot wide easement around the fire hydrant and/or water meter pad. (ii) a twenty (20) foot wide easement for all water service mains and service laterals all to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division. The easements shall be granted on the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department’s standard water easement deed. The easement deeds shall include language that requires the Owner to be responsible for restoring any special surface improvements, other than asphalt paving, including but not limited to colored concrete, bricks, pavers, stamped concrete, decorative hardscape, walls or landscaping that becomes damaged during any excavation, repair or replacement of City owned water facilities. Provisions for the repair, replacement and maintenance of all surface improvements other than asphalt paving shall be the responsibility of the Owner and included and recorded in the Master CC&Rs for the project. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 36 The Owner/Developer shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Public Utilities, Water Engineering - 14 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT Engineering review and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on-site water system to meet the project’s water demands and fire protection requirements. 37 The Owner/Developer shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on-site water system to meet the project’s water demands and fire protection requirements. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 38 The Owner/Developer shall submit to the Public Utilities Department Water Engineering Division an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off-site water system improvements required to serve the project shall be done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.1 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 39 Water improvement plans shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division for approval and a performance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and form approved by City Attorney shall be posted with the City of Anaheim. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 40 Prior to approval of permits for improvement plans, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with Electrical Engineering to establish electrical service requirements and submit electric system plans, electrical panel drawings, site plans, elevation plans, and related technical drawings and specifications. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering 41 Fire sprinklers, fire alarm, and standpipes are required on this project Fire Department Community Risk Reduction Division 42 Access to Rescue Windows and Other Required Openings All buildings equipped with openings, as required by the Fire and Building Code shall be provided with an approved direct access route from the fire access road to accommodate fire department operations. The access route shall be a minimum of six (6) feet in width and be designed to accommodate a twenty-one (21) foot fire department ladder. A clear area of at least eight (8) feet in width shall be maintained free of permanent obstructions below all required rescue windows to allow for fire department ladder placement. Show on final landscaping plan that this condition will be met. Fire Department Community Risk Reduction Division 43 Provide a Fire Master Plan for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. Plan shall include (but not be limited to) emergency vehicle site access, water availability and fire flow requirements, any interior laddering requirements, and fire protection features like fire sprinklers and alarms. Fire Department Community Risk Reduction Division - 15 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTIONS 44 Prior to Final Building and Zoning Inspections, the property owner/developer shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder an unsubordinated declaration of Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) to run with the land, satisfactory to the City Engineer, Planning Director, and City Attorney, which restricts the installation of vehicle gates across the project driveways or access roads as the site design does not allow any such gates to conform to City of Anaheim Engineering Standard Detail 475 pertaining to gate set back distance, turnaround area, guest phone, separate lane for guest access, and minimum width for ingress/egress as required by the Fire Department. Should gates be desired in the future, an amendment to the CC&R’s approved by the City Engineer, Planning Director and the City Attorney's office and recorded. Gates, if any, shall comply with the current version of City of Anaheim Engineering Standard Detail 475 and are subject to approval by the City Engineer. Public Works, Traffic Engineering 45 The developer shall construct a 5-ft. sidewalk and 5-ft. parkway along Anaheim Blvd and a 4ft. sidewalk and 7-ft. parkway along Midway Drive at the ultimate right of way, curb adjacent, or as approved by the City Engineer. The proposed irrigation line and meter shall be connected to the private main irrigation line. Public Works, Development Services 46 The developer shall construct all improvements along the project’s frontage on Anaheim Blvd and Midway Drive. The improvements shall include but not limited to curb and gutter, pavement, driveway, ADA ramps, parkway drains, install street lights, water meters removals, sewer improvements etc. As determined and approved by the City Engineer. Public Works, Development Services 47 All required on-site Water Quality Management Plan, sewer, storm drain, and public right of way improvements shall be completed, operational, and are subject to review and approval by the Public Works inspector. Public Works, Development Services 48 All public improvements shall be constructed by the developer, inspected and accepted by Construction Services prior to final building and zoning inspection. Public Works, Development Services 49 All remaining fees/deposits required by Public Works department must be paid in full. Public Works, Development Services 50 Set all Monuments in accordance with the final map and submit all centerline ties to Public Works Department. Any monuments damaged as a result of construction shall be reset to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Public Works, Development Services 51 Record Drawings and As-Built Plans shall be submitted for review and approval to the Department of Public Works, Development Services Division. Public Works, Development Services 52 After building permits are issued: 2019 CFC §510 – Emergency responder radio coverage (BDA/DAS) shall be submitted for plan review and inspections. Project will completed and commissioned prior to building final inspections. Fire Department Community Risk Reduction Division - 16 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT ON-GOING DURING PROJECT GRADING, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS 53 The General Plan Circulation Element and associated Planned Roadway Network Map (Figure C-1 of the General Plan), identifies those roadways that are planned to accommodate current development and future growth established by the Land Use Element. Roadways will be constructed as development occurs and as funding becomes available. In addition to the roadways identified on the Planned Roadway Network Map, the improvements identified in Table 5.4-7 will be necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service within the anticipated theoretical buildout identified in the General Plan. MMP No. 122A MM 5.15-8 Public Works, Traffic Engineering 54 Owner/Developer shall install an approved backflow prevention assembly on the water service connection(s) serving the property, behind property line and building setback in accordance with Public Utilities Department Water Engineering Division requirements. Public Utilities Water Engineering 55 Removal of nonnative trees shall be permitted only outside the nesting season. MMP No. 122 MM 5.3-4 Planning and Building Department, Planning Division GENERAL 56 File Emergency Listing Card, Form APD-281, with the Police Department, available at the Police Department front counter. This card should include on and off site property management contact information for regular business hours as well as emergency after hours contacts. Anaheim Police Department 57 In order to facilitate the efficient and rapid access by emergency vehicles and personnel, all electrically operated gates providing emergency vehicle access to any hotel or residential facility/community development with more than 20 (twenty) rooms/residential units, or when otherwise required by the Chief of Police or his designated representative, shall include the installation of an electronic access system which allows for the use of a public safety radio frequency to open the gate. Anaheim Police Department 58 Numbers should face the street to which the structure is addressed. Numbers are not to be visible from ground level. A complex map shall be provided in electronic form to the Anaheim Police Department. Anaheim Police Department 59 “No Trespassing 602(k) P.C.” posted at the entrances of parking lots/structures and located in other appropriate places (i.e., Resident gathering points and access points, bicycle parking, etc.) Signs must be at least 12” wide x 24” high in overall size, with white background and black 2” lettering. Anaheim Police Department 60 All entrances to parking areas should be posted with appropriate signs per 22658(a) C.V.C. to assist in removal of vehicles at the property owner’s/manager’s request. Anaheim Police Department - 17 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 61 Security Measures: 1. Residential buildings/units shall be pre-wired for the future installation of an alarm system. 2. Closed circuit television (CCTV) security cameras are recommended, with the following coverage areas: • Clubroom (Leasing Office, Lobby, Amenities, etc.) • Pool Area 3. If security cameras are not monitored, signs indicating so should be placed at each camera. 4. CCTV monitors and recorders should be secured in a separate locked compartment to prevent theft of, or tampering with, the recording. 5. With advances in technology, digital and wireless CCTV security systems are readily available and highly recommended over older VHS or “Tape” recording systems. 6. CCTV recordings should be kept for a minimum of 30 days before being deleted or recorded over. Anaheim Police Department 62 Addressing: 1. Each individual building should be clearly marked with its appropriate address. These should be positioned so they are easily viewed from vehicular and pedestrian pathways throughout the complex. Main building numbers should be a minimum height of 12” and illuminated during the hours of darkness. 2. Address numbers shall be positioned so as to be readily readable from the street. Numbers should be illuminated during hours of darkness. 3. Rooftop address/unit numbers for the police helicopter. Minimum size 4’ in height and 2’ in width. The lines of the numbers are to be a minimum of 6” thick. Numbers should be spaced 12” to 18” apart. Numbers should be painted or constructed in a contrasting color to the roofing material. Numbers should face the street to which the structure is addressed. Numbers are not to be visible from ground level. Anaheim Police Department - 18 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 63 Doors: 1. All exterior doors to have adequate security hardware, e.g. deadbolt locks. 2. The locks shall be so constructed that both the deadbolt and deadlocking latch can be retracted by a single action of the inside doorknob/lever/turn piece. 3. Wide-angle peepholes or other viewing device should be designed into all dwelling-unit front doors and all solid doors where exterior visibility is compromised. Anaheim Police Department 64 Lighting: 1. Monument signs and addresses shall be well lighted during hours of darkness. 2. Adequate lighting of parking lots and associated carports, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on-site Anaheim Police Department 65 Landscaping: 1. Landscaping shall be of the type and situated in locations to maximize observation while providing the desired degree of aesthetics. Security planting materials are encouraged along fence and property lines and under vulnerable windows. 2. Trees should not be planted close enough to the structure to allow easy access to the roof, or should be kept trimmed to make climbing difficult. Anaheim Police Department 66 Line of sight/natural surveillance: 1. Common rooms, such as gym facilities, recreation areas, laundry rooms, conference rooms, etc., should have transparent doors, have view panels installed in solid doors, or have a window installed next to the door for increased visibility into the room. 2. Doorways, alcoves, etc., should not be recessed to the extent that a place is created for a person to stand and go unobserved. Anaheim Police Department - 19 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 67 Fencing/access control: 1. Perimeter fencing should be utilized whenever possible to enhance territorial reinforcement and create defensible space. It should be an open design, utilizing materials such as wrought iron or tubular steel to maintain natural surveillance. 2. Decorative pavers should be used at all vehicular access points to enhance territorial reinforcement. Anaheim Police Department 68 Parking lots/garage alleys: 1. Minimum recommended lighting level in all parking lots in 0.5 foot-candle maintained, measured at the parking surface, with a maximum to minimum ratio no greater than 15:1. Anaheim Police Department 69 Prior to connection of electrical service, the legal owner shall provide to the City of Anaheim a Public Utilities easement with dimensions as shown on the approved utility service plan. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering 70 Prior to connection of electrical service, the legal owner shall submit payment to the City of Anaheim for service connection fees. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering 71 The following minimum horizontal clearances shall be maintained between proposed water main and other facilities: 1. 10-feet minimum separation (outside wall-to-outside wall) from sanitary sewer mains and laterals 2. 5-feet minimum separation from all other utilities, including storm drains, gas, and electric 3. 6-feet minimum separation from curb face 4. 10-feet minimum separation from structures, footings, and trees. The following minimum clearances shall be provided around all new and existing public water facilities (e.g. water mains, fire hydrants, service laterals, meters, meter boxes, backflow devices, etc.): 1. 10 feet from structures, footings, walls, stormwater BMPs, power poles, street lights, and trees. 2. 5 feet from driveways, BCR/ECR of curb returns, and all other utilities (e.g. storm drain, gas, electric, etc.) or above ground facilities. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 72 No public water main or public water facilities shall be installed in private alleys or paseo areas. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 73 No public water mains or laterals allowed under parking stalls or parking lots. Public Utilities, Water Engineering 74 All fire services 2-inch and smaller shall be metered with a UL listed meter, Hersey Residential Fire Meter with Translator Register, no equals. Public Utilities, Water Engineering - 20 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 75 Conditions of approval related to each of the timing milestones above shall be prominently displayed on plans submitted for permits. For example, conditions of approval that are required to be complied with prior to the issuance of building permits shall be provided on plans submitted for building plan check. This requirement applies to grading permits, final maps, street improvement plans, water and electrical plans, landscape irrigation plans, security plans, parks and trail plans, and fire and life safety plans, etc. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 76 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 77 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 78 All new landscaping shall be installed in conformance with Chapter 18.46 “Landscape and Screening” of the Anaheim Municipal Code and shall be maintained in perpetuity. Landscaping shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 - 1 - PC2021-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2021-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2021-00059) (110 WEST MIDWAY DRIVE; 1441, 1445, AND 1455 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the “Planning Commission”) did receive a verified petition for the approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123 to create a one lot subdivision by merging the existing eight parcels and vacated streets for that certain real property located on the southwest corner of West Midway Drive Avenue and South Anaheim Boulevard, and commonly referred to as 110 West Midway Drive; 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123 is proposed in conjunction with a request for Miscellaneous Permit No. 2021-00767 for a multi-family residential project consisting of 86 attached dwelling units (apartments) in a four-story building including 85 affordable units to households earning less than 60 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI), a density bonus of 5 units, and three Tier Two Development Incentives for reduced floor area minimums, reduced interior lot line landscape setbacks, and reduced street frontage setbacks. Tentative Tract Map No. 2021-123 and Miscellaneous Permit No. 2021-00767, shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Proposed Project"; and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 2.36 acres in size and the majority of the project site is vacant and is occasionally used as storage. A 1-story, 4,590-square-foot office structure is located on northwest corner of the site, and is is zoned “I” Industrial and “T” Transitional and is within the “RO” Residential Opportunity Overlay Zond and the “SABC” South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Overlay Zone. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Medium Density Residential land uses; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19. On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 (superseding the Brown Act-related provisions of Executive Order N-25-20 issued on March 12, 2020), which allows a local legislative body to hold public meetings via teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 the Planning Commission did hold a teleconferencing and in-person public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 21, 2021, at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, to hear and consider evidence and testimony for and against the Proposed Project and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and - 2 - PC2021-*** WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Section 15000 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedures, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15367, the City has discretionary authority over the proposed project and is the Lead Agency in the preparation of the Appendix N: Infill Environmental Checklist (Attachment 5) and any additional environmental documentation required for the proposed project. The Appendix N Checklist utilizes analysis from the previously- certified Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) No. 330 for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update, which was certified by the Anaheim City Council on May 25, 2004. In addition, the Appendix N Checklist also utilizes analysis from the certified Supplemental EIR No. 346 to Program EIR No. 330 for the City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project, which was certified by the City of Anaheim on September 24, 2013. The Appendix N Checklist collectively refers to Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 as the “Certified EIR”. The Appendix N Checklist compares the proposed project's effects with the analysis in the Certified EIR and assists the Lead Agency in the evaluation of potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies (PPPs), and mitigation measures from the Certified EIR that are applicable to the proposed project are included in the Appendix N Checklist; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds and determines that a streamlined review pursuant to Section 15183.3 (Streamlining for Infill Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines is the appropriate environmental review for this request under CEQA; and, that the proposed project would not cause any new specific effects or more significant effect that either have not already been analyzed in a prior environmental impact report or that uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due consideration, inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing pertaining to the request to approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed subdivision of the Property, as shown on proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Anaheim, and more particularly with the Residential Medium Density land use designation, because the Proposed Project will consist of a maximum density of 38 dwelling units per acre (apartments) which is permitted under the Residential Medium Density land use designation with the application of a 50 percent density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915, which allows up to 52 dwelling units per acre on the project site. 2. That the proposed subdivision of the Property, as shown on proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the zoning and development standards of the RM-4 Zone contained in Chapter 18.06 of the Code, because the - 3 - PC2021-*** project would comply with applicable development standards and include approval of Tier Two Incentive requests for reduced interior lot line setback, reduced street frontage landscape setbacks, minimum unit size, and increased building height, now pending. 3. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of the Proposed Project. 4. That the design of the subdivision, as shown on proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123, is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, as no sensitive environmental habitat has been identified, because the CEQA Appendix N Checklist determined that there will be no significant impacts to the environment as a result of the Proposed Project. 5. That the design of the subdivision, as shown on proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123, or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 6. That the design of the subdivision, as shown on proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-123, or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public, at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that negate from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations, the Planning Commission does approve Tentative Tract Map No. 2021-123, contingent upon and subject to: (1) the adoption by the Planning Commission of (i) a resolution approving Miscellaneous Permit No. 2021-00767 which is entitlement is now pending; and, (2) the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition (s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. - 4 - PC2021-*** BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 21, 2021. Said Resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Section 17.08.170 of the Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRPERSON, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2021-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Simonne Fannin, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on June 21, 2021, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 21st day of June, 2021. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 6 - PC2021-*** - 7 - PC2021-*** EXHIBIT “B” TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2021-123 (DEV2021-00059) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP 1 All existing structures shall be demolished. The developer shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division prior to any demolition work. Public Works, Development Services 2 The parcel map shall be submitted to the City of Anaheim, Public Works Development Services Division and to the Orange County Surveyor for technical correctness review and approval. Public Works, Development Services 3 The legal property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim, for road, public utilities and other public purposes, the right-of- way easements described below: a. 7-ft. in width on Anaheim Blvd. b. 2-ft in width on Midway Drive c. Corner cutback at Anaheim Blvd and Midway Drive d. Corner cutback at Zeyn Street and Midway Drive Public Works, Development Services 4 The vehicular access rights to Anaheim Blvd and Midway Drive shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim except at approved locations. Public Works, Development Services 5 The applicant shall execute a Subdivision Agreement and submit security in an amount acceptable to the City Engineer to guarantee construction of the public improvements required herein. Security deposit shall be in accordance to City of Anaheim Municipal Code. The agreement shall be recorded concurrently with the Parcel Map. Public Works, Development Services 6 The developer shall pay all applicable development impact fees required under the Anaheim Municipal Code. Public Works, Development Services 7 The legal property owner shall submit to Public Works, Development Services Division for review and approval of the City Council, the Abandonment application and appraisal of Zeyn Street (Public Street) and of the Public Alley that is requested to be abandoned. The Public Street and Alley abandonment shall be completed prior to recordation of the Parcel Map. Public Works, Development Services 8 The developer shall submit improvement plans, for the construction of required public improvements, to the Public Works Development Services Division for review, approval, and to determine security amounts. Prior to Public Works, Development Services - 8 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT parcel map approval, securities shall be posted in the amounts approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney. 9 A Memorandum of Understanding between the project developer and the existing owner of the Mobile Home Park to the south of the project site shall be prepared and executed to preserve and secure access and development rights prior to City Council abandonment hearing for the Public Street and Alley abandonment referenced in Condition No. 7. Public Works, Development Services 10 The legal property owner shall submit to the City for review and approval a Reciprocal Access Agreement for the benefit of the developments to the west, TM 19112, and to the south, APN 082-185-56, of the project site for ingress and egress, utility, and drainage purposes. The agreement shall be recorded prior to the abandonment of the Public Street and the Public Alley. The parcel map shall reference the recordation information of this agreement and the abandonment. Public Works, Development Services 11 The developer shall execute a Save Harmless Agreement with the City of Anaheim for any storm drain connections to the City’s storm drain system. The agreement shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map. Public Works, Development Services 12 The developer shall execute a maintenance covenant with the City of Anaheim in a form that is approved by the City Engineer and the City attorney for the private improvements including but not limited to private utilities, drainage devices, parkway landscaping and irrigation, private street lights, etc. in addition to maintenance requirements established in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) as applicable to the project. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map. Public Works, Development Services 13 Provide a Monumentation bond in an amount specified in writing by a Licensed Land Surveyor of Record. Public Works, Development Services 14 Comply with all applicable requirements of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Public Works, Development Services 15 Prior to issuance of the first building permit and subject to nexus requirements, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate right(s)-of-way as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan adjacent to their property. MMP No. 122 MM 5.15-6 Public Works, Traffic Engineering - 9 - PC2021-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 16 Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit the City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities or the Proposed Project, with peak flows provided by the property owner, will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line. If the City Engineer determines that either condition exists, the property owner/developer shall conduct a sanitary sewer study to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. If the proposed project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the proposed project currently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the applicable sewer deficiency study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the project area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. MMP No. 122 MM 5.13-4 Public Works, Development Services Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 7 , 2 0 2 1 A 0 . 0 C O V E R S H E E T S h e e t I n d e x A r c h i t e c t u r a l A 0 . 0 C o v e r S h e e t A 1 . 0 S i t e P l a n A 1 . 1 F i r e & T r a s h P l a n A 2 . 0 B u i l d i n g E l e v a t i o n s A 2 . 1 B u i l d i n g E l e v a t i o n s A 2 . 2 B u i l d i n g E l e v a t i o n s A 3 . 0 B u i l d i n g P l a n s A 3 . 1 B u i l d i n g P l a n s A 3 . 2 B u i l d i n g P l a n s A 3 . 3 B u i l d i n g P l a n s A 3 . 4 B u i l d i n g P l a n s A 4 . 0 B u i l d i n g S e c t i o n s A 5 . 0 U n i t P l a n s A 5 . 1 U n i t P l a n s A 5 . 2 U n i t P l a n s A 6 . 0 C o n c e p t u a l P e r s p e c t i v e s A 6 . 1 C o n c e p t u a l P e r s p e c t i v e s A 6 . 2 C o n c e p t u a l P e r s p e c t i v e s A 6 . 3 C o n c e p t u a l P e r s p e c t i v e s A 7 . 0 M a t e r i a l B o a r d C i v i l 1 P r e l i m i n a r y S i t e P l a n 2 P r e l i m i n a r y G r a d i n g P l a n 3 S e c t i o n s 4 P r e l i m i n a r y U t i l i t y P l a n 5 P r e l i m i n a r y F i r e A c c e s s & H y d r a n t L o c a t i o n P l a n T P M T e n t a t i v e P a r c e l M a p L a n d s c a p e L - 1 C o n c e p t u a l L a n d s c a p e P l a n L - 2 P l a n t P a l e t t e & N o t e s L - 3 P o o l C o u r t y a r d E n l a r g e m e n t L - 4 L a n d s c a p e L i g h t i n g P l a n L - 5 W a l l a n d F e n c e P l a n L - 6 O p e n S p a c e P l a n OWNERNational CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730909.483.2444Travis Haskinthaskin@nationalcore.org C I V I L E N G I N E E R C & V C o n s u l t i n g , I n c . 9 8 3 0 I r v i n e C e n t e r D r i v e I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 9 4 9 . 9 1 6 . 3 8 0 0 J o y H e n d r i c k s j h e n d r i c k s @ c v c - i n c . n e t ARCHITECTKTGY17911 Von Karman Avenue, Ste. 200Irvine, CA 92614949.221.6278Keith Labus AIA, LEED AP klabus@ktgy.com L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T M J S L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t u r e 5 0 7 3 0 t h S t N e w p o r t B e a c h , C A 9 2 6 6 3 9 4 9 . 6 7 5 . 9 9 6 4 M a r k S c h a t t i n g e r m a r k @ m j s - l a . c o m A T T A C H M E N T N O . 3 P1TRP2T ELEC / PHONECATVTRP3P4TRP1TRP2TELEC / PHONE CATV TRP3P4TRP1TRP2TELEC / PHONECATVTRP3P4TR P1 TRP2TELEC / PHONE CATV P2 TR TRP3 3 6 " 0,9 2 M 48 " 1, 2 2 M ToiletDirty ArmDW 30.0' 30.0' 1 9 . 0 ' 26.0'28.0'94.0'26.0'28.0' R 6 0 . 0 ' 2 6 . 0 ' 24.0' 3 0 . 1 ' 3 6 . 8 ' 2 . 0 ' S B C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A CACACA CA CACACA 12'-5" 2 2 ' - 6 " T o i l e t D i r t y A r m B u i l t i n D e s k A 5 3 T o i l e t D i r t y A r m C o m A 2 4 T o i l e t D i r t y A r m 20'-4" 1 7 ' - 4 " Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 7 , 2 0 2 1 A 1 . 1 S I T E P L A N F I R E & T R A S H P L A N 0 3 0 6 0 1 5 T u c k - U n d e r P a r k i n g w i t h 3 R e s i d e n t i a l F l o o r s A b o v e P u b l i c U s e & A m e n i t y w i t h 2 L e v e l s o f u n i t s a b o v e 4 F l o o r s o f R e s i d e n t i a l U n i t s M a x 1 5 0 ' H o s e P u l l Fire Hammerhead F i r e A c c e s s d o e s n o t e x c e e d 1 5 0 ' Gate Mnt. U t i l . R i g h t O n l y E n t r y & E x i t S h a r e d P r i v a t e D r i v e P r o p o s e d ( S . Z e y n S t r e e t V a c a t e d ) TrashStaging Mech P o o l F l e x S p a c e A m e n i t i e s Trash Trash P o o l B l d g Fire Access Lane L E G E N D R 1 7 . 5 ' 20' F i r e T u r n R a d i u s F i r e H o s e 150' Max Hose Pull ( o n s i t e m a i n t e n a n c e p e r s o n n e l t o p l a c e t r a s h b i n s f r o m b o t h t r a s h r o o m s f o r p i c k u p o n c o l l e c t i o n d a y ) 0 4 ' 8 ' 1 6 ' T r a s h C h u t e R e c y c l i n g C h u t e E N L A R G E D T R A S H & R E C Y C L I N G R O O M F L O O R P L A N T Y P I C A L U P P E R L E V E L S T r a s h R o u t e E N L A R G E D T R A S H & R E C Y C L I N G R O O M F L O O R P L A N G R O U N D L E V E L T r a s h C h u t e R e c y c l i n g C h u t e 8 ' x 1 0 ' B u l k y I t e m A r e a T r a s h B i n s T r a s h S t a g i n g A r e a T r a s h C o l l e c t i o n T r u c k T r a s h C o l l e c t i o n T r u c k P a t h o f T r a v e l L i n e o f S i g h t F i r e H a m m e r h e a d R 1 7 . 5 ' 28' 8 0 ' 2 8 ' U t i l . L i n e o f S i t e Line of Site F i r e A c c e s s T u r n i n g R a d i u s Trash Path of Travel E V EVEV 50'-0"9'-0"9'-0"9'-0" 1 . N O R T H E L E V A T I O N - W . M I D W A Y D R 7 1 3 6 9 2 9'-0" 1 0 5 4 L2 L3L1 T.O.P.L4 10 6 106 1 1 2 . E A S T E L E V A T I O N - S . A N A H E I M B L V D 50'-0"9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"L2 L3L1 T.O.P.9'-0"L4 7 1 6 9 2 3 5 8 5 5 1 0 6 6 6 Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 A 2 . 0 B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S 0 8 1 6 2 4 M a t e r i a l L e g e n d : 1 . S t u c c o B o d y 2 . F i b e r C e m e n t S i d i n g 3 . F i b e r C e m e n t P a n e l 4 . S t u c c o A c c e n t 5 . M e t a l R a i l i n g 6 . M e t a l A w n i n g 7 . V i n y l W i n d o w 8 . C a r p o r t O p e n i n g ( n o g a r a g e d o o r ) 9 . S t o r e f r o n t 1 0 . B r i c k V e n e e r 1 1 . D e c o r a t i v e A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l e m e n t T B D 1 . S O U T H E L E V A T I O N 50'-0"9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"L2 L3L1 T.O.P.9'-0"L4 1 3 6 9 2 5 5 8 1 0 1 1 0 6 7 1 1 2 . W E S T E L E V A T I O N 50'-0"9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"L2 L3L1 T.O.P.9'-0"L4 7 1 6 1 5 2 4 1 0 6 Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 A 2 . 1 B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S 0 8 1 6 2 4 M a t e r i a l L e g e n d : 1 . S t u c c o B o d y 2 . F i b e r C e m e n t S i d i n g 3 . F i b e r C e m e n t P a n e l 4 . S t u c c o A c c e n t 5 . M e t a l R a i l i n g 6 . M e t a l A w n i n g 7 . V i n y l W i n d o w 8 . C a r p o r t O p e n i n g ( n o g a r a g e d o o r ) 9 . S t o r e f r o n t 1 0 . B r i c k V e n e e r 1 1 . D e c o r a t i v e A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l e m e n t T B D 3 6 " 0 , 9 2 M 4 8 " 1, 2 2 M DW P o o l B l d g P a t i o M a i l F l e x S p a c e W C l u b r o o m T o t L o t G a t e Mnt. U t i l . M e c h T r a s h P 2 - 1 P 2 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 2 - 1 P 2 - 1 P3-2 Lau. P 2 - 1 a l t P3-1P3-1P2-1P2-1Trash P 2 - 1 a l t 1 A 2 . 0 1 A 2 . 1 2A2.1 2 A 2 . 0 M P o o l B i k e / E n t r y L e a s i n g C o m p . / M e e t i n g R o o m s M W U t i l . B i k e Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 0 8 1 6 3 2 A 3 . 0 B U I L D I N G P L A N S L E V E L 1 DW O p e n t o B e l o w O p e n t o B e l o w P 2 - 1 P 2 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 2 - 1 P 2 - 1 P3-2 Lau. P 3 - 1 P 3 - 1 P 1 - 2 P 1 - 2 P 1 - 3 P 1 - 3 P 2 - 2 P 2 - 2 P 1 - 3 P3-1P3-1P2-1P2-1 P 2 - 2 1 A 2 . 0 1 A 2 . 1 2A2.1 2 A 2 . 0 S t o . Sto. T r a s h TrashArchitecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 0 8 1 6 3 2 A 3 . 1 B U I L D I N G P L A N S L E V E L 2 DW DW D W P 2 - 1 P 2 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 2 - 1 P 2 - 1 Lau. P 3 - 1 P 3 - 1 P 1 - 2 P 1 - 2 P 1 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 3 - 2 P 3 - 2 P3-2 P 1 - 3 P 1 - 3 P 2 - 2 P 2 - 2 P 1 - 3 P3-1P3-1P2-1P2-1 P 2 - 2 1 A 2 . 0 1 A 2 . 1 2A2.1 2 A 2 . 0 S t o . Sto. T r a s h TrashArchitecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 0 8 1 6 3 2 A 3 . 2 B U I L D I N G P L A N S L E V E L 3 DW DW D W R o o f D e c k T P 1 - 2 P 1 - 2 P 1 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 3 - 2 P 3 - 2 P 2 - 1 P 2 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 1 - 1 P 2 - 1 P 2 - 1 Lau. P 3 - 1 P 3 - 1 P3-2 P 1 - 3 P 1 - 3 P 2 - 2 P 2 - 2 P 1 - 3 P3-1P3-1P2-1P2-1 P 2 - 2 1 A 2 . 0 1 A 2 . 1 2A2.1 2 A 2 . 0 S t o . Sto. T r a s h TrashArchitecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 0 8 1 6 3 2 A 3 . 3 B U I L D I N G P L A N S L E V E L 4 SOLAR READY AREA15% OF ROOF AREA±4,125 SQ. FT. R O O F A C C E S S F R O M S T A I R S H A F T B E L O W . C O N D E N S E R S C R E E N E L E V A T O R O V E R R U N R O O F T O P E Q U I P M E N T , T Y P . 1 5 ' - 9 " 12'-5"28'-6" 12'-3" R o o f D e c k B e l o w 1 A 2 . 0 1 A 2 . 1 2A2.1 2 A 2 . 0 Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 0 8 1 6 3 2 A 3 . 4 B U I L D I N G P L A N S R O O F ± 50'-0"9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"L2 L3L1 T.O.P.9'-0"L4 2 ' - 0 " S E C T I O N A A UnitUnitUnitUnitUnitUnitUnitGarage L e a s i n g / A m e n i t i e s U n i t U n i t U n i t R o o f D e c k P L ANAHEIM BLVD P o o l C o u r t y a r d S B ± 50'-0" 9'-0"9'-0"9'-0" L 2 L 3 L 1 T . O . P . 9'-0" L 4 S E C T I O N B B PL MIDWAY DRIVE U n i t U n i t U n i t U n i t U n i t U n i t U n i t G a r a g e P L S B Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 0 8 1 6 2 4 A 4 . 0 B U I L D I N G S E C T I O N S A A A A BBBB D W UNIT TYPE P3-13 BEDROOM / 2 BATHROOM - 11B UNIT±974 NET SQUARE FEET±1,054 GROSS SQUARE FEET±70 DECK SQUARE FEET 46'- 0 " 24'-2" U N I T T Y P E P 3 - 2 3 B E D R O O M / 2 B A T H R O O M - 1 1 B U N I T ± 9 4 1 N E T S Q U A R E F E E T ± 9 9 6 G R O S S S Q U A R E F E E T ± 7 5 D E C K S Q U A R E F E E T 3 6 ' - 1 1 / 2 " 30'-8" L i v i n g R o o m 1 2 ' - 0 " x 1 1 - 6 " B a t h L M . B e d r o o m 1 2 ' - 2 " x 1 1 ' - 8 " K i t c h e n / D i n i n g B e d r o o m 2 1 0 ' - 2 " x 1 0 ' - 0 " B e d r o o m 3 1 0 ' - 4 " x 1 0 ' - 0 " W I C B a t h B e d r o o m 3 1 0 ' - 8 " x 1 1 ' - 3 " B e d r o o m 2 1 0 ' - 8 " x 1 1 ' - 3 " B a t h Bath Kitchen/Dining Living Room11'-10" x 11-10"Deck11'-10" x 6'-0"70 SQ. FT. D e c k 1 1 ' - 1 0 " x 6 ' - 0 " 7 5 S Q . F T . M.Bedroom10'-8" x 13'-8"Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 0 2 4 8 A 5 . 2 U N I T P L A N S T H R E E B E D R O O M S Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 N T S A 6 . 0 C O N C E P T U A L P E R S P E C T I V E S C O R N E R O F M I D W A Y A N D A N A H E I M B L V D Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 N T S A 6 . 1 C O N C E P T U A L P E R S P E C T I V E S C O R N E R O F M I D W A Y A N D A N A H E I M B L V D Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 N T S A 6 . 2 C O N C E P T U A L P E R S P E C T I V E S V I E W F R O M E N T R Y O N A N A H E I M B L V D Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 S C H E M A T I C D E S I G N J u n e 1 1 , 2 0 2 1 N T S A 6 . 3 C O N C E P T U A L P E R S P E C T I V E S A E R A L V I E W O F C O U R T Y A R D 0 SCALE: 1" = 30' 15 30 60 ” ” ”” ” ” P5 P6P3 ELEC / P H O N E CATV FIRE RIS E R P5 P6P3 EL E C / P H O N E C A T V FI R E R I S E R P5 P6P3 ELEC / P H O N E CATV FIRE RISE R P 3 P1 P2 ELEC / P H O N E CATV FIRE RISE R TEL APU TEL CATV TEL CATV 36"0,92M48"1,22M TEL A P U T E L C A T V T E L C A T V 3 6 " 0, 9 2 M 4 8 " 1, 2 2 M ELEC / PHONECATVFIRERISERELEC / PHONE CATV FIRE RISERELEC / PHONECATVFIRERISER ELEC / PHONE CATV FIRERISER 0 S C A L E : 1 " = 2 0 ' 1 0 2 0 4 0 A P U T E L C A T V T E L C A T V 3 6 " 0 , 9 2 M 4 8 " 1 , 2 2 M ELEC / PHONECATVFIRERISERELEC / PHONE CATV FIRE RISERELEC / PHONECATVFIRERISER ELEC / PHONE CATV FIRERISERTEL 0 S C A L E : 1 " = 2 0 ' 1 0 2 0 4 0 0 S C A L E : 1 " = 2 0 ' 1 0 2 0 4 0 0 SCALE: 1" = 20' 10 20 40 FIRE LANE PHONE NUMBER POLICE OR SHERIFF'S CVC 22500.1 CVC 22658A AT OWNER'S EXPENSE BE CITED OR TOWED VIOLATING VEHICLES WILL APU TEL CATV TEL CATV 36"0,92M 48"1,22M ELE C / P H O N E CAT V FIR E RISE R E L E C / P H O N E C A T V FI R E R I S E R ELE C / P H O N E CAT V FIR E RISE R ELE C / P H O N E CAT V FIR E RISE R TEL M I D W A Y D R I V E ( P U B L I C ) A N A H E I M B L V D . ( P U B L I C ) S. ZEYN STREET (PUBLIC) 2 . 3 6 A C G R O S S 2 . 2 8 A C N E T C L L C P R O J E C T L O C A T I O N G N I R E E N E I G N 1 6 7 9 5 V o n K a r m a n , S u i t e 1 0 0 I r v i n e , C a l i f o r n i a 9 2 6 0 6 t e l 9 4 9 . 4 7 4 . 1 9 6 0 f a x 9 4 9 . 4 7 4 . 5 3 1 5 w w w . f u s c o e . c o m “ “ 6 / 1 5 / 2 0 2 1 CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLANENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL JUNE 11, 2021 L.140’20’10’0’ S . A N A H E I M B L V D . W. MIDWAY DRIVE LOBBY ELEVATOR LEASING POOL EQUIPMENT UTILITES FLEX SPACE AMENITY COURTYARD SEE L.3 VEHICULAR SLIDING GATE w/ ENHANCED PAVING 4’ WALKWAY WITH WALKABLE TREE GRATES TYP. PRIVATE PATIO R/W DEDICATION GOLDEN SKIES MONUMENT SIGN LINE OF SIGHT TRIANGLE • no landscape above 24” ht., typ. LINE OF SIGHT TRIANGLE • no landscape above 24” ht., typ. LINE OF SIGHT TRIANGLE • no landscape above 24” ht., typ. ENHANCED PLANTING AT ENTRANCE ENHANCED PAVING AT ENTRANCE S. ANAHEIM BLVD. STREETSCAPE • proposed 5’ sidwalk w/ 5’ wide parkway • trees & palms in treewell and parkway • enhanced landscaped setback SPECIMEN OLIVE at ENTRANCE DRY-SCAPE GARDEN TRANSFORMER located out of site from public right of way as landscape screening is not possible GOLDEN SKIES MOBILE HOME PARK ENCORE ANAHEIM ROOF DECK on LEVEL 4 • cafe tables • pottery • firepit • lounge seating ADA PATH OF TRAVEL TRASH TRASH T 6’ HT. MASONRY WALL, TYP. w/ 3’ LANDSCAPE SETBACK MIDWAY DRIVE STREETSCAPE • landscaped parkway • enhanced landscaped setback • 4’ concrete walkway LINE-OF-SIGHT TRIANGLE • no landscape above 24” ht., typ.R/W DEDICATION ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL JUNE 11, 2021 L.2PLANT PALETTE & NOTES IRRIGATION ZONES: IRRIGATION HYDRO-ZONES SHALL HAVE PLANTS GROUPED with SIMILAR WATERING REQUIREMENTS. DEPTH OF IRRIGATION LINES: ALL ON-GRADE LATERAL LINES SHALL BE BURIED TO A DEPTH OF 18" MIN. ALL ON-GRADE MAINLINES SHALL BE BURIED TO A DEPTH OF 24" MIN. BACKFLOW PREVENTER: BACKFLOW PREVENTER SHALL BE A REDUCED PRESSURE PRINCIPLE BACKFLOW PREVENTER (FEBCO 825Y OR EQUAL) TYPE AS APPROVED BY WATER PURVEYOR and SCREENED with LANDSCAPING from PUBLIC VIEW. IRRIGATION EMITTERS: ALL SHRUB AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED USING DRIP TYPE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. ALL TREES SHALL BE IRRIGATED USING BUBBLER AND/OR DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM. ALL GROUNDCOVER AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED USING DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM. IRRIGATION CONTROLLER: CONTROLLER SHALL BE AUTOMATIC WITH MULTIPLE PROGRAMMING CAPABILITY. CONTROLLER TO BE REPROGRAMMED SEASONALLY TO MINIMIZE RUNOFF AND OVER WATERING. "SMART" CONTROLLER WEATHER TRACKING DEVICES SHALL BE UTILIZED TO CONTROL IRRIGATION CYCLES ACCORDING TO SPECIFIC IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS. CLASS OF IRRIGATION PIPE: ALL MAINLINE SHALL BE CLASS 315 PVC. ALL LATERAL LINE SHALL BE CLASS 200 PVC. * * * SPECIAL PROJECT IRRIGATION NOTES * * * 1. THE IRRIGATION DESIGN SHALL COMPLY with THE CRITERIA of CITY of ANAHEIM WATER CONSERVATION POLICIES and REQUIREMENTS. 2. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SERVING LANDSCAPE and TREES in the PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY will be CONNECTED to the ON-SITE WATER SUPPLY. PURPOSE: TO PROVIDE THE MAINTENANCE STAFF A MECHANICAL DEVICE TO DISTRIBUTE WATER AND ENSURE PLANT SURVIVAL IN THE MOST EFFICIENT MANNER AND WITHIN A TIME FRAME THAT LEAST INTERFERES WITH THE ACTIVITIES OF THE RESIDENTS. CONCEPT: THE SYSTEM WILL UTILIZE DRIP and BUBBLER IRRIGATION COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA BEING WATERED AND INFILTRATION RATES OF THE SOIL. THE SYSTEM WILL BE CONTROLLED BY A 'WEATHER TRAK' or 'SMART' CONTROLLER. VALVES PROGRAMMED FROM AUTOMATIC CONTROLLERS WILL MAXIMIZE EFFICIENT WATER APPLICATION. TO AVOID WATER RUNOFF, THE CONTROLS WILL BE OVERSEEN BY A FLOW MONITOR THAT WILL DETECT ANY BROKEN BUBBLER HEADS or DRIP TUBING TO STOP THAT STATION'S OPERATION, ADVANCING TO THE NEXT WORKABLE STATION. IN THE EVENT OF PRESSURE SUPPLY LINE BREAKAGE, IT WILL COMPLETELY STOP THE OPERATION OF THE SYSTEM. ALL MATERIAL WILL BE NON-FERROUS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE BRASS PIPING INTO AND OUT OF THE BACKFLOW UNITS. ALL WORK WILL BE IN THE BEST ACCEPTABLE MANNER IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES AND STANDARDS PREVAILING IN THE INDUSTRY. IRRIGATION CONCEPT STATEMENT WATER CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES LANDSCAPING WILL BE OF THE TYPE AND SITUATED IN LOCATIONS TO MAXIMIZE OBSERVATION WHILE PROVIDING A DEGREE OF AESTHETICS . SECURITY PLANTING MATERIALS ARE ENCOURAGED ALONG PROPERTY LINES AND WALLS AND UNDER VULNERABLE WINDOWS. TREES WILL NOT BE PLANTED CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE STRUCTURE TO ALLOW EASY ACCESS TO THE ROOF, OR SHOULD BE KEPT TRIMMED TO MAKE CLIMBING DIFFICULT. ALL LANDSCAPING WILL BE MAINTAINED IN A MANNER THAT ALLOWS FOR THE MAXIMUM COVERAGE BY ADJACENT LIGHT FIXTURES. LANDSCAPE SECURITY MEASURES:. . . LANDSCAPE NOTES: 1. LANDSCAPE WILL BE DESIGNED , DOCUMENTED, INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN CONFORMANCE TO THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS. 2. ANY TREE OR PALM WITHIN 5 FEET OF HARDSCAPE AREA WILL RECEIVE ROOT CONTROL BARRIERS. 3. ALL PLANTING AREAS WILL RECEIVE 3" THICK LAYER OF SHREDDED WOOD MULCH. WUCOLS, Water Use Classification of Landscape Species, is a University of California Cooperative Extension Publication and is a guide to the water needs oflandscape plants. CROP FACTOR PERCENT OF EToH - HIGH 70% - 90% M - MEDIUM 40% - 60%L - LOW 10% - 30%VL - VERY LOW < 10% WUCOLS NOTES: PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO CITY'S LANDSCAPE WATER EFFICIENCYREQUIREMENTS PER CHAPTER 10.19 OF CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE. NOTE: MIDWAY DRIVE ( 1,801 SQ FT): SODDED HYBRID BERMUDA TIFGREEN TURF NOTE: TIPUANU TIPU TIPU TREE Low36" BOX SOUTH ANAHEIM BLVD. R.O.W. IN 4' x 10' TREE CUTOUT (to match existing Tipu Tree & Mexican Fan Palm scheme) PARKING LOT & ZEYN STREET 36" BOX LARGE SHRUBS IN ALL COMMON AREAS: FEIJOA SELLOWIANA PITTOSPORUM SPECIES MEDIUM SHRUBS IN ALL COMMON AREAS: 5 GAL 5 GAL SMALL SHRUBS IN ALL COMMON AREAS: GROUNDCOVER: COPROSMA x KIRKII 1 GAL at 3' o.c. 24" BOX AGAVE ATTENUATA 5 GAL PHORMIUM 'APRICOT QUEEN' 5 GAL AGAVE PINEAPPLE GUAVA PITTOSPORUM NEW ZEALAND FLAX BOUGAINVILLEA 'ROSENKA'5 GALBOUGAINVILLEA CALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN'5 GALDWARF CALLISTEMON LIGUSTRUM J. 'TEXANUM'5 GALWAX LEAF PRIVET RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA 'CLARA'5 GALINDIA HAWTHORN ROSA 'ICEBERG'5 GALICEBERG ROSE LAGERSTROEMIA I. HYBRID HYBRID CRAPE MYRTLE CERCIS 'FOREST PANSY'RED BUD TRISTANIA CONFERTA BRISBANE BOX 18' BTHPHOENIX DACTYLIFERA 'MEDJOOL'DATE PALM AGAPANTHUS A. 'PETER PAN'1 GALDWARF LILY OF THE NILE BUXUS M. 'GREEN BEAUTY'1 GALJAPANESE BOXWOOD FESTUCA OVINA GLAUCA 1 GALBLUE FESCUE HEMEROCALLIS HYBRIDS 1 GALDAYLILY ROSEMARINUS PROSTRATUS 1 GAL DWARF ROSEMARY SENECIO MANDRALISCAE 1 GAL SENECIO 1 GAL STAR JASMINE CARISSA M. 'PROSTRATA' 1 GAL NATAL PLUM PHILODENDRON 'XANADU'DWARF PHILODENDRON 5 GALSTRELITZIA REGINAE BIRD OF PARADISE MIRROR PLANT MYOPORUM 'PACIFICUM'1 GAL at 3' o.c.MYOPORUM 1 GAL Low Moderate24" BOX Medium Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Medium Medium Low ARBUTUS x 'MARINA'HYBRID STRAWBERRY TREE Low24" BOX METROSIDEROS EXCELSA NEW ZEALAND CHRISTMAS TREE 24" BOX SOUTH ANAHEIM BLVD. and MIDWAY DRIVE LANDSCAPE SETBACK 36" BOXOLEA 'SWAN HILL'FRUITLESS OLIVE - MULTI TRUNK Low Low 24" BOXTABEBUIA IPE MAGNOLIA 'LITTLE GEM'SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA Moderate36" BOX PINK TRUMPET TREE PROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL LIST Moderate SIZEBOTANICAL NAME WUCOLSCOMMON NAME ALL PROPOSED PLANTS WILL BE COMPLIANT WITH CAL GREEN REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER CONSERVING AND NON-INVASIVE AS DEFINED BY IPC. LOCATION BUILDING ENTRIES DINING TERRACE VERTICAL BACKDROP COURTYARD PARKING FINGERS Moderate COURTYARD ACCENT 4'X10' CUTOUT PARKING FINGERS VERTICAL ACCENT 36" BOX TREE MATURITY AT 20' high UNDER OVERHEAD UTILITIES WASHINGTONIA ROBUSTA MEXICAN FAN PALM 24' B.T.H.Low 4'X'10' CUTOUT LAGERSTROEMIA HYBRID'TUSCARORA'CRAPE MYRTLE Moderate MIDWAY DRIVE R.O.W. IN 6'-9" PARKWAY 48" BOXCERCIDIUM x 'DESERT MUSEUM' HYBRID PALO VERDE Low MOBILE HOME PARK MONUMENT SIGN 36" BOXBISMARKIA NOBILIS SILVER BISMARKIA Low INTERSECTION RESIDENT AMENITY COURTYARD 18' BTHPHOENIX DACTYLIFERA 'MEDJOOL'DATE PALM Low POOL TRISTANIA CONFERTA BRISBANE BOX Moderate24" BOX VERTICAL BACKDROP TRISTANIA CONFERTA BRISBANE BOX Moderate24" BOX EVERGREEN SCREEN atMOBILE HOME PARK GARAGES 15 GAL.JUNIPERUS 'BLUE POINT'BLUE POINT JUNIPER Low ALTERNATE TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES FEIJOA SELLOWIANA 5 GALPINEAPPLE GUAVA Low COURTYARD 40’20’10’0’ ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL JUNE 11, 2021 L.3POOL CONCEPT ENLARGEMENT 20’10’5’0’ SPECIMEN OLIVE • 36” box OUTDOOR LOUNGE • soft seating • fire pit • cafe tables • umbrellas • bbq counter (2 gas bbqs) TOT LOT (868 SF) • 28’x31’ • play structure • bench seating • tot lot surfacing COMMUNITY GARDEN • raised garden boxes • dg • benches • fence VERTICAL PLANTING ON CARPORT SCREENS POOL COURT • 20’x40’pool • chaise lounges • pool gate • cafe tables w/ umbrellas • matching height palms DOG PARK • 22’x24’ • synthetic turf • 6’ high fence w/ gate COVERED PARKING POOL EQUIPMENTMW CLUBROOM RESTROOMS BIKE PARKING ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL JUNE 11, 2021 L.4LANDSCAPE LIGHTING PLAN 40’20’10’0’ S . A N A H E I M B L V D . W. MIDWAY DRIVE EXTERIOR LIGHTING LEGEND TYPE/TECHNIQUE: STREET LIGHT STREET LIGHTS PER CITY STANDARDS LOCATION:SYMBOL 12' POLE LIGHT AT PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE UPLIGHT STAKE MOUNTED OVERHEAD FESTIVAL LIGHTING ATTACHED TO POLES. MINIMUM 12' ABOVE FINISH SURFACE BOLLARD AT PEDESTRIAN PATH OF TRAVEL WALL MOUNTED ON GARAGE UPLIGHT PALM MOUNTED THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING CONCEPT IS TO PROVIDE LEVELS OF LIGHTINGSUFFICIENT TO MEET SAFETY AND ORIENTATION NEEDS. WITHIN PUBLIC AREAS LIGHTING WILL BE WARM COLORED ANDUNOBTRUSIVE. LIGHT SOURCES WILL BE LEED. LIGHTING SOURCES FOR THE LANDSCAPE AND PAVED AREAS WILL BECONCEALED AND THE LIGHTING INDIRECT NOT VISIBLE FROM A PUBLICVIEWPOINT. LIGHT SOURCES SHOULD BE DIRECTED SO THAT IT DOES NOTFALL OUTSIDE THE AREA TO BE LIGHTED. ALL EXTERIOR SURFACE AND ABOVE-GROUND MOUNTED FIXTURES WILL BESYMPATHETIC AND COMPLIMENTARY TO THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME. WALL MOUNTED FIXTURES WILL HAVE OPAQUE GLASS AND BE FITTED WITHLAMPS NOT EXCEEDING 60 WATTS. 1.CONTRACTOR SHALL STUB OUT ELECTRICAL CONDUIT TO SPECIMENTREES/PALMS PRIOR TO PLANTING. ALL FIXTURES SHALL BE MOUNTEDAFTER INSTALLATION OF SPECIMEN PLANT MATERIAL. 2.ALL LIGHTING FIXTURES AND ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION SHALL BE INCONFORMANCE WITH THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODES AND LOCALGOVERNMENT AGENCY. 3.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION AND SHALL BE HELD LIABLE FOR ALL DAMAGESINCURRED. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS REQUIREDTO PERFORM THE WORK INDICATED HEREIN BEFORE BEGINNING WORK. 5.ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT UNIFORMBUILDING CODES, PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND STATE AND HEALTHSAFETY REQUIREMENTS. 6. ALL ELECTRICAL FIXTURES ARE SHOWN SCHEMATICALLY FORLOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES REQUIRED. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFYEXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLFIXTURES PER MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS. 7.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND INSTALL ALL NECESSARY CONDUITTHROUGH THE PODIUM DECK AND PLANTER WALLS AND UNDER PAVINGPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. GENERAL SITE LIGHTING NOTES LANDSCAPE LIGHTING CONCEPT WALL MOUNTED LIGHT BOLLARD at PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS PALM MOUNTED UPLIGHT STAKE MOUNTED LANDSCAPE UP-LIGHT SYMBOL INDICATES PROPOSED TREE or PALM LOCATION 2 - Pole Light3 - Bollard 4 - Palm Uplight 12' POLE LIGHT at PARKING EXTERIOR LIGHTING LEGEND TYPE/TECHNIQUE: STREET LIGHT STREET LIGHTS PER CITY STANDARDS LOCATION:SYMBOL 12' POLE LIGHT AT PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE UPLIGHT STAKE MOUNTED OVERHEAD FESTIVAL LIGHTING ATTACHED TO POLES. MINIMUM 12' ABOVE FINISH SURFACE BOLLARD AT PEDESTRIAN PATH OF TRAVEL WALL MOUNTED ON GARAGE UPLIGHT PALM MOUNTED THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING CONCEPT IS TO PROVIDE LEVELS OF LIGHTINGSUFFICIENT TO MEET SAFETY AND ORIENTATION NEEDS. WITHIN PUBLIC AREAS LIGHTING WILL BE WARM COLORED ANDUNOBTRUSIVE. LIGHT SOURCES WILL BE LEED. LIGHTING SOURCES FOR THE LANDSCAPE AND PAVED AREAS WILL BECONCEALED AND THE LIGHTING INDIRECT NOT VISIBLE FROM A PUBLICVIEWPOINT. LIGHT SOURCES SHOULD BE DIRECTED SO THAT IT DOES NOTFALL OUTSIDE THE AREA TO BE LIGHTED. ALL EXTERIOR SURFACE AND ABOVE-GROUND MOUNTED FIXTURES WILL BESYMPATHETIC AND COMPLIMENTARY TO THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME. WALL MOUNTED FIXTURES WILL HAVE OPAQUE GLASS AND BE FITTED WITHLAMPS NOT EXCEEDING 60 WATTS. 1.CONTRACTOR SHALL STUB OUT ELECTRICAL CONDUIT TO SPECIMENTREES/PALMS PRIOR TO PLANTING. ALL FIXTURES SHALL BE MOUNTEDAFTER INSTALLATION OF SPECIMEN PLANT MATERIAL. 2.ALL LIGHTING FIXTURES AND ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION SHALL BE INCONFORMANCE WITH THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODES AND LOCALGOVERNMENT AGENCY. 3.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION AND SHALL BE HELD LIABLE FOR ALL DAMAGESINCURRED. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS REQUIREDTO PERFORM THE WORK INDICATED HEREIN BEFORE BEGINNING WORK. 5.ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT UNIFORMBUILDING CODES, PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND STATE AND HEALTHSAFETY REQUIREMENTS. 6. ALL ELECTRICAL FIXTURES ARE SHOWN SCHEMATICALLY FORLOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES REQUIRED. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFYEXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLFIXTURES PER MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS. 7.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND INSTALL ALL NECESSARY CONDUITTHROUGH THE PODIUM DECK AND PLANTER WALLS AND UNDER PAVINGPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. GENERAL SITE LIGHTING NOTES LANDSCAPE LIGHTING CONCEPT WALL MOUNTED LIGHT BOLLARD at PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS PALM MOUNTED UPLIGHT STAKE MOUNTED LANDSCAPE UP-LIGHT SYMBOL INDICATES PROPOSED TREE or PALM LOCATION 2 - Pole Light3 - Bollard 4 - Palm Uplight 12' POLE LIGHT at PARKING L.5ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL MAY 7, 2021 WALL AND FENCE PLAN 40’20’10’0’ S . A N A H E I M B L V D . W. MIDWAY DRIVE A D BB BEE C B WALL and FENCE KEY: C 6' HT. MASONRY WALL AT PERIMETER 5'-6" TUBULAR STEEL FENCE AND GATE ATCOURTYARDS AND POOL ENCLOSURE 48" HT. DOG PARK FENCE AND GATE ENTRY MONUMENT VEHICULAR SLIDING GATE A D E A 6' SPLIT FACE BLOCK SPLIT FACE WALL CAP A 6' HIGH B 5' 6" HIGH 5' 6 " TUBULAR STEEL FENCE and GATE Scale: 1/2"=1'-0" MASONRY WALL at PERIMETER Scale: 1/2"=1'-0" KNOX BOX KEY FOB 48 " DOG PARK FENCE AND GATE Scale: 1/2"=1'-0" C 48" HIGH ENTRY MONUMENT Scale: 1/2"=1'-0" D 36" HIGH SIDE ELEVATION 36 " FRONT ELEVATION BLACK METAL PANEL WITH PROJECT SIGN. FINAL SIGN DESIGN TBD BOARDFORM CONCRETE 36 " 14'-0" NOTE: FINAL SIGN DESIGN A SEPARATE SUBMITTAL STUCCO WALL, COLOR to MATCH ARCHITECTURE DECORATIVE CUT METAL PANEL GATE VEHICULAR SLIDING GATE Scale: 1/4"=1'-0" E 5'-6" HIGH 5'- 6 " A D BB BEE C B WALL and FENCE KEY: C 6' HT. MASONRY WALL AT PERIMETER 5'-6" TUBULAR STEEL FENCE AND GATE ATCOURTYARDS AND POOL ENCLOSURE 48" HT. DOG PARK FENCE AND GATE ENTRY MONUMENT VEHICULAR SLIDING GATE A D E A 6' SPLIT FACE BLOCK SPLIT FACE WALL CAP A 6' HIGH B 5' 6" HIGH 5' 6 " TUBULAR STEEL FENCE and GATE Scale: 1/2"=1'-0" MASONRY WALL at PERIMETER Scale: 1/2"=1'-0" KNOX BOX KEY FOB 48 " DOG PARK FENCE AND GATE Scale: 1/2"=1'-0" C 48" HIGH ENTRY MONUMENT Scale: 1/2"=1'-0" D 36" HIGH SIDE ELEVATION 36 " FRONT ELEVATION BLACK METAL PANEL WITH PROJECT SIGN. FINAL SIGN DESIGN TBD BOARDFORM CONCRETE 36 " 14'-0" NOTE: FINAL SIGN DESIGN A SEPARATE SUBMITTAL STUCCO WALL, COLOR to MATCH ARCHITECTURE DECORATIVE CUT METAL PANEL GATE VEHICULAR SLIDING GATE Scale: 1/4"=1'-0" E 5'-6" HIGH 5' - 6 " ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL JUNE 11, 2021 L.6OPEN SPACE PLAN 40’20’10’0’ S . A N A H E I M B L V D . W. MIDWAY DRIVE OPEN SPACE SUMMARY: COMMON OPEN SPACE REQUIRED: LOCATION COURTYARD 17,200 SF(200 SF/DU = 200 x 86) 16,251 SF NOTE: COMMON RECREATIONAL-LEISURE AREA SHALL HAVE A MIN. DIMENSION OF 10'-0". CLUBROOM - UNDER ROOFTOP TOTAL OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 1,181 SF 18,613 SF ROOFTOP 1,181 SF OPEN SPACE SUMMARY: COMMON OPEN SPACE REQUIRED: LOCATION COURTYARD 17,200 SF(200 SF/DU = 200 x 86) 16,251 SF NOTE: COMMON RECREATIONAL-LEISURE AREA SHALL HAVE A MIN. DIMENSION OF 10'-0". CLUBROOM - UNDER ROOFTOP TOTAL OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 1,181 SF 18,613 SF ROOFTOP 1,181 SF DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY (Midway Affordable Housing) Development Standard RM-4 Zone Standards/Development Incentives Proposed Project Site Area N/A 2.36 acres (Gross) 98,445 sq. ft. Density (RM-4) 81 units 36 du/ac max. 122 units w/ Density Bonus 86 units w/ Density Bonus 38 du/ac Unit Size 1 bedroom 700 sq. ft. min. 2 bedroom 825 sq. ft. min. 3 bedroom 1,000 sq. ft. min. 29 1BR (569-610 sq. ft.)** 35 2BR (810-896 sq. ft.)** 22 3BR (1,015-1,054 sq. ft.) Street Setback 20 feet average; 15 feet min. (arterial) 15 feet min. (any other street) Structural Setback (4 story) Abutting Arterial Abutting Other Public Street Interior Setback 15’ landscape min. 20 ft. avg.; 15 ft. min.; 10’ landscape min. 25 ft. (Primary) [15’ per incentive] 20 ft. (Secondary) [10’ per incentive] 10 feet min. (Landscape) [5’ per incentive] 2 feet to Anaheim Blvd. ROW** 5.5 ft. to Midway Dr.** 5 ft. landscape setback* Building Height 40 feet >40 feet by CUPAdditional three stories , or 33 ft. if located within one-half mile of a Major Transit Stop, 4 Stories / 50 ft. Site Coverage Max. 55% 65% (Tier 1 Incentive) 27.5% Parking Per State Density Bonus Law 60.75 or 61 spaces Affordable units @0.5/unit*77 = 38.5 spaces Supportive Housing units (5) = 0 Manager’s unit = 2.25 spaces Community Center 3300 sq. ft. @1/250 = 13.2 Flex Space 1700 sq. ft. @1/250 = 6.8 128 spaces 18 garage spaces 12 carport spaces (incl. 2 H/C) 21 tandem spaces 77 open stalls Recreation-Leisure Area 200 sq. ft. per unit*86 = 17,200 sq. ft. total Private 5,848 sq.ft. Common 18,613 sq.ft Total = 24,461 sq.ft. *Tier One Incentive 06.21.21 **Tier Two Incentive ATTACHMENT NO. 4 NORTH AMERICA | EUROPE | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA | ASIA WWW.FIRSTCARBONSOLUTIONS.COM Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist City of Anaheim, Orange County, California Development Project No. 2021-00059 Prepared for: City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 714.765.5238 Contact: Andy T. Uk, Associate Planner Prepared by: FirstCarbon Solutions 250 Commerce, Suite 2500 Irvine, CA 92601 714.508.4100 Contact: Mary Bean, Project Director Tsui Li, Project Manager Report Date: June 16, 2021 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Table of Contents FirstCarbon Solutions iii Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ v Section 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 - Purpose of the Appendix N: Environmental Checklist....................................................... 1 1.2 - Document Organization .................................................................................................... 3 Section 2: Project Setting.............................................................................................................. 5 2.1 - Project Location ................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 - Environmental Setting ....................................................................................................... 5 2.2.1 - Land Uses and Designation .................................................................................... 5 2.3 - Surrounding Land uses ...................................................................................................... 7 2.4 - Environmental Background ............................................................................................... 8 Section 3: Project Description ....................................................................................................... 9 3.1 - Project Analyzed in the Certified EIR ................................................................................. 9 3.2 - Proposed Project ............................................................................................................... 9 3.3 - Construction .................................................................................................................... 11 Section 4: Required Approvals .................................................................................................... 13 Section 5: Environmental Checklist Form .................................................................................... 29 5.1 - The Proposed Project is an Infill Project Consistent with Guidelines Section 15183.3 ... 31 5.2 - Satisfaction of Appendix M Performance Standards ....................................................... 31 5.3 - Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................................... 34 5.4 - Environmental Determination ......................................................................................... 34 5.5 - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts of Infill Project ..................................................... 35 5.6 - Environmental Checklist Questions ................................................................................. 37 1. Aesthetics ................................................................................................................... 37 2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources ........................................................................... 40 3. Air Quality ................................................................................................................... 44 4. Biological Resources ................................................................................................... 53 5. Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources ...................................................... 58 6. Energy ......................................................................................................................... 64 7. Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................... 67 8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................ 73 9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials .............................................................................. 77 10. Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................................................................... 84 11. Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................... 89 12. Mineral Resources ...................................................................................................... 93 13. Noise ........................................................................................................................... 95 14. Population and Housing ............................................................................................. 99 15. Public Services .......................................................................................................... 101 16. Recreation ................................................................................................................ 104 17. Transportation .......................................................................................................... 106 18. Utilities and Service Systems .................................................................................... 110 19. Wildfire ..................................................................................................................... 119 20. Mandatory Findings of Significance ......................................................................... 121 Section 6: List of Preparers ....................................................................................................... 123 City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Table of Contents Appendix N Checklist iv FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Appendix A: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Analysis Report Appendix B: Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Appendix C: Cultural Resources Supporting Information Appendix D: Geotechnical Evaluation Report Appendix E: Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment, and Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation E.1 - Phase I Environmental Site Assessment E.2 - Phase II Environmental Site Assessment E.3 - Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation Appendix F: Hydrology and Water Quality Supporting Information F.1 - Hydrology Study F.2 - Water Quality Management Plan Appendix G: Noise Impact Analysis Report Appendix H: Traffic Statement Appendix I: Sewer Study List of Tables Table 1: Parking Requirements and Proposed Parking ......................................................................... 10 Table 2: Construction-Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions ................................................... 46 Table 3: Regional Operational Air Quality Emissions ............................................................................ 47 Table 4: Construction Localized Significance Analysis ........................................................................... 48 Table 5: Operational Localized Significance Analysis ............................................................................ 49 Table 6: Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions ......................................................................................... 74 List of Exhibits Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map .......................................................................................................... 15 Exhibit 2: Local Vicinity Map–Aerial Base ............................................................................................. 17 Exhibit 3: General Plan Land Use Map .................................................................................................. 19 Exhibit 4: Zoning Map ........................................................................................................................... 21 Exhibit 5: Site Plan ................................................................................................................................. 23 Exhibit 6: Architectural Style ................................................................................................................. 25 Exhibit 7: Landscaping Plan ................................................................................................................... 27 Exhibit 8: Proximity to High-Quality Transit Corridor ............................................................................ 33 Exhibit 9: Off-site Cross-Connection/Bypass Sewer ............................................................................ 117 City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Acronyms and Abbreviations FirstCarbon Solutions v Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AB Assembly Bill ADA Americans with Disabilities Act AMC Anaheim Municipal Code AMI Area Median Income APN Assessor’s Parcel Number APU Anaheim Public Utilities ARB California Air Resources Board BMP Best Management Practice CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CESA California Endangered Species Act CMP Congestion Management Plan CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level CNPSEI California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory dBA A-weighted decibel DTSC Department of Toxic Substance Control du/ac dwelling units per gross acre EIR Environmental Impact Report ESA Environmental Site Assessment ESL Environmental Screening Level FCS FirstCarbon Solutions FESA Federal Endangered Species Act FTA Federal Transit Administration gpd gallons per day HCP Habitat Conservation Plan HRA Health Risk Assessment HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development HVAC heating, air conditioning, and ventilation IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation kBTU kilo-British Thermal Units kWh kilowatt-hour Leq equivalent continuous sound level LOS Level of Service City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Acronyms and Abbreviations Appendix N Checklist vi FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx LST localized significance threshold MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MM Mitigation Measure MMP Mitigation Monitoring Program mph miles per hour MT CO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent MU Mixed Use MWD Metropolitan Water District NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority OCWD Orange County Water District PDF Project Design Features PPP Plans, Programs, or Policies PV photovoltaic RCP Right of Way Construction Permit R-M Medium Density Residential RO Residential Overlay RV Recreational Vehicle SB Senate Bill SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center SR State Route STC Sound Transmission Class SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan TAZ traffic analysis zone TCR Tribal Cultural Resource TIA Traffic Impact Analysis TPH total petroleum hydrocarbon USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service UST underground storage tank UWMP Urban Water Management Plan VIRE Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled VOC volatile organic compounds WQMP Water Quality Management Plan City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Introduction FirstCarbon Solutions 1 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION National Community Renaissance of California (National Core or Applicant) is seeking approval from the City of Anaheim (City) for the Midway Affordable Housing Community (proposed project) in the City of Anaheim, California. The proposed project includes the development of one L-shaped residential building accommodating 86 units, including 29 one-bedroom units, 35 two-bedroom units and 22 three-bedroom units. The Proposed Project will provide 85 units affordable to households earning less than 60 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI) along with one exempt manager’s unit. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15367, the City has discretionary authority over the proposed project and is the Lead Agency in the preparation of this Appendix N: Infill Environmental Checklist (Appendix N Checklist) and any additional environmental documentation required for the proposed project. The Lead Agency will utilize this document as evidence of whether the proposed project would qualify for the Infill Streamlining Provisions provided by Senate Bill (SB) 226,1 described below. This document utilizes analysis from the previously-certified Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) No. 330 for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update (referred to as the “Update Project”), which was certified by the Anaheim City Council on May 25, 2004. In addition, this document also utilizes analysis from the certified Supplemental EIR No. 346 to Program EIR No. 330 for the City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project (referred to as the “Rezoning Project”), which was certified by the City of Anaheim on September 24, 2013. This document collectively refers to Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 as the “Certified EIR” and the Updated Project and the Rezoning Project are collectively the “Approved Project.” 1.1 - Purpose of the Appendix N: Environmental Checklist This Appendix N Checklist has been prepared in accordance with the following: • CEQA of 1970 (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.); • California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (State CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15000 et seq.), specifically Sections 15060 and 15183.3. Governor Brown signed SB 226 into law in October 2011 to create a new streamlining mechanism in CEQA for infill projects that promote a specific set of environmental policy objectives. The broad purposes of SB 226 are two-fold: 1. Provide flexibility in project design by basing eligibility on environmental performance rather than prescribing specific project characteristics; and 1 Senate Bill 226, Simitian. 2011. Environmental Quality. October 4. Website: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120SB226. Accessed April 11, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Introduction Appendix N Checklist 2 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 2. Allow infill projects to avoid repetitive environmental analysis of environmental effects that were previously analyzed in a prior EIR for a planning-level decision. To qualify for the infill streamlining provision, a project site must either be in a developed urban area or adjoin existing qualified urban uses on 75 percent of the site perimeter. Appendix M of the CEQA Guidelines includes a set of performance standards required by SB 226 that a qualifying project must satisfy in order to be eligible for infill streamlining. As documented by the analysis contained in this checklist, the proposed project meets these performance standards, as further detailed in Section 5.1, Satisfaction of Appendix M Performance Standards. Compliance with the Appendix M performance standards leads to the next step in the infill streamlining process, which is the completion of the Appendix N Checklist. The Appendix N Checklist is a document that evaluates and discloses whether a development project is consistent with its environmental checklist topics and if the development project is eligible to use the infill streamlining process. The Appendix N Checklist also assists the Lead Agency in identifying and summarizing project-specific effects; and, whether a prior programmatic level CEQA document, or uniformly applicable development policies, would or would not address the potential effects of a proposed project, as described in the Appendix N: Infill Environmental Form, contained in the CEQA Guidelines:2 Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur as a result of an infill project, then the checklist answers must indicate whether that impact has already been analyzed in a prior EIR. If the effect of the infill project is not more significant than what has already been analyzed that effect of the infill project is not subject to CEQA. The brief explanation accompanying this determination should include page and section references to the portions of the prior EIR containing the analysis of that effect. The brief explanation shall also indicate whether the prior EIR included any mitigation measures to substantially lessen that effect and whether those measures have been incorporated into the infill project. Section 2.4, Environmental Background, provides a background of the prior environmental analysis. Project Design Features and Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies Throughout this document, three key components and/or types of documents are referenced to support the analysis: 1. Applicant-initiated Project Design Features (PDFs) 2. Existing Standard Conditions applied to all development on the basis of federal, State, or local law 2 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. CEQA Guidelines Appendix N Infill Environmental Checklist Form. Website: https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/ceqa/docs/2016_CEQA_Statutes_and_Guidelines_Appendix_N.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2021. City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Introduction FirstCarbon Solutions 3 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 3. Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies (PPPs), currently in place, which effectively reduce the environmental impacts of the proposed project As described throughout this checklist, the Appendix N analysis identifies Standard Conditions and Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies as PPPs, where applicable, and analyzes PDFs and PPPs to show their effect in reducing potential environmental impacts. Where the application of PDFs and PPPS would not reduce an impact to below a level of significance, applicable Mitigation Measures (MMs) from the Certified EIR (MMP No. 122 and MMP No. 122A), are identified. The City will include these PDFs and PPPs along with applicable MMs as Conditions of Approval of the proposed project. 1.2 - Document Organization This Appendix N Checklist includes the following sections: Section 1. Introduction Provides information about CEQA, its requirements for environmental review, and an explanation of the use of the Appendix N Checklist to evaluate potential impacts of the proposed project on the physical environment Section 2. Project Setting Provides information about the proposed project’s location, the project site, and the environmental setting, including the planning and zoning context Section 3. Project Description Includes a description of the proposed project’s physical features, along with the project’s construction and operational characteristics Section 4. Discretionary Approvals Describes anticipated approvals and permits needed for implementation of the proposed project Section 5. Environmental Checklist Includes the Appendix N Checklist and evaluates the proposed project’s potential to result in significant adverse effects to the physical environment THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Project Setting FirstCarbon Solutions 5 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx SECTION 2: PROJECT SETTING 2.1 - Project Location The proposed project is located at 110 West Midway Drive, in the City of Anaheim, in Orange County, California (Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map). The 2.36-acre project site is located on Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 082-185-01, 082-185-47, 082-185-52, 082-185-53, and 082-185-59. In addition, the project site includes South Zeyn Street, which the Applicant is requesting the City to abandon for the proposed project. The project site is located in the south-central portion of the City of Anaheim. It is located at the southwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and West Midway Drive, and east of a proposed townhome development and Interstate 5 (I-5) (Exhibit 2: Local Vicinity Map– Aerial Base). 2.2 - Environmental Setting 2.2.1 - Land Uses and Designation The majority of the project site is vacant and is occasionally used as storage. A 1-story, 4,590-square- foot office structure is located on APN 082-185-01. In addition, the Applicant is requesting to include South Zeyn Street, located along the project’s western boundary, as part of the project site, which would require street abandonment prior to project approval. Pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code (AMC) Section 18.90.050, a street that is abandoned takes on the General Plan land use designation and zoning of the adjacent property.3 The General Plan designates the project site for Medium Density Residential land use (Exhibit 3: General Plan Land Use Map). The intent of the Medium Density Residential designation is to provide a quality multiple-family living environment with design amenities, such as private open space or recreation areas, business services, swimming pools, etc. The RM-3, RM-3.5, and RM-4 Zones implement the Medium Density Residential land use designation. The project site is zoned as “I” Industrial Zone, “T” Transitional Zone, and the Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone (Exhibit 4: Zoning Map).4,5 The intent of the “I” Industrial Zone is to provide for and encourage the development of industrial uses and their related facilities, recognize the unique and valuable existing industrial land resources, and encourage industrial employment opportunities within the City.6 The intent of the "T" Zone is to provide for a zone to include land that is used for agricultural uses, in a transitory or interim use, restricted to limited uses because of special conditions, or not zoned to one of the zoning districts in this title for whatever reason, including recent annexation. The Applicant is not intending to develop the proposed project in 3 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.90.050 Zone Districts – Interpretation of Boundaries. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/anaheim_ca/0-0-0-71409. Accessed April 18, 2021. 4 City of Anaheim. 2021. Zoning Title 18. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/1871/Zoning-Map?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. 5 City of Anaheim Planning Technology. 2013. Residential Opportunity and Mixed-Use Overlay Zone Parcels. Housing Opportunity Sites from 2006-2014 Housing Element. Map 4 of 5 Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2296/Housing- Opportunity-Sites?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. 6 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.10.020 Intent. Website: http://anaheim-ca.elaws.us/code/muco_t18_ch18.10_sec18.10.020. Accessed April 18, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Project Setting Appendix N Checklist 6 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx accordance with the “I” Industrial Zone or “T” Transitional Zone. As described below, the Applicant intends to develop the proposed project in accordance with the RO Overlay Zone. The RO Overlay Zone provides “by-right” housing development opportunities consistent with a property’s residential General Plan land use designation. This Overlay Zone typically applies to properties currently zoned and/or developed with non-residential uses but designated for multiple- family residential uses by the City’s General Plan. Examples of non-residential zones to which the Overlay Zone may be applied include, but are not limited to, the General Commercial (C-G), Transitional (T), and Industrial (I) zones. The Overlay Zone serves as an implementation tool of the City’s Housing Element of the General Plan by facilitating residential development on identified “housing opportunity sites.”7 The Applicant intends to implement the General Plan Medium Density Residential land use designation through use of the RO Overlay Zone. As indicated in subparagraph 18.34.030.010.0101 of Chapter 18.34 (Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone) of the Anaheim Municipal Code: “Parcels designated as Medium Density Residential in the General Plan Land Use Element shall be subject to the (RM-4) Multiple-Family zoning designation.” Therefore, by applying the RO Overlay Zone, the proposed project would be subject to the development standards of the RM-4 Zone. The proposed project meets the density permitted within the RM-4 Zone, with the application of a 50 percent density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915.8 The RM-4 zone permits a maximum of up to 36 dwelling units per gross acre (du/ac), which equals to 81 dwelling units allowed by right on the 2.26-acre project site. The proposed project is providing 34 percent of the 81 units for extremely-low income households (28 dwelling units), 36 percent for very-low income households (29 dwelling units), and 34 percent for low income households (28 dwelling units). Based on the proposed level of affordability, the proposed project would qualify for a 50 percent density bonus per Section 65915 of the California Government Code, which equates to an additional 41 dwelling units. However, the proposed project is only requesting approval of an additional five dwelling units (86 total dwelling units), which would reflect a 6 percent density bonus. Pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.52.090, the Applicant is requesting the following development incentives: • Approval of Tier 2 Housing incentive related to minimum interior lot line setback. • Approval of Tier 2 Housing incentive related to minimum street frontage landscape setbacks. • Approval of Tier 2 Housing incentive related to minimum unit size. According to the Anaheim General Plan Housing Element, Tier 1 Incentives are granted through ministerial review, and Tier 2 Incentives are granted through a public hearing process before the Planning Commission.9 7 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.34.010 Purpose. Website: http://anaheim-ca.elaws.us/code/muco_t18_ch18.34_sec18.34.010. Accessed April 14, 2021. 8 State of California. 2021. California Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives 65915 - 65918. Website: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=65915. Accessed April 20, 2021. 9 City of Anaheim. 2014. 2014-2021 Housing Element. February. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/1867/M-Housing-Element. Accessed June 14, 2021. City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Project Setting FirstCarbon Solutions 7 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx The above development incentives would allow a reduction in the landscape setback requirements (Tier 2), and allow for a reduction in minimum unit sizes (Tier 2).10 The RM-4 zone requires an interior landscape setback of 10 feet. The proposed project would have a 3-foot landscaped setback along the southern property line. The Tier 1 incentives permit a reduction in the interior landscaped setback to 5 feet. As the applicant is requesting a setback reduction less than 5 feet, the reduced interior landscape setback falls into a Tier 2 incentive. The RM-4 zone requires a project located adjacent to an arterial highway have a landscape setback of no less than 20 feet abutting an arterial highway, and not less than 15 feet abutting any public street other than an arterial highway.11 The Applicant requests a landscape setback of 2 feet from South Anaheim Boulevard (arterial highway) and 5.5 feet from West Midway Avenue. The Tier 1 development incentives allow an applicant for an affordable housing development on a lot with multiple street frontages to request a reduced landscape setback of not less than 15 feet in depth along any arterial highway and a reduced landscaped setback of not less than 10 feet in depth on all other streets. As the Applicant is requesting setback reductions to be less than 15 feet and 10 feet respectively, the reduced landscape setbacks fall into a Tier 2 incentive.12 The Applicant is also requesting a reduced unit size for one and two bedroom units, with 1-bedroom units between 569 square feet and 610 square feet, and 2-bedroom units between 810 square feet and 896 square feet. The minimum size for 1-bedroom units is 700 square feet and 825 square feet for 2-bedroom units. The RM-4 zone allows for a maximum height of 40 feet or three stories.13 The Applicant requests approval of a four-story development with a maximum height of 50 feet. Pursuant to the City’s development incentives, if housing project is located within 0.5 mile of a Major Transit Stop, the project shall also receive a height increase incentive of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet. Bus route 47 and 47A on Anaheim Boulevard are located within 0.5 mile of the project site and operates more than eight times per day. The allowed height increase does not be counted towards the allowed number of incentives.14 2.3 - Surrounding Land uses North: West Midway Drive and Paul Revere Elementary School. East: South Anaheim Boulevard and a parking lot for the Anaheim Marketplace. South: A liquor store and Golden Skies Mobile Home Park. 10 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.52.090 Development Incentives. Website: http://anaheim-ca.elaws.us/code/muco_t18_ch18.52_sec18.52.090. Accessed April 20, 2021. 11 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.06.090 Structural Setbacks. Website: http://anaheim- ca.elaws.us/code/muco_t18_ch18.06_sec18.06.090. Accessed April 14, 2021. 12 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.52.090 Development Incentives. Website: http://anaheim-ca.elaws.us/code/muco_t18_ch18.52_sec18.52.090. Accessed June 10, 2021. 13 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.06.060 Structural Heights. Website: http://anaheim- ca.elaws.us/code/muco_t18_ch18.06_sec18.06.060. Accessed April 14, 2021. 14 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.52.090 Development Incentives. Website: http://anaheim-ca.elaws.us/code/muco_t18_ch18.52_sec18.52.090. Accessed June 10, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Project Setting Appendix N Checklist 8 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx West: A former recreational vehicle (RV) Park that is the project site for a proposed townhome development. 2.4 - Environmental Background In May 2004, the City of Anaheim certified the General Plan and Zoning Code Update Program EIR No. 330 (Program EIR No. 330). Program EIR No. 330 evaluated impacts associated with implementation of the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update (Updated Project) and included a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) No. 122 to mitigate those impacts. The approved and updated General Plan designated the project site for Medium Density Residential land uses. In September 2013, the City of Anaheim certified Supplemental EIR No. 346 for the Anaheim Housing Opportunities Site Rezoning Project (Rezoning Project). The City also approved a Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 122A (MMP No. 122A) as part of Supplemental EIR No. 346 supplemented Program EIR No. 330 in the areas of air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, noise, and transportation and traffic. This document collectively refers to Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 as the “Certified EIR” and collectively refers to the Updated Project and the Rezoning Project as the “Approved Project.” The Certified EIR and the Approved Project effectively serve as the “baseline” for the environmental impact analysis of the proposed project. The baseline mitigation includes all applicable mitigation measures from MMP No. 122 and MMP No. 122A. The Rezoning Project implemented a key strategy of the City’s 2006-2014 General Plan Housing Element by rezoning 166 Housing Opportunities Sites identified in the Housing Element. The rezoning included the application of an overlay zone to each property: either the Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone or the Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone. Both overlay zones allow “by-right” housing development. The Housing Element identified the project sites as Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151; all of which received the RO Overlay Zone as a part of the Rezoning Project. One of the City’s goals in the Rezoning Project was to provide updated community-level environmental review to facilitate redevelopment. The Rezoning and application of overlay zones provides the opportunity for applicants to utilize Public Resources Code Section 21159.24, which allows for an exemption from further CEQA review for urban infill residential development that meets certain criteria. Properties designated as Housing Opportunity Sites by the General Plan would quality for a Statutory Infill Housing Exemption, as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21159.20. The City also intended for future projects consistent with the Certified EIR and Approved Project to be able to utilize the streamlining provisions of SB 266, as implemented through CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3, Streamlining for Infill Projects, which went into effect January 1, 2013. City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Project Description FirstCarbon Solutions 9 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx SECTION 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 - Project Analyzed in the Certified EIR The Rezoning Project added the RO Overlay Zone to the project site and identified the project site as Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151.15 The potential number of units identified for Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151, as listed in Table 3-2 of the Draft Supplemental EIR No. 346, was 63 units. The proposed number of dwelling units (86 units), exceeds this number; however, it is consistent with the allowed number of units per acre in the RM-4 Zone, pursuant to the density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915.16 3.2 - Proposed Project The proposed project would include the demolition of all existing structures on the project site and the development of 86 housing units in one four-story building (Exhibit 5: Site Plan). The proposed project would include 29 one-bedroom units, 35 two-bedroom units, and 22 three-bedroom units. The proposed project would also provide amenities including a pool, a playground, a dog park, a community room, a public flex space, and a leasing office. The proposed project would include 128 parking spaces. Access and Circulation Vehicle access to the project site would be via an entryway from West Midway Drive and a restricted right-in/right-out only access entryway from Anaheim Boulevard. These entrances would connect via a private drive aisle at the southern portion of the site that would lead to the gated residential area (Exhibit 5: Site Plan). The entrance from Anaheim Boulevard would also provide the access service for Golden Skies Mobile Home Park to the south. Pedestrian circulation would be via a walkway along West Midway Drive, the proposed private drive to the west, and the courtyard, which would connect to the existing City sidewalk along Anaheim Boulevard. A bicycle entry would also be located on West Midway Drive. Parking In accordance with California Government Code Section 65915 Subdivision (P), the proposed project is required to provide 0.5 parking space per non-special needs affordable unit.17 California Government Code Section 65915(P)(4) states that there are no parking requirements for special needs units if the housing development is located within 0.5 mile of a fixed bus route that operates at least eight times per day.18 The project site is within 0.5 mile of bus routes 47 and 47A, which 15 City of Anaheim. 2014. 2014-2021 Housing Element. Appendix B-2: Mixed Use and Residential Opportunity Overlay Sites. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2138/Z4-2014-2021-Housing-Element-Adopted-2414?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. 16 City of Anaheim. 2013. City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. Table 3-2 Parcels to Apply Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. 17 State of California. 2021. California Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives 65915 - 65918. Website: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=65915. Accessed April 20, 2021. 18 State of California. 2021. California Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives 65915 - 65918. Website: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=65915. Accessed April 20, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Project Description Appendix N Checklist 10 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx operate more the eight times per day. Manager, flex space, and community center parking ratios are pursuant to Section 18.42 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Table 1 compares the amount of parking required and the proposed number of parking spaces. Table 1: Parking Requirements and Proposed Parking Uses Unit/Size Parking Ratio Required Parking Special Needs Units 8 units No minimum parking requirement 0 Affordable Housing Units 77 units 0.5 space/unit 38.5 2-Bedroom Manager Unit 1 unit 2.25 spaces/unit 2.25 Community Center 3,300 square feet 1 space/250 square feet 13.2 Flex Space 1,700 square feet 1 space/250 square feet 6.8 Total Parking Required 61 Total Parking Provided 128 Surface parking for the public would be along the driveway from Anaheim Boulevard and on the private driveway from West Midway Drive. A vehicular gate would be at the entrance to the residents parking court to secure the residents parking from the public parking. The proposed project would include 92 bicycle parking spaces. Building Design The proposed building would be four stories tall with a maximum height of 50 feet. The building would contain 29 one-bedroom units, 35 two-bedroom units, and 22 three-bedroom units, with sizes ranging from 569 to 1,054 gross square feet, depending on design and number of bedrooms. Each unit would have a private deck or patio ranging in size from 45 square feet to 84 square feet. The ground floor of the proposed building would include 13 residential units, public flex space, community center, and recreational courtyard. The second floor would contain 21 units, the third floor would contain 27 units, and the fourth floor would contain 25 units. Building exteriors would incorporate white and grey stucco bodies, taupe fiber cement panels, black fiber cement siding, ash and white brick veneer, bright accent colors, and vinyl window (Exhibit 6: Architectural Style). Project Amenities and Landscaping The proposed project would provide 1,700 square feet of public flex space on the ground floor that could provide space for a range of uses or community services. The ground floor would also contain a 3,300 square foot community room, as well as a leasing office. The proposed project would include an outdoor recreational courtyard with a tot lot, community gardens, a swimming pool, an outdoor fireplace lounge area, restrooms, and a dog park. In total, the City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Project Description FirstCarbon Solutions 11 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx proposed project would include 22,220 square feet of common open spaces and 6,172 square feet of private open space. Landscaping consisting of trees, shrubs, and groundcover would be included throughout the proposed project and along each side of the project site. All plants would be compliant with California Green Building requirements for water conservation and the California Invasive Plant Council requirements for non-invasive plants (Exhibit 7: Landscaping Plan). Infrastructure The proposed project would connect to existing water and sanitary lines on West Midway Drive and install storm drains, catch basins, and modular wetland units on-site. An off-site sewer improvement to connect the North Katella sewer and the South Katella sewer would be installed at the intersection of Harbor boulevard and Katella Avenue. 3.3 - Construction The Applicant anticipates that construction the proposed project would begin in March 2022 and end in September 2023. Construction activities would include demolition of the existing paved surfaces and structures, site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coatings, and paving. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Required Approvals FirstCarbon Solutions 13 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx SECTION 4: REQUIRED APPROVALS As mentioned previously, the City of Anaheim has discretionary authority over the proposed project and is the CEQA Lead Agency for the preparation of this Appendix N Checklist. In order to implement the project, the Applicant would need to secure the following ministerial and discretionary permits/approvals: • Tentative Parcel Map for Lot Merger or Conveyance Purposes • Abandonment of South Zeyn Street • Approval of Tier 2 Housing incentive related to minimum interior lot line setback, • Approval of Tier 2 Housing incentive related to minimum street frontage landscape setbacks, • Approval of Tier 2 Housing incentive related to minimum unit size. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Los Angeles OrangeCounty SanBernardinoCounty Orange County Los Angeles County 91 83 91 55 57 241 261 241 405 5 Orange C ounty Riverside County 60 110 710 5 605 10 5 405 22 133 1 1 210 P a c i f i c O c e a n Prado FloodControl Basin SantiagoReservoir ClevelandNationalForest San Dimas CovinaAlhambraEl Monte Pomona OntarioEast LosAngeles Walnut ChinoCommerce Whittier Norwalk Yorba LindaFullerton Anaheim OrangeLong Beach Garden Grove Seal Beach Santa Ana FountainValleyHuntingtonBeach Costa Mesa Irvine Lake Forest Newport Beach Laguna Hills Laguna Niguel San JuanCapistrano Bell Chino Hills UplandClaremont Montclair Laguna Woods Exhibit 1Regional Location Map Text Project Site Source: Census 2000 Data, The California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL). CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTAPPENDIX N CHECKLIST 00550086 • 04/2021 | 1_regional.mxd Project Site Miles 0 5 102.5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 00550086 • 04/2021 | 2_local_aerial.mxd Exhibit 2Local Vicinity MapAerial Base Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery. CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTAPPENDIX N CHECKLIST Cerritos Ave West Midway Dr Guinida Ln A n a h e i m B l v d Ball Rd Winston Rd O l i v e S t Katella Ave L e w i s S t Anaheim Blvd Disney Way 72 V e r m o n t A v e 5 Legend Project Site Feet 0 1,000 2,000500 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 00550086 06/2021 | 5_site_plan.cdr• Source: KTGY Architecture & Planning, June 11, 2021. CITY OF ANAHEIM MIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECT APPENDIX N CHECKLIST Exhibit 5 Site Plan W E S T M I D W A Y D R I V E A N A H E I M B O U L E V A R D THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 00550086 06/2021 | 6_architectural_style.cdr• Source: KTGY Architecture & Planning, May 7, 2021. CITY OF ANAHEIM MIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECT APPENDIX N CHECKLIST Exhibit 6 Architectural Style THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 29 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx SECTION 5: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM This Appendix N Checklist assists the Lead Agency in the evaluation of potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies (PPPs), and mitigation measures from the Certified EIR (MMP No. 122 and MMP No. 122A), that are applicable to the proposed project are included in the discussion for each topic area. As discussed above in Section 2.4, Environmental Background, Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 analyzed the project site as a Housing Opportunity Site; therefore, the proposed project is eligible for infill streamlining pursuant to Section 15183.3 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21094.5 of the Public Resources Code, adopted per SB 226. The maximum buildout of Housing Opportunity Sites 137-146, 149, and 152, as listed in Table 3-2 of the Supplemental EIR No. 346, is 198 residential units. The proposed project involves the demolition of the former RV Park and construction of 156 residential units. SB 226 eliminates repetitive analysis of effects of a project that were previously analyzed in a programmatic EIR for a planning level decision or that are substantially mitigated by uniformly applied development policies. This Appendix N Checklist compares the proposed project's effects with the analysis in the Certified EIR. Depending on this evaluation, the Lead Agency may determine that no further CEQA review is required, or it may prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, sustainable communities environmental assessment, or infill EIR. 1. Project title: Midway Townhomes 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Anaheim; 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California 92805 3. Contact person and phone number: Andy T. Uk, Associate Planner; 714.765.5238; auk@anaheim.net 4. Project location: 110 West Midway Drive, Anaheim, CA 92805 (APNs 082-185-01, 082-185- 47, 082-185-52, 082-185-53, and 082-185-59) 5. Project sponsor's name and address: National CORE; 9421 Haven Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 6. General plan designation: Medium Density Residential 7. Zoning: • “I” Industrial Zone, which allows industrial uses and their related facilities • “T” Transitional Zone applied to properties in transitory or interim use • Residential Opportunities (RO) Overlay Zone, which allows “by-right” housing development consistent with residential General Plan designations, on sites that are zoned or developed with non-residential uses City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 30 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 8. Prior Environmental Documents Analyzing the Effects of the Infill Project (including State Clearinghouse Number if assigned): • Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report No. 330, SCH No. 2003041105. Certified in May 2004. • Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 346, SCH No. 2003041105. Certified in July 2013. 9. Location of Prior Environmental Documents Analyzing the Effects of the Infill Project: Anaheim Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim CA 92805; City’s website at http://www.anaheim.net/712/General-Plan. 10. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The Applicant is seeking approval of a density bonus as well as a building height, building setback, and unit size incentives in order to a allow for the construction of a mixed-use building with 86 residential units and several publicly accessible amenities as part of the proposed project. The proposed project would include the demolition of all existing structures on-site and the development of 86 residential units. The proposed density would be 38 du/ac. The proposed development would include one-bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom residential units with amenities such as a dog park, a community garden, a swimming pool, a lounge area, a leasing office for supportive services and programs, and a flex space. The proposed project would provide 129 surface automobile parking and 92 bicycle parking spaces. The Applicant anticipates that construction of the proposed project would begin March 2022 and end in September 2023. 11. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings, including any prior uses of the project site, or, if vacant, describe the urban uses that exist on at least 75 percent of the project’s perimeter: To the north of the project site are West Midway Drive and Paul Revere Elementary School. To the east of the project site are South Anaheim Boulevard and a parking lot for the Anaheim Marketplace. To the south of the project site are Golden Skies Mobile Home Park and a liquor store. To the west of the project site is a former RV park is that the project site for a proposed townhome development. The majority of the project site is vacant and is occasionally used as storage. A 1-story, 4,590- square-foot office structure is located on APN 082-185-01. 12. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 31 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 5.1 - The Proposed Project is an Infill Project Consistent with Guidelines Section 15183.3 To be eligible for the streamlining procedures in CEQA Guidelines 15183.3, an infill project must: 1. Be located in an urban area on a site that either has been previously developed or that adjoins existing qualified urban uses on at least seventy-five percent of the site’s perimeter. For the purpose of this subdivision “adjoin” means the infill project is immediately adjacent to qualified urban uses, or is only separated from such uses by an improved public right-of- way; The proposed project is located in an urban area on a site that has been previously developed. 2. Satisfy the performance standards provided in Appendix M; and The proposed project satisfies the performance standards provided in Appendix M, see Section 5.2, below. 3. Be consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area in either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning strategy. The proposed project is consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies in Connect SoCal – The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and approved on September 3, 2020, by the SCAG Regional Council. The project site is located within a Priority Growth Area, as shown on Exhibit 3.4 (Priority Growth Areas & Growth Constraints) of Connect SoCal. The proposed project would provide housing in close proximity to high quality transit and job opportunities, a key Connect SoCal strategy for future growth. 5.2 - Satisfaction of Appendix M Performance Standards Provide the information demonstrating that the infill project satisfies the performance standards in Appendix M below. For mixed-use projects, the predominant use will determine which performance standards apply to the entire project. 1. Does the non-residential infill project include a renewable energy feature? If so, describe below. If not, explain below why it is not feasible to do so. The proposed project is a residential infill project and is therefore not required to include on- site renewable energy generation facilities. While Appendix M does not require renewable energy features for residential projects, the proposed project would comply with California Energy Code requirements for high-rise residential buildings to be "solar-ready," which refers City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 32 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx to a building's structural and electrical design which may accommodate future installation of solar panels.19 2. If the project site is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, either provide documentation of remediation or describe the recommendations provided in a preliminary endangerment assessment or comparable document that will be implemented as part of the project. The project is not included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. Refer to Section 5.9 of this document. 3. If the infill project includes residential units located within 500 feet, or such distance that the local agency or local air district has determined is appropriate based on local conditions, of a high-volume roadway or other significant source of air pollution, as defined in Appendix M, describe the measures that the project will implement to protect public health. Such measures may include policies and standards identified in the local general plan, specific plans, zoning code or community risk reduction plan, or measures recommended in a health risk assessment, to promote the protection of public health. Identify the policies or standards, or refer to the site specific analysis, below. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The project site is more than 500 feet away from the I-5. 4. For residential projects, the project satisfies which of the following? Located within a low vehicle travel area, as defined in Appendix M. (Attach VMT map.) Located within 0.5 mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor. (Attach map illustrating proximity to transit.) Consists of 300 or fewer units that are each affordable to low income households. (Attach evidence of legal commitment to ensure the continued availability and use of the housing units for lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, for a period of at least 30 years, at monthly housing costs, as determined pursuant to Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code. The project site is located in a traffic analysis zone (TAZ) identified by the City’s Housing Opportunity Sites, Supplemental EIR No. 346, Figure 3-4, City of Anaheim Low VMT Areas. There is a per capita 9.7 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) within the project site’s TAZ, which is less than the regional average of 16.4 VMT per capita. Therefore, the project site is located within a “low vehicle travel area” as defined for residential infill projects in Appendix M of the CEQA Guidelines. In addition, the project site is within 0.5 mile of an existing bus stop on Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Route 47 on Anaheim Boulevard (Exhibit 8: Proximity to High-Quality Transit Corridor), which has AM and PM peak-hour headways of 15 minutes. This 15-minute AM and PM peak-hour headway allows the project site to qualify as a high-quality transit corridor. 19 ICC Digital Codes. 2019. 2019 California Energy Code, Title 24, Part 6. Website: https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAEC2019/subchapter-6-nonresidential-high-rise-residential-and-hotel-motel-occupancies-additions-alterations-and-repairs. Accessed April 23, 2021. 00550086 • 04/2021 | 8_proximity_to_HQTC.mxd Exhibit 8Proximity toHigh-Quality Transit Corridor Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery. CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTAPPENDIX N CHECKLIST Cerritos Ave West Midway Dr Guinida Ln A n a h e i m B l v d Winston Rd Disney Way 72 Palais Rd Z e y n S t 5 Legend Project Site Bus Stop High-Quality Transit Corridor Feet 0 500 1,000250 City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 34 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 5.3 - Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The infill project could potentially result in one or more of the following effects (CEQA Guidelines, Appendix N.) 5.4 - Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed infill project WOULD NOT have any significant effects on the environment that either have not already been analyzed in a prior EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21094.5, CEQA does not apply to such effects. A Notice of Determination (Section 15094) will be filed. I find that although the proposed infill project will have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than describe in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. With respect to those effects that are subject to CEQA, I find that such effects WOULD NOT be significant and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION, or if the project is a Transit Priority Project a Sustainable Communities Assessment, will be prepared. I find that the proposed infill project will have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than describe in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. I find that although those effects could be significant, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the infill project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, or if the project is a Transit Priority Project a SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, will be prepared. I find that the proposed infill project would have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than described in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. I find that those effects WOULD be significant, and an infill ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required to analyze those effects that are subject to CEQA. Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards/Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Services Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance Date: Signed: June 15, 2021 City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 35 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 5.5 - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts of Infill Project 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. For the purposes of this checklist, “prior EIR” means the environmental impact report verified for a planning level decision, as supplemented by any subsequent or supplemental environmental impact reports, negative declarations, or addenda to those documents. “Planning level decision” means the enactment or amendment of a general plan, community plan, specific plan, or zoning code. (Section 15183.3(e).) 4. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur as a result of an infill project, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact has already been analyzed in a prior EIR. If the effect of the infill project is not more significant than what has already been analyzed that effect of the infill project is not subject to CEQA. The brief explanation accompanying this determination should include page and section references to the portions of the prior EIR containing the analysis of that effect. The brief explanation shall also indicate whether the prior EIR included any mitigation measures to substantially lessen that effect and whether those measures has been incorporated into the infill project. 5. If the infill project would cause a significant adverse effect that either is specific to the project site and was not analyzed in a prior EIR or is more significant than what was analyzed in a prior EIR, the lead agency must determine whether uniformly applicable development policies or standards that have been adopted by the lead agency, or city or county, would substantially mitigate that effect. If so, the checklist shall explain how the infill project’s implementation of the uniformly applicable development policies will substantially mitigate that effect. That effect of the infill project is not subject to CEQA if the lead agency makes a finding, based upon substantial evidence, that the development policies or standards will substantially mitigate that effect. 6. If all effects of an infill project were either analyzed in a prior EIR or are substantially mitigated by uniformly applicable development policies or standards, CEQA does not apply to the project, and the lead agency shall file a Notice of Determination. 7. Effects of an infill project that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or that uniformly applicable development policies or standards do not substantially mitigate, are subject to CEQA. With respect to those effects of the infill project that are subject to CEQA, the checklist shall indicate whether those effects are significant, less than significant with mitigation, or City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 36 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx less than significant. If there are one or more “Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an infill EIR is required. The infill EIR should be limited to analysis of those effects determined to be significant. (Sections 15128, 15183.3(d).) 8. “Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures will reduce an effect of an infill project that is subject to CEQA from “Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how those measures reduce the effect to a less than significant level. If the effects of an infill project that are subject to CEQA are less than significant with mitigation incorporated, the lead agency may prep a Mitigated Negative Declaration. If all of the effects of the infill project that are subject to CEQA are less than significant, the lead agency may prepare a Negative Declaration. 9. The analysis of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 37 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 5.6 - Environmental Checklist Questions Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 1. Aesthetics Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a State Scenic Highway? c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to scenic resources, scenic vistas, visual character, or light and glare upon implementation of General Plan goals and policies, and existing codes and regulations. No mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122.20 20 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.1, Aesthetics, Pages 5-1 to 5-12. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2183/51-Aesthetics-?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 38 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would not result in new impacts or impacts greater than those identified in EIR No. 330. No new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.21 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would not be located within or near any areas designated as a scenic vista. According to Program EIR No. 330, the open space features of Anaheim Hills are scenic vistas, which are located approximately five miles to the northeast of the project site. Due to the distance from the project site and intervening urban development between the project site and Anaheim Hills, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on the scenic vistas in Anaheim Hills. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to scenic vistas that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated by uniformly applicable development policies. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a State Scenic Highway? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would not be located within or near a State Scenic Highway. According to Program EIR No. 330, a 4.5-mile segment of State Route (SR) 91 from SR-55 to the Weir Canyon Road interchange is a scenic highway. The nearest portion of the scenic highway is located approximately five miles to the northeast of the project site. The project site’s distance and its location between intervening urban development and the scenic highway, would not result in a substantial adverse effect on any scenic resources such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related impacts within a State scenic highway that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated by uniformly applicable development policies. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? 21 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 7, CEQA Mandated Sections, Page 7-2 and Appendix A, Initial Study, Page 27. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 39 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is in a highly developed and urbanized area. While the proposed project would require approval of height and setback incentives, these incentives are permitted under Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.52.090. The proposed project would be consistent with its zoning and therefore would not create any new or increased impacts associated with zoning and regulations governing scenic quality that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed. The proposed project would not result in impacts that the application of uniformly applicable development policies could not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Because the proposed project is in a developed area, it would not substantially increase the light or glare at the project site that would adversely affect day or nighttime views. The proposed project would use typical residential construction materials such as stucco, cement, and glass, and would not use reflective materials that would result in glare. In addition, the proposed project would be subject to building code requirements that include approval of exterior lighting plans to ensure the shielding of exterior lighting fixtures to prevent light spill. With the residential nature of the proposed project and upon the approval of the lighting plans, the proposed project would not result in new or more significant impacts related to light and glare that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed. Additionally, the proposed project would not result in more significant or more severe impacts that uniformly applicable development policies could not mitigate. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 40 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Environmental Evaluation In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) regarding the State’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 41 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in no potential impacts to agricultural and forest resources and no mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122.22 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.23 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project area is classified as Urban and Built-Up Land, according to the California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency.24 The proposed project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to nonagricultural uses and would have no impact. The project site is within the “I” Industrial Zone, “T” Transistional Zone, and the Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone (Exhibit 4: Zoning Map).25,26 Although agricultural uses are permitted within the T Zone, the project site is located in a highly urbanized area and agricultural uses are not present on this site. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to farmland conversion that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate, therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. 22 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 11. Impacts Found Not to be Significant. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2203/11-Impacts-Found-Not-to-be-Significant-?bidId= Accessed April 21, 2021 23 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 7. CEQA Mandated Sections. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 21, 2021 24 California Department of Conservation. 2016. Important Farmland Finder. Website: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed April 21, 2021. 25 City of Anaheim. 2021. Zoning Title 18. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/1871/Zoning-Map?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. 26 City of Anaheim Planning Technology. 2013. Residential Opportunity and Mixed-Use Overlay Zone Parcels. Housing Opportunity Sites from 2006-2014 Housing Element. Map 4 of 5 Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2296/Housing-Opportunity-Sites?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 42 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The 2014-2021 Housing Element identifies the project site as Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151 in the Supplemental EIR No. 346; all of which received the RO Overlay Zone as a part of the Rezoning Project, which allows for housing development. Therefore, the proposed townhome development would not conflict with any existing zoning for agricultural use. According to the California Department of Conservation, the City of Anaheim does not contain Williamson Act Contract Land.27 The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to potential conflicts with existing agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act contract that either have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate, therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is within the “I” Industrial Zone, “T” Transitional Zone, and the Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone (Exhibit 4: Zoning Map).28,29 The Rezoning Project designated the project site as a RO Overlay Zone, which allows for housing development. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to forest land and timberland that either have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate, therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? and e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non- forest use? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site does not currently contain forest land or agricultural land. The project site is within the “I” Industrial Zone, “T” Transititional Zone, and the Residential 27 California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. 2017. State of California Williamson Contract Land. Website: https://planning.lacity.org/eir/HollywoodCenter/Deir/ELDP/(E)%20Initial%20Study/Initial%20Study/Attachment%20B%20Reference s/California%20Department%20of%20Conservation%20Williamson%20Map%202016.pdf. Accessed April 21, 2021. 28 City of Anaheim. 2021. Zoning Title 18. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/1871/Zoning-Map?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. 29 City of Anaheim Planning Technology. 2013. Residential Opportunity and Mixed-Use Overlay Zone Parcels. Housing Opportunity Sites from 2006-2014 Housing Element. Map 4 of 5 Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2296/Housing-Opportunity-Sites?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 43 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone (Exhibit 4: Zoning Map).30,31 The Rezoning Project designated the project site as a RO Overlay Zone, which allows for housing development. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to loss or conversion of agricultural or forest land that either have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate, therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. 30 City of Anaheim. 2021. Zoning Title 18. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/1871/Zoning-Map?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. 31 City of Anaheim Planning Technology. 2013. Residential Opportunity and Mixed-Use Overlay Zone Parcels. Housing Opportunity Sites from 2006-2014 Housing Element. Map 4 of 5 Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2296/Housing-Opportunity-Sites?bidId=. Accessed April 14, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 44 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 3. Air Quality Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors or) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would generate emissions in excess of the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) regional thresholds for CO, ROG, NOx and PM10. However, the General Plan is consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and other regional plan strategies to reduce the number and length of trips in the region and would improve the balance between jobs and housing at the sub-regional level. While mitigation measures included in the EIR would reduce emissions, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Impacts associated with potential obstruction of applicable air quality plans, violation of air quality standards, exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and odors were all less than significant without the need for mitigation.32 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Approved Project would remain significant and unavoidable with regard to regional thresholds. Impacts associated with exposing sensitive receptors to major sources 32 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.2, Air Quality, Pages 5-13 to 5-34. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2184/52-Air-Quality-?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 45 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx of air pollution were found to be less than significant with the addition of a new mitigation measure, MM 5.2-7. MM 5.2-7 requires the preparation of a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) for certain projects in order to reduce the air quality land use compatibility impacts of the Approved Project to less than significant. All other impacts were found to be less than significant.33 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project The following analysis is based on the Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Energy Analysis Report (Air Quality Report) prepared by Vista Environmental, dated May 5, 2021 (Appendix A). Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The Air Quality Report examined the proposed project’s impact using the SCAQMD’s recommended criteria. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency: • Criterion 1: Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. • Criterion 2: Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP, or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase. The first criterion represents an assessment of the overall impacts associated with the proposed project. As discussed below, the proposed project would not result in exceedances of SCAQMD’s regional thresholds or other air quality standards, contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore Criterion 1 does not indicate any significant impacts. The second criterion examines the proposed project’s consistency with assumptions made in the AQMP. The AQMP is based on land use patterns and forecasts contained in local general plans and other land use planning documents. As the proposed project is consistent with the City of Anaheim General Plan, it would follow that the proposed project is consistent with the assumptions made for Anaheim in the AQMP. Therefore Criterion 2 does not indicate any significant impacts. Furthermore, it should be noted that the proposed project would comply with all applicable rules and regulations, including SCAQMD Rule 403 (reducing fugitive dust during construction), state building code requirements, and others as detailed in the Air Quality Report. Step 3 does not indicate any significant impacts. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with the AQMP. 33 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 1. Air Quality. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2263/51-Air-Quality?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 46 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx As previously noted, the Certified EIR determined that buildout of the Approved Project would result in a less than significant impact related to confliction with or obstruction of the applicable air quality plan. The proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to conflicting with or obstructing the applicable air quality plan. In addition, the proposed project would not introduce impacts that have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Within the SCAQMD, this impact relates to regional criteria pollutant impacts, determined by the comparison of the proposed project’s construction and operational emissions to SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2016.3.2 calculated emissions associated with the proposed project. Detailed modeling assumptions and methodology are contained in the Air Quality Report; however, though it should be noted that no mitigation measures were included in the modeling. Table 2 and Table 3 below provide the results of the modeling. Table 2: Construction-Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions Activity Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day) VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Demolition – – – – – – On-site1 1.69 16.62 13.96 0.02 1.45 0.88 Off-site2 0.11 2.04 0.96 0.01 0.30 0.24 Total 1.80 18.66 14.92 0.03 1.74 1.11 Grading – – – – – – On-site 1.54 16.98 9.22 0.02 3.70 2.20 Off-site 0.14 3.37 1.30 0.01 0.37 0.11 Total 1.68 20.35 10.52 0.03 4.06 2.31 Building Construction (year 2022) – – – – – – On-site 1.86 14.60 14.35 0.03 0.70 0.67 Off-site 0.40 1.97 3.04 0.01 1.14 0.31 Total 2.26 16.57 17.39 0.04 1.85 0.99 Combined Building Construction (year 2023) and Architectural Coatings On-site 7.75 14.93 16.03 0.03 0.68 0.66 Off-site 0.44 1.54 3.31 0.01 1.34 0.37 Total 8.18 16.47 19.34 0.04 2.03 1.02 Paving – – – – – – City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 47 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Activity Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day) VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 On-site 0.98 8.61 11.68 0.02 0.43 0.40 Off-site 0.06 0.03 0.40 0.00 0.17 0.05 Total 1.03 8.64 12.08 0.02 0.60 0.45 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 8.18 20.35 19.34 0.04 4.06 2.31 SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Notes: NOX = oxides of nitrogen; VOC = volatile organic compounds; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides PM10 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less PM2.5 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers. SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District 1 On-site emissions from equipment not operated on public roads. 2 Off-site emissions from vehicles operating on public roads. Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2. Table 3: Regional Operational Air Quality Emissions Activity Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day) VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Area Sources1 2.31 0.10 7.10 0.00 0.04 0.04 Energy Usage2 0.03 0.24 0.11 0.00 0.02 0.02 Mobile Sources3 0.58 1.90 6.04 0.02 2.06 0.56 Total Emissions 2.92 2.24 13.25 0.02 2.12 0.62 SCAQMD Operational Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Notes: NOX = oxides of nitrogen; VOC = volatile organic compounds; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides PM10 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less PM2.5 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District 1 Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, hearths, and landscaping equipment. 2 Energy usage consist of emissions from natural gas usage (non-hearth). 3 Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust. Source: Calculated from CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2. As shown, construction and operational emissions do not exceed SCAQMD regional emissions thresholds of significance for any pollutant. Because the project’s construction and operational emissions are far below SCAQMD regional emissions thresholds of significance for any pollutant, the additional emissions associated with construction of the bypass sewer (as required by PPP UTIL-1) City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 48 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx would not cause the proposed project to exceed these thresholds. As previously noted, the Certified EIR determined that buildout of the Approved Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to cumulatively considerable increase in criteria pollutants. As illustrated above, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to criteria pollutants and would not introduce impacts that have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. This impact relates to the potential for sensitive receptors to be exposed to substantial concentrations of localized criteria pollutant emissions, toxic air contaminants (TACs), carbon monoxide (CO) hotspots, or asbestos. The basis for the analysis of the local air quality emissions from construction was the methodology described in Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (LST Methodology), prepared by SCAQMD, and revised October 2009. The LST Methodology found the primary criteria pollutant emissions of concern are NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. In order to determine if any of these pollutants require a detailed analysis of the local air quality impacts, each phase of construction was screened using the SCAQMD’s Mass Rate LST Look-up Tables. The Look-up Tables were developed by the SCAQMD in order to readily determine if the daily on-site emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 from the proposed project could result in a significant impact to the local air quality. Further modeling assumptions and details can be found in the Air Quality Report prepared by Vista Environmental, dated May 5, 2021. This report is included in Appendix A of this document. Table 4 and Table 5 below show the results of the LST analysis. Table 4: Construction Localized Significance Analysis Construction Phase Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1 NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 Demolition2 16.88 14.08 1.48 0.90 Grading2 17.40 9.38 3.74 2.21 Building Construction (Year 2022) 14.85 14.73 0.84 0.71 Combined Building Construction and Architectural Coatings (Year 2023) 15.12 16.44 0.85 0.70 Paving 8.61 11.73 0.45 0.41 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 17.40 16.44 3.74 2.21 SCAQMD Local Construction Thresholds3 115 715 6 4 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 49 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Construction Phase Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1 NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 Notes: NOX = oxides of nitrogen; VOC = volatile organic compounds; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx= sulfur oxides PM10 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less PM2.5 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District 1 The Pollutant Emissions include 100 percent of the On-Site emissions (off-road equipment and fugitive dust) and 1/8 of the Off-Site emissions (on road trucks and worker vehicles), in order to account for the on-road emissions that occur within a 0.25 mile of the project site. 2 Demolition and Grading phases based on adherence to fugitive dust suppression requirements from SCAQMD Rule 403. 3 The nearest off-site sensitive receptors are site are mobile homes located adjacent to the south of the project site. According to SCAQMD methodology, all receptors closer than 25 meters are based on the 25-meter threshold. Source: Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look-up Tables for two acres in Air Monitoring Area 17, Central Orange County. Table 5: Operational Localized Significance Analysis On-site Emission Source Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day) NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 Area Sources 0.10 7.10 0.04 0.04 Energy Usage 0.24 0.11 0.02 0.02 Mobile Sources 0.24 0.75 0.26 0.07 Total Emissions 0.58 7.96 0.32 0.13 SCAQMD Local Operational Thresholds1 115 715 2 1 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No Notes: NOX = oxides of nitrogen; VOC = volatile organic compounds; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx= sulfur oxides PM10 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less PM2.5 = particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District1 The nearest off-site sensitive receptors are mobile homes located adjacent to the south side of the project site. According to SCAQMD methodology, all receptors closer than 25 meters are based on the 25-meter threshold. Source: Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look-up Tables for two acres in Air Monitoring Area 17, Central Orange County. As shown, the proposed project would not exceed the LSTs for construction and operation for any pollutants and the impacts would be less than significant for localized criteria pollutants. In addition, the proposed construction of the sewer bypass (as required by PPP UTIL-1) would not result in a significant impact related to these pollutants; because the proposed bypass sewer’s distance from the nearest sensitive receptors is beyond the screening limit of 500 meters (1,640 feet) as described in the LST Methodology, the localized concentrations of pollutants would be negligible. Regarding TACs, the proposed project would not be a source of TACs during operation. There is the potential for emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM), which is a TAC, during construction of the proposed project. However, these activities would be short-term in nature and would not likely have a significant impact with regards to sensitive receptors. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 50 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Supplemental EIR No. 346 analyzed the potential for the proposed project to expose project residents to TACs due to the site’s proximity to the I-5 freeway. The EIR found that the potential for a significant impact existed, and introduced Mitigation Measure (MM) 5.2-7, which required property owners/developers for residential or residential mixed-use projects to prepare a HRA for any project within 500 feet of I-5. The proposed project is not located within 500 feet of I-5 (approximately 780 feet away) and therefore, no additional analysis is required. The proposed project would not create a CO hotspot, as shown by comparison with the LST for CO for the proposed project in Table 5. As discussed in the 1992 CO Plan and subsequent plan updates, peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the South Coast Air Basin are due to unusual meteorological and topographical conditions and not the impact of particular intersections.34 Considering the region’s unique meteorological conditions and the increasingly stringent CO emissions standards, CO modeling was performed as part of 1992 CO Plan and subsequent plan updates and air quality management plans. In the 1992 CO Plan, a CO hot spot analysis was conducted for four busy intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. The intersections evaluated included Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway (Lynwood); Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue (Westwood); Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue (Hollywood); and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard (Inglewood). These analyses did not predict a violation of CO standards. The busiest intersection evaluated was that at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. The modeling results and the determinations of this CO hot spot analysis is utilized in this analysis as the basis for determining whether the proposed project would result in a CO hot spot at impacted intersections and roadway segments. Therefore, the proposed project is not considered to be in an area that experiences a CO hotspot. Finally, the proposed project is not located in an area known to contain naturally-occurring asbestos, so that disturbance of the ground would not result in the release of naturally-occurring asbestos. There is the potential for asbestos to be within the existing buildings to be demolished. Existing regulations for the handling of asbestos, such as SCAQMD Rule 1403, require qualified technicians to contain and remediate any asbestos discovered during demolition.35 As previously noted, the Certified EIR determined that buildout of the Approved Project would result in a less than significant impact related to exposing sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of pollutants. As illustrated above, the proposed project would not expose receptors to substantial quantities or significant concentrations of asbestos from demolition or soils disturbance, construction-generated localized criteria pollutant concentrations, construction-generated DPM, operational TACs, or CO hotspots. As such, the proposed project would not introduce impacts that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. 34 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. 2005 South Coast Carbon Monoxide Plan. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/2005-south-coast-carbon-monoxide-plan. Accessed June 2, 2021. 35 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2021. Contractor. Website: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/compliance/asbestos-demolition-removal/contractor. Accessed June 2, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 51 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx d) Result in other emission (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Construction-related Odors Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include exhaust from diesel construction equipment. However, nearby sensitive receptors would not be affected by diesel exhaust odors associated with project construction, due to the temporary nature of these emissions, intermittent nature of construction activities, and highly diffusive properties of DPM exhaust. Odors from these sources are localized and generally confined to the immediate area surrounding the proposed project site. The proposed project would utilize typical construction techniques, and odors would be typical of most construction-sites and temporary in nature. Through compliance with the applicable regulations that reduce odors and due to the transitory nature of construction odors, the proposed project would not result in significant odors. Operational-related Odors The proposed project includes the construction and development of residences, parking spaces, and associated landscaping. Land uses typically identified as sources of objectionable odors include landfills, transfer stations, sewage treatment plants, wastewater pump stations, composting facilities, feed lots, coffee roasters, asphalt batch plants, and rendering plants. The proposed project would not engage in any of these activities and; therefore, the proposed project would not be a generator of objectionable odors during operations. Minor sources of odors, such as exhaust from mobile sources, are not typically associated with numerous odor complaints, but may have temporary and less concentrated odors. In summary, the proposed project’s long-term operational activities would not expose nearby receptors to any objectionable odors. As previously noted, the Certified EIR determined that buildout of the Approved Project would result in less than significant odor impacts. As illustrated above, the proposed project would result in less than significant odor impacts. As such, the proposed project would not introduce impacts that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 52 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 53 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 4. Biological Resources Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 54 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx The buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts to biological resources upon implementation of General Plan goals and policies, existing codes and regulations, and MMs 5.3-1 through 5.3-9 in MMP No. 122.36 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: The buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.37 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. A FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) Biologist reviewed the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), a special- status species and plant community account database, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system, and the California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California database for the Anaheim, California USGS 7.5-minute Topography Quadrangle Map and its eight neighboring quads.38,39,40 The literature search found that 43 special-status plant species and 45 special-status animal species have been recorded within the vicinity of the project site (Appendix B). The overwhelming majority of these species are not expected to occur on-site due to the lack of suitable habitat, or the project site being situated outside of their known geographic range, or the species have been have locally extirpated due to extensive urbanization and habitat modification of the surrounding area. No special-status plant species are expected to occur on-site due the lack of natural vegetation communities and lack of suitable natural substrate. The project site is entirely developed and contains little suitable habitat for most special-status animal species. The eastern edge of the project site does still contain a few remnant ornamental trees of sufficient size to provide suitable nesting locations for Native migratory or resident birds, 36 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 5.3 Biological Resources. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2185/53-Biological-Resources-?bidId= Accessed April 21, 2021. 37 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 7. CEQA Mandated Sections. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number- 346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 20, 2021. 38 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2021. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for Special-Status Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view /RareFind.aspx. Accessed May 6, 2021. 39 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021 Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Website: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed May 6, 2021. 40 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2020. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory (CNPSEI). Website: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed May 6, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 55 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and/or Fish and Game Code. Suitable nesting trees are present on the eastern edge of the project site. As a result, there is still potential, albeit very low potential, that special-status birds may choose to nest on-site or within its immediate vicinity. Consistent with the analysis of impacts in the Certified EIR, the development of the proposed project has the potential to impact protected bird nests due to the removal of this vegetation or indirectly harm birds though the generation of noise, lights, and other man-made disturbances that could result in the abandonment of eggs or young. The implementation of MM 5.3-3 and MM 5.3-4 from Program EIR No. 330 would reduce any of these potential impacts by requiring pre-construction surveys for nesting birds and limiting tree removal to outside the nesting season, respectively. Through the implementation of these mitigation measures, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to candidate, sensitive, or special status species that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is entirely developed and surrounded by extensive urban development in all directions. The site does not contain any naturally occurring vegetation communities that could be considered as sensistive such as riparian or coastal sage scrub habitats. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substanitally mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is entirely developed and no wetlands or other hydrological features that meet criteria as waters of the United States or waters of the State are present within the proposed project site. Additionally, the project site is not located adjacent to any known potentially jurisdictional water body. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to wetlands that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substanitally mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 56 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is entirely developed and surrounded on all sides by urban development, roadways and other man-made structures that serve as barriers to wildlife movement. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substanitally mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. A small triangular shaped area of ruderal vegetation and ornamental trees can be found in the eastern edge of the project site bordering Anaheim Boulevard. Plant species observed in this area include 12 Mexican fan palm trees (Washingtonia robusta), two Peruvian pepper trees (Schinus molle) and several weeds including cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), annual bluegrass (Poa annua), sow thistle (Sonchus oleraceus) and redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium). FCS reviewed the Anaheim Municipal Code regarding any applicable ordinances regarding tree preservation. 41 The project site is not located within the Scenic Corrdior Overlay Zone where additional tree preservation ordinances would apply.42 The project site does not contain any “Landmark Trees” as defined by the Anaheim Municipal Code. Two palm trees and two Peruvian pepper trees are located along the sidewalk bordering Anaheim Boulevard. These trees could meet the City’s definition as a “Street Tree” and be subject to the City’s Street Tree Ordinance.43 If the Applicant removes a street tree as part of the proposed project, the Applicant would secure written permission from the Director of Community Services and would comply with the provions of Chapter 13.12 of the Anaheim Municipal Code regarding removal and replacement of street trees.44 PPP BIO- 3 requires the Applicant to comply with the applicable provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to tree preservation. Following PPP BIO-3, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to conflicts with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources that either have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substanitally mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. 41 Anaheim Municipal Code. 2021. City of Anaheim. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/overview. Accessed May 6, 2021. 42 Anaheim Municipal Code. 2021. Chapter 18.18.040 Tree Preservation. City of Anaheim. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/anaheim_ca/0-0-0-66504. Accessed April 14, 2021. 43 Anaheim Municipal Code. 2021. Chapter 13.12 STREET TREES*. City of Anaheim. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/overview. Accessed April 14, 2021. 44 Ibid. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 57 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is located within the boundaries of the OCTA Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP). However, this habitat conservation plan only covers discrete linear or energy projects within its boundaries.45 Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to HCPs that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP BIO-1 The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), and the Central/Coastal Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) for protection of federal or State-listed species. PPP BIO-2 The Applicant shall comply with Section 1601-1603 of the Fish and Game Code and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. PPP BIO-3 The Applicant shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to tree preservation. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 MM 5.3-3 If construction activity is timed to occur during the nesting season (typically between March 1 and July 1), developers will be required to provide focused surveys for nesting birds pursuant to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) requirements. Such surveys shall identify avoidance measures taken to protect active nests. MM 5.3-4 Removal of nonnative trees shall be permitted only outside the nesting season. MMP No. 112A None. 45 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2020. NCCP Plan Summaries. Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/conservation/planning/nccp/plans. Accessed April 6, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 58 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 5. Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as pursuant to Section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: d) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or e) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: The buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impact to cultural resources with the implementation of the General Plan Goals and Policies, existing codes and regulations in addition to MM 5.4-1, 5.4-2 and 5.4-3 MMP No. 122.46 46 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 5.3 Cultural Resources. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2186/54-Cultural-Resources-?bidId=. Accessed January 21, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 59 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.47 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project The following analysis is based on Records Search results from the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), Historic Resource Assessment prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. on April 2021, and pedestrian survey conducted by FCS on April 23, 2021 (Appendix C). Cultural Resources Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as pursuant to Section 15064.5? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Records Search results from the SCCIC indicated no known historical resources within the 0.5-mile radius of the project boundaries. Additionally, on April 3, 2021, LSA Associates, Inc. surveyed the property at 200 West Midway Drive, located on the southeast corner of West Midway Drive and South Zeyn Street and determined that the property is not associated with significant contributions to the local or state history, it is not associated with people of local, California or national historical importance, nor is it representative of an architectural style that exhibits characterictics of high artistic values. Thus, the subject structure appear ineligble for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, and should not be considered a potential historic resource under CEQA. This was followed by a pedestrian survey conducted on April 23, 2021 by an FCS Staff Acrhaeologist on the remaining parcels south and east of the property, which confirmed LSA Associates, Inc. findings. The proposed project does not have any significant effects on the environment that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Records search from the SCCIC, and correspondence with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) indicated that no known archaeological resources were located within the 0.5-mile search radius. Additionally, the pedestrian survey failed to located any archaeological resources. The project site is comprised primarily of gravel-sand mixture, developed roads, with a few grassy clearances. Notwithstanding, there is a possibility that archaeological resources may be present beneath the surface, and may be impacted by deeper ground-disturbing activities associated with project construction. However, with the implementation of PPP CUL-1 and 47 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 7. CEQA Mandated Sections. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 20, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 60 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx PP CUL-2, the proposed project would not have any significant effects on the environment that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzedor that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. c.) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. In response to FCS’s request of a Sacred Lands Files search by the NAHC, no sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance were identified by the NAHC within the project site or within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. The condition of the site suggests that the likelihood of human remains being discovered to be low; however, there remains a possibility of inadvertnet discovery during initial grading and excavation. With the implementation of PPP CUL-1 and PP CUL-2, the proposed project would not have any significant effects on the environment that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzedor that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Tribal Cultural Resources Would the proposed project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: d) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or e) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Analyzed in the Certified EIR. As discussed in the Cultural Resources section, the project site is not listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) requires lead agencies to conduct a formal consultation process with California Native American Tribes to identify potential significant impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074, as part of CEQA. The proposed project is exempt from CEQA as documented in this Appendix N Checklist. Furthermore, there are no previously documented prehistoric archaeological sites or ethnographically documented camps within or near the project site—indicating a low probability for TCRs to exist. Past development that has occurred on the project site and surrounding area, including grading and export of soil, further decreases the probability of any tribal resources. Database searches have not identified substantial evidence that TCRs exist on the project site or within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. The proposed project does not have any significant effects on the environment that either the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 61 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP CUL-1 It is always possible that ground-disturbing activities during construction may uncover previously unknown, buried cultural resources. In the event that buried cultural resources are discovered during construction, operations shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified Archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified Archeologist shall make recommendations to the Lead Agency on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the Master Plan area should be recorded on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA Guidelines. If the resources are determined to be unique historic resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be donated to a qualified scientific institution approved by the Lead Agency where they would be afforded long-term preservation to allow future scientific study. PPP CUL-2 There is always the possibility that ground-disturbing activities during construction may uncover previously unknown buried human remains. Should this occur, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 must be followed. In this instance, once project-related earthmoving begins and if there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken: 1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the County City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 62 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the “most likely descendant” of the deceased Native American. The most likely descendant may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or 2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his/her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendent or on the project area in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance: - The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the Commission; - The descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or - The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 MM 5.4-1 City staff shall require property owners/developers to provide studies to document the presence/absence of historic resources for areas with documented or inferred resource presence. On properties where resources are identified, such studies shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified specialist. The requirement for historic resources documentations set forth in this mitigation measure has been satisfied by the cultural record searches and the Historic Resource Assessment prepared for the proposed project (Appendix C). Consequently, no further action is required. MM 5.4-2 City staff shall require property owners/developers to provide studies to document the presence/absence of archaeological and/or paleontological resources for areas with documented or inferred resource presence. On properties where resources are identified, such studies shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified specialist. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 63 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx The cultural record searches and implementation of PPP CUL-1 and PPP CUL-2 satisfies the requirement for historic resources documentations set forth in this mitigation measure. MM 5.4-3 All archaeological resources shall be subject to the provisions of CEQA (Public Resources Code) Section 21083.2. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 64 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 6. Energy Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: No potentially significant energy impacts were identified. Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded that GHG impacts would be less than significant after mitigation. No potentially significant energy impacts were identified. Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project The basis for the following analysis is the Air Quality Report prepared by Vista Environmental, dated May 7, 2021. This report is included in Appendix A of this document. Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Outputs from the CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 used for the Air Quality and GHG Emissions analyses, also assessed energy use from the proposed project. Based on the CalEEMod estimations, construction equipment would consume approximately 41,871 gallons of diesel fuel. Construction vehicle trips, including haul and vendor truck trips and worker vehicle trips, would consume an estimated 21,366 gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel. Limitations on idling of vehicles and equipment and requirements for the proper maintenance of equipment would result in subsequent fuel savings. California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2449 and 2485, limit idling from both on-road and off-road diesel-powered equipment and are enforced by the ARB. Additionally, given the cost of fuel, contractors and owners have a strong financial incentive to avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy during construction. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 65 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Operation of the proposed project would consume an estimated 364,017 kilowatt hour (kWh) of electricity and an estimated 961,691 kilo-British Thermal Units (kBTU) of natural gas on an annual basis. The proposed project’s buildings would be designed and constructed in accordance with the latest adopted energy efficiency standards, based on the State’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards. These are widely regarded as the most advanced building energy efficiency standards and compliance. Compliance with the standards would ensure that building energy consumption would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. Project-related vehicle trips would consume an estimated 37,048 gallons of gasoline and diesel annually. Regional access to the project site is via I-5, which borders the project site. Additionally, the proposed project is an urban infill development sited near existing public transportation and amenities. The proposed project’s proximity to public transportation and amenities would encourage future residents to use public transit or walk to nearby amenities, thereby reducing wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of fossil fuels. Moreover, as the project’s operational years progress, the analysis anticipates that the proposed project would consume incrementally fewer fossil fuels with each year as vehicle fuel economy standards increase. The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would comply with existing energy efficiency and conservation policies, building standards, and fuel standards that would support that energy consumption would not be wasteful, unnecessary, or inefficient. As illustrated above, the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during operation. As such, the proposed project would not introduce impacts that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Anaheim Public Utilities (APU) would serve the proposed project with electricity. In 2019, APU obtained 31 percent of its electricity from renewable energy sources. APU created a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (Plan) in 2015, which provides a roadmap for meeting the Renewables Portfolio Standard. According to the 2020 version of the Plan, APU met the 33 percent renewables requirement in 2020. APU is also on track to meet the 60 percent renewables target for 2030, as required. The design of the proposed buildings would be in accordance with Title 24, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings. These standards include minimum energy efficiency requirements related to building envelope, mechanical systems (e.g., heating, air conditioning, and ventilation [HVAC] and water heating systems), and indoor and outdoor lighting. The incorporation of the Title 24 standards into the design of the proposed project would ensure that the proposed project would not result in the use of energy in a wasteful manner. The proposed project is also an urban infill project, located next to public transportation (including an existing OCTA Bus Stop), shops and other amenities, and I-5. Vehicle trips; and, therefore, overall VMT would be minimized, with a consequent relative reduction in vehicle fuel consumption. The Certified EIR determined that the Approved Project would be consistent with existing statewide programs that reduced GHG emissions as well as energy consumption. As illustrated above, the City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 66 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct an applicable State or local plan or policy for renewable energy or energy efficiency. As such, the proposed project would not introduce impacts that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 67 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 7. Geology and Soils Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 68 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to geology and soils upon implementation of General Plan goals and policies, existing codes and regulations, and MM 5.5-1 in MMP No. 122.48 Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to paleontological resources with the implementation of MM 5.4-2 in MMP No. 122.49 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330. No new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.50 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Analyzed in the Certified EIR. As required by MM 5.5-1, EEI Engineering Solutions prepared a Geotechnical Evaluation Report was prepared for the proposed project on April 15, 2021 (Appendix D). The Geotechnical Evaluation Report determined that there are no known active or potentially active faults that exist at this site, nor is the site within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to fault rupturing that have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further analysis is required. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The Geotechnical Evaluation Report found that the site is located within a seismically active area, as is all of Southern California.51 There are no active or potentially active faults on or within the immediate vicinity of the site. The closest known active fault to the site 48 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.5, Geology and Soils, Page 5-57 to 5-84. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2187/55-Geology-and-Soils-?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. 49 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.4, Cultural Resources, Pages 5-49 through 5-59. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2186/54-Cultural-Resources- ?bidId=. Accessed April 26, 2021. 50 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 7, CEQA Mandated Sections, Page 7-5 and Appendix A, Initial Study and NOP, Page 31. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346- Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 2021. 51 EEI Engineering Solutions. 2021. Geotechnical Evaluation Report. April 15. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 69 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx is the Puente Hills (Coyote Hills) Fault and is located approximately 4.2 miles west of the site. According to the Geotechnical Evaluation Report, this fault is capable of a maximum 6.9 moment magnitude earthquake.52,53 However, as stated in Program EIR No. 330, compliance with the General Plan Goals and Policies and existing codes and regulations (PPP GEO-1) would ensure that potential impacts related to seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. In addition, the proposed project would comply with MM 5.5-1, which requires all grading operations to be in conformance with the recommendations contained in the project-specific Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation. Therefore, the proposed project would not have significant impacts related to seismic ground shaking that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The Geotechnical Evaluation Report determined that, due to the absence of shallow ground water, the potential for liquefaction to occur is negligible, and liquefaction is not a significant geotechnical concern at the project site. Additionally, according to the Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, the project site is not mapped within a zone of potential liquefaction. The potential for liquefaction induced lateral spreading and seismic induced settlement to occur at the project site is considered negligible. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. iv) Landslides? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. According to the Geotechnical Evaluation Report, the potential for seismically induced land sliding to occur is very low due to the presence of a very low on-site gradient. Additionally, according to the Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, the project site is also not within a zone of potential seismically induced land sliding. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to landslides that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would comply with PPP GEO-2, which requires the Applicant to submit a Notice of Intent to cover the proposed project under the Storm Water Permit, in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. In 52 The average earthquake effects of a 6.9 moment magnitude earthquake include: (1) Damage to a moderate number of well-built structures in populated areas, (2) Earthquake-resistant structures survive with slight to moderate damage, (3) Poorly designed structures receive moderate to severe damage, (4) Felt in wider areas; up to hundreds of miles/kilometers from the epicenter, and (5) Strong to violent shaking in epicentral area. 53 Prost, Gary, and Benjamin Prost. 2017. The Geology Companion: Essential for Understanding the Earth. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 70 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx addition, PPP GEO-2 requires future projects to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which incorporates Best Management Practices (BMPs). The proposed project would comply with the NPDES permit program and would be required to implement a SWPPP. As part of the SWPPP, the proposed project would implement BMPs such as on-site infiltration and retention, biotreatment, and a Modular Wetland System. Additionally, non-structural source control BMPs would include education and training for property owners, tenants, occupants, and employees; activity restrictions; common area landscape management; BMP maintenance; common area litter control; catch basin inspection; and street sweeping. Structural source control BMPs would include storm drain signage, as well as efficient irrigation, landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to soil erosion or loss or topsoil that the Certified EIR did not already analyze, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The Geotechnical Evaluation Report determined that the potential for landslides or slope instability at the project site is negligible because of the presence of gradient. Additionally, the report determined that the potential for soil liquefaction at the project site is very low due to the absence of shallow ground water. The potential for liquefaction induced lateral spreading and seismic induced settlement to occur at the subject property is considered negligible. The Geotechnical Evaluation Report provided design recommendations to prevent impacts related to subsidence. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, and collapse that the Certified EIR did not already analyze, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The Geotechnical Report determined that the near-surface on-site soils encountered in the borings are sands and silty sands. The expansion potential of these materials is not considered to pose a hazard for the proposed project. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to expansive soil that have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further analysis is required. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 71 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would not use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. The proposed project would connect to the City’s existing wastewater infrastructure. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems that the Certified EIR did not already analyze, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated by the application of uniformly applicable development policies. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. A Paleontological Resources Records Search was prepared for the development immediately west of the project site and included a 0.5-mile search radius, which encompasses the project site (Appendix D). Kenneth L. Finger, PhD, completed the literature search for paleontological records at the University of California, Museum of Paleontology. The records search did not reveal any recorded vertebrate or plant localities. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to paleontological resources that the Certified EIR did not already analyze, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further analysis is required. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP GEO-1 All grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Title 17–Land Development and Resources. PPP GEO-2 The Property Owner/Developer shall submit for approval to the State Water Resources Control Board, a Notice of Intent to be covered under the Storm Water Permit, in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. In addition, future projects shall be required to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which incorporates Best Management Practices (BMPs). Applicable Mitigation Measures Clarification on project-specific implementation of a mitigation measure from Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 is in bold text. MMP No. 122 MM 5.4-2 City staff shall require property owners/developers to provide studies to document the presence/absence of archaeological and/or paleontological resources for areas with documented or inferred resource presence. On properties where resources are identified, such studies shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 72 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified specialist. The requirement for archaeological and paleontological resources documentations set forth in this mitigation measure has been satisfied by the review of the Cultural and Paleontological Records Searches (Appendix C). Consequently, no further action is required. MM 5.5-1 The City shall require geologic and geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards as part of the environmental or development review process. All grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the recommendations contained in the applicable geotechnical investigation. The requirement for a geotechnical investigation set forth in this mitigation measure has been satisfied by the completion of the Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Appendix D). Proof of intent to comply with these operations, such as applicable notes on plans, shall be provided by the property owner/developer prior to issuance of grading permits. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 73 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: EIR No. 330 did not analyze greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts because existing CEQA criteria and thresholds for analyzing GHG emissions did not exist at the time EIR No.330 was prepared. Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Despite the implementation of MMs 5.2-8 through 5.2-12, buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in impacts of GHG emissions that were significant and unavoidable. The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding this impact.54 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project The Air Quality Report prepared by Vista Environmental, dated May 7, 2021, is the basis for the following analysis. This report is included in Appendix A of this document. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Vista Environmental modeled GHG emissions from construction and operation of the proposed project using CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2. The analysis totaled construction estimates and amortized this total over a standard project lifetime of 30 years, then 54 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.2, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2264/52-Greenhouse-Gas-Emissions?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 74 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx added that amount to operational emissions. The analysis compared the resulting estimates with the draft SCAQMD threshold for residential developments of 3,500 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e) per year as shown below. As illustrated in Table 6, the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds for GHG emissions for residential developments. Table 6: Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Category Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons per Year) CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Area Sources1 1.69 0.00 0.00 1.73 Energy Usage2 176.21 0.00 0.00 176.72 Mobile Sources3 362.25 0.02 0.00 362.63 Solid Waste4 4.18 0.25 0.00 10.34 Water and Wastewater5 35.91 0.15 0.00 40.90 Construction6 19.43 0.00 0.00 19.51 Total GHG Emissions 599.66 0.42 0.00 611.83 SCAQMD Draft Threshold of Significance 3,000 Notes: CO2 = carbon dioxide CH4 = methane GHG = greenhouse gas N20 = nitrous oxide CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District 1 Area sources consist of GHG emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, hearths, and landscaping equipment. 2 Energy usage consists of GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas usage. 3 Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles. 4 Waste includes the CO2 and CH4 emissions created from the solid waste placed in landfills. 5 Water includes GHG emissions from electricity used for transport of water and processing of wastewater. 6 Construction emissions amortized over 30 years as recommended in the SCAQMD GHG Working Group on November 19, 2009. Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2. As previously noted, the Certified EIR determined that the buildout of the Approved Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to GHG emissions. As illustrated above, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact when related to the applicable SCAQMD significance threshold. As such, the proposed project would not introduce impacts that the Certified EIR did not already analyze or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The APU adopted the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GHG Reduction Plan), July 2015. The GHG Reduction City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 75 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Plan was prepared to assist the City’s power supplies in conforming to the GHG emissions reductions as mandated under AB 32. The GHG Reduction Plan provides a utilities GHG emission reduction target of 20 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2020 and a 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The GHG Reduction Plan provides reduction targets for energy usage, photovoltaic (PV) rooftop installations, and use of electric vehicles. For energy usage, the GHG Reduction Plan provides a target of a 15 percent reduction by 2020 and a 30 percent reduction by 2030 of the energy utilized by homes in Anaheim. This target will be met through application of State regulations including California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6. The 2019 Title 24 Building Standards that went into effect on January 1, 2020, and are required to be met for the proposed project’s structures. Homes built with the 2019 Standards will use about 7 percent less energy than the current 2016 Standards. It should also be noted that the 2016 Title 24 Standards included new energy-efficiency requirements that resulted in new homes being 15 percent more efficient than the 2013 Title 24 Part 6 Standards that were in effect at the time of the preparation of the GHG Reduction Plan. Therefore, through implementation of the State regulations the proposed project would meet the energy use reduction targets provided in the GHG Reduction Plan. For PV rooftop installations, the GHG Reduction Plan provides a target of 27,000 kW of PV systems installed by 2020 and 37,000 kW of PV systems installed by 2030. This target will be met through application of State regulations including Title 24, Part 6. The project Applicant has committed to installing a rooftop PV system on the proposed apartment complex. Therefore, through implementation of the State regulations the proposed project would meet the PV rooftop installation targets provided in the GHG Reduction Plan. For electric vehicles, the GHG Reduction Plan provides a target of 2,000 low or zero emission vehicles by 2020 and 5,000 low or zero emission vehicles by 2030. As detailed on the site plan for the proposed project, 13 parking spaces would have electric vehicle charging stations. Therefore, development of the proposed project would assist the City in meeting the electric vehicle usage targets provided in the GHG Reduction Plan. As detailed above, development of the proposed project would meet the targets outlined in the GHG Reduction Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with the GHG Reduction Plan reduction targets and would not conflict with the applicable plan for reducing GHG emissions. As such, the proposed project would not introduce impacts that the Certified EIR did not already analyze or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 76 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 77 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 78 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts with mitigation related to hazards and hazardous materials upon implementation of General Plan goals and policies, existing codes and regulations, and MMs 5.6-1 through 5.6-3 in MMP No. 122.55 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.56 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. During construction, limited quantities of hazardous substances, including oils, gasoline, diesel fuels, automotive chemicals, and other substances would be used on the project site. However, the use of these materials would be limited to the construction period. The handling, transport, and disposal of such substances must comply with all local, State, and federal laws and regulations (PPP HAZ-1); therefore, impacts associated with the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. During the operational phase of the proposed project, there would not be significant quantities of hazardous materials on-site, and the project would not generate hazardous emissions. As required by MM 5.6-3, Gilray Enterprises, Inc. prepared a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) for the proposed project on July 29, 2002, Pacific Edge Engineering Inc. prepared a Phase II Assessment on December 9, 2020. Enviro-Tox Services Inc., prepared a Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation (VIRE) for the proposed project on May 20, 2021. The Phase I and Phase II assessments and VIRE are included as Appendix E of this document. According to the Phase I ESA, the project site was used as an air-conditioning sales and refurbishing facility from 1954 to 1989, and as a metal fabrication facility from 1990 to 2001. These uses are considered to be high in environmental risks due to potential use and storage of oils, waste oils, solvents, and chlorofluorocarbons. In addition, heavy slag deposits found on concrete surfaces in isolated areas of the site are considered to be an environmental concern due to the potential for elevated levels of metals. The Phase I ESA recommended a Phase II investigation of subsurface soil conditions in the area of a former fuel underground storage tank (UST) and on-site sump, and an investigation of the areas with heavy slag deposits. 55 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Pages 5-85 to 5-104. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2188/56-Hazards-and-Hazardous-Materials-?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. 56 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 7, Impacts Found Not to be Significant, Pages 7-5 to 7-6; Appendix A, Initial Study and NOP, Pages 32-33. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 79 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx According to the Phase II Assessment, a subsurface investigation was performed in September 2002 to address the environmental concerns identified in the Phase I ESA. No significant impact from release of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or metals was observed in site soils. No further action was recommended. In 2020, a Phase II Assessment was prepared for the proposed project. The Phase II Assessment found TPH-gas/diesel/motor oil concentrations in soil that exceeded the Tier 1 Environmental Screening Level (ESL) at one part of the site and did not exceed the Tier 1 ESL in another part of the site. The Phase II Assessment also found that metal concentrations were below the Department of Toxic Substance Control’s (DTSC) Screening Level with the exception of arsenic. Detected VOC concentrations in soil gas were below DTSC’s ESLs for all analytes except for Benzene, Bromodichloromethane on part of the project site. The Phase II Assessment recommended further evaluation of potential human health concerns be conducted in order to determine whether the presence of chemicals at concentrations exceeding screening level values indicates adverse impacts to human health. It was also recommended that “hot spots” where arsenic, TPH-diesel, and TPH-mo exceed background/SLs be excavated. While confirmation samples should be collected, no further action regarding soil will be recommended assuming the confirmation samples are below the screening levels. Finally, a vapor barrier or equivalent shall be designed for incorporation into the proposed development to prevent migration of VOCs detected in soil gas into indoor air. As recommended in the Phase II Assessment, Enviro-Tox Services Inc. prepared a VIRE to evaluate potential human health concerns. The VIRE confirmed the Phase II Assessment findings that traces of VOCs may be present in soil gas under the project site, and that the estimated cancer risk is well below the known cancer risk for the United States population and is considered acceptable by California health and environmental protection agencies. Similar to the Phase II Assessment, the VIRE found that the estimated Hazard Index is considered acceptable to California health and environmental protection agencies. Consistent with the Phase II Assessment, the VIRE recommended that engineered vapor mitigation measures be included in the design of any slab on grade residential buildings at the site. The recommended engineering controls would be considered as a precaution to prevent vapor intrusion. The proposed project would implement the recommendations of the Phase II Assessment and the VIRE by including a vapor barrier or equivalent to be incorporated into the proposed development to prevent migration of VOCs detected in soil gas into indoor air. These recommendations, including the “hot spots” removal of areas where arsenic, total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH-) diesel, and TPH- motor oil exceed background/screening levels, are incorporated as PPP HAZ-2. With the implementation of PPP HAZ-2, the proposed project would not have more severe impacts to hazards or hazardous materials than what was analyzed in the Certified EIR, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 80 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. As discussed in the previous question, construction of the proposed project would include the use of limited quantities of hazardous substances, including oils, gasoline, diesel fuels, automotive chemicals, and other substances on the project site. However, the use of these materials would be limited to the construction period, and the handling, transport, and disposal of such substances must comply with all local, State, and federal laws and regulations. The management of any hazardous materials utilized during the construction of the residences and other site improvements would be in accordance with State and local regulations, as implemented through grading and building permit requirements. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to the release of hazardous materials that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further analysis is required. With the implementation of PPP HAZ-1 and PPP HAZ-2, the proposed project would not have more severe impacts related to the release of hazardous materials that the Certified EIR did not already analyze, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The nearest school to the project site is Paul Revere Elementary School, located at 140 West Guinida Lane, directly north of the project site. Consistent with Program EIR No. 330, the proposed project would comply with State and local requirements to prevent significant hazard impacts associated with schools. The use of hazardous materials would be limited to the construction period, and the handling, transport, and disposal of such substances must comply with all local, State, and federal laws and regulations. The handling, transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials must comply with the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, California Public Resources Code, and other State and local regulations, which limits the risk of emissions. During the operational phase of the proposed project, there would not be significant quantities of hazardous materials on-site, and the project would not generate hazardous emissions. With the implementation of PPP HAZ-1 and PPP HAZ-2, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to the presence hazardous materials near a school that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 81 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project is not included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. However, as discussed above, quantities of arsenic, TPH-diesel, and TPH-motor oil on the project site exceed background/ESLs which could be released into the environment and create a hazard for residents. However, PPP HAZ-1 and PPP HAZ-2 would be implemented to avoid significant hazard exposure. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related hazardous materials sites that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. No further analysis is required. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project is located 5.71 miles from the Fullerton Municipal Airport and 9.64 miles from the John Wayne Airport. Due to the distances, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to an airport land use plan or airport operations that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further analysis is required. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would comply with building code and fire code requirements, including the requirement for fire sprinklers. Access roads are subject to Anaheim Fire and Rescue Department design review to ensure adequate emergency response and evacuation at the project site. Emergency access would be provided from the private drive to the west and from the driveway located on Anaheim Boulevard, each with a width of 26 feet to provide adequate emergency vehicle access and to be consistent with the 24 feet minimum requirement in the Anaheim Municipal Code.57 Therefore, the proposed project would not impair or interfere with emergency response or evacuation. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to emergency response plans or emergency evacuation that the Certified EIR did not already analyze, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further analysis is required. 57 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter18.20.120 Parking, Loading and Vehicular Access Section .304. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/anaheim_ca/0-0-0-66839. Accessed April 26, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 82 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project is located in an urbanized area in the central and western portion of Anaheim and is not adjacent to or near the Hill or Canyon areas or other wildland areas that are susceptible to wildfires. The project site is not located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as determined by Program EIR No. 330. Furthermore, the proposed project is subject to building code and fire code requirements, including the requirement for fire sprinklers, and the project would be subject to Anaheim Fire and Rescue Department design review. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to wildland fires that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP HAZ-1 The proposed project shall comply with all relevant local, State, and federal regulations related to hazardous materials. PPP HAZ-2 “Hot spots” where arsenic, total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH-) diesel, and TPH- motor oil exceed background/screening levels shall be excavated. Confirmation samples should be collected and assuming the confirmation samples are below the screening levels, no further action regarding soil will be recommended. A vapor barrier or equivalent shall be design for incorporation into the proposed development to prevent migration of VOCs detected in soil gas into indoor air. Applicable Mitigation Measures Clarification on project-specific implementation of a mitigation measure from Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 is in bold text. MMP No. 122 MM 5.6-3 Prior to issuance of any discretionary permit for a current or former hazardous waste disposal site or solid waste disposal site, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to the City. If possible, hazardous materials are identified during the site assessments, the appropriate response/remedial measures will be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA) and/or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), as appropriate. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 83 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx The requirement for a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment set forth in this mitigation measure has been satisfied by the completion of the Phase I ESA by Gilray Enterprises, Inc. (July 29, 2002), Subsurface Investigation Report by Pacific Edge Engineering (September 30, 2002), a Phase II Assessment by Pacific Edge Engineering (December 9, 2020), and Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation (May 20, 2021). The recommendations listed in the 2020 Subsurface Investigation Report and Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation are incorporated as PPP HAZ-2. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 84 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 10. Hydrology and Water Quality Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: (i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; (iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or (iv) impede or redirect flood flows? d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 85 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx With implementation of General Plan goals and policies, existing codes and regulations, and MMs 5.7-1 through 5.7-3 in MMP No. 122, buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality.58 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would not result in new or greater significant impacts than those identified in Program EIR No. 330. No new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.59 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. As required by MM 5.7-2, C&V Consulting, Inc. prepared a Pre- Hydrology and Drainage Study for the proposed project, in May 2021. Additionally, as required by MM 5.7-3 and in compliance with the City’s NPDES-related requirements, C&V Consulting, Inc. prepared a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), in May 2021. These documents are included as Appendix F of this report. The proposed project would comply with standard regulatory requirements that would minimize impacts related to hydrology and water quality, including preparation of a SWPPP for construction, and a WQMP for operations, both of which would contain BMPs. During operation, three proposed catch basins within localized sumps would capture and convey site surface runoff to two proposed, private underground storm drain systems. At the driveway on Anaheim Boulevard, proposed grading would convey runoff through proposed curb cuts into adjacent landscaped areas. The landscaped area would serve as pre-treatment before excess runoff is conveyed through area drains into the underground infiltration system. Two areas along the southerly property line were graded to slope south in order to provide a positive overflow path to West Midway Drive. The runoff from these areas would be conveyed through curb cuts and into the adjacent landscaped areas. Area drains (designed during final engineering) would collect and convey excess runoff from the landscaped areas into the underground infiltration system as well. The proposed infiltration system would capture, detain, and infiltrate water runoff for water quality treatment within 48 hours. During larger storm events and when the proposed infiltration system is at capacity, stormwater would overflow out of the proposed catch basin nearest to the northwest corner of the site. Primary overflow would be conveyed to West Midway Drive via two proposed parkway culverts along the project site’s northerly right-of-way and via a proposed storm drain pipe located in South Zeyn Street. In the event 58 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Section 5.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, Pages 5-105 to 5-131. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2189/57-Hydrology-and-Water-Quality-?bidId=. Accessed April 27, 2021. 59 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 7, CEQA Mandated Sections, Pages 7-6 to 7-7; Appendix A, Initial Study and NOP, Pages 33-35). Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 86 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx the storm drain system becomes clogged, the catch basins would pond within the localized sumps and overflow to West Midway Drive via the proposed driveway entrances/exits. Upon entering the public right-of-way, site runoff would follow the historic drainage pattern. The proposed drainage system would ensure that runoff would not degrade surface or groundwater quality. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to runoff that have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. APU would provide water supply to the project site through the City’s municipal water distribution system. There are no groundwater wells are located within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. The nearest well is located 0.76 mile to the southwest.60 The proposed project would comply with the policies and goals of the General Plan and the development standards of the Zoning Code, which would ensure that the proposed project would not increase demand on groundwater supplies beyond those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to runoff that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: (i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is not near any natural waterway and would not cause erosion or siltation due to a change in the course of a stream. Additionally, the project SWPPP and WQMP would include BMPs to prevent erosion at the project site. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related impacts related to erosion or siltation that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated by the application of uniformly applicable development policies. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; and 60 WRD. 2021. Well Search. Website: https://gis-apps.wrd.org/Html5Viewer/Index.html?viewer=Well_Search.Well_Search. Accessed May 28, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 87 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx (iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or and (iv) impede or redirect flood flows? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. According to the Pre-Hydrology and Drainage Study prepared for the proposed project, due to the slight increased peak flow rate because of the change in land use and increased impervious coverage, a small amount of stormwater would need to be detained and mitigated on-site. The small unit area hydrograph was analyzed to determine the amount increased volume runoff that will need to be mitigated. Approximately 189 cubic feet (cf) would need to be detained on-site and mitigated based on the existing 100-year storm event. The water quality infiltration system would be designed to mitigate both water quality and increase 100-year peak flow rates. The system is sized to statistically hold the required design capture volume of 6,332 cf to promote on-site infiltration and retention. Therefore, the proposed project would not hydrologically or hydraulically impact facilities that are downstream from the project site. .61 The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to runoff or flood flows that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. According to Program EIR No. 330, the project site is not located within a 100-year flood zone. The project-specific Geotechnical Evaluation Report determined that the potential for hazards as seiche or tsunami is low.62 The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to flood hazards, tsunami, or seiches that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated by the application of uniformly applicable development policies. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. The proposed project would comply with the applicable General Plan Goals and Policies and mitigation measures. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan that have the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts 61 C&V Consulting Inc. April 2021. Preliminary Hydrology Study. April 28, 2021. 62 EEI Engineering Solutions. 2021. Geotechnical Evaluation Report. April 28, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 88 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx that could not be substantially mitigated by the application of uniformly applicable development policies. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP HYD-1 The Property Owner/Developer shall comply with all applicable local, State, and federal regulations relating hydrology and water quality. Applicable Mitigation Measures Any modifications to the mitigation measures from Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and underlined for new, inserted text. Clarification on project-specific implementation of a mitigation measure from Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 is in bold text. MMP No. 122 MM 5.7-2 Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the City shall require that new developments conduct a drainage study and mitigate its drainage impacts if the development creates a deficiency in an existing storm drain facility or discharges to an existing deficient facility. The requirement for a drainage study set forth in this mitigation measure has been conditionally satisfied by the completion of the project-specific Preliminary Hydrology Study. MM 5.7-3 Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the City shall require that new developments and/or significant redevelopments prepare a drainage study Final Water Quality Management Plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and mitigate its drainage impacts conform to the City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) related requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The requirement for a Water Quality Management Plan set forth in this mitigation measure has been conditionally satisfied by the completion of the project-specific Preliminary WQMP. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 89 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 11. Land Use and Planning Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to land use and planning upon implementation of General Plan goals and policies and existing codes and regulations. No mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122.63 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.64 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? and b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 63 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 5.8 Land Use and Relevant Planning. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2190/58-Land-Use-and-Relevant-Planning-?bidId=. Accessed May 8, 2021. 64 City of Anaheim. 2013. City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report: 5.8 Land Use and Relevant Planning. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2268/7-CEQA-Mandated-Sections?bidId=. Accessed May 8, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 90 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Analyzed in Certified EIR. The proposed project would be in a highly developed and urbanized area. Surrounding land uses include mobile home parks, a school, parking lots, and a liquor store. Supplemental EIR No. 346 analyzed the Rezoning Project’s reclassification of the project site to the RO Overlay Zone. The Rezoning Project was a part of the City’s effort to facilitate development on properties identified as Opportunity Sites in the Housing Element. The proposed project’s land use is consistent with the project site’s existing Medium Density Residential General Plan designation and implements the RO Overlay Zone. Furthermore, the proposed project would meet all of the development standards of the RM-4 Zone, with the application of a 50 percent density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915, as well as the setback, unit size and height incentives allowed under Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.52.090.65,66 Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community or conflict with land use plan and would not have any significant effects on the environment that either have not been already analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Noise Levels That Would Conflict with Any Land Use Plan, Policy, or Regulation Analyzed in Certified EIR. MM 5.10-1 of the Program EIR No. 330, requires a project level noise impact analysis for any project generating over 100 peak hour trips. In compliance with this mitigation measure, LSA Associates prepared a Noise Impact Analysis memorandum for the project, dated April 9, 2021, that analyzed mobile source noise impacts to the proposed project to satisfy the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements for a project- specific noise impact analysis. The memorandum is appended to the Noise Impact Analysis Report prepared for the proposed project that is included in Appendix G of this document. The analysis shows that combined mobile source exterior noise levels at proposed building façades within 100- feet of the nearest travel lane of South Anaheim Boulevard could experience traffic noise levels of approximately 73 A-weighted decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL).67 These noise levels are in excess in excess of the City’s “normally acceptable” land use compatibility standard of 65 dBA CNEL which would also result in interior noise levels that would exceed the State of California’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Even with windows closed, habitable spaces of units with façades that have a direct line-of-site and are within 100-feet of the nearest travel lane of South Anaheim Boulevard would still experience noise levels in excess of the normally acceptable interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Therefore, the exterior wall assembly for these units shall be required to meet an overall exterior wall assembly Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of STC-31. This exterior wall assembly may include, but is not limited to, fiber cement board siding or three-coat cement plaster, one layer of 0.5-inch-thick plywood or Oriented Strand Board, 2-inch x 4-inch wood stud wall channels spaced at 65 State of California. 2021. California Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives 65915 - 65918. Website: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=65915. Accessed April 20, 2021. 66 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.52.090 Development Incentives. Website: http://anaheim-ca.elaws.us/code/muco_t18_ch18.52_sec18.52.090. Accessed April 20, 2021. 67 Noise levels in the memorandum were calculated to meet HUD noise requirements and were therefore expressed in terms of Ldn. As noted in the characteristics of noise discussion, CNEL and Ldn are within 1 dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable. In order to provide a conservative analysis, 1 dB was added to the calculated Ldn noise levels to estimate the CNEL noise level. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 91 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 16 inches and a minimum of R-19 fiberglass insulation, and one layer of 5/8-inch-thick Type X gypsum board. All windows for residential dwelling units in noise-sensitive rooms facing South Anaheim Boulevard shall have a minimum STC rating of 31. All other windows for residential dwelling units in noise-sensitive rooms shall have a minimum STC rating of 28. With implementation of the above measures (PDF LU-1), interior noise levels would be below the normally acceptable interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL, and traffic noise impacts to the proposed project would be in compliance with the City’s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. This analysis satisfies the requirements of Program EIR No. 330, MM 5.10-1, which requires the preparation of a site-specific acoustical analysis that shows that the development would be sound- attenuated against present and projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter and railroad, to meet City interior and exterior noise standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to noise land use compatibility that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. No further analysis is required. Project Design Features PDF LU-1 To reduce potential traffic noise impacts that conflict with land use compatibility, the following project design features shall be implemented for the project: • Mechanical ventilation systems such as air conditioning are required for all residential dwelling units so that windows can remain closed for a prolonged period of time. • The exterior wall assembly of all units facing and within 100-feet of the nearest travel lane of South Anaheim Boulevard shall meet or exceed an assumed exterior wall assembly that includes fiber cement board siding or three-coat cement plaster, one layer of 0.5-inch-thick plywood or OSB, 2-inch x 4-inch wood stud wall channels spaced at 16 inches and a minimum of R-19 fiberglass insulation, and one layer of 5/8-inch-thick Type X gypsum board. All windows for residential dwelling units in noise-sensitive rooms directly facing South Anaheim Boulevard shall have a minimum STC rating of 31. All other windows for residential dwelling units in noise-sensitive rooms shall have a minimum STC rating of 28. The Applicant shall provide the information necessary for Planning and Building Department staff to determine compliance. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. Applicable Mitigation Measures Clarification on project-specific implementation of a mitigation measure from Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 is in bold text. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 92 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx MMP No. 122 MM 5.10-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits for any project generating over 100 peak- hour trips, the project property owner/developer shall submit a final acoustical report prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The report shall show that the development will be sound-attenuated against present and projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter and railroad, to meet City interior and exterior noise standards. The requirement for an acoustical report set forth in this mitigation measure has been satisfied by the -1 completion of the project-specific Noise Impact Analysis. The recommendation listed in the Noise Impact Analysis has been incorporated as PDF LU-1. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 93 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 12. Mineral Resources Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to mineral resources upon implementation of General Plan goals and policies and existing codes and regulations. No impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122.68 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No.122A.69 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? and 68 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 5.9 Mineral Resources. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2191/59-Mineral-Resources-?bidId= Accessed April 21, 2021. 69 City of Anaheim. 2013. City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report: 7. CEQA Mandated Sections. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 21, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 94 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Analyzed in Certified EIR. The proposed project involves the construction of 86 residential units on Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151. The proposed project would not impact any parcels other than those analyzed in the Certified EIR, and would therefore not have the potential to impact mineral resources beyond those previously analyzed. The proposed project does not have any significant effects on the environment that either have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 95 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 13. Noise Would the project result in: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: EIR No. 330 concluded that short-term construction noise as well as other long-term operational noise sources such as events, railroad and aircraft activity would not result in significant noise and vibration impacts. However, the noise analysis concluded that noise sensitive uses along several roadways would experience a substantial noise increase in excess of 65 dBA CNEL. Mitigation measures required by MMP No. 122 would reduce these potential noise impacts. Implementation of the proposed General Plan goals and policies, existing codes and regulations, and mitigation measures would reduce all potential short-term and long-term noise impacts to the extent feasible. However, even with implementation of mitigation measures and General Plan goals and policies, many roadways within the City would generate significant noise impacts. As a result, in locations where these roadways are adjacent to existing sensitive land uses, the impacts related to traffic noise would remain significant.70 The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact.71 70 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: 5.10 Noise. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2192/510-Noise-?bidId=. Accessed April 21, 2021. 71 City of Anaheim. 2004. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 330, Statement of Findings of Facts and Overriding Considerations. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/Home/View/2167. Accessed May 28, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 96 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would not result in new or greater significant impacts than those identified in Program EIR No. 330. No new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.72 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project The basis for the following analysis is Noise Impact Analysis Report prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions, dated May 5, 2021. This report is included in Appendix G of this document. Would the project result in: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Short Term Construction Noise Impacts Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The Noise Impact Analysis Report identified that with implementation of the proposed project short-term construction-related noise impacts associated with the transportation of workers and equipment to the project site would be less than significant. Although there could be a relatively high single event noise exposure potential causing an intermittent noise nuisance, the effect of construction activities on longer-term (hourly or daily) ambient noise levels would be small but could result in a temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. This increase could result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, limiting construction activities to the daytime hours would reduce the effects of noise levels produced by these activities on longer-term (hourly or daily) ambient noise levels, and would reduce potential impacts that could result in annoyance or sleep disturbances at nearby sensitive receptors. The Anaheim Municipal Code outlines the City’s standards for noise- producing construction activities. According to this ordinance, construction and building repair activities are exempt from the applications of the Municipal Code between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. This finding is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to construction noise that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Operational/Mobile Source Noise Impacts Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a doubling of traffic volumes along any roadway segment in the project vicinity on an hourly or on a 24-hour average basis. A characteristic of noise is that a doubling of sound sources with equal strength is required to result in a perceptible increase (defined to be a 3 dBA or greater) in noise 72 City of Anaheim. 2013. City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report: 5.3. Noise. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 20, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 97 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx levels. As a result, the proposed project would not result in even a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels along any roadway segment in the project vicinity, and any increase would be well below the 5 dBA increase that would result in a substantial impact. Therefore, impacts from project-related traffic noise levels would not result in a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels in excess of applicable standards. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to increases in mobile source noise that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Operational Stationary Source Noise Impacts Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would include new stationary noise sources, such as typical parking lot activities and mechanical ventilation systems. However, the analysis showed that reasonable worst-case noise levels from parking lot activity would range up to 57 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) as measured at the nearest receptor, and reasonable worst- case mechanical equipment operational noise levels could range up approximately 44 dBA Leq at the nearest off-site residential receptors. These reasonable worst-case stationary source activity noise levels would not exceed the City’s noise performance standard of 60 dBA Leq. These reasonable worst-case stationary source activity noise levels would not exceed the City’s noise performance standard of 60 dBA Leq. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to operational stationary noise that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The nearest off-site receptors are the residential homes located north- west of the project site, approximately 30 feet from the nearest construction footprint where the largest construction equipment would potentially operate. Of the variety of equipment used during construction, the small vibratory rollers that are anticipated to be used in the site preparation phase of construction would produce the greatest groundborne vibration levels. At the distance of 30 feet, groundborne vibration levels could range up to 0.08 PPV from operation of a large vibratory roller. This is below the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) construction vibration damage criteria of 0.2 PPV for the nearby types of structures. Furthermore, implementation of the proposed project would not include any permanent sources that would expose persons in the project vicinity to groundborne vibration levels that could be perceptible without instruments at any existing sensitive land use in the project vicinity. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to groundborne vibration that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 98 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The nearest public airport to the project site is the Fullerton Municipal Airport, located approximately 5.71 miles northwest of the project site. Because of the distance from and orientation of the airport runways, the project site is located well outside of the 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. The project site is also not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. While aircraft noise is occasionally audible on the project site from aircraft flyovers, aircraft noise associated with nearby airport activity would not expose people residing or working near the project site to excessive noise levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose persons residing or working in the project vicinity to noise levels from airport activity that would be in excess of normally acceptable standards for multi-family residential land use development. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to airport noise that the Certified EIR has already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP NOI-1 Compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code noise ordinances restricting the permissible hours of noise producing construction activity. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 99 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 14. Population and Housing Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to population and housing upon implementation of General Plan goals and policies, and existing codes and regulations. No impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122.73 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.74 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: 73 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Section 5.12, Population and Housing, Pages 5-203 to 5-212. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2194/512-Population-and-Housing-?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. 74 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report Chapter 7, CEQA Mandated Sections, and Appendix A, Initial Study and NOP. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 100 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site was identified as Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151 in Supplemental EIR No. 346; all of which received the RO Overlay Zone as a part of the Rezoning Project, which allows for housing development. The proposed project meets the development standards of the RM-4 Zone, with the application of density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to unplanned population growth that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is currently occupied by a 1-story, 4,590-square-foot office structure that is not currently in use. The remainder of the site is mostly vacant and occasionally used as storage. The proposed project would not remove any existing residential units. Therefore, the proposed project would not displace existing people or housing in the City of Anaheim. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to people or housing that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 101 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 15. Public Services Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts to police and fire protection upon implementation of MM 5.11-1 in MMP No. 122.75 Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts to school services upon payment of school fees pursuant to SB 50 and implementation of MM 5.13-1.76 Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts to recreational facilities through continued compliance with the City of Anaheim park dedication ordinance.77 Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts to library and no mitigation measures are required in MMP No. 122.78 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: 75 City of Anaheim. 2005. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: Chapter 5.11 Police and Fire. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2193/511-Police-and-Fire-?bidId=. Accessed April 18, 2021. 76 City of Anaheim. 2005. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: Chapter 5.13 Public Services and Facilities. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2195/513-Public-Services-and-Facilities?bidId=. Accessed April 18, 2021. 77 City of Anaheim. 2005. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: Chapter 5.14 Recreation. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2196/514-Recreation-?bidId=. Accessed April 18, 2021. 78 City of Anaheim. 2005. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report: Chapter 5.13 Public Services and Facilities. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2195/513-Public-Services-and-Facilities?bidId=. Accessed April 18, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 102 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new impacts than were identified in EIR 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.79 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a-e) Fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other public facilities? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The Certified EIR determined that buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in less than significant impacts related to public services. The proposed project would create 86 new residential units on a currently mostly vacant site. The project site is zoned with a RO overlay zone, which allows “by-right” housing development opportunities consistent with residential General Plan designations on sites that are zoned or developed with non-residential uses. The proposed project meets the development standards of the RM-4 Zone, with the application of a density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915, as well as development incentives allowed under Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.52.090. As such, there would not be significant impacts related to public services beyond what the Certified EIR previously analyzed. In order to provide adequate emergency vehicle access, the proposed project would have driveways via a private drive from West Midway Drive and from Anaheim Boulevard, each with a width of 26 feet to be consistent with the 24 feet minimum requirement in the Anaheim Municipal Code.80 The property Applicant would also comply with payment of police and fire impact fees at the time of issuance of building permits. Table 5.13-14 in Program EIR No. 330 provides student generation rates for Multi-Family Residential homes. According to the generation rates provided, the proposed project would generate 10 elementary students, two junior high students, and three high school students. This increase in students would not create a significant impact to schools. The project Applicant would also be required to pay school impact fees pursuant to SB 50, codified in Government Code Section 65995. The payment of development fees would offset the costs to each District of providing educational facilities to students added by the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, that either have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of 79 City of Anaheim. 2013. City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number- 346-Entire-Document?bidId= Accessed February 18, 2021. 80 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter18.20.130 Parking, Loading and Vehicular Access Section .304. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/anaheim_ca/0-0-0-66839 Accessed April 26, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 103 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP PS-1 The Property Owner/Developer would pay school impact fees pursuant to Senate Bill 50 (Government Code Section 65995). Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 104 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 16. Recreation a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would increase demand for parks in the City overall, and specifically in areas where residential uses would be permitted where no such uses existed at the time. Residential developments in the City are required to dedicate land for parkland and/or pay in-lieu fees to offset impacts on demands for parks. Impacts were less than significant after compliance with the City’s park dedication ordinance and no mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122.81 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in Program EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.82 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? and 81 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR: 5.14 Recreation. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2196/514-Recreation-?bidId=. Accessed April 21, 2021 82 City of Anaheim. 2013. City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report: Report: 7 CEQA Mandated Sections. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2268/7-CEQA-Mandated-Sections?bidId=. April 21, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 105 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The Certified EIR determined that buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in less than significant impacts related to public services. The proposed project would create 86 new residential units on a currently vacant site. The project site is zoned with a RO overlay zone, which allows “by-right” housing development opportunities consistent with residential General Plan designations on sites that are zoned or developed with non-residential uses. The proposed project would include the demolition of all existing structures on-site for the development of 86 residential units. The project would provide 22,220 square feet of common open space, including a swimming pool, an outdoor fireplace lounge area, and a dog park. As part of the proposed project, the proposed recreational facilities have been analyzed in this document and no impacts beyond what was analyzed in the Certified EIR was found. With implementation of PPP REC- 1, the proposed project would not have significant impacts related to recreation that either have not been analyzed in the Certified EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP REC-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Property Owners/Developers shall comply with Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.250, which requires the provision of parkland and/or the payment of fees, consistent with the Quimby Act. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 106 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 17. Transportation Would the project: a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in significant traffic impacts at seven intersections. With implementation of MM 5.15-1 through 5.15-8, Program EIR No. 330 identified traffic impacts at three of the intersections as significant and unavoidable. Program EIR No. 330 also identified impacts at one Congestion Management Program intersection, Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road, as significant and unavoidable. The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations related to this impact. Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts to air traffic levels and air traffic patterns; roadway design hazards; emergency access; and parking capacity. No mitigation measures related to these impacts were required in MMP No. 122.83 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in significant traffic impacts at 20 intersections. With implementation of new MM 5.15-8, Supplemental EIR No. 346 identified traffic impacts at seven of the intersections as significant and unavoidable due to physical 83 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.15, Traffic and Circulation, Pages 5-263 to 5-322. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2197/515-Traffic-and-Circulation-?bidId=. Accessed April 27, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 107 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx constraints on intersection widening, including buildings and mature trees. The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations related to this impact. Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would not result in new or greater significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 related to roadway design hazards, emergency access, or alternative transportation. No new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.84 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. prepared a Traffic Statement for the proposed project on April 15, 2021. The document is included as Appendix H of this report. According to the Traffic Statement, the proposed project would generate a net increase of 34 trips during the AM peak-hour, 42 trips during the PM peak-hour, and 517 daily trips. Based on the estimated trip generation, the proposed project would generate less than 100 weekday peak-hour vehicle trips and no further traffic impact analysis is required in accordance with the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Would the project: a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. According to the Traffic Statement, the proposed project would generate a net increase of 34 trips during the AM peak-hour, 42 trips during the PM peak-hour, and 517 daily trips. The Traffic Statement determined that traffic from the proposed site would not be impact intersections or highways that are a part of OCTA Congestion Management Plan (CMP) and would not require further analysis for the congestion management plan. Pedestrian facilities, including sidewalks and crosswalks are available in the project vicinity. Pedestrian circulation would be via a walkway along West Midway Drive, the private street to the west, and the courtyard, which would connect to the existing City sidewalk along Anaheim Boulevard. A bicycle entry would also be located on West Midway Drive. The proposed project would also be located near various alternative transportation modes and routes, including transit stops and pedestrian facilities consistent with the goals and policies of the Anaheim General Plan Green Element. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to conflicts with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. No further environmental analysis is required. 84 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.2, Transportation/Traffic, Pages 5-13 through 5-34. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 27, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 108 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The City’s Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for CEQA Analysis includes screening criteria for three project types that these Guidelines presume would result in a less-than- significant transportation impact. The “Type 3: Project Type Screening” section provides a list of project types that are local serving in nature, including affordable housing and a community center. The proposed project would fall under this “Type 3” determination and would be screened out from a full VMT assessment as it is presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact regarding conflict or inconsistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to VMT that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. No further environmental analysis is required. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Pursuant to Program EIR No. 330, the proposed project plans would comply with the City’s roadway design standards and General Plan goals and policies related to maintaining a safe circulation system, which would ensure that the proposed project would not introduce any hazardous design features. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to hazardous design features that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. No further environmental analysis is required. d) Result in inadequate emergency access? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Emergency access would be provided from a private drive via West Midway Drive and from the driveway located on Anaheim Boulevard, each with a width of 26 feet to provide adequate emergency vehicle access and to be consistent with the 24 feet minimum requirement in the City of Anaheim Municipal Code.85 Pursuant to Program EIR No. 330, the proposed project would comply with the Anaheim General Plan Circulation Element, which would maintain a comprehensive circulation system in the City at buildout. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to emergency access that the Certified EIR has already analyzed and would not result in more significant or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. No further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. 85 City of Anaheim. 2021. Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter18.20.130 Parking, Loading and Vehicular Access Section .304. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/anaheim_ca/0-0-0-66839 Accessed April 26, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 109 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. Applicable Mitigation Measures Any modifications to the mitigation measures from Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and underlined for new, inserted text. MMP No. 122 MM 5.15-5 Prior to issuance of each building permit, appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Traffic Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees shall be paid by the property owner/developer to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the Property Owner/Developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. MM 5.15-6 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, and subject to nexus requirements, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate right(s)-of- way as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan adjacent to their property. MMP No. 112A MM 5.15-8 The General Plan Circulation Element and associated Planned Roadway Network Map (Figure C-1 of the General Plan), identifies those roadways that are planned to accommodate current development and future growth established by the Land Use Element. Roadways will be constructed as development occurs and as funding becomes available. In addition to the roadways identified on the Planned Roadway Network Map, the improvements identified in Table 5.4-7 will be necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service within the anticipated theoretical buildout identified in the General Plan. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 110 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 18. Utilities and Service Systems Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to utilities and service systems, including water services, sewer services, solid waste, natural gas, telephone and cable services, with implementation of MM 5.13-3 and 5.13-6 in MMP No. 122.86 86 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.13, Public Services and Facilities. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2195/513-Public-Services-and-Facilities?bidId=. Accessed April 27, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 111 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.87 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Water The City of Anaheim’s increasing demands for local and regional water supplies depend on Orange County Water District (OCWD) and Metropolitan Water District (MWD). The OCWD has managed the OC Basin for over 75 years and has plans to sustainably manage the groundwater system through 2040 under the policies and guidelines of the new California Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. According to MWD’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the available water supply will be able to satisfy regional growth and water demands through 2040. In its 2015 UWMP, the City of Anaheim concluded that both MWD and OCWD supplies would meet future water demands. According to the City of Anaheim 2015 UWMP, projected water demands would grow from 62,053 acre-feet in 2015 to 67,143 acre-feet in 2040. In 2016, actual demands decreased substantially to 53,146 acre-feet due to local conservation and regional drought management regulations. The project site was identified as Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151 in Supplemental EIR No. 346; all of which received the RO Overlay Zone as a part of the Rezoning Project, which allows “by-right” housing development opportunities consistent with residential General Plan designations on sites that are zoned or developed with non-residential uses. The proposed project meets the development standards of the RM-4 Zone, with the application of a density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915, as well as development incentives allowed under Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.52.090. The proposed project’s water demand would be within the projected water supply availability. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to water facilities that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further analysis is required. 87 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Appendix A, Initial Study and NOP). Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2294/Draft-Supplemental-Environmental-Impact-Report-DSEIR-Number-346-Entire-Document?bidId=. Accessed April 25, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 112 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Wastewater As required by MM 5.13-4, PSOMAS prepared a Sewer Study for the proposed project on May 6, 2021. The project-specific Sewer Study also includes a memorandum prepared by the City of Anaheim that provides directions to correct the identified sewer deficiency. The required sewer improvements to alleviate deficiencies in the North Katella sewer are based on Alternative 6 of the City’s South Central Anaheim Sewer Study.88 The project-specific Sewer Study, the City’s Memorandum, and the South Central Anaheim Sewer Study are included as Appendix I. The project is within the boundaries of the Central Anaheim Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers which was updated subsequent to Program EIR No. 330. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to wastewater treatment; however, the sewer collection system is currently deficient downstream of the proposed project, and the additional flow generated by the proposed project to the sewer collection system would exacerbate the deficiency. According to the Sewer Study, the proposed project’s average daily flow to the sewer collection system would be 18,525 gallons per day (gpd). Sewer system improvements upstream of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue are not required for the proposed project. However, model results show insufficient capacity within certain segments of the sewer system would be exacerbated by the increased sewer flow generated by the proposed project for both existing and buildout demand scenarios. As stated in MM 5.13-4, the Applicant is required to install sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to mitigate the impacts of the proposed project based upon the applicable sewer study. Therefore, as directed by the City and incorporated as PPP UTIL-1 of this document, the Applicant shall implement a bypass sewer to relieve the deficiency in the North Katella sewer to the satisfaction and approval of the City. The improvement options of either constructing a bypass sewer to connect North Katella sewer and South Katella sewer, or re-instating the previously closed bypass sewer, are shown in Exhibit 9: Off-site Cross-Connection/Bypass Sewer. The bypass sewer would be constructed within the North and South Katella Sewers’ existing road right-of-way. Due to the nature of the sewer, it would only have construction impacts related to air quality, noise, and transportation. Post-construction, the bypass sewer would be underground and would not have operational impacts. The details of the sewer improvement would not be finalized until the proposed project’s final engineering phase, however, it is anticipated that construction would occur during the project’s grading phase and excavation would consist of two 15-foot deep, 10-foot-wide trenches that would be 50 feet long. Construction of the bypass sewer would result in temporary construction air quality impacts but would not cause the proposed project to exceed SCAQMD regional emissions construction thresholds. In addition, the proposed sewer’s distance from the nearest sensitive receptors is beyond the screening limit of 500 meters (1,640 feet) as described in the LST Methodology, thus the localized concentrations of pollutants would be negligible. Given the proposed sewer’s distance from the nearest sensitive receptors, the temporary construction noise impacts also be insignificant and would be mitigated through previously 88 City of Anaheim. 2020. South Central Anaheim Sewer Study. May. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 113 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx identified construction best practices, including, but not limited to, restrictions on permissible hours of construction. To mitigate transportation impacts, the Applicant is required to obtain a Right of Way Construction Permit (RCP) for the construction of the sewer improvement and provide Site Specific Traffic Control Plans, which would ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles, transit facilities, bicycles, and pedestrians. Therefore, the proposed project would not have impacts related to construction of wastewater facilities that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further analysis is required. Stormwater As discussed in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, during larger storm events and when the proposed infiltration system is at capacity, stormwater would overflow out of the proposed catch basin nearest to the northwest corner of the site. Primary overflow would be conveyed to West Midway Drive via two proposed parkway culverts along the site’s northerly right-of-way. In the event the storm drain system becomes clogged, the catch basins would pond within the localized sumps and overflow to West Midway Drive via the proposed driveway entrances/exits. Upon entering the public right-of-way, site runoff would follow the historic drainage pattern. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to runoff and stormwater drainage that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications The project site is an urban infill site, served by existing electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities. Impacts associated with electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities would not be greater than those analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to telecommunications facilities that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. As previously discussed, the City of Anaheim’s projected water supplies are able to meet future water demands. The project site was identified as Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151 in Supplemental EIR No. 346; all of which received the RO Overlay Zone as a part of the Rezoning Project, which allows “by-right” housing development opportunities consistent with residential General Plan designations on sites that are zoned or developed with non-residential uses. The proposed project meets the development standards of the RM-4 Zone, with the application of a density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915, as well as development incentives allowed under Anaheim Municipal Code Section City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 114 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx 18.52.090. The proposed project’s water demand would be within the projected water supply availability. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to water supply availability that have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR, nor would the proposed project have any impacts that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that the application of uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate; therefore, no further analysis is required. c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. According to PSOMAS’ Sewer Study prepared for the proposed project, the sewer collection system is currently deficient downstream of the proposed project, and the additional flow generated by the proposed project to the sewer collection system would exacerbate the deficiency. According to the Sewer Study, the proposed project’s average daily flow to the sewer collection system would be 18,525 gpd. As discussed previously, the project Applicant would implement PPP UTIL-1 to relieve the deficiency in the North Katella Sewer. Therefore, with implementation of improvements, the proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to wastewater that have not already been analyzed in the Certified EIR, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site was identified as Housing Opportunity Sites 137, 147, 150, and 151 in Supplemental EIR No. 346; all of which received the RO Overlay Zone as a part of the Rezoning Project, which allows “by-right” housing development opportunities consistent with residential General Plan designations on sites that are zoned or developed with non-residential uses. The proposed project meets the development standards of the RM-4 Zone, with the application of a density bonus allowed per California Government Code Section 65915, as well as development incentives allowed under Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.52.090. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to solid waste that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. e) Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would comply with all federal, State, and local requirements related to solid waste. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to solid waste statutes and regulations that the Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 115 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies PPP UTIL-1 Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall provide proof to the City to implement one of the following cross-connection/bypass to relieve the sewer deficiency in the North Katella Sewer: 1) Design—to the satisfaction and approval of the City – a bypass sewer that is demonstrated (through calculations) to provide the required flow between the North Katella Sewer and the South Katella Sewer. Construct said improvement, which includes the following actions/steps: a. Obtain a Right of Way Construction Permit (RCP) for the Construction of the Sewer including Site Specific Traffic Control Plans. 2) Explore with the support of a confined entry contractor and in coordination with City Staff, the possibility of opening up 2 existing bypass pipes (one 15” and one 8”) that were sealed about 10 years ago. a. An RCP shall be obtained from the Public Works Department to access the bypass pipes and for any additional related construction activities. 3) Propose an alternative approach to accomplish the same goal as the bypass would accomplish, which is to relieve the deficiency in the North Katella Sewer while not creating any deficiencies elsewhere. Applicable Mitigation Measures Clarification on project-specific implementation of a mitigation measure from Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 is in bold text. MMP No. 122 MM 5.13-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, future projects shall demonstrate compliance with the following water conservation measures to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department: • Install a separate irrigation meter when the total landscaped area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation systems and automatic systems that include moisture sensors. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in the irrigation system. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 116 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx • Use of water-conservation landscape plant materials, wherever feasible. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment including low flush toilets and urinals. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of cooling tower and waterway recirculation systems. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) • Use of water efficient ice machines, dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water using appliances. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures). MM 5.13-4 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities or the Proposed Project, with peak flows provided by the property owner, will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line. If the City Engineer determines that either condition exists, the property owner/developer shall conduct a sanitary sewer study to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. If the proposed project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the proposed project currently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the applicable sewer deficiency study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the project area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. The requirement for City Engineer review of sewer facilities serving each project set forth in this mitigation measure has been satisfied by the completion of the Sewer Study prepared for the project, which has been reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and the recommendations have been incorporated into this document as PPP UTIL-1. MMP No. 112A None. New cross connection/sewer bypass between North Katella Sewer and South Katella Sewer (PPP UTIL-1 Option 1) Re-instate connection between North Katella Sewer and South Katella Sewer (PPP UTIL-1 Option 2) 00550086 06/2021 | 9_OffSite_Cross_Connection_Bypass_Sewer.cdr• Source: CITY OF ANAHEIM MIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECT APPENDIX N CHECKLIST Exhibit 9 Off-Site Cross-Connection/Bypass Sewer THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 119 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 19. Wildfire If located in or near State Responsibility Areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Environmental Evaluation Summary of Impacts in the Certified EIR Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346 analyzed impacts related to Wildfire in the Hazards section of each respective EIR. Program EIR No. 330 concluded the following: Buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to wildfire.89 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded the following: 89 City of Anaheim. 2004. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 5.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2188/56-Hazards-and-Hazardous-Materials-?bidId=. Accessed April 27, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 120 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Buildout of the Housing Opportunity Sites would result in no new or increased significant impacts than those identified in Program EIR No. 330 and no new mitigation measures were required in MMP No. 122A.90 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: a)-d) Impair an emergency response plan, create exposure to wildfire impacts, require instillation or maintenance of infrastructure, or create exposure to flooding or landslides? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. The project site is located in an urbanized area of Anaheim surrounded by extensive urban development in all directions. The project site is not located adjacent to areas or lands classified as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. In addition, the project site is an urban infill site that is not intermixed with wildlands. As such, the proposed project would not subject people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death because of exposure to wildfires. The proposed project does not have other features with the potential to exacerbate wildfire, downstream flooding, or landslide risks. Because the proposed project is located in an urbanized area, it would not require the installation of maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or result in ongoing impacts to the environment. The proposed project would not have any significant impacts related to wildfires that Certified EIR has not already analyzed, nor would the proposed project result in more significant or more severe impacts that could not be substantially mitigated. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required. Project Design Features None. Standard Conditions/Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies None. Applicable Mitigation Measures MMP No. 122 None. MMP No. 112A None. 90 City of Anaheim. 2013. Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report: 7 CEQA Mandated Sections. Website: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/2268/7-CEQA-Mandated-Sections?bidId= April 22, 2021. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist Environmental Checklist Form FirstCarbon Solutions 121 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Environmental Issues Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact Analyzed in the Certified EIR Substantially Mitigated by Uniformly Applicable Development Policies 20. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Environmental Evaluation a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. As described in Section 4, Biological Resources, Program EIR No. 330 determined that buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to nesting birds with implementation of MM 5.3-3 and MM 5.3-4. These mitigation measures would require focused surveys to identify avoidance measures to protect active nests, and restricting removal of nonnative trees to protect nesting birds. With implementation of these mitigation measures, it was determined that there would be no significant impacts related to the potential for the degradation of the quality of the environment, a substantial reduction in the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, the drop of a fish or wildlife population below self-sustaining levels, a substantial reduction in the number or restriction on the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Environmental Checklist Form Appendix N Checklist 122 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx Furthermore, as described in Section 5, Cultural Resources, Program EIR No. 330 determined that impacts related to cultural resources would be less than significant. It was determined that there would be no significant impacts related to the potential for elimination of important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. Program EIR No. 330 identified cumulatively considerable impacts related to air quality, noise, and traffic. MM 5.2-1 through MM 5.2-6 (Air Quality), MM 5.10-1 and MM 5.10-2 (Noise), and MM 5.15-1 through MM 5.15-8 (traffic) were required to mitigate impacts to these analysis areas. Supplemental EIR No. 346 identified cumulatively considerable impacts related to Air Quality, GHG Emissions, Noise, and Traffic. MM 5.2-1, MM 5.2-5, MM 5.2-6, and MM 5.2-7 (Air Quality and GHG Emissions); MM 5.10-1 (Noise); and MM 5.15-4, MM 5.15-5, MM 5.15-6, and MM 5.15-8 (Traffic) were required to mitigate impacts to these analysis areas. Based on the analysis provided in Section 3, Air Quality; Section 13, Noise, and Section 17, Transportation, the proposed project would not substantially increase cumulative impacts related to these analysis areas. No new mitigation measures would be required. Additionally, as presented throughout this Appendix N Checklist, the proposed project’s cumulative impacts would be consistent with Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Analyzed in the Certified EIR. This analysis has not found the proposed project to generate new or substantially more severe environmental effects than those previously analyzed in Program EIR No. 330 or Supplemental EIR No. 346; therefore, there is no likelihood of the proposed project causing substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, beyond that which was previously analyzed in the Certified EIR. Impacts would be consistent with what the Certified EIR analyzed. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist List of Preparers FirstCarbon Solutions 123 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Appendix N/00550086 Midway Anaheim Appendix N Checklist.docx SECTION 6: LIST OF PREPARERS FirstCarbon Solutions 250 Commerce, Suite 250 Irvine, CA 92602 Phone: 888.826.5814 Fax: 714.508.4110 Project Director ....................................................................................................................... Mary Bean Senior Project Manager ............................................................................................................. Cecilia So Project Manager ............................................................................................................................. Tsui Li Environmental Services Analyst .................................................................................. Stephanie Shepard Environmental Services Analyst ........................................................................................ Madelyn Dolan Senior Air Quality and Noise Scientist ..................................................................................... Phillip Ault Air Quality Specialist ................................................................................................................ Lance Park Senior Biologist ...................................................................................................................... Kevin Derby Biologist ............................................................................................................................ Alec Villanueva Archaeologist ................................................................................................................... Stefanie Griffin Archaeologist .................................................................................................................... Natalie Adame Senior Editor .......................................................................................................................... Susie Harris Word Processor .............................................................................................................. Melissa Ramirez GIS/Graphics ................................................................................................................ Karlee McCracken Vista Environmental—Technical Subconsultant 1021 Didrickson Way Laguna Beach, CA 92651 Phone: 949.510.5355 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix A: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Analysis Report THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK       AIR QUALITY, ENERGY, AND GREENHOUSE GAS  EMISSIONS IMPACT ANALYSIS  MIDWAY AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT  CITY OF ANAHEIM      Lead Agency:     City of Anaheim  200 S Anaheim Boulevard  Anaheim, CA 92805        Prepared by:     Vista Environmental   1021 Didrickson Way  Laguna Beach, CA 92651  949 510 5355  Greg Tonkovich, AICP      Project No. 21048    May 5, 2021      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim    Page i    TABLE  OF CONTENTS  1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1  1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives ................................................................................. 1  1.2 Site Locations and Study Area .................................................................................................... 1  1.3 Proposed Project Description .................................................................................................... 1  1.4 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 2  1.5 Mitigation Measures for the Proposed Project ......................................................................... 3  2.0 Air Pollutants ........................................................................................................................... 9  2.1 Criteria Pollutants and Ozone Precursors .................................................................................. 9  2.2 Other Pollutants of Concern .................................................................................................... 11  3.0 Greenhouse Gases ................................................................................................................. 13  3.1 Greenhouse Gases ................................................................................................................... 13  3.2 Global Warming Potential ........................................................................................................ 15  3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory ...................................................................................... 16  4.0 Air Quality Management ....................................................................................................... 17  4.1 Federal – United States Environmental Protection Agency..................................................... 17  4.2 State – California Air Resources Board .................................................................................... 20  4.3 Regional – Southern California ................................................................................................ 21  4.4 Local – City of Anaheim ............................................................................................................ 24  5.0 Energy Conservation Management ........................................................................................ 26  5.1 State ......................................................................................................................................... 26  5.2 Local ‐ City of Anaheim ............................................................................................................ 28  6.0 Global Climate Change Management ..................................................................................... 29  6.1 International ............................................................................................................................ 29  6.2 Federal – United States Environmental Protection Agency..................................................... 29  6.3 State ......................................................................................................................................... 30  6.4 Regional – Southern California ................................................................................................ 35  6.5 Local – City of Anaheim ............................................................................................................ 36  7.0 Atmospheric Setting .............................................................................................................. 38  7.1 South Coast Air Basin ............................................................................................................... 38  6.2 Local Climate ............................................................................................................................ 38  6.3 Monitored Local Air Quality ..................................................................................................... 39  7.4 Toxic Air Contaminant Levels in the Air Basin ......................................................................... 41  8.0 Modeling Parameters and Assumptions ................................................................................. 42  8.1 CalEEMod Model Input Parameters ........................................................................................ 42  8.2 Energy Use Calculations ........................................................................................................... 46          Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim    Page ii    TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED  9.0 Thresholds of Significance ...................................................................................................... 50  9.1 Regional Air Quality ................................................................................................................. 50  9.2 Local Air Quality ....................................................................................................................... 50  9.3 Toxic Air Contaminants ............................................................................................................ 51  9.4 Odor Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 51  9.5 Energy Conservation ................................................................................................................ 51  9.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...................................................................................................... 52  10.0 Impact Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 54  10.1 CEQA Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................................... 54  10.2 Air Quality Compliance .......................................................................................................... 54  10.3 Cumulative Net Increase in Non‐Attainment Pollution ......................................................... 56  10.4 Sensitive Receptors ................................................................................................................ 62  10.5 Odor Emissions ...................................................................................................................... 65  10.6 Energy Consumption .............................................................................................................. 66  10.7 Energy Plan Consistency ........................................................................................................ 70  10.8 Generation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................. 70  10.9 Greenhouse Gas Plan Consistency ......................................................................................... 71  11.0 References ............................................................................................................................. 73       APPENDIX  Appendix A – CalEEMod Model Daily Printouts  Appendix B – EMFAC2017 Model Printouts   Appendix C – CalEEMod Model Annual Printouts                Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim    Page iii    LIST OF FIGURES  Figure 1 – Project Local Study Area .............................................................................................................. 7  Figure 2 – Proposed Site Plan ....................................................................................................................... 8    LIST OF TABLES  Table A – Global Warming Potentials, Atmospheric Lifetimes and Abundances of GHGs ......................... 15  Table B – State and Federal Criteria Pollutant Standards ........................................................................... 17  Table C – South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status .................................................................................... 18  Table D – Monthly Climate Data ................................................................................................................. 39  Table E – Local Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary ............................................................................... 40  Table F – CalEEMod Land Use Parameters ................................................................................................. 42  Table G – Off‐Road Equipment and Fuel Consumption from Construction of the Proposed Project ........ 47  Table H – On‐Road Vehicle Trips and Fuel Consumption from Construction of the Proposed Project ...... 48  Table I – SCAQMD Regional Criteria Pollutant Emission Thresholds of Significance .................................. 50  Table J – SCAQMD Local Air Quality Thresholds of Significance ................................................................. 51  Table K – Construction‐Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions Prior to Mitigation ....................... 57  Table L – Construction‐Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions ............................................................ 58  Table M – Operational Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions .................................................................... 59  Table N – Operations‐Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions .............................................................. 61  Table O – Proposed Project Compliance with the General Plan Energy Conservation Policies ................. 70  Table P – Project Related Greenhouse Gas Annual Emissions ................................................................... 71        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim    Page iv    ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS  AB  Assembly Bill  Air Basin South Coast Air Basin  AQMP  Air Quality Management Plan   BACT  Best Available Control Technology  BSFC  Brake Specific Fuel Consumption  CAAQS  California Ambient Air Quality Standards  CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model  CalEPA  California Environmental Protection Agency  CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association  CARB  California Air Resources Board  CEC  California Energy Commission  CEQA  California Environmental Quality Act  CFCs  chlorofluorocarbons  Cf4  tetrafluoromethane  C2F6  hexafluoroethane  CH4  Methane  CO  Carbon monoxide  CO2  Carbon dioxide  CO2e  Carbon dioxide equivalent  City  City of Anaheim  DPM  Diesel particulate matter   EPA  Environmental Protection Agency   ºF  Fahrenheit  FTIP  Federal Transportation Improvement Program  GHG  Greenhouse gas   GWP  Global warming potential  HAP  Hazardous Air Pollutants  HFCs  Hydrofluorocarbons  IPCC  International Panel on Climate Change  kWhr  kilowatt‐hour  LCFS  Low Carbon Fuel Standard      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim    Page v    LST  Localized Significant Thresholds   MATES  Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study  MMTCO2e Million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent  MPO  Metropolitan Planning Organization  MWh  Megawatt‐hour  NAAQS  National Ambient Air Quality Standards  NOx  Nitrogen oxides  NO2  Nitrogen dioxide   OPR  Office of Planning and Research  Pfc  Perfluorocarbons  PM  Particle matter  PM10  Particles that are less than 10 micrometers in diameter  PM2.5  Particles that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter  PPM  Parts per million  PPB  Parts per billion  PPT  Parts per trillion  RTIP  Regional Transportation Improvement Plan  RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy  SB  Senate Bill  SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District  SCAG  Southern California Association of Governments  SF6  Sulfur Hexafluoride  SIP  State Implementation Plan  SOx  Sulfur oxides  TAC  Toxic air contaminants  UNFCCC United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change  VOC  Volatile organic compounds      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 1    1.0 INTRODUCTION  1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives  This Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Impact Analysis has been completed to  determine the air quality, energy, and GHG emissions impacts associated with the proposed Midway  Affordable Residential project (proposed project).  The following is provided in this report:   A description of the proposed project;    A description of the atmospheric setting;   A description of the criteria pollutants and GHGs;   A description of the air quality regulatory framework;    A description of the energy conservation regulatory framework;   A description of the GHG emissions regulatory framework;   A description of the air quality, energy, and GHG emissions thresholds including the California  Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) significance thresholds;   An analysis of the conformity of the proposed project with the South Coast Air Quality  Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP);    An analysis of the short‐term construction related and long‐term operational air quality, energy,  and GHG emissions impacts; and    An analysis of the conformity of the proposed project with all applicable energy and GHG  emissions reduction plans and policies.  1.2 Site Locations and Study Area  The project site is located in the City of Anaheim (City).  The approximately 2.26‐acre project site is  currently mostly vacant with an approximately 4,590 square foot commercial building located in the  northwest corner and public alleyways on the west side and east portion of the project site that runs the  length of the property.  The project site is bounded by Midway Drive and Paul Revere Elementary School  and an operations yard for Anaheim Elementary School District to the north, Anaheim Boulevard and  commercial retail uses to the east, a mobile home park and commercial retail uses to the south, and multi‐ family residential (currently under construction) to the west.  The project local study area is shown in  Figure 1.    Sensitive Receptors in Project Vicinity  The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are residents at the mobile home park located adjacent  to the south side of the project site.  The nearest school is Paul Revere Elementary School, which is located  as near as 55 feet north of the project site.  1.3 Proposed Project Description  The proposed project would consist of development of an affordable four‐story residential apartment  complex with 86 residential apartment units, a 3,300 square foot leasing and residential amenity area,  and a 1,700 square foot flex space area that would be used for community programs and meetings.  The      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 2    complex would also include recreational areas that include a tot lot, community garden, and a pool with  a pool building that would include public restrooms, a pool equipment room and an indoor bike storage  area.  The proposed project would provide 129 parking spaces, of which 18 would be garage spaces, and  12 would be dedicated for electric vehicle (EV) charging stalls.  As part of the proposed project, the existing  public alleyway on the eastern portion of the project site would be vacated and the public alleyway will  be re‐routed to connect to Anaheim Boulevard in the southeast corner of the project site.   The proposed  site plan is shown in Figure 2.  1.4 Executive Summary  Standard Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Regulatory Conditions  The proposed project will be required to comply with the following regulatory conditions from the  SCAQMD and State of California (State).    South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules  The following lists the SCAQMD rules that are applicable, but not limited to the proposed project.     Rule 402 Nuisance – Controls the emissions of odors and other air contaminants;    Rule 403 Fugitive Dust – Controls the emissions of fugitive dust;   Rule 445 Fireplaces – Controls the emissions of fireplaces and restricts all new fireplaces and fire  pits to natural gas only;   Rules 1108 and 1108.1 Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt – Controls the VOC content in asphalt;   Rule 1113 Architectural Coatings – Controls the VOC content in paints and solvents; and   Rule 1143 Paint Thinners – Controls the VOC content in paint thinners.    State of California Rules  The following lists the State of California Code of Regulations (CCR) air quality emission rules that are  applicable, but not limited to the proposed project.    CCR Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449 – In use Off‐Road Diesel Vehicles;    CCR Title 13, Section 2025 – On‐Road Diesel Truck Fleets;    CCR Title 24 Part 6 – California Building Energy Standards; and   CCR Title 24 Part 11 – California Green Building Standards.  Summary of Analysis Results  The following is a summary of the proposed project’s impacts with regard to the State CEQA Guidelines  air quality, energy, and GHG emissions checklist questions.  Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?  Less than significant impact.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 3    Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is  non‐attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard?  Less than significant impact.  Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?  Less than significant impact.  Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of  people?  Less than significant impact.  Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary  consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation;  Less than significant impact.  Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy;  Less than significant impact.  Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the  environment?  Less than significant impact.  Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing  the emissions of GHGs?  Less than significant impact.  1.5 Mitigation Measures for the Proposed Project  This analysis found that implementation of the State and SCAQMD air quality, energy, and GHG emissions  reductions regulations listed above as well as implementation of the following Mitigation Measures from  Draft City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental Environmental Impact  Report No. 330 (DSEIR No. 330), prepared by The Planning Center, July 2013, would limit criteria  pollutants, TACs, odors, energy, and GHG emissions from the proposed project to less than significant  levels.    Applicable Mitigation Measures from the 2004 Certified EIR  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐1:  Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall include a note on all  grading plans which requires the construction contractor to implement the following measures  during grading. These measures shall also be discussed at the pre‐grade conference.   Use low emission mobile construction equipment.   Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them tuned.   Use low sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment.   Utilize existing power sources (i.e., power poles) when feasible.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 4     Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference.   Minimize obstruction of through‐traffic lanes. When feasible, construction should be  planned so that lane closures on existing streets are kept to a minimum.   Schedule construction operations affecting traffic for off‐peak hours.   Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities  (the plan may include advance public notice of routing, use of public transportation and  satellite parking areas with a shuttle service).  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐2:  The City shall reduce vehicle emissions caused by traffic congestion by implementing  transportation systems management techniques that include synchronized traffic signals and  limiting on‐street parking.  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐3:  The City shall encourage major employers, tenants in business parks and other activity centers,  and developers of large new developments to participate in transportation management  associations.  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐4:  The City shall consider the feasibility of diverting commercial truck traffic to off‐peak periods to  alleviate nonrecurrent congestion as a means to improve roadway efficiency.  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐5:  The City will encourage the incorporation of energy conservation techniques (i.e. installation of  energy saving devices, construction of electric vehicle charging stations, use of sunlight filtering  window coatings or double‐paned windows, utilization of light‐colored roofing materials as  opposed to dark‐colored roofing materials, and placement of shady trees next to habitable  structures) in new developments.  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐6:  The City will encourage the incorporation of bus stands, bicycle racks, bicycle lanes, and other  alternative transportation related infrastructure in new developments.  Additional Mitigation Measures from DSEIR No. 330  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐7:  Prior to the issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer for residential or  residential mixed‐use projects within:  1) 1,000 feet from the truck bays of an existing distribution  centers that accommodate more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating  transport refrigeration units, or where transport refrigeration unit operations exceed 300 hours  per week; 2) 1,000 feet of an industrial facility which emits toxic air contaminants; or 3) 500 feet  of Interstate 5 (I‐5), SR‐91, SR‐57 or SR‐ 55, shall submit a health risk assessment (HRA) prepared  in accordance with policies and procedures of the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard  Assessment (OEHHA) and the SCAQMD.  The HRA shall be submitted to the City Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits  for any future discretionary residential or residential mixed‐use project. If the HRA shows that the  incremental cancer risk exceeds one in 100,000 (1.0E‐05), or the appropriate noncancer hazard  index exceeds 1.0, or if the PM10 or PM2.5 ambient air quality standard exceeds 2.5 μg/m3, the      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 5    HRA shall identify the level of high‐efficiency Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) filter  required to reduce indoor air concentrations of pollutants to achieve the cancer and/or noncancer  and/or ambient air quality threshold. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems for units  that are installed with MERV filters shall maintain positive pressure within the building’s filtered  ventilation system to reduce infiltration of unfiltered outdoor air. The property owner/developer  shall be required to install high efficiency MERV filters in the intake of residential ventilation  systems, consistent with the recommendations of the HRA. Heating, air conditioning and  ventilation (HVAC) systems shall be installed with a fan unit power designed to force air through  the MERV filter. To ensure long‐term maintenance and replacement of the MERV filters in the  individual units, the following shall occur:  a) Developer, sale, and/or rental representative shall provide notification to all affected  tenants/residents of the potential health risk for affected units.  b) For rental units, the owner/property manager shall maintain and replace MERV filters in  accordance with the manufacture’s recommendations. The property owner shall inform  renters of increased risk of exposure to diesel particulates when windows are open.  c) For residential owned units, the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) shall incorporate  requirements for long‐term maintenance in the Covenant Conditions and Restrictions  (CC&Rs) and inform homeowners of their responsibility to maintain the MERV filter in  accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. The HOA shall inform  homeowners of increased risk of exposure to diesel particulates when windows are open.  e) For projects within 500 feet of the freeway, air intakes on residential buildings shall be  placed as far from the freeway as possible.  f) For projects within 500 feet of the freeway, the residential buildings should be designed  to limit the use of operable windows and/or balconies on portions of the site adjacent to  and facing the freeway.  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐8:  The City shall evaluate strategies to reduce truck idling during the peak hour period of the  roadway network, such as staggered work/delivery schedules, truck routes, and/or intersection  improvements.  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐9:  The City shall support and promote the use of low‐ and zero‐emission vehicles, by:   Encouraging the necessary infrastructure to facilitate the use of zero‐ emission vehicles  and clean alternative fuels, such as electric vehicle charging facilities and conveniently‐ located alternative fueling stations.   Encouraging new construction to include vehicle access to properly wired outdoor  receptacles to accommodate zero emission vehicles (ZEV) and/or plug‐in electric hybrids  (PHEV).   Encouraging transportation fleet standards to achieve the lowest emissions possible,  using a mix of alternate fuels, partial ZEV, or newer fleet mixes.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 6    Mitigation Measure 5.2‐10:  The City shall encourage the performance of energy audits of buildings prior to completion of sale,  and that audit results and information about opportunities for energy efficiency improvements  be presented to the buyer.  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐11:  The City shall develop protocols for safe storage of renewable and alternative energy products  with the potential to leak, ignite, or explode, such as biodiesel, hydrogen, and/or compressed air.  Mitigation Measure 5.2‐12:  The City shall recognize businesses in the City that reduce GHG emissions (e.g., reduced energy  use) as a means to encourage GHG reductions and recognize success.  Fi g u r e 1 Pr o j e c t L o c a l S t u d y A r e a SO U R C E : G o o g l e M a p s . Pr o j e c t N Pr o j e c t S i t e Si t e Figure 2 Proposed Site Plan SOURCE: KTGY. N     Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 9    2.0 AIR POLLUTANTS   Air pollutants are generally classified as either criteria pollutants or non‐criteria pollutants.  Federal  ambient air quality standards have been established for criteria pollutants, whereas no ambient standards  have been established for non‐criteria pollutants.  For some criteria pollutants, separate standards have  been set for different periods.  Most standards have been set to protect public health.  For some  pollutants, standards have been based on other values (such as protection of crops, protection of  materials, or avoidance of nuisance conditions).  A summary of federal and state ambient air quality  standards is provided in the Regulatory Framework section.  2.1 Criteria Pollutants and Ozone Precursors  The criteria pollutants consist of: ozone, nitrogen oxides (NOx), CO, sulfur oxides (Sox), lead, and  particulate matter (PM). The ozone precursors consist of NOx and VOC. These pollutants can harm your  health and the environment, and cause property damage.  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)  calls these pollutants “criteria” air pollutants because it regulates them by developing human health‐ based and/or environmentally‐based criteria for setting permissible levels.  The following provides  descriptions of each of the criteria pollutants and ozone precursors.   Nitrogen Oxides  NOx is the generic term for a group of highly reactive gases which contain nitrogen and oxygen. While  most NOx are colorless and odorless, concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) can often be seen as a  reddish‐brown layer over many urban areas.  NOx form when fuel is burned at high temperatures, as in a  combustion process. The primary manmade sources of NOx are motor vehicles, electric utilities, and other  industrial, commercial, and residential sources that burn fuel.  NOx reacts with other pollutants to form,  ground‐level ozone, nitrate particles, acid aerosols, as well as NO2, which cause respiratory problems. NOx  and the pollutants formed from NOx can be transported over long distances, following the patterns of  prevailing winds.  Therefore, controlling NOx is often most effective if done from a regional perspective,  rather than focusing on the nearest sources.  Ozone  Ozone is not usually emitted directly into the air, instead it is created by a chemical reaction between NOx  and VOCs in the presence of sunlight. Motor vehicle exhaust, industrial emissions, gasoline vapors,  chemical solvents as well as natural sources emit NOx and VOC that help form ozone.  Ground‐level ozone  is the primary constituent of smog.  Sunlight and hot weather cause ground‐level ozone to form with the  greatest concentrations usually occurring downwind from urban areas.  Ozone is subsequently considered  a regional pollutant.  Ground‐level ozone is a respiratory irritant and an oxidant that increases  susceptibility to respiratory infections and can cause substantial damage to vegetation and other  materials.  Because NOx and VOC are ozone precursors, the health effects associated with ozone are also  indirect health effects associated with significant levels of NOx and VOC emissions.  Carbon Monoxide  Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas that is formed when carbon in fuel is not burned  completely.  It is a component of motor vehicle exhaust, which contributes approximately 56 percent of  all CO emissions nationwide.  In cities, 85 to 95 percent of all CO emissions may come from motor vehicle  exhaust.  Other sources of CO emissions include industrial processes (such as metals processing and  chemical manufacturing), residential wood burning, and natural sources such as forest fires.  Woodstoves,      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 10    gas stoves, cigarette smoke, and unvented gas and kerosene space heaters are indoor sources of CO.  The  highest levels of CO in the outside air typically occur during the colder months of the year when inversion  conditions are more frequent.  The air pollution becomes trapped near the ground beneath a layer of  warm air. CO is described as having only a local influence because it dissipates quickly.  Since CO  concentrations are strongly associated with motor vehicle emissions, high CO concentrations generally  occur in the immediate vicinity of roadways with high traffic volumes and traffic congestion, active parking  lots, and in automobile tunnels.  Areas adjacent to heavily traveled and congested intersections are  particularly susceptible to high CO concentrations.  CO is a public health concern because it combines readily with hemoglobin and thus reduces the amount  of oxygen transported in the bloodstream.  The health threat from lower levels of CO is most serious for  those who suffer from heart disease such as angina, clogged arteries, or congestive heart failure.  For a  person with heart disease, a single exposure to CO at low levels may cause chest pain and reduce that  person’s ability to exercise; repeated exposures may contribute to other cardiovascular effects.  High  levels of CO can affect even healthy people.  People who breathe high levels of CO can develop vision  problems, reduced ability to work or learn, reduced manual dexterity, and difficulty performing complex  tasks.  At extremely high levels, CO is poisonous and can cause death.  Sulfur Oxides  SOx gases are formed when fuel containing sulfur, such as coal and oil is burned, as well as from the  refining of gasoline.  SOx dissolves easily in water vapor to form acid and interacts with other gases and  particles in the air to form sulfates and other products that can be harmful to people and the environment.   Lead  Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment as well as manufactured products.  The major sources  of lead emissions have historically been motor vehicles and industrial sources.  Due to the phase out of  leaded gasoline, metal processing is now the primary source of lead emissions to the air.  High levels of  lead in the air are typically only found near lead smelters, waste incinerators, utilities, and lead‐acid  battery manufacturers. Exposure of fetuses, infants and children to low levels of lead can adversely affect  the development and function of the central nervous system, leading to learning disorders, distractibility,  inability to follow simple commands, and lower intelligence quotient. In adults, increased lead levels are  associated with increased blood pressure.  Particulate Matter  PM is the term for a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. PM is made up of a  number of components including acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil  or dust particles.  The size of particles is directly linked to their potential for causing health problems.  Particles that are less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) that are also known as Respirable  Particulate Matter are the particles that generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs.   Once inhaled, these particles can affect the heart and lungs and cause serious health effects.  Particles  that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5) that are also known as Fine Particulate Matter  have been designated as a subset of PM10 due to their increased negative health impacts and its ability  to remain suspended in the air longer and travel further.    Volatile Organic Compounds   Hydrocarbons are organic gases that are formed from hydrogen and carbon and sometimes other  elements. Hydrocarbons that contribute to formation of ozone are referred to and regulated as VOCs (also      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 11    referred to as reactive organic gases). Combustion engine exhaust, oil refineries, and fossil‐fueled power  plants are the sources of hydrocarbons. Other sources of hydrocarbons include evaporation from  petroleum fuels, solvents, dry cleaning solutions, and paint.  VOC is not classified as a criteria pollutant, since VOCs by themselves are not a known source of adverse  health effects. The primary health effects of VOCs result from the formation of ozone and its related health  effects. High levels of VOCs in the atmosphere can interfere with oxygen intake by reducing the amount  of available oxygen through displacement. Carcinogenic forms of hydrocarbons, such as benzene, are  considered TACs. There are no separate health standards for VOCs as a group.   2.2 Other Pollutants of Concern  Toxic Air Contaminants   In addition to the above‐listed criteria pollutants, TACs are another group of pollutants of concern.  TACs  is a term that is defined under the California Clean Air Act and consists of the same substances that are  defined as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) in the Federal Clean Air Act.  There are over 700 hundred  different types of TACs with varying degrees of toxicity.  Sources of TACs include industrial processes such  as petroleum refining and chrome plating operations, commercial operations such as gasoline stations  and dry cleaners, and motor vehicle exhaust.  Cars and trucks release at least 40 different toxic air  contaminants.  The most important of these TACs, in terms of health risk, are diesel particulates, benzene,  formaldehyde, 1,3‐butadiene, and acetaldehyde.  Public exposure to TACs can result from emissions from  normal operations as well as from accidental releases.  Health effects of TACs include cancer, birth defects,  neurological damage, and death.  TACs are less pervasive in the urban atmosphere than criteria air pollutants, however they are linked to  short‐term (acute) or long‐term (chronic or carcinogenic) adverse human health effects.  There are  hundreds of different types of TACs with varying degrees of toxicity.  Sources of TACs include industrial  processes, commercial operations (e.g., gasoline stations and dry cleaners), and motor vehicle exhaust.  According to The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality 2013 Edition, the majority of the  estimated health risk from TACs can be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important of  which is DPM.  DPM is a subset of PM2.5 because the size of diesel particles are typically 2.5 microns and  smaller.  The identification of DPM as a TAC in 1998 led the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt  the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel‐fueled Engines and Vehicles  in September 2000.  The plan’s goals are a 75‐percent reduction in DPM by 2010 and an 85‐percent  reduction by 2020 from the 2000 baseline.  Diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air pollutants,  composed of gaseous and solid material.  The visible emissions in diesel exhaust are known as particulate  matter or PM, which includes carbon particles or “soot.”  Diesel exhaust also contains a variety of harmful  gases and over 40 other cancer‐causing substances.  California’s identification of DPM as a toxic air  contaminant was based on its potential to cause cancer, premature deaths, and other health problems.   Exposure to DPM is a health hazard, particularly to children whose lungs are still developing and the  elderly who may have other serious health problems.  Overall, diesel engine emissions are responsible for  the majority of California’s potential airborne cancer risk from combustion sources.    Asbestos   Asbestos is listed as a TAC by CARB and as a HAP by the EPA.  Asbestos occurs naturally in mineral  formations and crushing or breaking these rocks, through construction or other means, can release      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 12    asbestiform fibers into the air.  Asbestos emissions can result from the sale or use of asbestos‐containing  materials, road surfacing with such materials, grading activities, and surface mining.  The risk of disease is  dependent upon the intensity and duration of exposure.  When inhaled, asbestos fibers may remain in  the lungs and with time may be linked to such diseases as asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma.  The  nearest likely locations of naturally occurring asbestos, as identified in the General Location Guide for  Ultramafic Rocks in California, prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology, is located in  Santa Barbara County.  The nearest historic asbestos mine to the project site, as identified in the Reported  Historic Asbestos Mines, Historic Asbestos Prospects, and Other Natural Occurrences of Asbestos in  California, prepared by U.S. Geological Survey, is located at Asbestos Mountain, which is approximately  70 miles east of the project site in the San Jacinto Mountains.  Due to the distance to the nearest natural  occurrences of asbestos, the project site is not likely to contain asbestos.        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 13    3.0 GREENHOUSE GASES  3.1 Greenhouse Gases   Constituent gases of the Earth’s atmosphere, called atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs), play a critical  role in the Earth’s radiation amount by trapping infrared radiation from the Earth’s surface, which  otherwise would have escaped to space.  Prominent greenhouse gases contributing to this process include  carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone, water vapor, nitrous oxide (N2O), and chlorofluorocarbons  (CFCs).  This phenomenon, known as the Greenhouse Effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable  climate.  Anthropogenic (caused or produced by humans) emissions of these greenhouse gases in excess  of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for the enhancement of the Greenhouse Effect and  have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the Earth’s natural climate, known as global warming or  climate change.  Emissions of gases that induce global warming are attributable to human activities  associated with industrial/manufacturing, agriculture, utilities, transportation, and residential land uses.   Emissions of CO2 and N2O are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion.  Methane, a potent greenhouse gas,  results from off‐gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills.  Sinks of CO2, where CO2 is  stored outside of the atmosphere, include uptake by vegetation and dissolution into the ocean.  The  following provides a description of each of the greenhouse gases and their global warming potential.  Water Vapor   Water vapor is the most abundant, important, and variable GHG in the atmosphere.  Water vapor is not  considered a pollutant; in the atmosphere it maintains a climate necessary for life.  Changes in its  concentration are primarily considered a result of climate feedbacks related to the warming of the  atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization.  The feedback loop in which water is involved  is critically important to projecting future climate change.  As the temperature of the atmosphere rises,  more water is evaporated from ground storage (rivers, oceans, reservoirs, soil).  Because the air is warmer,  the relative humidity can be higher (in essence, the air is able to “hold” more water when it is warmer),  leading to more water vapor in the atmosphere.  As a GHG, the higher concentration of water vapor is  then able to absorb more thermal indirect energy radiated from the Earth, thus further warming the  atmosphere.  The warmer atmosphere can then hold more water vapor and so on and so on.  This is  referred to as a “positive feedback loop.”  The extent to which this positive feedback loop will continue is  unknown as there is also dynamics that put the positive feedback loop in check.  As an example, when  water vapor increases in the atmosphere, more of it will eventually also condense into clouds, which are  more able to reflect incoming solar radiation (thus allowing less energy to reach the Earth’s surface and  heat it up).   Carbon Dioxide   The natural production and absorption of CO2 is achieved through the terrestrial biosphere and the ocean.   However, humankind has altered the natural carbon cycle by burning coal, oil, natural gas, and wood.   Since the industrial revolution began in the mid 1700s, each of these activities has increased in scale and  distribution.  CO2 was the first GHG demonstrated to be increasing in atmospheric concentration with the  first conclusive measurements being made in the last half of the 20th century.  Prior to the industrial  revolution, concentrations were fairly stable at 280 parts per million (ppm).  The International Panel on  Climate Change (IPCC) indicates that concentrations were 379 ppm in 2005, an increase of more than 30  percent.  Left unchecked, the IPCC projects that concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is  projected to increase to a minimum of 540 ppm by 2100 as a direct result of anthropogenic sources.  This      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 14    could result in an average global temperature rise of at least two degrees Celsius or 3.6 degrees  Fahrenheit.    Methane  CH4 is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, although its atmospheric concentration is less than  that of CO2.  Its lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10 to 12 years), compared to some other GHGs (such  as CO2, N2O, and CFCs).  CH4 has both natural and anthropogenic sources.  It is released as part of the  biological processes in low oxygen environments, such as in swamplands or in rice production (at the roots  of the plants).  Over the last 50 years, human activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural  gas, and mining coal have added to the atmospheric concentration of methane.  Other anthropocentric  sources include fossil‐fuel combustion and biomass burning.  Nitrous Oxide  Concentrations of N2O also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution.  In 1998, the global  concentration of this GHG was documented at 314 parts per billion (ppb).  N2O is produced by microbial  processes in soil and water, including those reactions which occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen.  In  addition to agricultural sources, some industrial processes (fossil fuel‐fired power plants, nylon  production, nitric acid production, and vehicle emissions) also contribute to its atmospheric load.  N2O is  also commonly used as an aerosol spray propellant (i.e., in whipped cream bottles, in potato chip bags to  keep chips fresh, and in rocket engines and race cars).  Chlorofluorocarbons   CFCs are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane with chlorine  and/or fluorine atoms.  CFCs are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble, and chemically unreactive in the  troposphere (the level of air at the Earth’s surface).  CFCs have no natural source, but were first  synthesized in 1928.  They were used for refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and cleaning solvents.  Due to  the discovery that they are able to destroy stratospheric ozone, a global effort to halt their production  was undertaken and in 1989 the European Community agreed to ban CFCs by 2000 and subsequent  treaties banned CFCs worldwide by 2010.  This effort was extremely successful, and the levels of the major  CFCs are now remaining level or declining.  However, their long atmospheric lifetimes mean that some of  the CFCs will remain in the atmosphere for over 100 years.  Hydrofluorocarbons   Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are synthetic man‐made chemicals that are used as a substitute for CFCs.  Out  of all the GHGs, they are one of three groups with the highest global warming potential.  The HFCs with  the largest measured atmospheric abundances are (in order), HFC‐23 (CHF3), HFC‐134a (CF3CH2F), and  HFC‐152a (CH3CHF2).  Prior to 1990, the only significant emissions were HFC‐23.  HFC‐134a use is  increasing due to its use as a refrigerant.  Concentrations of HFC‐23 and HFC‐134a in the atmosphere are  now about 10 parts per trillion (ppt) each.  Concentrations of HFC‐152a are about 1 ppt.  HFCs are  manmade for applications such as automobile air conditioners and refrigerants.  Perfluorocarbons  Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) have stable molecular structures and do not break down through the chemical  processes in the lower atmosphere.  High‐energy ultraviolet rays about 60 kilometers above Earth’s  surface are able to destroy the compounds.  Because of this, PFCs have very long lifetimes, between  10,000 and 50,000 years.  Two common PFCs are tetrafluoromethane (CF4) and hexafluoroethane (C2F6).       Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 15    Concentrations of CF4 in the atmosphere are over 70 ppt.  The two main sources of PFCs are primary  aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing.  Sulfur Hexafluoride  Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic, nonflammable gas.  SF6 has the  highest global warming potential of any gas evaluated; 23,900 times that of CO2.  Concentrations in the  1990s were about 4 ppt.  Sulfur hexafluoride is used for insulation in electric power transmission and  distribution equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas  for leak detection.  Aerosols  Aerosols are particles emitted into the air through burning biomass (plant material) and fossil fuels.   Aerosols can warm the atmosphere by absorbing and emitting heat and can cool the atmosphere by  reflecting light.  Cloud formation can also be affected by aerosols.  Sulfate aerosols are emitted when fuel  containing sulfur is burned.  Black carbon (or soot) is emitted during biomass burning due to the  incomplete combustion of fossil fuels.  Particulate matter regulation has been lowering aerosol  concentrations in the United States; however, global concentrations are likely increasing.  3.2 Global Warming Potential  GHGs have varying global warming potential (GWP).  The GWP is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap  heat in the atmosphere; it is the cumulative radiative forcing effects of a gas over a specified time horizon  resulting from the emission of a unit mass of gas relative to the reference gas, CO2.  The GHGs listed by  the IPCC and the CEQA Guidelines are discussed in this section in order of abundance in the atmosphere.   Water vapor, the most abundant GHG, is not included in this list because its natural concentrations and  fluctuations far outweigh its anthropogenic (human‐made) sources.  To simplify reporting and analysis,  GHGs are commonly defined in terms of their GWP.  The IPCC defines the GWP of various GHG emissions  on a normalized scale that recasts all GHG emissions in terms of CO2 equivalent (CO2e).  As such, the GWP  of CO2 is equal to 1.  The GWP values used in this analysis are based on the 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment  Report, which are used in CARB’s 2014 Scoping Plan Update and the CalEEMod Model Version 2016.3.2  and are detailed in Table A.  The IPCC has updated the Global Warming Potentials of some gases in their  Fifth Assessment Report, however the new values have not yet been incorporated into the CalEEMod  model that has been utilized in this analysis.  Table A – Global Warming Potentials, Atmospheric Lifetimes and Abundances of GHGs  Gas  Atmospheric Lifetime  (years)1  Global Warming Potential  (100 Year Horizon)2  Atmospheric  Abundance  Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 50‐200 1 379 ppm  Methane (CH4) 9‐15 25 1,774 ppb  Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 114 298 319 ppb  HFC‐23  270 14,800 18 ppt  HFC‐134a 14 1,430 35 ppt  HFC‐152a 1.4 124 3.9 ppt  PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CF4) 50,000 7,390 74 ppt  PFC:  Hexafluoroethane (C2F6) 10,000 12,200 2.9 ppt  Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 22,800 5.6 ppt  Notes:      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 16    1 Defined as the half‐life of the gas.  2 Compared to the same quantity of CO2 emissions and is based on the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) 2007 standard, which  is utilized in CalEEMod (Version 2016.3.2),that is used in this report (CalEEMod user guide: Appendix A).  Definitions: ppm = parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; ppt = parts per trillion  Source: IPCC 2007, EPA 2015   3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory  According to https://cdiac.ess‐dive.lbl.gov/trends/emis/tre_glob_2014.html 9,855 million metric tons  (MMT) of CO2e emissions were created globally in the year 2014. According to  https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global‐greenhouse‐gas‐emissions‐data the breakdown of global  GHG emissions by sector consists of: 25 percent from electricity and heat production; 21 percent from  industry; 24 percent from agriculture, forestry and other land use activities; 14 percent from  transportation; 6 percent from building energy use; and 10 percent from all other sources of energy use.   According to Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990‐2019, prepared by EPA, in 2019  total U.S. GHG emissions were 6,558 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e emissions.  Total U.S. emissions  have increased by 4 percent between 1990 and 2016 and GHG emissions decreased by 13 percent  between 2005 and 2019.  The recent decrease in GHG emissions was a result of multiple factors, including  population, economic growth, energy markets, and technological changes the include energy efficiency  and energy fuel choices.  Between 2018 and 2019, GHG emissions decreased by almost 2 percent due to  multiple factors, including a one percent decrease in total energy use.   According to https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm the State of California created 425  million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) in 2018. The breakdown of California GHG  emissions by sector consists of: 39.9 percent from transportation; 21.0 percent from industrial; 14.8  percent from electricity generation; 7.7 percent from agriculture; 9.7 percent from residential and  commercial buildings; 4.8 percent from high global warming potential sources, and 2.1 percent from  waste.  In 2018, GHG emissions were 0.8 MMTCO2e higher than 2017 levels and 6 MMTCO2e below the  2020 GHG limit of 431 MMTCO2e .              Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 17    4.0 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT  The air quality at the project site is addressed through the efforts of various international, federal, state,  regional, and local government agencies.  These agencies work jointly, as well as individually, to improve  air quality through legislation, regulations, planning, policy‐making, education, and a variety of programs.   The agencies responsible for improving the air quality are discussed below.  4.1 Federal – United States Environmental Protection Agency  The Clean Air Act, first passed in 1963 with major amendments in 1970, 1977 and 1990, is the overarching  legislation covering regulation of air pollution in the United States. The Clean Air Act has established the  mandate for requiring regulation of both mobile and stationary sources of air pollution at the state and  federal level. The EPA was created in 1970 in order to consolidate research, monitoring, standard‐setting  and enforcement authority into a single agency.  The EPA is responsible for setting and enforcing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for  atmospheric pollutants.  It regulates emission sources that are under the exclusive authority of the federal  government, such as aircraft, ships, and certain locomotives. NAAQS pollutants were identified using  medical evidence and are shown below in Table B.  Table B – State and Federal Criteria Pollutant Standards  Air  Pollutant  Concentration / Averaging Time  Most Relevant Effects  California  Standards  Federal Primary  Standards  Ozone (O3)  0.09 ppm / 1‐hour    0.07 ppm / 8‐hour  0.070 ppm, / 8‐hour  (a) Pulmonary function decrements and localized lung edema  in humans and animals; (b) Risk to public health implied by  alterations in pulmonary morphology and host defense in  animals; (c) Increased mortality risk; (d) Risk to public health  implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and altered  pulmonary morphology in animals after long‐term exposures  and pulmonary function decrements in chronically exposed  humans; (e) Vegetation damage; and (f) Property damage.  Carbon  Monoxide  (CO)  20.0 ppm / 1‐hour    9.0 ppm / 8‐hour  35.0 ppm / 1‐hour    9.0 ppm / 8‐hour  (a) Aggravation of angina pectoris and other aspects of  coronary heart disease; (b) Decreased exercise tolerance in  persons with peripheral vascular disease and lung disease; (c)   Impairment of central nervous system functions;  and (d)  Possible increased risk to fetuses.  Nitrogen  Dioxide  (NO2)  0.18 ppm / 1‐hour  0.030 ppm / annual  100 ppb / 1‐hour  0.053 ppm / annual   (a) Potential to aggravate chronic respiratory disease and  respiratory symptoms in sensitive groups; (b) Risk to public  health implied by pulmonary and extra‐pulmonary  biochemical and cellular changes and pulmonary structural  changes; and (c) Contribution to atmospheric discoloration.  Sulfur  Dioxide       (SO2)  0.25 ppm / 1‐hour    0.04 ppm / 24‐hour  75 ppb / 1‐hour  0.14 ppm/annual  (a) Bronchoconstriction accompanied by symptoms which  may include wheezing, shortness of breath and chest  tightness, during exercise or physical activity in persons with  asthma.  Suspended  Particulate  Matter  (PM10)  50 µg/m3 / 24‐hour  20 µg/m3 / annual  150 µg/m3 / 24‐ hour  (a) Exacerbation of symptoms in sensitive patients with  respiratory or cardiovascular disease; (b) Declines in  pulmonary function growth in children; and (c) Increased risk  of premature death from heart or lung diseases in elderly.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 18    Air  Pollutant  Concentration / Averaging Time  Most Relevant Effects  California  Standards  Federal Primary  Standards  Suspended  Particulate  Matter  (PM2.5)  12 µg/m3 / annual 35 µg/m3 / 24‐hour  12 µg/m3 / annual  Sulfates 25 µg/m3 / 24‐hour No Federal  Standards  (a) Decrease in ventilatory function; (b) Aggravation of  asthmatic symptoms; (c ) Aggravation of cardio‐pulmonary  disease; (d) Vegetation damage; (e) Degradation of visibility;  and (f) Property damage.  Lead 1.5 µg/m3 / 30‐day  0.15 µg/m3 /3‐  month rolling  (a) Learning disabilities; and (b) Impairment of blood  formation and nerve conduction.  Visibility  Reducing  Particles  Extinction  coefficient of 0.23  per kilometer ‐  visibility of ten miles  or more due to  particles when  relative humidity is  less than 70 percent.   No Federal  Standards  Visibility impairment on days when relative humidity is less  than 70 percent.  Source: http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf .    As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the EPA requires each state with federal nonattainment areas  to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain the  national standards.  The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local components and regulations to  identify specific measures to reduce pollution, using a combination of performance standards and market‐ based programs within the timeframe identified in the SIP.  The CARB defines attainment as the category  given to an area with no violations in the past three years. As indicated below in Table C, the Air Basin has  been designated by EPA for the national standards as a non‐attainment area for ozone and PM2.5 and  partial non‐attainment for lead.  Currently, the Air Basin is in attainment with the national ambient air  quality standards for CO, PM10, SO2, and NO2.      Table C – South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status  Criteria Pollutant Standard Averaging Time Designationa) Attainment Dateb)  1‐Hour Ozonec)      NAAQS 1979 1‐Hour  (0.12 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 2/6/2023  (revised deadline)  CAAQS 1‐Hour  (0.09 ppm) Nonattainment N/A  8‐Hour Ozoned)        NAAQS 1997 8‐Hour  (0.08 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 6/15/2024  NAAQS 2008 8‐Hour   (0.075 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 8/3/2038  NAAQS 2015 8‐Hour   (0.070 ppm)  Pending – Expect  Nonattainment (Extreme)  Pending (beyond  2032)  CAAQS 8‐Hour (0.070 ppm) Nonattainment Beyond 2032  CO  NAAQS 1‐Hour (35 ppm)  8‐Hour (9 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 6/11/2007  (attained)  CAAQS 1‐Hour (20 ppm)  8‐Hour (9 ppm) Attainment 6/11/2007      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 19    Criteria Pollutant Standard Averaging Time Designationa) Attainment Dateb)  (attained)  NO2e)  NAAQS 2010 1‐Hour (0.10 ppm) Unclassifiable/ Attainment N/A (attained)  NAAQS 1971 Annual (0.053 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 9/22/1998  (attained)  CAAQS 1‐Hour (0.18 ppm)  Annual (0.030 ppm) Attainment  ‐‐‐  SO2f)  NAAQS 2010 1‐Hour (75 ppb) Designations Pending (expect  Unclassifiable/ Attainment) N/A (attained)  NAAQS 1971 24‐Hour (0.14 ppm)  1971 Annual (0.03 ppm) Unclassifiable/ Attainment 3/19/1979  (attained)  PM10  NAAQS 1987 24‐hour   (150 μg/m3) Attainment (Maintenance)g) 7/26/2013  (attained)  CAAQS 24‐hour (50 μg/m3)  Annual (20 μg/m3) Nonattainment N/A  PM2.5h)  NAAQS 2006 24‐Hour   (35 μg/m3) Nonattainment (Serious) 12/31/2019  NAAQS 1997 Annual   (15.0 μg/m3)  Attainment (final  determination pending)  8/24/2016   (attained 2013)  NAAQS 2012 Annual   (12.0 μg/m3) Nonattainment (Moderate) 12/31/2025  CAAQS Annual (12.0 μg/m3) Nonattainment N/A  Leadi) NAAQS 2008 3‐Months Rolling   (0.15 μg/m3)  Nonattainment (Partial)  (Attainment determination  requested)  12/31/2015  Source: SCAQMD, February 2016  Notes:  a) U.S. EPA often only declares Nonattainment areas; everywhere else is listed as Unclassifiable/Attainment or Unclassifiable  b) A design value below the NAAQS for data through the full year or smog season prior to the attainment date is typically required for  attainment demonstration  c) The 1979 1‐hour O3 standard (0.12 ppm) was revoked, effective June 15, 2005; however, the Basin has not attained this standard and  therefore has some continuing obligations with respect to the revoked standard  d) The 2008 8‐hour ozone NAAQS (0.075 ppm) was revised to 0.070 ppm. Effective 12/28/15 with classifications and implementation goals to  be finalized by 10/1/17; the 1997 8‐hour O3 NAAQS (0.08 ppm) was revoked in the 2008 O3 implementation rule, effective 4/6/15;there are  continuing obligations under the revoked 1997 and revised 2008 O3 until they are attained.  e) New NO2 1‐hour standard, effective August 2, 2010; attainment designations January 20, 2012; annual NO2 standard retained  f) The 1971 annual and 24‐hour SO2 standards were revoked, effective August 23, 2010; however, these 1971 standards will remain in effect  until one year after U.S. EPA promulgates area designations for the 2010 SO2 1‐hour standard. Area designations are still pending, with Basin  expected to be designated Unclassifiable /Attainment.  g) Annual PM10 standard was revoked, effective December 18, 2006; 24‐hour PM10 NAAQS deadline was 12/31/2006; SCAQMD request for  attainment redesignation and PM10 maintenance plan was approved by U.S. EPA on June 26, 2013, effective July 26, 2013.  h) The attainment deadline for the 2006 24‐Hour PM2.5 NAAQS was 12/31/15 for the former “moderate” classification; EPA approved  reclassification to “serious”, effective 2/12/16 with an attainment deadline of 12/31/19; the 2012 (proposal year) annual PM2.5 NAAQS was  revised on 1/15/13, effective 3/18/13, from 15 to 12 μg/m3; new annual designations were final 1/15/15, effective 4/15/15; on July 25, 2016  EPA finalized a determination that the Basin attained the 1997 annual (15.0 μg/m3) and 24‐hour PM2.5 (65 μg/m3) NAAQS, effective August 24,  2016  i) Partial Nonattainment designation – Los Angeles County portion of Basin only for near‐source monitors. Expect to remain in attainment based  on current monitoring data; attainment re‐designation request pending.  In 2015, one or more stations in the Air Basin exceeded the most current federal standards on a total of  146 days (40 percent of the year), including: 8‐hour ozone (113 days over 2015 ozone NAAQS), 24‐hour  PM2.5 (30 days, including near‐road sites; 25 days for ambient sites only), PM10 (2 days), and NO2 (1 day).   Despite substantial improvement in air quality over the past few decades, some air monitoring stations in  the Air Basin still exceed the NAAQS for ozone more frequently than any other area in the United States.   Seven of the top 10 stations in the nation most frequently exceeding the 2015 8‐hour ozone NAAQS in      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 20    2015 were located within the Air Basin, including stations in San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles  Counties (SCAQMD, 2016).    PM2.5 levels in the Air Basin have improved significantly in recent years.  By 2013 and again in 2014 and  2015, there were no stations measuring PM2.5 in the Air Basin that violated the former 1997 annual  PM2.5 NAAQS (15.0 µg/m3) for the 3‐year design value period.  On July 25, 2016 the EPA finalized a  determination that the Basin attained the 1997 annual (15.0 µg/m3) and 24‐hour PM2.5 (65 µg/m3)  NAAQS, effective August 24, 2016.  Of the 17 federal PM2.5 monitors at ambient stations in the Air Basin  for the 2013‐2015 period, five stations had design values over the current 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS  (12.0 µg/m3), including: Mira Loma (Air Basin maximum at 14.1 µg/m3), Rubidoux, Fontana, Ontario,  Central Los Angeles, and Compton.  For the 24‐hour PM2.5 NAAQS (35.0 µg/m3) there were 14 stations in  the Air Basin in 2015 that had one or more daily exceedances of the standard, with a combined total of  25 days over that standard in the Air Basin.  While it was previously anticipated that the Air Basin’s 24‐ hour PM2.5 NAAQS would be attained by 2015, this did not occur based on the data for 2013 through  2015.  The higher number of days exceeding the 24‐hour PM2.5 NAAQS over what was expected is largely  attributed to the severe drought conditions over this period that allowed for more stagnant conditions in  the Air Basin with multi‐day buildups of higher PM2.5 concentrations.  This was caused by the lack of  storm‐related dispersion and rain‐out of PM and its precursors (SCAQMD, 2016).  The Air Basin is currently in attainment for the federal standards for SO2, CO, NO2, and PM10 and the  Orange County portion of the Air Basin is currently in attainment for the federal standards for lead.  While  the concentration level of the 1‐hour NO2 federal standard (100 ppb) was exceeded in the Air Basin for  one day in 2015 (Long Beach‐ Hudson Station), the NAAQS NO2 design value has not been exceeded.  Therefore, the Air Basin remains in attainment of the NO2 NAAQS (SCAQMD, 2016).  4.2 State – California Air Resources Board  The CARB, which is a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency, is responsible for the  coordination and administration of both federal and state air pollution control programs within California.   In this capacity, the CARB conducts research, sets the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS),  compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, provides oversight of local  programs, and prepares the SIP.  The CAAQS for criteria pollutants are shown above in Table B.  In addition,  the CARB establishes emission standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (e.g.  hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbeque lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment.  It also  sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions.  The Air Basin has been designated by the CARB as a non‐attainment area for ozone, PM10 and PM2.5.   Currently, the Air Basin is in attainment with the ambient air quality standards for CO, NO2, SO2, lead, and  sulfates and is unclassified for visibility reducing particles and Hydrogen Sulfide.  The following lists the State of California Code of Regulations (CCR) air quality emission rules that are  applicable, but not limited to all warehouse projects in the State.   Assembly Bill 2588  The Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 2588, 1987, Connelly) was  enacted in 1987 as a means to establish a formal air toxics emission inventory risk quantification program.  AB 2588, as amended, establishes a process that requires stationary sources to report the type and  quantities of certain substances their facilities routinely release in California.  The data is ranked by high,      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 21    intermediate, and low categories, which are determined by: the potency, toxicity, quantity, volume, and  proximity of the facility to nearby receptors.  CARB Regulation for In‐Use Off‐Road Diesel Vehicles  On July 26, 2007, the CARB adopted California Code of Regulations Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section  2449 to reduce DPM and NOx emissions from in‐use off‐road heavy‐duty diesel vehicles in California.  Such  vehicles are used in construction, mining, and industrial operations.  The regulation limits idling to no  more than five consecutive minutes, requires reporting and labeling, and requires disclosure of the  regulation upon vehicle sale.  Performance requirements of the rule are based on a fleet’s average NOx  emissions, which can be met by replacing older vehicles with newer, cleaner vehicles or by applying  exhaust retrofits.  The regulation was amended in 2010 to delay the original timeline of the performance  requirement making the first compliance deadline January 1, 2014 for large fleets (over 5,000  horsepower), 2017 for medium fleets (2,501‐5,000 horsepower), and 2019 for small fleets (2,500  horsepower or less).  Currently, no commercial operation in California may add any equipment to their  fleet that has a Tier 0 or Tier 1 engine.  By January 1, 2018 medium and large fleets will be restricted from  adding Tier 2 engines to their fleets and by January 2023, no commercial operation will be allowed to add  Tier 2 engines to their fleets.  It should be noted that commercial fleets may continue to use their existing  Tier 0 and 1 equipment, if they can demonstrate that the average emissions from their entire fleet  emissions meet the NOx emissions targets.   CARB Resolution 08‐43 for On‐Road Diesel Truck Fleets    On December 12, 2008 the CARB adopted Resolution 08‐43, which limits NOx, PM10 and PM2.5 emissions  from on‐road diesel truck fleets that operate in California. On October 12, 2009 Executive Order R‐09‐010  was adopted that codified Resolution 08‐43 into Section 2025, title 13 of the California Code of  Regulations.  This regulation requires that by the year 2023 all commercial diesel trucks that operate in  California shall meet model year 2010 (Tier 4 Final) or latter emission standards.  In the interim period,  this regulation provides annual interim targets for fleet owners to meet.  By January 1, 2014, 50 percent  of a truck fleet is required to have installed Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for NOx emissions  and 100 percent of a truck fleet installed BACT for PM10 emissions.  This regulation also provides a few  exemptions including a onetime per year 3‐day pass for trucks registered outside of California.  All on‐ road diesel trucks utilized during construction of the proposed project will be required to comply with  Resolution 08‐43.  4.3 Regional – Southern California   The SCAQMD is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the South  Coast Air Basin.  To that end, as a regional agency, the SCAQMD works directly with the Southern California  Association of Governments (SCAG), county transportation commissions, and local governments and  cooperates actively with all federal and state agencies.  South Coast Air Quality Management District  SCAQMD develops rules and regulations, establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources,  inspects emission sources, and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when  necessary.  SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect  sources.  It has responded to this requirement by preparing a sequence of AQMPs.  The Final 2016 Air  Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP) was adopted by the SCAQMD Board on March 3, 2016 and was      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 22    adopted by CARB on March 23, 2017 for inclusion into the SIP.  The 2016 AQMP was prepared in order to  meet the following standards:   8‐hour Ozone (75 ppb) by 2032   Annual PM2.5 (12 µg/m3) by 2021‐2025   8‐hour Ozone (80 ppb) by 2024 (updated from the 2007 and 2012 AQMPs)   1‐hour Ozone (120 ppb) by 2023 (updated from the 2012 AQMP)   24‐hour PM2.5 (35 µg/m3) by 2019 (updated from the 2012 AQMP)  In addition to meeting the above standards, the 2016 AQMP also includes revisions to the attainment  demonstrations for the 1997 8‐hour ozone NAAQS and the 1979 1‐hour ozone NAAQS.  The prior 2012  AQMP was prepared in order to demonstrate attainment with the 24‐hour PM2.5 standard by 2014  through adoption of all feasible measures.  The prior 2007 AQMP demonstrated attainment with the 1997  8‐hour ozone (80 ppb) standard by 2023, through implementation of future improvements in control  techniques and technologies.  These “black box” emissions reductions represent 65 percent of the  remaining NOx emission reductions by 2023 in order to show attainment with the 1997 8‐hour ozone  NAAQS.  Given the magnitude of these needed emissions reductions, additional NOx control measures  have been provided in the 2012 AQMP even though the primary purpose was to show compliance with  24‐hour PM2.5 emissions standards.  The 2016 AQMP provides a new approach that focuses on available, proven and cost effective alternatives  to traditional strategies, while seeking to achieve multiple goals in partnership with other entities to  promote reductions in GHG emissions and TAC emissions as well as efficiencies in energy use,  transportation, and goods movement. The 2016 AQMP recognizes the critical importance of working with  other agencies to develop funding and other incentives that encourage the accelerated transition of  vehicles, buildings and industrial facilities to cleaner technologies in a manner that benefits not only air  quality, but also local businesses and the regional economy.   Although SCAQMD is responsible for regional air quality planning efforts, it does not have the authority  to directly regulate air quality issues associated with plans and new development projects throughout the  Air Basin.  Instead, this is controlled through local jurisdictions in accordance to the CEQA.  In order to  assist local jurisdictions with air quality compliance issues the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD CEQA  Handbook), prepared by SCAQMD, 1993, with the most current updates found at  http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html, was developed in accordance with the projections and programs  detailed in the AQMPs.  The purpose of the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook is to assist Lead Agencies, as well  as consultants, project proponents, and other interested parties in evaluating a proposed project’s  potential air quality impacts.  Specifically, the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook explains the procedures that  SCAQMD recommends be followed for the environmental review process required by CEQA.  The  SCAQMD CEQA Handbook provides direction on how to evaluate potential air quality impacts, how to  determine whether these impacts are significant, and how to mitigate these impacts.  The SCAQMD  intends that by providing this guidance, the air quality impacts of plans and development proposals will  be analyzed accurately and consistently throughout the Air Basin, and adverse impacts will be minimized.  The following lists the SCAQMD rules that are applicable but not limited to residential development  projects in the Air Basin.        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 23    Rule 402 ‐ Nuisance   Rule 402 prohibits a person from discharging from any source whatsoever such quantities of air  contaminants or other material which causes injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any  considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety  of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage  to business or property. Compliance with Rule 402 will reduce local air quality and odor impacts to nearby  sensitive receptors.  Rule 403‐ Fugitive Dust  Rule 403 governs emissions of fugitive dust during construction activities and requires that no person shall  cause or allow the emissions of fugitive dust such that dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the  property line or the dust emission exceeds 20 percent opacity, if the dust is from the operation of a  motorized vehicle. Compliance with this rule is achieved through application of standard Best Available  Control Measures, which include but are not limited to the measures below.  Compliance with these rules  would reduce local air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.    Utilize either a pad of washed gravel 50 feet long, 100 feet of paved surface, a wheel shaker, or a  wheel washing device to remove material from vehicle tires and undercarriages before leaving  project site.   Do not allow any track out of material to extend more than 25 feet onto a public roadway and  remove all track out at the end of each workday.   Water all exposed areas on active sites at least three times per day and pre‐water all areas prior  to clearing and soil moving activities.   Apply nontoxic chemical stabilizers according to manufacturer specifications to all construction  areas that will remain inactive for 10 days or longer.     Pre‐water all material to be exported prior to loading, and either cover all loads or maintain at  least 2 feet of freeboard in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code Section  23114.   Replant all disturbed area as soon as practical.   Suspend all grading activities when wind speeds (including wind gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour.   Restrict traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour or less.   Rule 445‐ Fireplaces  Rule 445 governs emissions from fireplaces.  This rule restricts the installation of wood‐burning fireplaces  into any new development and only allows the installation of dedicated gaseous‐fueled fireplaces.   Rules 1108 and 1108.1 – Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt  Rules 1108 and 1108.1 govern the sale, use, and manufacturing of asphalt and limits the VOC content in  asphalt.  This rule regulates the VOC contents of asphalt used during construction as well as any on‐going  maintenance during operations.  Therefore, all asphalt used during construction and operation of the  proposed project must comply with SCAQMD Rules 1108 and 1108.1.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 24    Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings  Rule 1113 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of architectural coatings and limits the VOC content  in sealers, coatings, paints and solvents.  This rule regulates the VOC contents of paints available during  construction.  Therefore, all paints and solvents used during construction and operation of the proposed  project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1113.  Rule 1143 – Paint Thinners  Rule 1143 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of paint thinners and multi‐purpose solvents that are  used in thinning of coating materials, cleaning of coating application equipment, and other solvent  cleaning operations.  This rule regulates the VOC content of solvents used during construction.  Solvents  used during construction and operation of the proposed project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1143.  Southern California Association of Governments  The SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino,  and Imperial Counties and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community  development and the environment.  SCAG is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization  (MPO) for the majority of the southern California region and is the largest MPO in the nation.  With respect  to air quality planning, SCAG has prepared the 2020‐2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable  Communities Strategy (Connect SoCal), adopted September 3, 2020and the 2019 Federal Transportation  Improvement Program (2019 FTIP), adopted September 2018, which addresses regional development and  growth forecasts.  Although the Connect SoCal and 2019 FTIP are primarily planning documents for future  transportation projects a key component of these plans are to integrate land use planning with  transportation planning that promotes higher density infill development in close proximity to existing  transit service.  These plans form the basis for the land use and transportation components of the AQMP,  which are utilized in the preparation of air quality forecasts and in the consistency analysis included in the  AQMP.  The Connect SoCal, 2019 FTIP, and AQMP are based on projections originating within the City and  County General Plans.    4.4 Local – City of Anaheim  Local jurisdictions, such as the City of Anaheim, have the authority and responsibility to reduce air  pollution through its police power and decision‐making authority.  Specifically, the City is responsible for  the assessment and mitigation of air emissions resulting from its land use decisions.  The City is also  responsible for the implementation of transportation control measures as outlined in the AQMPs.   Examples of such measures include bus turnouts, energy‐efficient streetlights, and synchronized traffic  signals.  In accordance with CEQA requirements and the CEQA review process, the City assesses the air  quality impacts of new development projects, requires mitigation of potentially significant air quality  impacts by conditioning discretionary permits, and monitors and enforces implementation of such  mitigation.  In accordance with the CEQA requirements, the City does not, however, have the expertise to develop  plans, programs, procedures, and methodologies to ensure that air quality within the City and region will  meet federal and state standards.  Instead, the City relies on the expertise of the SCAQMD and utilizes the  SCAQMD CEQA Handbook as the guidance document for the environmental review of plans and  development proposals within its jurisdiction.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 25    City of Anaheim General Plan  The City of Anaheim General Plan provides the following air quality‐related goals and policies that are  applicable to the proposed project.  Goal 8.1   Reduce locally generated emissions through improved traffic flows and construction management  practices.  Policies  2) Regulate construction practices, including grading, dust suppression, chemical management, and  encourage pre‐determined construction routes that minimize dust and particulate matter  pollution.  Goal 9.1   Reduce single‐occupancy vehicle trips.  Policies  3) Encourage bicycle and pedestrian travel by improving the City’s trail and bikeway master plan and  by providing convenient links between the trail system and desired destinations.         Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 26    5.0 ENERGY CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT  The regulatory setting related to energy conservation is primarily addressed through State and City  regulations, which are discussed below.   5.1 State   Energy conservation management in the State was initiated by the 1974 Warren‐Alquist State Energy  Resources Conservation and Development Act that created the California Energy Resource Conservation  and Development Commission (currently named California Energy Commission [CEC]), which was  originally tasked with certifying new electric generating plants based on the need for the plant and the  suitability of the site of the plant.  In 1976 the Warren‐Alquist Act was expanded to include new  restrictions on nuclear generating plants, that effectively resulted in a moratorium of any new nuclear  generating plants in the State. The following details specific regulations adopted by the State in order to  reduce the consumption of energy.  California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 20   On November 3, 1976 the CEC adopted the Regulations for Appliance Efficiency Standards Relating to  Refrigerators, Refrigerator‐Freezers and Freezers and Air Conditioners, which were the first energy‐ efficiency standards for appliances.  The appliance efficiency regulations have been updated several times  by the Commission and the most current version is the 2016 Appliance Efficiency Regulations, adopted  January 2017 and now includes almost all types of appliances and lamps that use electricity, natural gas  as well as plumbing fixtures. The authority for the CEC to control the energy‐efficiency of appliances is  detailed in California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 20, Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 4, Sections 1601‐ 1609.  California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 6   The CEC is also responsible for implementing the CCR Title 24, Part 6: California’s Energy Efficiency  Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24 Part 6) that were first established in 1978  in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption.  In 2008 the State set an  energy‐use reduction goal of zero‐net‐energy use of all new homes by 2020 and the CEC was mandated  to meet this goal through revisions to the Title 24, Part 6 regulations.  The Title 24 standards are updated on a three‐year schedule and since 2008 the standards have been  incrementally moving to the 2020 goal of the zero‐net‐energy use.  Currently the 2019 Title 24 standards  are in effect and have been designed so that the average new home built in California will now use zero‐ net‐energy.  Single‐family homes built with 2019 standards will use about 7 percent less energy due to  energy efficiency measures versus those built under the 2016 standards.  The 2019 standards also now  require that all single‐family homes to have rooftop solar photovoltaic systems and when the solar  systems are factored in, homes built under the 2019 standards will use about 53 percent less energy than  homes built under the prior 2016 standards. In addition to requiring rooftop solar systems, the 2019  standards also encourage the use of battery storage and heat pump water heaters, require the more  widespread use of LED lighting, as well as improve the building’s thermal envelope through high  performance attics, walls and windows.  The 2019 standards also require improvements to ventilation  systems by requiring highly efficient air filters to trap hazardous air particulates as well as improvements  to kitchen ventilation systems.       Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 27    California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11  CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards (CalGreen) was developed in response to  continued efforts to reduce GHG emissions associated with energy consumption. The CalGreen Building  Standards are also updated every three years and the current version is the 2019 California Green Building  Standard Code that become effective on January 1, 2020.  The CALGreen Code contains requirements for construction site selection; storm water control during  construction; construction waste reduction; indoor water use reduction; material selection; natural  resource conservation; site irrigation conservation; and more. The code provides for design options  allowing the designer to determine how best to achieve compliance for a given site or building condition.  The code also requires building commissioning, which is a process for verifying that all building systems  (e.g., heating and cooling equipment and lighting systems) are functioning at their maximum efficiency.  The CALGreen Code provides standards for bicycle parking, carpool/vanpool/electric vehicle spaces, light  and glare reduction, grading and paving, energy efficient appliances, renewable energy, graywater  systems, water efficient plumbing fixtures, recycling and recycled materials, pollutant controls (including  moisture control and indoor air quality), acoustical controls, storm water management, building design,  insulation, flooring, and framing, among others. Implementation of the CALGreen Code measures reduces  energy consumption and vehicle trips and encourages the use of alternative‐fuel vehicles, which reduces  pollutant emissions.   Some of the notable changes in the 2019 CALGreen Code over the prior 2016 CALGreen Code include: an  alignment of building code engineering requirements with the national standards that include anchorage  requirements for solar panels, provides design requirements for buildings in tsunami zones, increases  Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) for air filters from 8 to 13, increased electric vehicle charging  requirements in parking areas, and sets minimum requirements for use of shade trees.  Senate Bill 100   Senate Bill 100 (SB 100) was adopted September 2018 and requires that by December 1, 2045 that 100  percent of retail sales of electricity to be generated from renewable or zero‐carbon emission sources of  electricity.  SB 100 supersedes the renewable energy requirements set by SB 350, SB 1078, SB 107, and  SB X1‐2. However, the interim renewable energy thresholds from the prior Bills of 44 percent by  December 31, 2024, 52 percent by December 31, 2027, and 60 percent by December 31, 2030, will remain  in effect.  Executive Order B‐48‐18 and Assembly Bill 2127  The California Governor issued Executive Order B‐48‐18 on January 26, 2018 that orders all state entities  to work with the private sector to put at least five million zero‐emission vehicles on California roads by  2030 and to install 200 hydrogen fueling stations and 250,000 electric vehicle chargers by 2025.  Currently  there are approximately 350,000 electric vehicles operating in California, which represents approximately  1.5 percent of the 24 million vehicles total currently operating in California.  Implementation of Executive  Order B‐48‐18 would result in approximately 20 percent of all vehicles in California to be zero emission  electric vehicles.  Assembly Bill 2127 (AB 2127) was codified into statute on September 13, 2018 and  requires that the California Energy Commission working with the State Air Resources Board prepare  biannual assessments of the statewide electric vehicle charging infrastructure needed to support the  levels of zero emission vehicle adoption required for the State to meet its goals of putting at least 5 million  zero‐emission vehicles on California roads by 2030.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 28    Assembly Bill 1109  California Assembly Bill 1109 (AB 1109) was adopted October 2007, also known as the Lighting Efficiency  and Toxics Reduction Act, prohibits the manufacturing of lights after January 1, 2010 that contain levels  of hazardous substances prohibited by the European Union pursuant to the RoHS Directive.  AB 1109 also  requires reductions in energy usage for lighting and is structured to reduce lighting electrical consumption  by: (1) At least 50 percent reduction from 2007 levels for indoor residential lighting; and (2) At least 25  percent reduction from 2007 levels for indoor commercial and all outdoor lighting by 2018.  AB 1109  would reduce GHG emissions through reducing the amount of electricity required to be generated by  fossil fuels in California.  Assembly Bill 1493  California Assembly Bill 1493 (also known as the Pavley Bill, in reference to its author Fran Pavley) was  enacted on July 22, 2002 and required CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted  by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks.  In 2004, CARB approved the “Pavley I” regulations limiting  the amount of GHGs that may be released from new passenger automobiles that are being phased in  between model years 2009 through 2016.  These regulations will reduce GHG emissions by 30 percent  from 2002 levels by 2016. In June 2009, the EPA granted California the authority to implement GHG  emission reduction standards for light duty vehicles, in September 2009, amendments to the Pavley I  regulations were adopted by CARB and implementation of the “Pavley I” regulations started in 2009.  The second set of regulations “Pavley II” was developed in 2010, and is being phased in between model  years 2017 through 2025 with the goal of reducing GHG emissions by 45 percent by the year 2020 as  compared to the 2002 fleet.  The Pavley II standards were developed by linking the GHG emissions and  formerly separate toxic tailpipe emissions standards previously known as the “LEV III” (third stage of the  Low Emission Vehicle standards) into a single regulatory framework. The new rules reduce emissions from  gasoline‐powered cars as well as promote zero‐emissions auto technologies such as electricity and  hydrogen, and through increasing the infrastructure for fueling hydrogen vehicles. In 2009, the U.S. EPA  granted California the authority to implement the GHG standards for passenger cars, pickup trucks and  sport utility vehicles and these GHG emissions standards are currently being implemented nationwide.  However, EPA has performed a midterm evaluation of the longer‐term standards for model years 2022‐ 2025, and based on the findings of this midterm evaluation, the EPA proposed The Safer Affordable Fuel  Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Proposed Rule for Model Years 2021‐2026 that amends the corporate average  fuel economy (CAFE) and GHG emissions standards for light vehicles for model years 2021 through 2026.   The EPA’s proposed amendments do not include any extension of the legal waiver granted to California  by the 1970 Clean Air Act and which has allowed the State to set tighter standards for vehicle pipe  emissions than the EPA standards.   On September 20, 2019, California filed suit over the EPA decision to  revoke California’s legal waiver that has been joined by 22 other states.   5.2 Local ‐ City of Anaheim  The applicable energy plan for the proposed project is the City of Anaheim General Plan Green Element,  adopted May 2004.  The Green Element of the General Plan establishes goals and policies aimed at  preserving and enhancing energy resources.  The Green Element of the General Plan was prepared to  comprehensively address energy management issues in order to implement the State’s legislation to  decrease reliance on fossil fuels and mitigate impacts of global warming.        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 29    6.0 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE MANAGEMENT  The regulatory setting related to global climate change is addressed through the efforts of various  international, federal, state, regional, and local government agencies.  These agencies work jointly, as well  as individually, to reduce GHG emissions through legislation, regulations, planning, policy‐making,  education, and a variety of programs.  The agencies responsible for global climate change regulations are  discussed below.  6.1 International  In 1988, the United Nations established the IPCC to evaluate the impacts of global climate change and to  develop strategies that nations could implement to curtail global climate change.  In 1992, the United  States joined other countries around the world in signing the United Nations’ Framework Convention on  Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreement with the goal of controlling GHG emissions.  The parties of the  UNFCCC adopted the Kyoto Protocol, which set binding GHG reduction targets for 37 industrialized  countries, the objective of reducing their collective GHG emissions by five percent below 1990 levels by  2012.  The Kyoto Protocol has been ratified by 182 countries, but has not been ratified by the United  States.  It should be noted that Japan and Canada opted out of the Kyoto Protocol and the remaining  developed countries that ratified the Kyoto Protocol have not met their Kyoto targets. The Kyoto Protocol  expired in 2012 and the amendment for the second commitment period from 2013 to 2020 has not yet  entered into legal force.  The Parties to the Kyoto Protocol negotiated the Paris Agreement in December  2015, agreeing to set a goal of limiting global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius compared with pre‐ industrial levels. The Paris Agreement has been adopted by 195 nations with 147 ratifying it, including the  United States by President Obama, who ratified it by Executive Order on September 3, 2016.  On June 1,  2017, President Trump announced that the United States is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and  on January 21, 2021 President Biden signed an executive order rejoining the Paris Agreement.  Additionally, the Montreal Protocol was originally signed in 1987 and substantially amended in 1990 and  1992.  The Montreal Protocol stipulates that the production and consumption of compounds that deplete  ozone in the stratosphere—CFCs, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform—were to be  phased out, with the first three by the year 2000 and methyl chloroform by 2005.  6.2 Federal – United States Environmental Protection Agency  The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for implementing federal policy  to address global climate change.  The Federal government administers a wide array of public‐private  partnerships to reduce U.S. GHG intensity.  These programs focus on energy efficiency, renewable energy,  methane, and other non‐CO2 gases, agricultural practices and implementation of technologies to achieve  GHG reductions.  EPA implements several voluntary programs that substantially contribute to the  reduction of GHG emissions.  In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (Docket No. 05–1120), argued November 29, 2006  and decided April 2, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court held that not only did the EPA have authority to  regulate greenhouse gases, but the EPA's reasons for not regulating this area did not fit the statutory  requirements.  As such, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA should be required to regulate CO2  and other greenhouse gases as pollutants under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA).      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 30    In response to the FY2008 Consolidations Appropriations Act (H.R. 2764; Public Law 110‐161), EPA  proposed a rule on March 10, 2009 that requires mandatory reporting of GHG emissions from large  sources in the United States.  On September 22, 2009, the Final Mandatory Reporting of GHG Rule was  signed and published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2009.  The rule became effective on December  29, 2009.  This rule requires suppliers of fossil fuels or industrial GHGs, manufacturers of vehicles and  engines, and facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more per year of GHG emissions to submit annual  reports to EPA.  On December 7, 2009, the EPA Administrator signed two distinct findings under section 202(a) of the  Clean Air Act.  One is an endangerment finding that finds concentrations of the six GHGs in the atmosphere  threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.  The other is a cause or  contribute finding, that finds emissions from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines  contribute to the GHG pollution which threatens public health and welfare.  These actions did not impose  any requirements on industry or other entities, however, since 2009 the EPA has been providing GHG  emission standards for vehicles and other stationary sources of GHG emissions that are regulated by the  EPA. On September 13, 2013 the EPA Administrator signed 40 CFR Part 60, that limits emissions from new  sources to 1,100 pounds of CO2 per mega‐watt hour (MWh) for fossil fuel‐fired utility boilers and 1,000  pounds of CO2 per MWh for large natural gas‐fired combustion units.    On April 30, 2020, the EPA and the National Highway Safety Administration published the Final Rule for  the Safer Affordable Fuel‐Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021‐2026 Passenger Cars and  Light Trucks (SAFE Vehicles Rule). Part One of the Rule revokes California’s authority to set its own GHG  emissions standards and zero‐emission vehicle mandates in California, which results in one emission  standard to be used nationally for all passenger cars and light trucks that is set by the EPA.  6.3 State   The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has the primary responsible for implementing state policy to  address global climate change, however there are State regulations related to global climate change that  affect a variety of State agencies.  CARB, which is a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency,  is responsible for the coordination and administration of both the federal and state air pollution control  programs within California.  In this capacity, the CARB conducts research, sets California Ambient Air  Quality Standards (CAAQS), compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures,  provides oversight of local programs, and prepares the SIP.  In addition, the CARB establishes emission  standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (e.g. hairspray, aerosol paints, and  barbeque lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment.  It also sets fuel specifications to  further reduce vehicular emissions.  In 2008, CARB approved a Climate Change Scoping Plan that proposes a “comprehensive set of actions  designed to reduce overall carbon GHG emissions in California, improve our environment, reduce our  dependence on oil, diversify our energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health”  (CARB 2008). The Climate Change Scoping Plan has a range of GHG reduction actions which include direct  regulations; alternative compliance mechanisms; monetary and non‐monetary incentives; voluntary  actions; market‐based mechanisms such as a cap‐and‐trade system. In 2014, CARB approved the First  Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB, 2014) that identifies additional strategies moving  beyond the 2020 targets to the year 2050. On December 14, 2017 CARB adopted the California’s 2017  Climate Change Scoping Plan, November 2017 (CARB, 2017) that provides specific statewide policies and  measures to achieve the 2030 GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and the      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 31    aspirational 2050 GHG reduction target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.  In addition, the State  has passed the following laws directing CARB to develop actions to reduce GHG emissions, which are listed  below in chronological order, with the most current first.  Executive Order N‐79‐20  The California Governor issued Executive Order N‐79‐20 on September 23, 2020 that requires all new  passenger cars and trucks and commercial drayage trucks sold in California to be zero‐emissions by the  year 2035 and all medium‐ heavy‐duty vehicles (commercial trucks) sold in the state to be zero‐emission  by 2045 for all operations where feasible.  Executive Order N‐79‐20 also requires all off‐road vehicles and  equipment to transition to 100 percent zero‐emission equipment, where feasible by 2035.  California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 6   The Title 24 Part 6 standards have been developed by the CEC primarily for energy conservation and is  described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.  It should be noted  that implementation of the Title 24 Part 6 building standards would also reduce GHG emissions, since as  detailed above in Section 3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, energy use for residential and  commercial buildings creates 9.7 percent of the GHG emissions in the State.  California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11  The CalGreen Building standards have been developed by the CEC primarily for energy conservation and  is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.  It should be  noted that implementation of the CalGreen Building standards would also reduce GHG emissions, since  as detailed above under Title 23, Part 6, energy usage from buildings creates 9.7 percent of GHG emissions  in the State.  Senate Bill 100   SB 100 requires that by December 1, 2045 that 100 percent of retail sales of electricity to be generated  from renewable or zero‐carbon emission sources of electricity and is described in more detail above in  Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.  Executive Order B‐48‐18 and Assembly Bill 2127  Executive Order B‐48‐18 and AB 2127 provides measures to put at least five million zero‐emission vehicles  on California roads by 2030 and to install 200 hydrogen fueling stations and 250,000 electric vehicle  chargers by 2025 and is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation  Management.  Executive Order B‐30‐15, Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197  The California Governor issued Executive Order B‐30‐15 on April 29, 2015 that aims to reduce California’s  GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.  This executive order aligns California’s GHG  reduction targets with those of other international governments, such as the European Union that set the  same target for 2030 in October, 2014.  This target will make it possible to reach the ultimate goal of  reducing GHG emissions 80 percent under 1990 levels by 2050 that is based on scientifically established  levels needed in the U.S.A to limit global warming below 2 degrees Celsius – the warming threshold at  which scientists say there will likely be major climate disruptions such as super droughts and rising sea  levels.  Assembly Bill 197 (AB 197) (September 8, 2016) and Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) (September 8, 2016)  codified into statute the GHG emissions reduction targets of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 32    as detailed in Executive Order B‐30‐15.  AB 197 also requires additional GHG emissions reporting that is  broken down to sub‐county levels and requires CARB to consider the social costs of emissions impacting  disadvantaged communities.  Executive Order B‐29‐15  The California Governor issued Executive Order B‐29‐15 on April 1, 2015 and directed the State Water  Resources Control Board to impose restrictions to achieve a statewide 25% reduction in urban water  usage and directed the Department of Water Resources to replace 50 million square feet of lawn with  drought tolerant landscaping through an update to the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape  Ordinance. The Ordinance also requires installation of more efficient irrigation systems, promotion of  greywater usage and onsite stormwater capture, and limits the turf planted in new residential landscapes  to 25 percent of the total area and restricts turf from being planted in median strips or in parkways unless  the parkway is next to a parking strip and a flat surface is required to enter and exit vehicles. Executive  Order B‐29‐15 would reduce GHG emissions associated with the energy used to transport and filter water.  Assembly Bill 341 and Senate Bills 939 and 1374  Senate Bill 939 (SB 939) requires that each jurisdiction in California to divert at least 50 percent of its  waste away from landfills, whether through waste reduction, recycling or other means.  Senate Bill 1374  (SB 1374) requires the California Integrated Waste Management Board to adopt a model ordinance by  March 1, 2004 suitable for adoption by any local agency to require 50 to 75 percent diversion of  construction and demolition of waste materials from landfills.  Assembly Bill 341 (AB 341) was adopted in  2011 and builds upon the waste reduction measures of SB 939 and 1374, and sets a new target of a 75  percent reduction in solid waste generated by the year 2020.  Senate Bill 375  Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) was adopted September 2008 in order to support the State’s climate action goals  to reduce GHG emissions through coordinated regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG  emission reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation.  SB 375 requires CARB to set regional  targets for GHG emissions reductions from passenger vehicle use. In 2010, CARB established targets for  2020 and 2035 for each Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) within the State. It was up to each  MPO to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that  MPOs Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) to meet CARB’s 2020 and 2035 GHG emission reduction targets.   These reduction targets are required to be updated every eight years and the most current targets are  detailed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our‐work/programs/sustainable‐communities‐program/regional‐ plan‐targets, which provides GHG emissions reduction targets for SCAG of 8 percent by 2020 and 19  percent by 2035.    The Connect SoCal (SCAG, 2020) provides a 2035 GHG emission reduction target of 19 percent reduction  over the 2005 per capita emissions levels.  The Connect SoCal include new initiatives of land use,  transportation and technology to meet the 2035 new 19 percent GHG emission reduction target for 2035.   CARB is also charged with reviewing SCAG’s RTP/SCS for consistency with its assigned targets.    City and County land use policies, including General Plans, are not required to be consistent with the RTP  and associated SCS.  However, new provisions of CEQA incentivize, through streamlining and other  provisions, qualified projects that are consistent with an approved SCS and categorized as “transit priority  projects.”      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 33    Assembly Bill 1109  AB 1109 requires reductions in energy usage for lighting and is described in more detail above in Section  5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.  Executive Order S‐1‐07  Executive Order S‐1‐07 was issued in 2007 and proclaims that the transportation sector is the main source  of GHG emissions in the State, since it generates more than 40 percent of the State’s GHG emissions.  It  establishes a goal to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in the State by at least ten  percent by 2020.  This Executive Order also directs CARB to determine whether this Low Carbon Fuel  Standard (LCFS) could be adopted as a discrete early‐action measure as part of the effort to meet the  mandates in AB 32.  In 2009 CARB approved the proposed regulation to implement the LCFS.  The standard was challenged in  the courts, but has been in effect since 2011 and was re‐approved by the CARB in 2015. The LCFS is  anticipated to reduce GHG emissions by about 16 MMT per year by 2020.  The LCFS is designed to provide  a framework that uses market mechanisms to spur the steady introduction of lower carbon fuels.  The  framework establishes performance standards that fuel producers and importers must meet annually.   Reformulated gasoline mixed with corn‐derived ethanol and low‐sulfur diesel fuel represent the baseline  fuels.  Lower carbon fuels may be ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, or blends of these fuels with  gasoline or diesel. Compressed natural gas and liquefied natural gas also may be low‐carbon fuels.   Hydrogen and electricity, when used in fuel cells or electric vehicles, are also considered as low‐carbon  fuels.  Senate Bill 97  Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) was adopted August 2007 and acknowledges that climate change is a prominent  environmental issue that requires analysis under CEQA.  SB 97 directed the Governor’s Office of Planning  and Research (OPR), which is part of the State Natural Resources Agency, to prepare, develop, and  transmit to CARB guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions,  as required by CEQA, by July 1, 2009.  The Natural Resources Agency was required to certify and adopt  those guidelines by January 1, 2010.  Pursuant to the requirements of SB 97 as stated above, on December 30, 2009 the Natural Resources  Agency adopted amendments to the State CEQA guidelines that addresses GHG emissions.  The CEQA  Guidelines Amendments changed 14 sections of the CEQA Guidelines and incorporated GHG language  throughout the Guidelines.  However, no GHG emissions thresholds of significance were provided and no  specific mitigation measures were identified.  The GHG emission reduction amendments went into effect  on March 18, 2010 and are summarized below:   Climate Action Plans and other greenhouse gas reduction plans can be used to determine whether  a project has significant impacts, based upon its compliance with the plan.   Local governments are encouraged to quantify the GHG emissions of proposed projects, noting  that they have the freedom to select the models and methodologies that best meet their needs  and circumstances.  The section also recommends consideration of several qualitative factors that  may be used in the determination of significance, such as the extent to which the given project  complies with state, regional, or local GHG reduction plans and policies.  OPR does not set or  dictate specific thresholds of significance.  Consistent with existing CEQA Guidelines, OPR      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 34    encourages local governments to develop and publish their own thresholds of significance for  GHG impacts assessment.   When creating their own thresholds of significance, local governments may consider the  thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by other public agencies, or recommended  by experts.   New amendments include guidelines for determining methods to mitigate the effects of GHG  emissions in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines.   OPR is clear to state that “to qualify as mitigation, specific measures from an existing plan must  be identified and incorporated into the project; general compliance with a plan, by itself, is not  mitigation.”   OPR’s emphasizes the advantages of analyzing GHG impacts on an institutional, programmatic  level.  OPR therefore approves tiering of environmental analyses and highlights some benefits of  such an approach.   Environmental impact reports must specifically consider a project's energy use and energy  efficiency potential.  Assembly Bill 32  In 2006, the California State Legislature adopted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of  2006.  AB 32 requires CARB, to adopt rules and regulations that would achieve GHG emissions equivalent  to statewide levels in 1990 by 2020 through an enforceable statewide emission cap which will be phased  in starting in 2012.  Emission reductions shall include carbon sequestration projects that would remove  carbon from the atmosphere and utilize best management practices that are technologically feasible and  cost effective.  In 2007 CARB released the calculated Year 1990 GHG emissions of 431 MMTCO2e.  The 2020 target of 431  MMTCO2e requires the reduction of 78 MMTCO2e, or approximately 16 percent from the State’s projected  2020 business as usual emissions of 509 MMTCO2e (CARB, 2014).  Under AB 32, CARB was required to  adopt regulations by January 1, 2011 to achieve reductions in GHGs to meet the 1990 cap by 2020.  Early  measures CARB took to lower GHG emissions included requiring operators of the largest industrial  facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons of CO2 in a calendar year to submit verification of GHG emissions by  December 1, 2010.  The CARB Board also approved nine discrete early action measures that include  regulations affecting landfills, motor vehicle fuels, refrigerants in cars, port operations and other sources,  all of which became enforceable on or before January 1, 2010.  CARB’s Scoping Plan that was adopted in 2009, proposes a variety of measures including: strengthening  energy efficiency and building standards; targeted fees on water and energy use; a market‐based cap‐ and‐trade system; achieving a 33 percent renewable energy mix; and a fee regulation to fund the program.  The 2014 update to the Scoping Plan identifies strategies moving beyond the 2020 targets to the year  2050.   The Cap and Trade Program established under the Scoping Plan sets a statewide limit on sources  responsible for 85 percent of California’s GHG emissions, and has established a market for long‐term  investment in energy efficiency and cleaner fuels since 2012.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 35    Executive Order S‐3‐05  In 2005 the California Governor issued Executive Order S 3‐05, GHG Emission, which established the  following reduction targets:   2010: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 2000 levels;   2020: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels;    2050: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.  The Executive Order directed the secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to  coordinate a multi‐agency effort to reduce GHG emissions to the target levels.  To comply with the  Executive Order, the secretary of CalEPA created the California Climate Action Team (CAT), made up of  members from various state agencies and commissions.  The team released its first report in March 2006.   The report proposed to achieve the targets by building on the voluntary actions of businesses, local  governments, and communities and through State incentive and regulatory programs. The State achieved  its first goal of reducing GHG emissions to 2000 levels by 2010.  Assembly Bill 1493  AB 1493 or the Pavley Bill sets tailpipe GHG emissions limits for passenger vehicles in California as well as  fuel economy standards and is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation  Management.  6.4 Regional – Southern California   The SCAQMD is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the South  Coast Air Basin.  To that end, as a regional agency, the SCAQMD works directly with the Southern California  Association of Governments (SCAG), county transportation commissions, and local governments and  cooperates actively with all federal and state agencies.  South Coast Air Quality Management District  SCAQMD develops rules and regulations, establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources,  inspects emission sources, and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when  necessary.  SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect  sources.  The SCAQMD is also responsible for GHG emissions for projects where it is the lead agency.  However, for other projects in the Air Basin where it is not the lead agency, it is limited to providing  resources to other lead agencies in order to assist them in determining GHG emission thresholds and GHG  reduction measures. In order to assist local agencies with direction on GHG emissions, the SCAQMD  organized a working group and adopted Rules 2700, 2701, and 2702, which are described below.  SCAQMD Working Group  Since neither CARB nor the OPR has developed GHG emissions threshold, the SCAQMD formed a Working  Group to develop significance thresholds related to GHG emissions. At the September 28, 2010 Working  Group meeting, the SCAQMD released its most current version of the draft GHG emissions thresholds,  which recommends a tiered approach that either provides a quantitative annual thresholds of 3,500  MTCO2e for residential uses, 1,400 MTCO2e for commercial uses, and 3,000 MTCO2e for mixed uses. An  alternative annual threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e for all land use types is also proposed.       Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 36    Southern California Association of Governments  The SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino,  and Imperial Counties and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community  development and the environment.  SCAG is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization  (MPO) for the majority of the southern California region and is the largest MPO in the nation.  With respect  to air quality planning, SCAG has prepared the Connect SoCal and 2019 FTIP addresses regional  development and growth forecasts.  Although the Connect SoCal and 2019 FTIP are primarily planning  documents for future transportation projects a key component of these plans are to integrate land use  planning with transportation planning that promotes higher density infill development in close proximity  to existing transit service.  These plans form the basis for the land use and transportation components of  the AQMP, which are utilized in the preparation of air quality forecasts and in the consistency analysis  included in the AQMP.  The Connect SoCal, 2019FTIP, and AQMP are based on projections originating  within the City and County General Plans.  6.5 Local – City of Anaheim  Local jurisdictions, such as the City of Anaheim, have the authority and responsibility to reduce GHG  emissions through their police power and decision‐making authority.  Specifically, the City is responsible  for the assessment and mitigation of GHG emissions resulting from its land use decisions.  In accordance  with CEQA requirements and the CEQA review process, the City assesses the global climate change  potential of new development projects, requires mitigation of potentially significant global climate change  impacts by conditioning discretionary permits, and monitors and enforces implementation of such  mitigation.  The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan: Sustainable Electric & Water Initiatives (GHG Reduction  Plan), prepared by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, July 2015, provides targets to energy  use, water conservation, photovoltaic (PV) rooftop installations, and transportation emissions.  The  targets provided in the GHG Reduction Plan that are applicable to the proposed project are detailed  below:  Power Supply Targets  2020 Target  20% (480,000 MTCO2e) GHG emissions reduction from 1990 baseline levels annually.  2030 Target  40% (920,000 MTCO2e) GHG emissions reduction from 1990 baseline levels annually.  Energy Efficiency Targets  2020 Target  15 percent reduction in energy utilized by businesses and homes in Anaheim.  2030 Target  30 percent reduction in energy utilized by businesses and homes in Anaheim.  Water Conservation Targets  2020 Target      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 37    20 percent reduction in water utilized by businesses and homes in Anaheim.  2030 Target  25 percent reduction in water utilized by businesses and homes in Anaheim.  Photovoltaic (PV) Targets  2020 Target  27,000 kW of PV systems installed.  2030 Target  37,000 kW of PV systems installed.  Vehicle Emissions Targets  2020 Target  6,000 MTCO2e reduction in vehicle emissions.  2030 Target  20,000 MTCO2e reduction in vehicle emissions.       Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 38    7.0 ATMOSPHERIC SETTING  7.1 South Coast Air Basin  The project site is located within central Orange County, which is part of the South Coast Air Basin (Air  Basin) that includes the non‐desert portions of Riverside, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles Counties and  all of Orange County.  The Air Basin is located on a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low  hills to the east.  Regionally, the Air Basin is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high  mountains to the east forming the inland perimeter.    6.2 Local Climate  Orange County is located on a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills to the east. The  general region lies in the semi‐permanent high‐pressure zone of the eastern Pacific.  As a result, the  climate is mild, tempered by cool sea breezes.  Occasional periods of strong Santa Ana winds and winter  storms interrupt the otherwise mild weather pattern.    Although the Air Basin has a semi‐arid climate, the air near the surface is typically moist because of the  presence of a shallow marine layer.  Except for infrequent periods when dry air is brought into the Air  Basin by offshore winds, the ocean effect is dominant.  Periods of heavy fog are frequent and low stratus  clouds, often referred to as “high fog” are a characteristic climate feature.  Winds are an important parameter in characterizing the air quality environment of a project site because  they determine the regional pattern of air pollution transport and control the rate of dispersion near a  source.  Daytime winds in Orange County are usually light breezes from off the coast as air moves  regionally onshore from the cool Pacific Ocean.  These winds are usually the strongest in the dry summer  months.  Nighttime winds in Orange County are a result mainly from the drainage of cool air off of the  mountains to the east and they occur more often during the winter months and are usually lighter than  the daytime winds.  Between the periods of dominant airflow, periods of air stagnation may occur, both  in the morning and evening hours.  Whether such a period of stagnation occurs is one of the critical  determinants of air quality conditions on any given day.  During the winter and fall months, surface high‐pressure systems north of the Air Basin combined with  other meteorological conditions, can result in very strong winds, called “Santa Ana Winds”, from the  northeast.  These winds normally have durations of a few days before predominant meteorological  conditions are reestablished. The highest wind speed typically occurs during the afternoon due to daytime  thermal convection caused by surface heating.  This convection brings about a downward transfer of  momentum from stronger winds aloft.  It is not uncommon to have sustained winds of 60 miles per hour  with higher gusts during a Santa Ana Wind event.  The temperature and precipitation levels for the Anaheim Monitoring Station is shown below in Table D.   Table D shows that August is typically the warmest month and December is typically the coolest month.   Rainfall in the project area varies considerably in both time and space.  Almost all the annual rainfall comes  from the fringes of mid‐latitude storms from late November to early April, with summers being almost  completely dry.              Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 39    Table D – Monthly Climate Data  Month  Average Maximum  Temperature (°F)  Average Minimum  Temperature (°F)  Average Total Precipitation  (inches)  January 70.0 47.5 3.34  February 70.0 48.2 3.47  March 72.4 50.4 1.86  April 74.7 52.8 0.83  May 77.1 57.3 0.53  June 80.1 60.5 0.15  July 85.2 64.2 0.07  August 87.1 64.5 0.01  September 86.5 62.7 0.10  October 81.2 57.7 0.72  November 75.4 51.8 0.99  December 69.7 46.9 2.02  Annual 77.4 55.4 14.09  Source: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi‐bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca0192   6.3 Monitored Local Air Quality  The air quality at any site is dependent on the regional air quality and local pollutant sources.  Regional  air quality is determined by the release of pollutants throughout the Air Basin.  Estimates of the existing  emissions in the Air Basin provided in the 2012 AQMP, indicate that collectively, mobile sources account  for 59 percent of the VOC, 88 percent of the NOx emissions and 40 percent of directly emitted PM2.5,  with another 10 percent of PM2.5 from road dust.  The 2016 AQMP found that since 2012 AQMP  projections were made stationary source VOC emissions have decreased by approximately 12 percent,  but mobile VOC emissions have increased by 5 percent.  The percentage of NOx emissions remain  unchanged between the 2012 and 2016 projections.   SCAQMD has divided the Air Basin into 38 air‐monitoring areas with a designated ambient air monitoring  station representative of each area.  The project site is located in air monitoring area 17, which covers the  central portion of Orange County. The nearest air monitoring station to the project site is the Anaheim‐ Pampas Lane Monitoring Station (Anaheim Station), which is located approximately two miles northwest  of the project site at 1630 Pampas Lane, Anaheim.  The monitoring data is presented in Table E and shows  the most recent three years of monitoring data from CARB.  CO measurements have not been provided,  since CO is currently in attainment in the Air Basin and monitoring of CO within the Air Basin ended on  March 31, 2013.                  Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 40    Table E – Local Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary  Pollutant 1 (Standard)  Year1  2017 2018 2019  Ozone:   Maximum 1‐Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.090 0.112 0.096   Days > CAAQS (0.09 ppm) 0 1 1  Maximum 8‐Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.076 0.071 0.082   Days > NAAQS (0.070 ppm) 4 1 1   Days > CAAQs (0.070 ppm) 4 1 1  Nitrogen Dioxide:     Maximum 1‐Hour Concentration (ppb) 81.2 66.0 59.4   Days > NAAQS (100 ppb) 0 0 0   Days > CAAQS (180 ppb) 0 0 0  Inhalable Particulates (PM10) :     Maximum 24‐Hour National Measurement (ug/m3) 95.7 94.6 127.6   Days > NAAQS (150 ug/m3) 0 0 0   Days > CAAQS (50 ug/m3) 5 2 4  Annual Arithmetic Mean (AAM) (ug/m3) 26.9 27.9 24.6   Annual > NAAQS (50 ug/m3) No No No   Annual > CAAQS (20 ug/m3) Yes Yes Yes  Ultra‐Fine Particulates (PM2.5):     Maximum 24‐Hour National Measurement (ug/m3) 53.9 63.1 36.1   Days > NAAQS (35 ug/m3)  7 7 4  Annual Arithmetic Mean (AAM) (ug/m3) ND 11.4 9.3   Annual > NAAQS and CAAQS (12 ug/m3) ND No No  Notes: Exceedances are listed in bold.  CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standard; NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard; ppm =  parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; ND = no data available.  1  Data obtained from the Anaheim Station.  Source: http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/    Ozone   During the last three years, the State 1‐hour concentration standard for ozone has been exceeded  between zero and one day each year at the Anaheim Station.  Both the State and federal 8‐hour ozone  standards have been exceeded between one and four days each year over the last three years at the  Anaheim Station.  Ozone is a secondary pollutant as it is not directly emitted. Ozone is the result of  chemical reactions between other pollutants, most importantly hydrocarbons and NO2, which occur only  in the presence of bright sunlight. Pollutants emitted from upwind cities react during transport downwind  to produce the oxidant concentrations experienced in the area.  Many areas of Southern California  contribute to the ozone levels experienced at this monitoring station, with the more significant areas  being those directly upwind.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 41    Nitrogen Dioxide  The Anaheim Station did not record an exceedance of either the Federal or State 1‐hour NO2 standards  for the last three years.  Particulate Matter  The State 24‐hour concentration standard for PM10 has been exceeded between two and five days each  year over the past three years at the Anaheim Station. Over the past three years the Federal 24‐hour  standard for PM10 has not been exceeded at the Anaheim Station.  The annual PM10 concentration at  the Anaheim Station has exceeded the State standard for the past three years and has not exceeded the  Federal standard for the past three years.  Over the past three years the 24‐hour concentration standard for PM2.5 has been exceeded between four  and seven days each year over the past three years at the Anaheim Station.  The annual PM2.5  concentrations at the Anaheim Station has not exceeded either the State or Federal standard for the past  three years. Particulate levels in the area are due to natural sources, grading operations, and motor  vehicles.  According to the EPA, some people are much more sensitive than others to breathing fine particles (PM10  and PM2.5).  People with influenza, chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and the elderly may  suffer worsening illness and premature death due to breathing these fine particles.  People with bronchitis  can expect aggravated symptoms from breathing in fine particles.  Children may experience decline in  lung function due to breathing in PM10 and PM2.5.  Other groups considered sensitive are smokers and  people who cannot breathe well through their noses.  Exercising athletes are also considered sensitive,  because many breathe through their mouths during exercise.  7.4 Toxic Air Contaminant Levels in the Air Basin  In order to determine the Air Basin‐wide risks associated with major airborne carcinogens, the SCAQMD  conducted the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES) studies.  According to the SCAQMD’s MATES‐ IV study, the project site has an estimated cancer risk of 1,039 per million persons chance of cancer.  In  comparison, the average cancer risk for the Air Basin is 991 per million persons, which is based on the use  of age‐sensitivity factors detailed in the OEHHA Guidelines (OEHHA, 2015).    In order to provide a perspective of risk, it is often estimated that the incidence in cancer over a lifetime  for the U.S. population ranges between 1 in 3 to 4 and 1 in 3, or a risk of about 300,000 per million persons.  The MATES‐III study referenced a Harvard Report on Cancer Prevention, which estimated that of cancers  associated with known risk factors, about 30 percent were related to tobacco, about 30 percent were  related to diet and obesity, and about 2 percent were associated with environmental pollution related  exposures that includes hazardous air pollutants.       Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 42    8.0 MODELING PARAMETERS AND ASSUMPTIONS  8.1 CalEEMod Model Input Parameters   The criteria air pollution and GHG emissions impacts created by the proposed project have been analyzed  through use of CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.  CalEEMod is a computer model published by the SCAQMD  for estimating air pollutant emissions.  The CalEEMod program uses the EMFAC2014 computer program  to calculate the emission rates specific for Orange County for employee, vendor and haul truck vehicle  trips and the OFFROAD2011 computer program to calculate emission rates for heavy equipment  operations.  EMFAC2014 and OFFROAD2011 are computer programs generated by CARB that calculates  composite emission rates for vehicles.  Emission rates are reported by the program in grams per trip and  grams per mile or grams per running hour.    The project characteristics in the CalEEMod model were set to a project location of Orange County, a  Climate Zone of 8, utility company of City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department and an opening year of  2023 was utilized in this analysis.   Land Use Parameters  The proposed project would consist of development of an affordable four‐story residential apartment  complex with 86 residential apartment units and a 1,700 square foot flex space area that would be used  for community programs and meetings.  The total project building space would be 96,150 square feet.     The proposed project would also provide 129 parking spaces, of which 18 would be garage spaces, and 12  would be dedicated for electric vehicle (EV) charging stalls.  As part of the proposed project, the existing  public alleyway on the eastern portion of the project site would be vacated and the public alleyway will  be re‐routed to connect to Anaheim Boulevard in the southeast corner of the project site.   The proposed  project’s land use parameters that were entered into the CalEEMod model are shown in Table F.   Table F – CalEEMod Land Use Parameters  Proposed Land Use Land Use Subtype in CalEEMod  Land Use  Size1  Lot  Acreage2  Building/Paving3   (square feet)  Apartment Complex Apartment Mid Rise4 86 DU  0.70 94,450  Flexible Community Space General Office Building5 1.7 TSF 0.06 1,700  Parking lots, Onsite Roads,  Sidewalks, and Hardscapes Other Asphalt Surfaces 1.5 AC 1.50 65,340  Notes:   1 DU = Dwelling Unit; TSF = thousand square feet; AC = Acres  2 Lot acreage calculated based on the total project area of 1.58‐acres.  3 Building/Paving square feet represent area where architectural coatings will be applied. The building square feet for the single‐family homes  was obtained from the architectural plans.  4 Apartment Mid Rise is defined as Mid‐rise apartments in rental building that have between 3 and 10 levels.  5 The Recreational Community Center Land Use utilized in The Trip Gen Memo (Kimley Horn, 2021) is not available in CalEEMod.  The nearest  land use available in CalEEMod of General Office Building was utilized.   Electricity Emission Factors  The default CalEEMod emission factors for Anaheim Public Utilities for the Reporting year of 2007  (CalEEMod User Guide Appendix D, Table 1.2) are as follows:   Carbon dioxide: 1,543.28 pounds per megawatt‐hour       Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 43     Methane: 0.029 pounds per megawatt‐hour   Nitrous oxide: 0.00617 pounds per megawatt‐hour  According to the City of Anaheim 2018 Power Content Label (http://www.anaheim.net/3452/Power‐ Content‐Label) the 2018 Anaheim Power Mix consisted of 33.97% renewable and 32.84% coal.  The City  of Anaheim 2007 Power Content Label found that Anaheim Power Mix consisted of 6% renewable and  67% coal.  This equates to approximately a 51 percent reduction in GHG emissions between year 2018  and year 2007, which CalEEMod’s default emission factors are based on.  As such the CalEEMod default  intensity factors have been reduced by 51 percent and the resultant intensity factors that have been  utilized in this analysis are shown below:   Carbon dioxide: 756.4 pounds per megawatt‐hour    Methane: 0.014 pounds per megawatt‐hour   Nitrous oxide: 0.003 pounds per megawatt‐hour  It should be noted that the use of the above intensity factors is a conservative estimate as they are based  on the year 2018 rates and by opening year GHG emissions intensity factors are anticipated to be much  lower.  Construction Parameters  Construction activities have been modeled based on the default construction schedule provided by the  project applicant of starting March 2022 and completed in 18 months.  The construction‐related GHG  emissions were based on a 30‐year amortization rate as recommended in the SCAQMD GHG Working  Group meeting on November 19, 2009.  The phases of construction activities that have been analyzed are  detailed below and include: 1) Demolition, 2) Grading, 3) Building construction, 4) Application of  architectural coatings, and 5) Paving. Since the project site had been previously developed, the site  preparation activities that consist of removal of rocks and tree stumps would not be required during  construction of the proposed project.  Demolition  The demolition phase would consist of demolishing the existing approximately 4,590 square foot  commercial building located in the northwest corner and public alleyways on the west side and east  portion of the project site that runs the length of the property.  The pavement for the alleyways was  assumed to cover an acre of the project site and be an average of 4‐inches thick and weigh 145 pounds  per square foot, which results in 1,053 tons of pavement that would be removed from the project site.   For the existing structure, CalEEMod utilizes a factor of 0.046 tons of debris of building material per  building square foot.  This results in 211 tons of debris that would be generated from demolition of the  4,590 square feet of existing building space.  Therefore, the combined demolition of the structures and  pavement area would require the removal of 1,264 tons of debris that would be exported from the site  and would require a total of 120 haul truck trips (average 6.3 haul truck trips per day over 20 day  demolition phase).  The demolition phase has been modeled as starting in March 2022 and occurring over four weeks.  The  demolition activities would require 13 worker trips per day.  In order to account for water truck emissions,  six vendor truck emissions were added to the demolition phase.  The onsite equipment would consist of  one concrete/industrial saw, one rubber‐tired dozer, and three of either tractors, loaders, or backhoes,      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 44    which is based on the CalEEMod default equipment mix.  The mitigation of water all exposed areas two  times per day was chosen in order to account for the fugitive dust reduction that would occur through  adhering to SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires that the Best Available Control Measures be utilized to  reduce fugitive dust emissions.  Grading  The grading phase was modeled as starting after completion of the demolition phase and occurring over  nine weeks.  According to C & V Consulting, Inc., the rough earthwork quantities for grading include 183  cubic yards of cut and 4,480 cubic yards of fill, which would require up to 4,297 cubic yards of dirt to be  imported to the project site. However, it should be noted that these earth quantities do not consider  spoils from building/wall footings and utility trenches and any shrinkage or subsidence for grading, which  will likely result in less dirt being imported to the project site.   The import of dirt would require a total of  537 haul truck trips (average 11.9 haul truck trips per day over nine week grading phase).  The onsite equipment utilized during the grading phase was based on the CalEEMod default equipment  list of one grader, one rubber‐tired dozer, and two of either tractors, loaders, or backhoes.  The grading  activities would also generate 10 automobile trips per day for the workers. In order to account for water  truck emissions, six daily vendor truck trips were added to the grading phase.  The mitigation of water all  exposed areas two times per day was chosen in order to account for the fugitive dust reduction that would  occur through adhering to SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires that the Best Available Control Measures be  utilized to reduce fugitive dust emissions.  Building Construction  The building construction would occur after the completion of the grading phase and was modeled as  occurring over one year.  The building construction phase would generate 90 worker trips and 20 vendor  trips per day. The onsite equipment would consist of the simultaneous operation of one crane, two  forklifts, one generator, three welders, and one of either a tractor, loader, or backhoe, which is based on  the CalEEMod default equipment mix.  Architectural Coating  The application of architectural coatings was modeled as occurring concurrently with the last five months  of the building construction phase.  The architectural coating phase was modeled based on covering  765,677 square feet of residential interior area, 255,226 square feet of residential exterior area, 5,120  square feet of non‐residential interior area, 1,707 square feet of non‐residential exterior area, and 14,344  square feet of parking area.  The architectural coating phase would generate 66 worker trip per day.  The  onsite equipment would consist of one air compressor, which is based on the CalEEMod default  equipment mix.   Paving  The paving phase would consist of paving the onsite roads and parking areas, sidewalks and hardscapes  as well as the reconfiguration of the public alleyway/driveway to the mobile home park in the southeast  corner of the project site. The paving phase was modeled as occurring after completion of the building  construction and architectural coating phases and taking eight weeks to complete.  The paving phase  would require up to 15 worker trips per day.  The onsite equipment would consist of the simultaneous  operation of one cement mixer, one paver, one paving equipment, two rollers, and one of either a tractor,  loader, or backhoe, which is based on the CalEEMod default equipment mix.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 45    Operational Emissions Modeling  The operations‐related criteria air pollutant emissions and GHG emissions created by the proposed  project have been analyzed through use of the CalEEMod model.  The proposed project was analyzed in  the CalEEMod model based on the land use parameters provided above and the parameters entered for  each operational source is described below.    Mobile Sources  Mobile sources include emissions the additional vehicle miles generated from the proposed project.  The  vehicle trips associated with the proposed 86 residential apartment units and a 1,700 square foot flex  space area have been analyzed through use of the trip rates obtained from the Midway Affordable Traffic  Statement (Traffic Analysis), prepared by Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc., April 15, 2021.  The Traffic  Analysis found that the proposed project would generate 5.44 daily trips per residential unit and 28.82  daily trips per thousand square feet of flex space area, which equates to 878 weekday vehicle trips per  day.  No other changes were made to the CalEEMod default mobile source parameters.  The CalEEMod model provides the selection of “mitigation” to account for project conditions that would  result in less emissions than a project without these conditions, however it should be noted that this  “mitigation” may represent current conditions, such as development that is in close proximity to an  existing bus stop, where a project built at such location, would create less vehicle trips and associated  emissions than a project that was not built in close proximity to an existing bus stop.  The mobile source  emissions analysis included the CalEEMod mitigation of: (1) Increase Density to 36 dwelling units per acre;  (2) Improved pedestrian network onsite and connecting offsite, since the project site has sidewalks  adjacent to Midway Drive and Anaheim Boulevard; and (3) Increase transit accessibility was also selected  in order to account for the OCTA bus stop that is adjacent to the project site on Anaheim Boulevard.  Area Sources  Area sources include emissions from consumer products, landscape equipment, hearths and architectural  coatings.  The area source emissions were based on the on‐going use of the proposed project in the  CalEEMod model.  According to the proposed project plans, no woodstoves or fireplaces will be  constructed inside the proposed structure, however there will be one firepit in the outside lounge area.    Since SCAQMD Rule 445 restricts the installation of wood‐burning devices into new developments, the  fire pit was modeled as a natural gas only fireplace in the CalEEMod model.  No other changes were made  to the default area source parameters in the CalEEMod model.  Energy Usage  Energy usage includes emissions from electricity and natural gas used onsite.  The energy usage was based  on the ongoing use of the proposed project in the CalEEMod Model.  No changes were made to the default  energy usage parameters in the CalEEMod model.  The new 2019 Title 24, Part 6 building energy efficiency  standards have been developed so that the average new home built in California will have zero‐net‐energy  use.  In order to account for the new 2019 Title 24, Part 6 standards, this analysis included the CalEEMod  mitigation of exceed the 2016 Title 24 standards by 7 percent, since the 2019 building standards have  been calculated to result in new homes using about 7 percent less energy than homes built with the 2016  building standards.  The project applicant has stated that solar PV panels will be installed on the roof of  the proposed apartment complex, however the size of the PV system is not yet known, so no credit was  taken for the proposed PV system.       Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 46    Solid Waste  Waste includes the GHG emissions associated with the processing of waste from the proposed project as  well as the GHG emissions from the waste once it is interred into a landfill. The analysis was based on the  default CalEEMod waste generation rate of 41 tons of solid waste per year from the proposed project.  No  changes were made to the default solid waste parameters or mitigation measures in the CalEEMod model.  The CalEEMod “mitigation” of a 50 percent reduction in landfill waste was selected to account for  implementation of AB 341 that provides strategies to reduce, recycle or compost solid waste by 75 percent  by 2020.  Only 50 percent was selected, since AB 341 builds upon the waste reduction measures of SB 939  and 1374 and therefore, it was assumed approximately 25 percent of the waste reduction target has  already been accounted for in the CalEEMod model.  Water and Wastewater  Water includes the water used for the interior of the buildings as well as for landscaping and is based on  the GHG emissions associated with the energy used to transport and filter the water.  The analysis was  based on the default CalEEMod water usage rate of 5,905,394 gallons per year of indoor water use and  3,717,668 gallons per year of outdoor water use.  No changes were made to the default water and  wastewater parameters in the CalEEMod model.    The CalEEMod “mitigation” of the use of low flow faucets, showers, and toilets and use of smart irrigation  system controllers were selected to account for the implementation of the 2016 CCR Title 24 Part 11  (CalGreen) requirements.  8.2 Energy Use Calculations   The proposed project is anticipated to consume energy during both construction and operation of the  proposed project and the parameters utilized to calculate energy use from construction and operation of  the proposed project are detailed separately below.  Construction‐Related Energy Use  Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to use energy in the forms of petroleum fuel for both  off‐road equipment as well as from the transport of workers and materials to and from the project site  and the calculations for each source are described below.    Off‐Road Construction Equipment  The off‐road construction equipment fuel usage was calculated through use of the CalEEMod model’s  default off‐road equipment assumptions detailed above in Section 8.1. For each piece of off‐road  equipment, the fuel usage was calculated through use of the 2017 Off‐road Diesel Emission Factors  spreadsheet, prepared by CARB (https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/ordiesel.htm).  The Spreadsheet provides  the following formula to calculate fuel usage from off‐road equipment:  Fuel Used = Load Factor x Horsepower x Total Operational Hours x BSFC / Unit Conversion   Where:   Load Factor ‐ Obtained from CalEEMod default values    Horsepower – Obtained from CalEEMod default values      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 47    Total Operational Hours – Calculated by multiplying CalEEMod default daily hours by CalEEMod  default number of working days for each phase of construction  BSFC – Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (pounds per horsepower‐hour) – If less than 100  Horsepower = 0.408, if greater than 100 Horsepower = 0.367  Unit Conversion – Converts pounds to gallons = 7.109  Table G shows the off‐road construction equipment fuel calculations based on the above formula.    Table G – Off‐Road Equipment and Fuel Consumption from Construction of the Proposed Project  Equipment Type  Equipment  Quantity  Horse‐ power  Load  Factor  Operating Hours  per Day  Total Operational  Hours1  Fuel Used  (gallons)  Demolition  Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 81 0.73 8 160 543  Rubber Tired Dozers 1 247 0.40 8 160 816  Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 97 0.37 8 480 989  Grading  Grader 1 187 0.41 8  360    1,425   Rubber‐Tired Dozer 1 247 0.4 8  360    1,836   Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 97 0.37 7  630    1,298   Building Construction  Cranes 1 231 0.29 8 2,080 7,193  Forklifts 2 89 0.2 7 3,640 3,719  Generators 1 84 0.74 8 2,080 7,420  Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 97 0.37 8 2,080 4,284  Welders 3 46 0.45 8 6,240 7,413  Architectural Coatings  Air Compressor 1 78 0.48 6 120 1,380  Paving  Cement & Mortar Mixer 1 9 0.56 8 320 93  Paver 1 130 0.42 8  320    902   Paving Equipment 2 132 0.36 8  640  1,117  Tractors/Loaders/ Backhoes 1 97 0.37 8 320 659  Total Off‐Road Equipment Fuel Used during Construction (gallons) 41,871  Notes:  1 Based on: 20 days for Demolition; 45 days for Grading; 260 days for Building Construction; 107 days for Painting; and 40 days for Paving.   Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 (see Appendix A); CARB, 2017.   Table G shows that the off‐road equipment utilized during construction of the proposed project would  consume 41,871 gallons of fuel.  On‐Road Construction‐Related Vehicle Trips  The on‐road construction‐related vehicle trips fuel usage was calculated through use of the construction  vehicle trip assumptions from the CalEEMod model run as detailed above in Section 8.1. The calculated  total construction miles was then divided by the fleet average for all of Southern California miles per gallon  rates for the year 2022 calculated through use of the EMFAC2017 model  (https://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/2017/) and the EMFAC2017 model printouts are shown in Appendix B.       Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 48    The worker trips were based on the entire fleet average miles per gallon rate for gasoline powered  vehicles and the vendor trips were based on the Heavy‐Heavy Duty Truck (HHDT), Medium Duty Vehicle  (MDV), and Medium Heavy‐Duty Vehicle (MHDV) fleet average miles per gallon rate for diesel‐powered  vehicles.  Table H shows the on‐road construction vehicle trips modeled in CalEEMod and the fuel usage  calculations.    Table H – On‐Road Vehicle Trips and Fuel Consumption from Construction of the Proposed Project   Vehicle Trip Types Daily Trips  Trip Length  (miles)  Total Miles  per Day  Total Miles  per Phase1  Fleet Average  Miles per Gallon2  Fuel Used  (gallons)  Demolition  Worker Trips  13 14.7 191 3,822 26.0 147  Vendor Truck Trips 6 6.9 41 828 8.2 101  Haul Truck Trips 6.3 20 125 2,500 8.2 304  Grading  Worker Trips  10 14.7 147 6,615 26.0 255  Vendor Truck Trips 6 6.9 41 1,863 8.2 227  Haul Truck Trips 11.9 20 239 10,740 8.2 1,306  Building Construction   Worker Trips  90 14.7 1,323 343,980 26.0 13,236  Vendor Truck Trips  20 6.9 138 35,880 8.2 4,362  Architectural Coatings  Worker Trips  18 14.7 265 28,312 26.0 1,089  Paving  Worker Trips  15 14.7 221 8,820 26.0 339  Total Fuel Used from On‐Road Construction Vehicles (gallons) 21,366  Notes:  1 Based on: 20 days for Demolition; 45 days for Grading; 260 days for Building Construction; 107 days for Painting; and 40 days for Paving.  2 From EMFAC 2017 model (see Appendix B). Worker Trips based on entire fleet of gasoline vehicles and Vendor Trips based on only truck  fleet of diesel vehicles.   Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2; CARB, 2018.    Table H shows that the on‐road construction‐related vehicle trips would consume 21,366 gallons of fuel  and as detailed above, Table G shows that the off‐road construction equipment would consume 41,871  gallons of fuel.  This would result in the total consumption of 63,237 gallons of petroleum fuel from  construction of the proposed project.    Operations‐Related Energy Use  The operation of the proposed project is anticipated to use energy in the forms of petroleum fuel,  electricity, and natural gas, and the calculations for each source are described below.    Operational Petroleum Fuel   The on‐road operations‐related vehicle trips fuel usage was calculated through use of the total annual  vehicle miles traveled assumptions from the CalEEMod model run as detailed above in Section 8.1, which  found that operation of the proposed project would generate 962,811 vehicle miles traveled per year.   The calculated total operational miles were then divided by the Southern California fleet average rate of  26.0 miles per gallon, which was calculated through use of the EMFAC2017 model and based on the year  2022.  The EMFAC2017 model printouts are shown in Appendix B.  Based on the above calculation      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 49    methodology, operational vehicle trips generated from the proposed project would consume 37,048  gallons per year.      Operational Electricity Use   The operations‐related electricity usage was calculated in the CalEEMod model run that is detailed above  in Section 8.1 that found the proposed apartment complex will use 340,794 kilowatt hours (kWh) per year  and the proposed flex space will use 23,223 kWh per year.  Based on the above, it is anticipated that the  proposed project would utilize 364,017 kWh per year of electricity.  Operational Natural Gas Use   The operations‐related natural gas usage was calculated in the CalEEMod model run that is provided  above in Section 8.1 that found the proposed apartment complex will use 947,175 kilo British Thermal  Units (kBTU) per year and the proposed flex space will use 14,516 kBTU per year.  Based on the above, it  is anticipated that the proposed project would utilize 961,691 kBTU per year of natural gas, which is  equivalent to 962 mega‐British Thermal units (MBTU) per year of natural gas          Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 50    9.0 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE  9.1 Regional Air Quality   Many air quality impacts that derive from dispersed mobile sources, which are the dominant pollution  generators in the Air Basin, often occurs hours later and miles away after photochemical processes have  converted primary exhaust pollutants into secondary contaminants such as ozone.  The incremental  regional air quality impact of an individual project is generally very small and difficult to measure.   Therefore, SCAQMD has developed significance thresholds based on the volume of pollution emitted  rather than on actual ambient air quality because the direct air quality impact of a project is not  quantifiable on a regional scale.  The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that any project in the Air Basin  with daily emissions that exceed any of the identified significance thresholds should be considered as  having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact.  For the purposes to this air quality  impact analysis, a regional air quality impact would be considered significant if emissions exceed the  SCAQMD significance thresholds identified in Table I.    Table I – SCAQMD Regional Criteria Pollutant Emission Thresholds of Significance   Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)   VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Lead  Construction 75 100 550 150 150 55 3  Operation 55 55 550 150 150 55 3  Source: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default‐source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd‐air‐quality‐significance‐thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2   9.2 Local Air Quality  Project‐related construction air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air  quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant  enough to create a regional impact to the Air Basin.  In order to assess local air quality impacts the  SCAQMD has developed Localized Significant Thresholds (LSTs) to assess the project‐related air emissions  in the project vicinity.  SCAQMD has also provided Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology  (LST Methodology), July 2008, which details the methodology to analyze local air emission impacts. The  LST Methodology found that the primary emissions of concern are NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.  The LST Methodology provides Look‐Up Tables with different thresholds based on the location and size of  the project site and distance to the nearest sensitive receptors.  As detailed above in Section 4.1, the  project site is located in Air Monitoring Area 17, which covers the central portion of Orange County.  The  Look‐Up Tables provided in the LST Methodology include project site acreage sizes of 1‐acre, 2‐acres and  5‐acres.  The 2‐acre project site values in the Look‐Up Tables have been utilized in this analysis, since that  is the nearest size available for the 2.26‐acre project site.   The nearest offsite sensitive receptors are  residents at the mobile home park located adjacent to the south side of the project site.  According to LST  Methodology, any receptor located closer than 25 meters (82 feet) shall be based on the 25 meter  thresholds.  Table J below shows the LSTs for NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 for both construction and operational  activities.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 51    Table J – SCAQMD Local Air Quality Thresholds of Significance   Activity  Allowable Emissions (pounds/day)1   NOx CO PM10 PM2.5  Construction 115 715 6 4  Operation 115 715 2 1  Notes:  1 The nearest offsite sensitive receptors include mobile homes located adjacent to the south side of the project site.  According to SCAQMD  methodology, all receptors closer than 25 meters are based on the 25‐meter threshold.    Source: Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look‐up Tables for two acres in Air Monitoring Area 17, Central Orange County.    9.3 Toxic Air Contaminants  According to the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, any project that has the potential to expose the public to  toxic air contaminants in excess of the following thresholds would be considered to have a significant air  quality impact:    If the Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk is 10 in one million or greater; or   Toxic air contaminants from the proposed project would result in a Hazard Index increase of 1 or  greater.  In order to determine if the proposed project may have a significant impact related to TACs, the Health  Risk Assessment Guidance for analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA  Air Quality Analysis, (Diesel Analysis) prepared by SCAQMD, August 2003, recommends that if the  proposed project is anticipated to create TACs through stationary sources or regular operations of diesel  trucks on the project site, then the proximity of the nearest receptors to the source of the TAC and the  toxicity of the HAP should be analyzed through a comprehensive facility‐wide health risk assessment  (HRA).  9.4 Odor Impacts  The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that an odor impact would occur if the proposed project creates an  odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402, which states:  “A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or  other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number  of persons to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such  persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to  business or property.  The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations  necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.”  If the proposed project results in a violation of Rule 402 with regards to odor impacts, then the proposed  project would create a significant odor impact.  9.5 Energy Conservation  The new 2018 amendments and additions to the CEQA Checklist now includes an Energy Section that  analyzes the proposed project’s energy consumption in order to avoid or reduce inefficient, wasteful or  unnecessary consumption of energy.  Since the Energy Section was just added, no state or local agencies      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 52    have adopted specific criteria or thresholds to be utilized in an energy impact analysis.  However, the 2018  Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, provide the following  direction on how to analyze a project’s energy consumption:  “If analysis of the project’s energy use reveals that the project may result in significant  environmental effects due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy, or wasteful use  of energy resources, the EIR shall mitigate that energy use. This analysis should include the  project’s energy use for all project phases and components, including transportation‐related  energy, during construction and operation. In addition to building code compliance, other  relevant considerations may include, among others, the project’s size, location, orientation,  equipment use and any renewable energy features that could be incorporated into the project.  (Guidance on information that may be included in such an analysis is presented in Appendix F.)  This analysis is subject to the rule of reason and shall focus on energy use that is caused by the  project. This analysis may be included in related analyses of air quality, greenhouse gas emissions,  transportation or utilities in the discretion of the lead agency.”  If the proposed project creates inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy during  construction or operation activities or conflicts with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy  efficiency, then the proposed project would create a significant energy impact.  9.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions  The Anaheim Public Utilities has adopted the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GHG Reduction Plan), July  2015.  The GHG Reduction Plan has been prepared to assist the City’s power supplies in conforming to the  GHG emissions reductions as mandated under AB 32.  The GHG Reduction Plan provides a utilities GHG  emission reduction targets of 20 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2020 and a 40 percent below 1990  levels by 2030.   Since the GHG Reduction Plan does not provide any quantitative GHG emissions  thresholds for new development projects nor does it provide any direction on how to analyze new  development projects within the City, the SCAQMD GHG emissions reduction thresholds have been  utilized in this analysis.  In order to identify significance criteria under CEQA for development projects, SCAQMD initiated a  Working Group, which provided detailed methodology for evaluating significance under CEQA.  At the  September 28, 2010 Working Group meeting, the SCAQMD released its most current version of the draft  GHG emissions thresholds, which recommends a tiered approach that provides a quantitative annual  threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e for all land use projects. Although the SCAQMD provided substantial evidence  supporting the use of the above threshold, the SCAQMD Board has not yet considered or approved the  Working Group’s thresholds.  However, it should be noted that the SCAQMD threshold was utilized in  DSEIR No. 330.  It should be noted that SCAQMD’s Working Group’s thresholds were prepared prior to the issuance of  Executive Order B‐30‐15 on April 29, 2015 that provided a reduction goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels  by 2030. This target was codified into statute through passage of AB 197 and SB 32 in September 2016.   However, to date no air district or local agency within California has provided guidance on how to address  AB 197 and SB 32 with relation to land use projects.  In addition, the California Supreme Court’s ruling on  Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of Governments (Cleveland v. SANDAG),  Filed July 13, 2017 stated:      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 53    SANDAG did not abuse its discretion in declining to adopt the 2050 goal as a measure of  significance in light of the fact that the Executive Order does not specify any plan or  implementation measures to achieve its goal.  In its response to comments, the EIR said: “It is  uncertain what role regional land use and transportation strategies can or should play in achieving  the EO’s 2050 emissions reduction target.  A recent California Energy Commission report  concludes, however, that the primary strategies to achieve this target should be major  ‘decarbonization’ of electricity supplies and fuels, and major improvements in energy efficiency  [citation].  Although, the above court case was referencing California’s GHG emission targets for the year 2050, at  this time it is also unclear what role land use strategies can or should play in achieving the AB 197 and SB  32 reduction goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.  As such this analysis has relied on the SCAQMD  Working Group’s recommended thresholds. Therefore, the proposed project would be considered to  create a significant cumulative GHG impact if the proposed project would exceed the annual threshold of  3,000 MTCO2e.  The GHG emissions analysis for both construction and operation of the proposed project can be found  below in Sections 10.8 and 10.9.            Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 54    10.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS  10.1 CEQA Thresholds of Significance   Consistent with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to air quality, energy,  and GHG emissions would occur if the proposed project is determined to:   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  region is in non‐attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard;   Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations;    Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number  of people;   Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary  consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation;   Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy;   Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the  environment; or   Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of  reducing the emissions of GHGs.  10.2 Air Quality Compliance  The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD Air Quality  Management Plan (AQMP).  The following section discusses the proposed project’s consistency with the  SCAQMD AQMP.  SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan  The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a  proposed project and applicable General Plans and regional plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125).  The  regional plan that applies to the proposed project includes the SCAQMD AQMP. Therefore, this section  discusses any potential inconsistencies of the proposed project with the AQMP.  The purpose of this discussion is to set forth the issues regarding consistency with the assumptions and  objectives of the AQMP and discuss whether the proposed project would interfere with the region’s ability  to comply with Federal and State air quality standards. If the decision‐makers determine that the  proposed project is inconsistent, the lead agency may consider project modifications or inclusion of  mitigation to eliminate the inconsistency.  The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended GP Elements (including land use zoning and  density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant projects must be analyzed for consistency with the  AQMP." Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan is usually not required. A proposed project should  be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct  other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency:      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 55    (1) Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality  violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality  standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP.  (2)  Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year  of project buildout and phase.  Both of these criteria are evaluated in the following sections.  Criterion 1 ‐ Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations?  Based on the air quality modeling analysis contained in this report, short‐term regional construction air  emissions would not result in significant impacts based on SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance  discussed above in Section 9.1 or local thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.2.  The  ongoing operation of the proposed project would generate air pollutant emissions that are  inconsequential on a regional basis and would not result in significant impacts based on SCAQMD  thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.1.  The analysis for long‐term local air quality  impacts showed that local pollutant concentrations would not be projected to exceed the air quality  standards.  Therefore, a less than significant long‐term impact would occur and no mitigation would be  required.  Therefore, based on the information provided above, the proposed project would be consistent with the  first criterion.    Criterion 2 ‐ Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP?  Consistency with the AQMP assumptions is determined by performing an analysis of the proposed project  with the assumptions in the AQMP.  The emphasis of this criterion is to insure that the analyses conducted  for the proposed project are based on the same forecasts as the AQMP. The AQMP is developed through  use of the planning forecasts provided in the RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal) and FTIP (2019 FTIP).  The RTP/SCS  is a major planning document for the regional transportation and land use network within Southern  California.  The RTP/SCS is a long‐range plan that is required by federal and state requirements placed on  SCAG and is updated every four years.  The FTIP provides long‐range planning for future transportation  improvement projects that are constructed with state and/or federal funds within Southern California.   Local governments are required to use these plans as the basis of their plans for the purpose of  consistency with applicable regional plans under CEQA.  For this project, the City of Anaheim General  Plan’s Land Use Plan defines the assumptions that are represented in AQMP.  The proposed project would consist of development of 86 residential apartment units and a 1,700 square  foot flex space area on a 2.26‐acre project site that would result in 36 dwelling units per acre.  The project  site is currently designated Medium Density Residential in the General Plan that allows for up to 36  dwelling units per acre. The proposed project is consistent with the current General Plan land use  designation and would not require a General Plan Amendment.  As such, the proposed project is not  anticipated to exceed the AQMP assumptions for the project site and is found to be consistent with the  AQMP for the second criterion.  Based on the above, the proposed project will not result in an inconsistency with the SCAQMD AQMP.   Therefore, a less than significant impact will occur in relation to implementation of the AQMP.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 56    Level of Significance   Less than significant impact.  10.3 Cumulative Net Increase in Non‐Attainment Pollution  The proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant  for which the project region is non‐attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality  standard.  The following section calculates the potential air emissions associated with the construction  and operations of the proposed project and compares the emissions to the SCAQMD standards.  Construction Emissions  The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include demolition of the existing  commercial building located in the northwest corner and the public alleyways on the project site, grading  of the 2.26‐acre project site, building construction of the apartment complex, application of architectural  coatings and paving of the onsite roads and parking areas, sidewalks and hardscapes as well as paving of  the reconfigured public alleyway on the southeast corner of the project site.  The construction emissions  have been analyzed for both regional and local air quality impacts.  Construction‐Related Regional Impacts  The CalEEMod model has been utilized to calculate the construction‐related regional emissions from the  proposed project and the input parameters utilized in this analysis have been detailed in Section 7.1.  The  worst‐case summer or winter daily construction‐related criteria pollutant emissions from the proposed  project for each phase of construction activities are shown below in Table K and the CalEEMod daily  printouts are shown in Appendix A.  Since it is possible that building construction and architectural coating  activities may occur concurrently towards the end of the building construction phase, Table K also shows  the combined regional criteria pollutant emissions from building construction (year 2023) and  architectural coating phases of construction.  Table K shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the regional emissions  thresholds during either demolition, grading, paving or the combined building construction and  architectural coatings phases.  Therefore, a less than significant regional air quality impact would occur  from construction of the proposed project.                      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 57    Table K – Construction‐Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions    Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)  Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5  Demolition                   Onsite1 1.69 16.62 13.96 0.02 1.45 0.88  Offsite2 0.11 2.04 0.96 0.01 0.30 0.24  Total 1.80 18.66 14.92 0.03 1.74 1.11  Grading                   Onsite 1.54 16.98 9.22 0.02 3.70 2.20  Offsite 0.14 3.37 1.30 0.01 0.37 0.11  Total 1.68 20.35 10.52 0.03 4.06 2.31  Building Construction (year 2022)              Onsite 1.86 14.60 14.35 0.03 0.70 0.67  Offsite 0.40 1.97 3.04 0.01 1.14 0.31  Total 2.26 16.57 17.39 0.04 1.85 0.99  Combined Building Construction (year 2023) and Architectural Coatings       Onsite 7.75 14.93 16.03 0.03 0.68 0.66  Offsite 0.44 1.54 3.31 0.01 1.34 0.37  Total 8.18 16.47 19.34 0.04 2.03 1.02  Paving         Onsite 0.98 8.61 11.68 0.02 0.43 0.40  Offsite 0.06 0.03 0.40 0.00 0.17 0.05  Total 1.03 8.64 12.08 0.02 0.60 0.45  Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 8.18 20.35 19.34 0.04 4.06 2.31  SCQAMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55  Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No  Notes:  1 Onsite emissions from equipment not operated on public roads.  2 Offsite emissions from vehicles operating on public roads.  Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.   Construction‐Related Local Impacts  Construction‐related air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality  standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to  create a regional impact to the Air Basin.    The local air quality emissions from construction were analyzed through utilizing the methodology  described in Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (LST Methodology), prepared by SCAQMD,  revised October 2009.  The LST Methodology found the primary criteria pollutant emissions of concern  are NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.  In order to determine if any of these pollutants require a detailed analysis  of the local air quality impacts, each phase of construction was screened using the SCAQMD’s Mass Rate  LST Look‐up Tables.  The Look‐up Tables were developed by the SCAQMD in order to readily determine if  the daily onsite emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 from the proposed project could result in a  significant impact to the local air quality.        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 58    Table L shows the onsite emissions from the CalEEMod model for the different construction phases and  the calculated localized emissions thresholds that have been detailed above in Section 8.2. Since it is  possible that building construction and architectural coating activities may occur concurrently towards  the end of the building construction phase, Table L also shows the combined local criteria pollutant  emissions from year 2023 building construction and architectural coating phases of construction.  Table L – Construction‐Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions   Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1  Construction Phase NOx CO PM10 PM2.5  Demolition2 16.88 14.08 1.48 0.90  Grading2 17.40 9.38 3.74 2.21  Building Construction (Year 2022)  14.85 14.73 0.84 0.71  Combined Building Construction and Architectural Coatings  (Year 2023)  15.12 16.44 0.85 0.70  Paving 8.61 11.73 0.45 0.41  Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 17.40 16.44 3.74 2.21  SCAQMD Local Construction Thresholds3 115 715 6 4  Exceeds Threshold? No No No No  Notes:  1 The Pollutant Emissions include 100% of the On‐Site emissions (off‐road equipment and fugitive dust) and 1/8 of the Off‐Site emissions (on  road trucks and worker vehicles), in order to account for the on‐road emissions that occur within a ¼ mile of the project site.   2 Demolition and Grading phases based on adherence to fugitive dust suppression requirements from SCAQMD Rule 403.  3 The nearest offsite sensitive receptors are site are mobile homes located adjacent to the south of the project site. According to SCAQMD  methodology, all receptors closer than 25 meters are based on the 25‐meter threshold.    Source: Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look‐up Tables for two acres in Air Monitoring Area 17, Central Orange County.     The data provided in Table L shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the local  emissions thresholds during either demolition, grading, building construction, paving or the combined  building construction and application of architectural coatings phases.  Therefore, a less than significant  local air quality impact would occur from construction of the proposed project.  Operational Emissions  The on‐going operation of the proposed project would result in a long‐term increase in air quality  emissions.  This increase would be due to emissions from the project‐generated vehicle trips, emissions  from energy usage, onsite area source emissions created from the on‐going use of the proposed project.   The following section provides an analysis of potential long‐term air quality impacts due to regional air  quality and local air quality impacts with the on‐going operations of the proposed project.   Operations‐Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Analysis  The operations‐related regional criteria air quality impacts created by the proposed project have been  analyzed through use of the CalEEMod model and the input parameters utilized in this analysis have been  detailed in Section 8.1.  The worst‐case summer or winter VOC, NOx, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 daily  emissions created from the proposed project’s long‐term operations have been calculated and are  summarized below in Table M and the CalEEMod daily emissions printouts are shown in Appendix A.        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 59    Table M – Operational Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions    Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)  Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5  Area Sources1 2.31 0.10 7.10 0.00 0.04 0.04  Energy Usage2 0.03 0.24 0.11 0.00 0.02 0.02  Mobile Sources3 0.58 1.90 6.04 0.02 2.06 0.56  Total Emissions 2.92 2.24 13.25 0.02 2.12 0.62  SCQAMD Operational Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55  Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No  Notes:  1 Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, hearths, and landscaping equipment.  2 Energy usage consist of emissions from natural gas usage (non‐hearth).  3 Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust.  Source: Calculated from CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.    The data provided in Table M shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the  regional emissions thresholds.  Therefore, a less than significant regional air quality impact would occur  from operation of the proposed project.  In Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502 (also referred to as “Friant Ranch”), the California  Supreme Court held that when an EIR concluded that when a project would have significant impacts to  air quality impacts, an EIR should “make a reasonable effort to substantively connect a project’s air quality  impacts to likely health consequences.” In order to determine compliance with this Case, the Court  developed a multi‐part test that includes the following:   1) The air quality discussion shall describe the specific health risks created from each criteria  pollutant, including diesel particulate matter.    This Analysis details the specific health risks created from each criteria pollutant above in Section 4.1 and  specifically in Table B.  In addition, the specific health risks created from diesel particulate matter is  detailed above in Section 2.2 of this analysis.  As such, this analysis meets the part 1 requirements of the  Friant Ranch Case.  2) The analysis shall identify the magnitude of the health risks created from the Project.  The Ruling  details how to identify the magnitude of the health risks.  Specifically, on page 24 of the ruling it  states “The Court of Appeal identified several ways in which the EIR could have framed the  analysis so as to adequately inform the public and decision makers of possible adverse health  effects.  The County could have, for example, identified the Project’s impact on the days of  nonattainment per year.”    The Friant Ranch Case found that an EIR's air quality analysis must meaningfully connect the identified air  quality impacts to the human health consequences of those impacts, or meaningfully explain why that  analysis cannot be provided.  As noted in the Brief of Amicus Curiae by the SCAQMD in the Friant Ranch  case (https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/9‐s219783‐ac‐south‐coast‐air‐quality‐mgt‐dist‐041315.pdf)  (Brief), SCAQMD has among the most sophisticated air quality modeling and health impact evaluation  capability of any of the air districts in the State, and thus it is uniquely situated to express an opinion on  how lead agencies should correlate air quality impacts with specific health outcomes.  The SCAQMD  discusses that it may be infeasible to quantify health risks caused by projects similar to the proposed      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 60    Project, due to many factors.  It is necessary to have data regarding the sources and types of air toxic  contaminants, location of emission points, velocity of emissions, the meteorology and topography of the  area, and the location of receptors (worker and residence).   The Brief states that it may not be feasible  to perform a health risk assessment for airborne toxics that will be emitted by a generic industrial building  that was built on "speculation" (i.e., without knowing the future tenant(s)).  Even where a health risk  assessment can be prepared, however, the resulting maximum health risk value is only a calculation of  risk, it does not necessarily mean anyone will contract cancer as a result of the Project. The Brief also cites  the author of the CARB methodology, which reported that a PM2.5 methodology is not suited for small  projects and may yield unreliable results.  Similarly, SCAQMD staff does not currently know of a way to  accurately quantify ozone‐related health impacts caused by NOX or VOC emissions from relatively small  projects, due to photochemistry and regional model limitations. The Brief concludes, with respect to the  Friant Ranch EIR, that although it may have been technically possible to plug the data into a methodology,  the results would not have been reliable or meaningful.    On the other hand, for extremely large regional projects (unlike the proposed project), the SCAQMD states  that it has been able to correlate potential health outcomes for very large emissions sources – as part of  their rulemaking activity, specifically 6,620 pounds per day of NOx and 89,180 pounds per day of VOC  were expected to result in approximately 20 premature deaths per year and 89,947 school absences due  to ozone.  As shown above in Table K, project‐related construction activities would generate a maximum  of 8.18 pounds per day of VOC and 20.3 pounds per day of NOx and as shown above in Table M, operation  of the proposed project would generate 2.92 pounds per day of VOC and 2.24 pounds per day NOx. The  proposed project would not generate anywhere near these levels of 6,620 pounds per day of NOx or  89,190 pounds per day of VOC emissions. Therefore, the proposed project’s emissions are not sufficiently  high enough to use a regional modeling program to correlate health effects on a basin‐wide level.   Notwithstanding, this analysis does evaluate the proposed project’s localized impact to air quality for  emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 by comparing the proposed project’s onsite emissions to the  SCAQMD’s applicable LST thresholds.  As evaluated in this analysis, the proposed project would not result  in emissions that exceeded the SCAQMD’s LSTs. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected  to exceed the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards for emissions of CO,  NOx, PM10, and PM2.5.  Operations‐Related Local Air Quality Impacts  Project‐related air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality standards  in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a  regional impact to the Air Basin.  The proposed project has been analyzed for the potential local CO  emission impacts from the project‐generated vehicular trips and from the potential local air quality  impacts from on‐site operations. The following analyzes the vehicular CO emissions and local impacts  from on‐site operations.  Local CO Hotspot Impacts from Project‐Generated Vehicular Trips  CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor  vehicles.  For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a  roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential local air quality impacts.  Local air quality  impacts can be assessed by comparing future without and with project CO levels to the State and Federal  CO standards of 20 ppm over one hour or 9 ppm over eight hours.        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 61    At the time of the 1993 Handbook, the Air Basin was designated nonattainment under the CAAQS and  NAAQS for CO. With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of  control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the Air Basin and in the state have steadily  declined. According to the SCAQMD Air Quality Data Tables, in 2007 Central Orange County had maximum  CO concentrations of 4.0 ppm for 1 hour and 2.9 ppm for 8‐hours and in 2018 Central Orange County had  maximum CO concentrations of 2.3 ppm for 1‐hour and 1.9 ppm for 8‐hours, which represent decreases  in CO concentrations of 43 percent and 34 percent, respectively between 2018 and 2007.  In 2007, the Air  Basin was designated in attainment for CO under both the CAAQS and NAAQS. SCAQMD conducted a CO  hot spot analysis for attainment at the busiest intersections in Los Angeles1 during the peak morning and  afternoon periods and did not predict a violation of CO standards.  Since the nearby intersections to the  proposed project are much smaller with less traffic than what was analyzed by the SCAQMD and since the  CO concentrations are now at least 34 percent lower than when CO was designated in attainment in 2007,  no local CO Hotspot are anticipated to be created from the proposed project and no CO Hotspot modeling  was performed.  Therefore, a less than significant long‐term air quality impact is anticipated to local air  quality with the on‐going use of the proposed project.  Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Onsite Operations   Project‐related air emissions from onsite sources such as architectural coatings, landscaping equipment,  and onsite usage of natural gas appliances may have the potential to create emissions areas that exceed  the State and Federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions  may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the Air Basin.    The local air quality emissions from onsite operations were analyzed using the SCAQMD’s Mass Rate LST  Look‐up Tables and the methodology described in LST Methodology. The Look‐up Tables were developed  by the SCAQMD in order to readily determine if the daily emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 from  the proposed project could result in a significant impact to the local air quality.  Table N shows the onsite  emissions from the CalEEMod model that includes area sources, energy usage, and vehicles operating in  the immediate vicinity of the project site and the calculated emissions thresholds.  Table N – Operations‐Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions   Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)  Onsite Emission Source NOx CO PM10 PM2.5  Area Sources 0.10 7.10 0.04 0.04  Energy Usage 0.24 0.11 0.02 0.02  Mobile Sources 0.24 0.75 0.26 0.07  Total Emissions 0.58 7.96 0.32 0.13  SCAQMD Local Operational Thresholds1 115 715 2 1  Exceeds Threshold? No No No No  Notes:  1 The nearest offsite sensitive receptors are mobile homes located adjacent to the south side of the project site. According to SCAQMD  methodology, all receptors closer than 25 meters are based on the 25‐meter threshold.    Source: Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look‐up Tables for two acres in Air Monitoring Area 17, Central Orange County.      1 The four intersections analyzed by the SCAQMD were: Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway; Wilshire  Boulevard and Veteran Avenue; Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue; and La Cienega Boulevard and Century  Boulevard.  The busiest intersection evaluated (Wilshire and Veteran) had a daily traffic volume of approximately  100,000 vehicles per day with LOS E in the morning and LOS F in the evening peak hour.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 62    The data provided in Table N shows that the on‐going operations of the proposed project would not  exceed the local NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.2.   Therefore, the on‐going operations of the proposed project would create a less than significant  operations‐related impact to local air quality due to onsite emissions and no mitigation would be required.  Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any  criteria pollutant.  Level of Significance  Less than significant impact.  10.4 Sensitive Receptors  The proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.  The  local concentrations of criteria pollutant emissions produced in the nearby vicinity of the proposed  project, which may expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations have been calculated above  in Section 10.3 for both construction and operations, which are discussed separately below.  The  discussion below also includes an analysis of the potential impacts from toxic air contaminant emissions.   The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are residents at the mobile home park located adjacent  to the south side of the project site.  The nearest school is Paul Revere Elementary School, which is located  as near as 55 feet north of the project site.  Construction‐Related Sensitive Receptor Impacts  The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include demolition of the existing  commercial building located in the northwest corner and the public alleyways on the project site, grading  of the 2.26‐acre project site, building construction of the apartment complex, application of architectural  coatings and paving of the onsite roads and parking areas, sidewalks and hardscapes as well as paving of  the reconfigured public alleyway on the southeast corner of the project site.  Construction activities may  expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of localized criteria pollutant  concentrations and from toxic air contaminant emissions created from onsite construction equipment,  which are described below.  Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Construction   The local air quality impacts from construction of the proposed project have been analyzed above in  Section 10.3 and found that the construction of the proposed project would not exceed the local NOx, CO,  PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.2.  Therefore, construction of the  proposed project would create a less than significant construction‐related impact to local air quality and  no mitigation would be required.  Toxic Air Contaminants Impacts from Construction   The greatest potential for toxic air contaminant emissions would be related to diesel particulate matter  (DPM) emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during construction of the proposed  project.  According to SCAQMD methodology, health effects from carcinogenic air toxics are usually  described in terms of “individual cancer risk”.  “Individual Cancer Risk” is the likelihood that a person  exposed to concentrations of toxic air contaminants over a 70‐year lifetime will contract cancer, based on  the use of standard risk‐assessment methodology. It should be noted that the most current cancer risk      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 63    assessment methodology recommends analyzing a 30‐year exposure period for the nearby sensitive  receptors (OEHHA, 2015).  Given the relatively limited number of heavy‐duty construction equipment, the varying distances that  construction equipment would operate to the nearby sensitive receptors, and the short‐term construction  schedule, the proposed project would not result in a long‐term (i.e., 30 or 70 years) substantial source of  toxic air contaminant emissions and corresponding individual cancer risk.  In addition, California Code of  Regulations Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449 regulates emissions from off‐road diesel  equipment in California.  This regulation limits idling of equipment to no more than five minutes, requires  equipment operators to label each piece of equipment and provide annual reports to CARB of their fleet’s  usage and emissions.  This regulation also requires systematic upgrading of the emission Tier level of each  fleet, and currently no commercial operator is allowed to purchase Tier 0 or Tier 1 equipment and by  January 2023 no commercial operator is allowed to purchase Tier 2 equipment.  In addition to the  purchase restrictions, equipment operators need to meet fleet average emissions targets that become  more stringent each year between years 2014 and 2023.  By January, 2022, 50 percent or more of all  contractors’ equipment fleets must be Tier 2 or higher.  Therefore, no significant short‐term toxic air  contaminant impacts would occur during construction of the proposed project.  As such, construction of  the proposed project would result in a less than significant exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial  pollutant concentrations.  Operations‐Related Sensitive Receptor Impacts  The on‐going operations of the proposed project may expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant  concentrations of local CO emission impacts from the project‐generated vehicular trips and from the  potential local air quality impacts from onsite operations. The following analyzes the vehicular CO  emissions. Local criteria pollutant impacts from onsite operations, and toxic air contaminant impacts.    Local CO Hotspot Impacts from Project‐Generated Vehicle Trips  CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor  vehicles.  For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a  roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential impacts to sensitive receptors.  The analysis  provided above in Section 9.3 shows that no local CO Hotspots are anticipated to be created at any nearby  intersections from the vehicle traffic generated by the proposed project.  Therefore, operation of the  proposed project would result in a less than significant exposure of offsite sensitive receptors to  substantial pollutant concentrations.  Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Onsite Operations   The local air quality impacts from the operation of the proposed project would occur from onsite sources  such as architectural coatings, landscaping equipment, and onsite usage of natural gas appliances. The  analysis provided above in Section 10.3 found that the operation of the proposed project would not  exceed the local NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.2.   Therefore, the on‐going operations of the proposed project would create a less than significant  operations‐related impact to local air quality due to on‐site emissions and no mitigation would be  required.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 64    Operations‐Related Toxic Air Contaminant Impacts  Particulate matter (PM) from diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in most areas and according to The  California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality 2013 Edition, prepared by CARB, about 80 percent of the  outdoor TAC cancer risk is from diesel exhaust.  Some chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and  formaldehyde have been listed as carcinogens by State Proposition 65 and the Federal Hazardous Air  Pollutants program.  Due to the nominal number of diesel truck trips that are anticipated to be generated  by the on‐going operation of the proposed seven single‐family homes, a less than significant TAC impact  would be created from the on‐going operations of the proposed project and no mitigation would be  required.  DSEIR No. 330 includes Mitigation Measure 5.2‐7 (see Section 1.5 above) that is applicable to the proposed  project and requires the preparation of an HRA that analyzes the impacts to the proposed residents, if the  following three conditions occur at the project site:  1) 1,000 feet from the truck bays of an existing distribution centers that accommodate more  than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units, or  where transport refrigeration unit operations exceed 300 hours per week;   The nearest truck bays for an existing distribution center is located as near as 750 feet to the southeast of  the project site, however this facility is currently utilized as a gymnasium (Open Gym Premier) and the  truck bay area is utilized for automobile parking.  There are no other distribution centers with truck bays  that are located within 1,000 feet of the project site.  As such, the proposed project does not meet item  1) requirements for the preparation of an HRA.    2) 1,000 feet of an industrial facility which emits toxic air contaminants; or  The area within 1,000 feet of the project site was searched with the SCAQMD Facility Information Detail  (FIND) Facilities Map, and no facilities that emit known TAC emissions were found within 1,000 feet of the  project site.  As such, the proposed project does not meet item 2) requirements for the preparation of an  HRA.  3) 500 feet of Interstate 5 (I‐5), SR‐91, SR‐57 or SR‐ 55, shall submit a health risk assessment (HRA)  prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the state Office of Environmental Health  Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and the SCAQMD.  The nearest freeway to the project site is Interstate 5 that is located as near as 800 feet to the southwest  of the project site.  As such, the proposed project does not meet item 3) requirements for the preparation  of an HRA.    As detailed above, the project site is not located in any areas that have the potential to have elevated  levels of TAC contaminants, where the impacts to the proposed residents would need to be analyzed per  the requirements of Mitigation Measure 5.2‐7 from DSEIR No. 330.  Therefore, operation of the proposed  project would result in a less than significant exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant  concentrations.  Level of Significance  Less than significant impact.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 65    10.5 Odor Emissions   The proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.   Individual responses to odors are highly variable and can result in a variety of effects.  Generally, the  impact of an odor results from a variety of factors such as frequency, duration, offensiveness, location,  and sensory perception.  The frequency is a measure of how often an individual is exposed to an odor in  the ambient environment.  The intensity refers to an individual’s or group’s perception of the odor  strength or concentration.  The duration of an odor refers to the elapsed time over which an odor is  experienced.  The offensiveness of the odor is the subjective rating of the pleasantness or unpleasantness  of an odor.  The location accounts for the type of area in which a potentially affected person lives, works,  or visits; the type of activity in which he or she is engaged; and the sensitivity of the impacted receptor.    Sensory perception has four major components: detectability, intensity, character, and hedonic tone.  The  detection (or threshold) of an odor is based on a panel of responses to the odor.  There are two types of  thresholds: the odor detection threshold and the recognition threshold.  The detection threshold is the  lowest concentration of an odor that will elicit a response in a percentage of the people that live and work  in the immediate vicinity of the project site and is typically presented as the mean (or 50 percent of the  population).  The recognition threshold is the minimum concentration that is recognized as having a  characteristic odor quality, this is typically represented by recognition by 50 percent of the population.   The intensity refers to the perceived strength of the odor.  The odor character is what the substance smells  like.  The hedonic tone is a judgment of the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the odor.  The hedonic  tone varies in subjective experience, frequency, odor character, odor intensity, and duration. Potential  odor impacts have been analyzed separately for construction and operations below.  Construction‐Related Odor Impacts  Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the application of coatings  such as asphalt pavement, paints and solvents and from emissions from diesel equipment.  Standard  construction requirements that limit the time of day when construction may occur as well as SCAQMD  Rule 1108 that limits VOC content in asphalt and Rule 1113 that limits the VOC content in paints and  solvents would minimize odor impacts from construction.  As such, the objectionable odors that may be  produced during the construction process would be temporary and would not likely be noticeable for  extended periods of time beyond the project site’s boundaries.  Through compliance with the applicable  regulations that reduce odors and due to the transitory nature of construction odors, a less than  significant odor impact would occur and no mitigation would be required.  Operations‐Related Odor Impacts  The proposed project would consist of the development of an apartment complex.  Potential sources that  may emit odors during the on‐going operations of the proposed project would primarily occur from the  trash storage areas.  Pursuant to City regulations, permanent trash enclosures that protect trash bins from  rain as well as limit air circulation would be required for the trash storage areas.  Due to the distance of  the nearest receptors from the project site and through compliance with SCAQMD’s Rule 402 and City  trash storage regulations, no significant impact related to odors would occur during the on‐going  operations of the proposed project.  Therefore, a less than significant odor impact would occur and no  mitigation would be required.  Level of Significance   Less than significant impact.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 66    10.6 Energy Consumption  The proposed project would impact energy resources during construction and operation.  Energy  resources that would be potentially impacted include electricity, natural gas, and petroleum based fuel  supplies and distribution systems.   This analysis includes a discussion of the potential energy impacts of  the proposed projects, with particular emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and  unnecessary consumption of energy.  A general definition of each of these energy resources are provided  below.  Electricity, a consumptive utility, is a man‐made resource. The production of electricity requires the  consumption or conversion of energy resources, including water, wind, oil, gas, coal, solar, geothermal,  and nuclear resources, into energy. The delivery of electricity involves a number of system components,  including substations and transformers that lower transmission line power (voltage) to a level appropriate  for on‐site distribution and use. The electricity generated is distributed through a network of transmission  and distribution lines commonly called a power grid. Conveyance of electricity through transmission lines  is typically responsive to market demands.  In 2019, the City of Anaheim Public Utilities provided 2,237.11  Gigawatt‐hours per year of electricity to the City2 (http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx).   Natural gas is a combustible mixture of simple hydrocarbon compounds (primarily methane) that is used  as a fuel source.  Natural gas consumed in California is obtained from naturally occurring reservoirs, mainly  located outside the State, and delivered through high‐pressure transmission pipelines. The natural gas  transportation system is a nationwide network and, therefore, resource availability is typically not an  issue. Natural gas satisfies almost one‐third of the State’s total energy requirements and is used in  electricity generation, space heating, cooking, water heating, industrial processes, and as a transportation  fuel.  Natural gas is measured in terms of cubic feet.   In 2019, Orange County consumed 623.146 Million  Therms of natural gas3.  Petroleum‐based fuels currently account for a majority of the California’s transportation energy sources  and primarily consist of diesel and gasoline types of fuels.  However, the state has been working on  developing strategies to reduce petroleum use. Over the last decade California has implemented several  policies, rules, and regulations to improve vehicle efficiency, increase the development and use of  alternative fuels, reduce air pollutants and GHG emissions from the transportation sector, and reduce  vehicle miles traveled (VMT).  Accordingly, petroleum‐based fuel consumption in California has declined.  In 2017, 1,382 million gallons of gasoline and 61 million gallons of diesel was sold in Orange County4.    The following section calculates the potential energy consumption associated with the construction and  operations of the proposed project and provides a determination if any energy utilized by the proposed  project is wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.  Construction Energy   The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include demolition of the existing  commercial building located in the northwest corner and the public alleyways on the project site, grading  of the 2.26‐acre project site, building construction of the apartment complex, application of architectural  coatings and paving of the onsite roads and parking areas, sidewalks and hardscapes as well as paving of    2 Obtained from: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx  3 Obtained from: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx  4 Obtained from: https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/almanac/transportation_data/gasoline/      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 67    the reconfigured public alleyway on the southeast corner of the project site.  The proposed project would  consume energy resources during construction in three (3) general forms:   1. Petroleum‐based fuels used to power off‐road construction vehicles and equipment on the  Project Site, construction worker travel to and from the Project Site, as well as delivery and haul  truck trips (e.g. hauling of demolition material to off‐site reuse and disposal facilities);   2. Electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during Project  construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary  lighting during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating  electrical power; and,  3. Energy used in the production of construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes,  and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass.  Construction‐Related Electricity   During construction the proposed project would consume electricity to construct the new structures and  infrastructure. Electricity would be supplied to the project site by Anaheim Public Utilities and would be  obtained from the existing electrical lines in the vicinity of the project site.  The use of electricity from  existing power lines rather than temporary diesel or gasoline powered generators would minimize  impacts on energy use.  Electricity consumed during project construction would vary throughout the  construction period based on the construction activities being performed. Various construction activities  include electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during project  construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary lighting  during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power.   Such electricity demand would be temporary, nominal, and would cease upon the completion of  construction. Overall, construction activities associated with the proposed project would require limited  electricity consumption that would not be expected to have an adverse impact on available electricity  supplies and infrastructure. Therefore, the use of electricity during project construction would not be  wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.  Since the project site already has electrical service, it is anticipated that only nominal improvements would  be required to Anaheim Public Utilities distribution lines and equipment with development of the  proposed project.  Where feasible, the new service installations and connections would be scheduled and  implemented in a manner that would not result in electrical service interruptions to other properties.   Compliance with City’s guidelines and requirements would ensure that the proposed project fulfills its  responsibilities relative to infrastructure installation, coordinates any electrical infrastructure removals or  relocations, and limits any impacts associated with demolition, grading, construction, and development.   Construction of the project’s electrical infrastructure is not anticipated to adversely affect the electrical  infrastructure serving the surrounding uses or utility system capacity.   Construction‐Related Natural Gas   Construction of the proposed project typically would not involve the consumption of natural gas.  Natural  gas would not be supplied to support construction activities, thus there would be no demand generated  by construction. Since the project site is adjacent to roads that currently have natural gas lines,  construction of the proposed project would be limited to installation of new natural gas connections  within the project site.  Development of the proposed project would likely not require extensive  infrastructure improvements to serve the project site.  Construction‐related energy usage impacts      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 68    associated with the installation of natural gas connections are expected to be confined to trenching in  order to place the lines below surface.  In addition, prior to ground disturbance, the proposed project  would notify and coordinate with SoCalGas to identify the locations and depth of all existing gas lines and  avoid disruption of gas service.  Therefore, construction‐related impacts to natural gas supply and  infrastructure would be less than significant.  Construction‐Related Petroleum Fuel Use   Petroleum‐based fuel usage represents the highest amount of transportation energy potentially  consumed during construction, which would be utilized by both off‐road equipment operating on the  project site and on‐road automobiles transporting workers to and from the project site and on‐road trucks  transporting equipment and supplies to the project site.    The off‐road construction equipment fuel usage was calculated through use of the off‐road equipment  assumptions and fuel use assumptions shown above in Section 8.2, which found that the off‐road  equipment utilized during construction of the proposed project would consume 21,366 gallons of fuel.   The on‐road construction trips fuel usage was calculated through use of the construction vehicle trip  assumptions and fuel use assumptions shown above in Section 8.2, which found that the on‐road trips  generated from construction of the proposed project would consume 41,871 gallons of fuel.  As such, the  combined fuel used from off‐road construction equipment and on‐road construction trips for the  proposed project would result in the consumption of 63,237 gallons of petroleum fuel.  This equates to  0.004 percent of the gasoline and diesel consumed annually in Orange County.  As such, the construction‐ related petroleum use would be nominal, when compared to current county‐wide petroleum usage rates.  Construction activities associated with the proposed project would be required to adhere to all State and  SCAQMD regulations for off‐road equipment and on‐road trucks, which provide minimum fuel efficiency  standards.  As such, construction activities for the proposed project would not result in the wasteful,  inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources.  Impacts regarding transportation energy  would be less than significant.  Development of the project would not result in the need to manufacture  construction materials or create new building material facilities specifically to supply the proposed  project.  It is difficult to measure the energy used in the production of construction materials such as  asphalt, steel, and concrete, it is reasonable to assume that the production of building materials such as  concrete, steel, etc., would employ all reasonable energy conservation practices in the interest of  minimizing the cost of doing business.  Operational Energy  The on‐going operation of the proposed project would require the use of energy resources for multiple  purposes including, but not limited to, heating/ventilating/air conditioning (HVAC), refrigeration, lighting,  appliances, and electronics.  Energy would also be consumed during operations related to water usage,  solid waste disposal, landscape equipment and vehicle trips.  Operations‐Related Electricity  Operation of the proposed project would result in consumption of electricity at the project site.  As  detailed above in Section 8.2 the proposed project would consume 364,017 kilowatt‐hours per year of  electricity.  This equates to 0.016 percent of the electricity consumed annually by Anaheim Public Utilities.  As such, the operations‐related electricity use would be nominal, when compared to current electricity  usage rates in the City.  It should be noted that, the proposed project would comply with all Federal, State,  and City requirements related to the consumption of electricity, that includes CCR Title 24, Part 6 Building      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 69    Energy Efficiency Standards and CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards.  The CCR Title  24, Part 6 and Part 11 standards require numerous energy efficiency measures to be incorporated into  the proposed buildings, including enhanced insulation, use of energy efficient lighting and appliances as  well as requiring a variety of other energy‐efficiency measures to be incorporated into all of the proposed  structures.  In addition, the project applicant has committed to installing a rooftop solar PV system that  was not included in the above electricity use calculations.  Therefore, it is anticipated the proposed project  will be designed and built to minimize electricity use and that existing and planned electricity capacity and  electricity supplies would be sufficient to support the proposed project’s electricity demand. Thus,  impacts with regard to electrical supply and infrastructure capacity would be less than significant and no  mitigation measures would be required.  Operations‐Related Natural Gas   Operation of the proposed project would result in increased consumption of natural gas at the project  site.  As detailed above in Section 8.2 the proposed project would consume 962 MBTU per year of natural  gas.  This equates to 0.00015 percent of the natural gas consumed annually in Orange County. As such,  the operations‐related natural gas use would be nominal, when compared to current natural gas usage  rates in the County.  It should be noted that, the proposed project would comply with all Federal, State, and County  requirements related to the consumption of natural gas, that includes CCR Title 24, Part 6 Building Energy  Efficiency Standards and CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards.  The CCR Title 24, Part  6 and Part 11 standards require numerous energy efficiency measures to be incorporated into the  proposed structures, including enhanced insulation as well as use of efficient natural gas appliances and  HVAC units.  Therefore, it is anticipated the proposed project will be designed and built to minimize  natural gas use and that existing and planned natural gas capacity and natural gas supplies would be  sufficient to support the proposed project’s natural gas demand.  Thus, impacts with regard to natural gas  supply and infrastructure capacity would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be  required.  Operations‐Related Vehicular Petroleum Fuel Usage  Operation of the proposed project would result in increased consumption of petroleum‐based fuels  related to vehicular travel to and from the project site.  As detailed above in Section 8.2 the proposed  project would consume 37,048 gallons of petroleum fuel per year from vehicle travel.  This equates to  0.0026 percent of the gasoline and diesel consumed in Orange County annually. As such, the operations‐ related petroleum use would be nominal, when compared to current petroleum usage rates  It should be noted that, the proposed project would comply with all Federal, State, and City requirements  related to the consumption of transportation energy that includes California Code of Regulations Title 24,  Part 10 California Green Building Standards that require the proposed project to include 12 electric vehicle  charging spaces on the project site as well as providing preferred Clean Air vehicle parking spaces.  The  proposed project would also be located next to an existing OCTA Bus Stop, which will encourage the use  of public transportation.  Therefore, it is anticipated the proposed project will be designed and built to  minimize transportation energy through the promotion of the use of electric‐powered vehicles and it is  anticipated that existing and planned capacity and supplies of transportation fuels would be sufficient to  support the proposed project’s demand. Thus, impacts with regard transportation energy supply and  infrastructure capacity would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 70    In conclusion, the proposed project would comply with regulatory compliance measures outlined by the  State and City related to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG), Transportation/Circulation, and  Water Supply.  Additionally, the proposed project would be constructed in accordance with all applicable  City Building and Fire Codes.  Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient,  or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation.  Impacts would  be less than significant.  Level of Significance   Less than significant impact.  10.7 Energy Plan Consistency  The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or  energy efficiency.  The applicable energy plan for the proposed project is the City of Anaheim General Plan  Green Element, adopted May 2004.  The proposed project’s consistency with the energy conservation  policies from the General Plan are shown in Table O.   Table O – Proposed Project Compliance with the General Plan Energy Conservation Policies  General Plan Policy Proposed Project Implementation Actions  Continue to maintain and update energy conservation  programs and information provided on the City’s  website.  Not Applicable.  The policy is only applicable to City Staff  for maintain the City’s website.  Encourage increased use of passive and active solar  design in existing and new development (e.g.,  orienting buildings to maximize exposure to cooling,  effects of prevailing winds and locating landscaping  and landscape structures to shade buildings).  Consistent.  The project applicant has committed to  installing a rooftop solar PV system on the proposed  apartment complex, in addition the project has been  designed to orient buildings to maximize exposure to  cooling and the landscape plan has been designed to  locate landscaping to shade structures.  Encourage energy‐efficient retrofitting of existing  buildings throughout the City.  Not Applicable.  The proposed project consists of the  demolition of the existing structures on the project site  and construction of new buildings.  No existing structures  would remain onsite that could be retrofitted.  Continue to provide free energy audits for the public. Not Applicable.  The policy is only applicable for the City  as a service that the City provides.  Source: City of Anaheim, 2004.   As shown in Table O, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable energy conservation  policies from the General Plan.  Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a  state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Impacts would be less than significant.  Level of Significance   Less than significant impact.  10.8 Generation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions  The proposed project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a  significant impact on the environment and would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation  of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.  The proposed project would consist of  development of an apartment complex. The proposed project is anticipated to generate GHG emissions      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 71    from area sources, energy usage, mobile sources, waste disposal, water usage, and construction  equipment.   The City of Anaheim has adopted the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan, July 2015, that details measures  for the City that includes new development within the City to implement in order to meet the State’s 2030  GHG emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 baseline levels.  In order to show consistency  with the GHG Reduction Plan, quantification of the proposed project’s GHG emissions are not required.   As such, the proposed project’s GHG emissions have been provided for informational purposes only. The  project’s GHG emissions have been calculated with the CalEEMod model based on the construction and  operational parameters detailed above in Section 8.1.  A summary of the results is shown below in Table  P and the CalEEMod model run is provided in Appendix D.  Table P – Project Related Greenhouse Gas Annual Emissions   Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons per Year)  Category CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e  Area Sources1 1.69 0.00 0.00 1.73  Energy Usage2 176.21 0.00 0.00 176.72  Mobile Sources3 362.25 0.02 0.00 362.63  Solid Waste4 4.18 0.25 0.00 10.34  Water and Wastewater5 35.91 0.15 0.00 40.90  Construction6 19.43 0.00 0.00 19.51  Total GHG Emissions 599.66 0.42 0.00 611.83  SCAQMD Draft Threshold of Significance 3,000  Notes:  1 Area sources consist of GHG emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, hearths, and landscaping equipment.  2 Energy usage consists of GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas usage.   3 Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles.  4 Waste includes the CO2 and CH4 emissions created from the solid waste placed in landfills.  5 Water includes GHG emissions from electricity used for transport of water and processing of wastewater.  6 Construction emissions amortized over 30 years as recommended in the SCAQMD GHG Working Group on November 19, 2009.  Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.    The data provided in Table P shows that the proposed project would create 611.83 MTCO2e per year. For  reference purposes Table P also shows, the SCAQMD’s draft threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e, which the  proposed project would be within this threshold, which is the threshold that was utilized in DSEIR No. 330.  In addition, as detailed below in Section 10.9, the proposed project would be consistent with the  applicable measures in the GHG Reduction Plan. Therefore, a less than significant generation of  greenhouse gas emissions would occur from development of the proposed project.  Impacts would be less  than significant.       Level of Significance   Less than significant impact.  10.9 Greenhouse Gas Plan Consistency  The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency  adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.  The Anaheim Public Utilities adopted the  Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GHG Reduction Plan), July 2015.  The GHG Reduction Plan was prepared  to assist the City’s power supplies in conforming to the GHG emissions reductions as mandated under AB      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 72    32.  The GHG Reduction Plan provides a utilities GHG emission reduction targets of 20 percent below 1990  levels by the year 2020 and a 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.   The Plan provides reduction targets  for energy usage, photovoltaic (PV) rooftop installations, and use of electric vehicles.    For energy usage, the GHG Reduction Plan provides a target of a 15 percent reduction by 2020 and a 30  percent reduction by 2030 of the energy utilized by homes in Anaheim.  This target will be met through  application of State regulations including CCR Title 24, Part 6. The 2019 Title 24 Building Standards that  went into effect on January 1, 2020, and are required to be met for the proposed project’s structures.   Homes built with the 2019 Standards will use about 7 percent less energy than the current 2016  Standards.  It should also be noted that the 2016 Title 24 Standards included new energy‐efficiency  requirements that resulted in new homes being 15 percent more efficient than the 2013 Title 24 Part 6  Standards that were in effect at the time of the preparation of the GHG Reduction Plan.  Therefore,  through implementation of the State regulations the proposed project will meet the energy use reduction  targets provided in the GHG Reduction Plan.  For PV rooftop installations, the GHG Reduction Plan provides a target of 27,000 kW of PV systems  installed by 2020 and 37,000 kW of PV systems installed by 2030.  This target will be met through  application of State regulations including Title 24, Part 6.  The project applicant has committed to installing  a rooftop PV system on the proposed apartment complex.  Therefore, through implementation of the  State regulations the proposed project will meet the PV rooftop installation targets provided in the GHG  Reduction Plan.  For electric vehicles, the GHG Reduction Plan provides a target of 2,000 low or zero emission vehicles by  2020 and 5,000 low or zero emission vehicles by 2030.  As detailed on the site plan for the proposed  project, 13 parking spaces would have electric vehicle charging stations.  Therefore, development of the  proposed project will assist the City in meeting the electric vehicle usage targets provided in the GHG  Reduction Plan.  As detailed above, development of the proposed project would meet the targets outlined in the GHG  Reduction Plan.  Therefore, the proposed project would comply with the GHG Reduction Plan reduction  targets and would not conflict with the applicable plan for reducing GHG emissions.  Impacts would be  less than significant.    Level of Significance  Less than significant impact.        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 73    11.0 REFERENCES    Breeze Software, California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2016.3.2.  California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk  Assessment Guidelines, November 1997.  California Air Resources Board, 2017 Off‐Road Diesel Emission Factor Update for NOx and PM, 2017.  California Air Resources Board, Appendix VII Risk Characterization Scenarios, October 2000.  California Air Resources Board, California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, November 2017.  California Air Resources Board, First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, May 2014.  California Air Resources Board, Resolution 08‐43, December 12, 2008.  California Air Resources Board, Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for  Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act, on October 24, 2008.  California Air Resources Board, Final Staff Report Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission  Reduction Targets, October 2017.  California Air Resources Board, The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality 2013 Edition.  California Department of Conservation, A General Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More  Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos, August, 2000.  City of Anaheim, City of Anaheim General Plan, May 2004.  City of Anaheim, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Sustainable Electric & Water Initiatives, July 2015.  Environmental Protection Agency, Nonattainment Major New Source Review Implementation Under 8‐ Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard: Reconsideration, June 30, 2005.  Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990‐2016.   International Code Council, Guide to the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code Nonresidential,  January 2017.  Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc., Midway Affordable – Traffic Statement, April 15, 2021.  Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk  Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, February 2015  South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2007 Air Quality Management Plan, June 1, 2007.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod, February  2011.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 74    South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan, December, 2012.   South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan, March, 2017.   South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, Revised  July 2008.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Revised Draft – 2012 Lead State Implementation Plan Los  Angeles County, May 4, 2012.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 402 Nuisance, Adopted May 7, 1976.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 403 Fugitive Dust, Amended June 3, 2005.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1108 Cutback Asphalt, Amended February 1, 1985.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1108.1 Emulsified Asphalt, Amended November 4,  1983.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1110.2 Emissions from Gaseous and Liquid Fueled  Engines, Amended September 7, 2019.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1113 Architectural Coatings, Amended September 6,  2013.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1143 Consumer Paint Thinners & Multi‐Purpose  Solvents, Amended December 3, 2010.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, March 2015.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Draft Report Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South  Coast Air Basin, MATES III, January 2008.  South Coast Air Quality Management District, Draft Report Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South  Coast Air Basin, MATES‐IV, October 2014.  Southern California Association of Governments, 2016‐2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable  Communities Strategy, April 2016.  Southern California Association of Governments, 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program  (FTIP) Guidelines, September 2018.  The Planning Center, Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environment Impact Report  No. 330, May 25, 2004.  The Planning Center, Draft City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Supplemental  Environmental Impact Report, July 2013.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim  Page 75    University of California, Davis, Transportation Project‐Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol, December 1997.  U.S. Geological Survey, Reported Historic Asbestos Mines, Historic Asbestos Prospects, and Other Natural  Occurrences of Asbestos in California, 2011.      Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim   Appendix  A    APPENDIX A    CalEEMod Model Daily Printouts      1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 1.70 1000sqft 0.06 1,700.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 1.50 Acre 1.50 65,340.00 0 Apartments Mid Rise 86.00 Dwelling Unit 0.70 94,450.00 246 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 8 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 30 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 2023Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 756.4 0.014CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.003N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Midway Affordable Residential Orange County, Summer CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 1 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer Project Characteristics - GHG Intensity Factors reduced by 51% to account for GHG reductions between the default year 2007 values and 2018 values. Land Use - Total project size 2.26 acres Construction Phase - Construction schedule provided by applicant. Trips and VMT - 6 vendor trips added to Demo and Grading to account for water truck emissions. Demolition - Demo - 4,590 sq ft building = 211 tons + 1 acre of paving = 1,053 tons. Total Demo = 1,264 tons Grading - Max import of 4,297 cubic yards of dirt Woodstoves - 1 natural gas only firepit in outside lounge area Energy Use - Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Water Exposed Area 2 times per day selected to account for SCAQMD Rule 403 minimum requirements. Mobile Land Use Mitigation - Urban, 36 Dwelling Units/acre, 0.01 mile to transit selected to account for OCTA Bus Stop and Improve Pedestrian Network Onsite and Connecting Offsite Energy Mitigation - Exceed Title 24 by 7% selected to account for the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 standards Water Mitigation - Install low flow fixtures and water-efficient irrigation selected to account for Title 24 Part 11 requirements Waste Mitigation - 50% reduction in waste selected to account for AB 341. CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 2 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 107.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 260.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6.00 45.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 40.00 tblFireplaces NumberGas 73.10 1.00 tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 8.60 86.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 4.30 0.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 4,297.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 86,000.00 94,450.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.04 0.06 tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.26 0.70 tblProjectCharacteristics CH4IntensityFactor 0.029 0.014 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 756.4 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.003 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 5.44 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 28.82 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 5.44 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 28.82 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 5.44 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 28.82 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 4.30 0.00 tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 4.30 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 3 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 2022 2.2127 20.3235 17.3959 0.0390 6.9210 0.8442 7.6733 3.4667 0.7888 4.1591 0.0000 3,733.467 6 3,733.467 6 0.7626 0.0000 3,745.990 6 2023 8.1328 16.4607 19.3393 0.0433 1.3350 0.6936 2.0286 0.3569 0.6673 1.0242 0.0000 4,139.293 9 4,139.293 9 0.5447 0.0000 4,151.989 6 Maximum 8.1328 20.3235 19.3393 0.0433 6.9210 0.8442 7.6733 3.4667 0.7888 4.1591 0.0000 4,139.293 9 4,139.293 9 0.7626 0.0000 4,151.989 6 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2022 2.2127 20.3235 17.3959 0.0390 3.3113 0.8442 4.0635 1.6136 0.7888 2.3061 0.0000 3,733.467 6 3,733.467 6 0.7626 0.0000 3,745.990 6 2023 8.1328 16.4607 19.3393 0.0433 1.3350 0.6936 2.0286 0.3569 0.6673 1.0242 0.0000 4,139.293 9 4,139.293 9 0.5447 0.0000 4,151.989 6 Maximum 8.1328 20.3235 19.3393 0.0433 3.3113 0.8442 4.0635 1.6136 0.7888 2.3061 0.0000 4,139.293 9 4,139.293 9 0.7626 0.0000 4,151.989 6 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 43.72 0.00 37.21 48.46 0.00 35.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 4 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Energy 0.0295 0.2523 0.1091 1.6100e- 003 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 321.7726 321.7726 6.1700e- 003 5.9000e- 003 323.6848 Mobile 0.7086 2.4653 9.7933 0.0394 3.7263 0.0262 3.7525 0.9965 0.0243 1.0208 4,004.016 0 4,004.016 0 0.1545 4,007.877 6 Total 3.0520 2.8160 17.0064 0.0415 3.7263 0.0872 3.8135 0.9965 0.0853 1.0818 0.0000 4,359.741 3 4,359.741 3 0.1733 6.2900e- 003 4,365.948 1 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 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Energy 0.0284 0.2431 0.1050 1.5500e- 003 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 309.9727 309.9727 5.9400e- 003 5.6800e- 003 311.8147 Mobile 0.5774 1.8643 6.0360 0.0223 2.0425 0.0156 2.0581 0.5462 0.0145 0.5607 2,267.085 5 2,267.085 5 0.0933 2,269.418 0 Total 2.9197 2.2057 13.2451 0.0243 2.0425 0.0758 2.1184 0.5462 0.0747 0.6209 0.0000 2,611.010 9 2,611.010 9 0.1119 6.0700e- 003 2,615.618 4 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 5 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 3/1/2022 3/28/2022 5 20 2 Grading Grading 3/29/2022 5/30/2022 5 45 3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/1/2022 5/30/2023 5 260 4 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/1/2023 5/30/2023 5 107 5 Paving Paving 6/1/2023 7/26/2023 5 40 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 4.34 21.67 22.12 41.38 45.19 13.03 44.45 45.19 12.43 42.60 0.00 40.11 40.11 35.42 3.50 40.09 Residential Indoor: 191,261; Residential Outdoor: 63,754; Non-Residential Indoor: 2,550; Non-Residential Outdoor: 850; Striped Parking Area: 3,920 (Architectural Coating ±sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 22.5 Acres of Paving: 1.5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 6 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 8.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 2 7.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 5 13.00 6.00 125.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 4 10.00 6.00 537.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 8 90.00 20.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 7 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.3524 0.0000 1.3524 0.2048 0.0000 0.2048 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.6889 16.6217 13.9605 0.0241 0.8379 0.8379 0.7829 0.7829 2,323.416 8 2,323.416 8 0.5921 2,338.219 1 Total 1.6889 16.6217 13.9605 0.0241 1.3524 0.8379 2.1903 0.2048 0.7829 0.9877 2,323.416 8 2,323.416 8 0.5921 2,338.219 1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Water Exposed Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 8 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0427 1.4599 0.4388 4.6400e- 003 0.1088 4.3100e- 003 0.1131 0.0298 4.1300e- 003 0.0339 519.6999 519.6999 0.0539 521.0479 Vendor 0.0151 0.5325 0.1474 1.4600e- 003 0.0383 1.0200e- 003 0.0394 0.0110 9.7000e- 004 0.0120 159.6916 159.6916 0.0123 159.9978 Worker 0.0443 0.0257 0.3685 1.3200e- 003 0.1453 9.2000e- 004 0.1462 0.0385 8.5000e- 004 0.0394 131.7162 131.7162 2.6600e- 003 131.7827 Total 0.1021 2.0182 0.9547 7.4200e- 003 0.2925 6.2500e- 003 0.2987 0.0794 5.9500e- 003 0.0853 811.1076 811.1076 0.0688 812.8284 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 0.6086 0.0000 0.6086 0.0922 0.0000 0.0922 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.6889 16.6217 13.9605 0.0241 0.8379 0.8379 0.7829 0.7829 0.0000 2,323.416 8 2,323.416 8 0.5921 2,338.219 1 Total 1.6889 16.6217 13.9605 0.0241 0.6086 0.8379 1.4465 0.0922 0.7829 0.8750 0.0000 2,323.416 8 2,323.416 8 0.5921 2,338.219 1 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 9 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0427 1.4599 0.4388 4.6400e- 003 0.1088 4.3100e- 003 0.1131 0.0298 4.1300e- 003 0.0339 519.6999 519.6999 0.0539 521.0479 Vendor 0.0151 0.5325 0.1474 1.4600e- 003 0.0383 1.0200e- 003 0.0394 0.0110 9.7000e- 004 0.0120 159.6916 159.6916 0.0123 159.9978 Worker 0.0443 0.0257 0.3685 1.3200e- 003 0.1453 9.2000e- 004 0.1462 0.0385 8.5000e- 004 0.0394 131.7162 131.7162 2.6600e- 003 131.7827 Total 0.1021 2.0182 0.9547 7.4200e- 003 0.2925 6.2500e- 003 0.2987 0.0794 5.9500e- 003 0.0853 811.1076 811.1076 0.0688 812.8284 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.5631 0.0000 6.5631 3.3691 0.0000 3.3691 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.5403 16.9836 9.2202 0.0206 0.7423 0.7423 0.6829 0.6829 1,995.482 5 1,995.482 5 0.6454 2,011.616 9 Total 1.5403 16.9836 9.2202 0.0206 6.5631 0.7423 7.3054 3.3691 0.6829 4.0520 1,995.482 5 1,995.482 5 0.6454 2,011.616 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 10 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0816 2.7875 0.8378 8.8600e- 003 0.2078 8.2400e- 003 0.2160 0.0569 7.8800e- 003 0.0648 992.2803 992.2803 0.1030 994.8541 Vendor 0.0151 0.5325 0.1474 1.4600e- 003 0.0383 1.0200e- 003 0.0394 0.0110 9.7000e- 004 0.0120 159.6916 159.6916 0.0123 159.9978 Worker 0.0341 0.0198 0.2835 1.0200e- 003 0.1118 7.1000e- 004 0.1125 0.0296 6.5000e- 004 0.0303 101.3201 101.3201 2.0500e- 003 101.3713 Total 0.1307 3.3398 1.2687 0.0113 0.3579 9.9700e- 003 0.3678 0.0975 9.5000e- 003 0.1071 1,253.292 0 1,253.292 0 0.1173 1,256.223 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 2.9534 0.0000 2.9534 1.5161 0.0000 1.5161 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.5403 16.9836 9.2202 0.0206 0.7423 0.7423 0.6829 0.6829 0.0000 1,995.482 5 1,995.482 5 0.6454 2,011.616 9 Total 1.5403 16.9836 9.2202 0.0206 2.9534 0.7423 3.6957 1.5161 0.6829 2.1990 0.0000 1,995.482 5 1,995.482 5 0.6454 2,011.616 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 11 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0816 2.7875 0.8378 8.8600e- 003 0.2078 8.2400e- 003 0.2160 0.0569 7.8800e- 003 0.0648 992.2803 992.2803 0.1030 994.8541 Vendor 0.0151 0.5325 0.1474 1.4600e- 003 0.0383 1.0200e- 003 0.0394 0.0110 9.7000e- 004 0.0120 159.6916 159.6916 0.0123 159.9978 Worker 0.0341 0.0198 0.2835 1.0200e- 003 0.1118 7.1000e- 004 0.1125 0.0296 6.5000e- 004 0.0303 101.3201 101.3201 2.0500e- 003 101.3713 Total 0.1307 3.3398 1.2687 0.0113 0.3579 9.9700e- 003 0.3678 0.0975 9.5000e- 003 0.1071 1,253.292 0 1,253.292 0 0.1173 1,256.223 2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.8555 14.6040 14.3533 0.0250 0.7022 0.7022 0.6731 0.6731 2,289.281 3 2,289.281 3 0.4417 2,300.323 0 Total 1.8555 14.6040 14.3533 0.0250 0.7022 0.7022 0.6731 0.6731 2,289.281 3 2,289.281 3 0.4417 2,300.323 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 12 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0502 1.7751 0.4913 4.8800e- 003 0.1278 3.3900e- 003 0.1312 0.0368 3.2400e- 003 0.0400 532.3052 532.3052 0.0408 533.3261 Worker 0.3070 0.1781 2.5513 9.1400e- 003 1.0060 6.3900e- 003 1.0124 0.2668 5.8800e- 003 0.2727 911.8811 911.8811 0.0184 912.3415 Total 0.3572 1.9532 3.0426 0.0140 1.1338 9.7800e- 003 1.1435 0.3036 9.1200e- 003 0.3127 1,444.186 3 1,444.186 3 0.0593 1,445.667 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 1.8555 14.6040 14.3533 0.0250 0.7022 0.7022 0.6731 0.6731 0.0000 2,289.281 3 2,289.281 3 0.4417 2,300.323 0 Total 1.8555 14.6040 14.3533 0.0250 0.7022 0.7022 0.6731 0.6731 0.0000 2,289.281 3 2,289.281 3 0.4417 2,300.323 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 13 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0502 1.7751 0.4913 4.8800e- 003 0.1278 3.3900e- 003 0.1312 0.0368 3.2400e- 003 0.0400 532.3052 532.3052 0.0408 533.3261 Worker 0.3070 0.1781 2.5513 9.1400e- 003 1.0060 6.3900e- 003 1.0124 0.2668 5.8800e- 003 0.2727 911.8811 911.8811 0.0184 912.3415 Total 0.3572 1.9532 3.0426 0.0140 1.1338 9.7800e- 003 1.1435 0.3036 9.1200e- 003 0.3127 1,444.186 3 1,444.186 3 0.0593 1,445.667 6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.7136 13.6239 14.2145 0.0250 0.6136 0.6136 0.5880 0.5880 2,289.523 3 2,289.523 3 0.4330 2,300.347 9 Total 1.7136 13.6239 14.2145 0.0250 0.6136 0.6136 0.5880 0.5880 2,289.523 3 2,289.523 3 0.4330 2,300.347 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 14 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0382 1.3398 0.4586 4.7200e- 003 0.1278 1.6100e- 003 0.1294 0.0368 1.5400e- 003 0.0383 516.1331 516.1331 0.0380 517.0821 Worker 0.2907 0.1617 2.3793 8.7900e- 003 1.0060 6.2800e- 003 1.0123 0.2668 5.7800e- 003 0.2726 876.8245 876.8245 0.0167 877.2422 Total 0.3289 1.5014 2.8379 0.0135 1.1338 7.8900e- 003 1.1417 0.3036 7.3200e- 003 0.3109 1,392.957 6 1,392.957 6 0.0547 1,394.324 3 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 1.7136 13.6239 14.2145 0.0250 0.6136 0.6136 0.5880 0.5880 0.0000 2,289.523 3 2,289.523 3 0.4330 2,300.347 9 Total 1.7136 13.6239 14.2145 0.0250 0.6136 0.6136 0.5880 0.5880 0.0000 2,289.523 3 2,289.523 3 0.4330 2,300.347 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 15 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0382 1.3398 0.4586 4.7200e- 003 0.1278 1.6100e- 003 0.1294 0.0368 1.5400e- 003 0.0383 516.1331 516.1331 0.0380 517.0821 Worker 0.2907 0.1617 2.3793 8.7900e- 003 1.0060 6.2800e- 003 1.0123 0.2668 5.7800e- 003 0.2726 876.8245 876.8245 0.0167 877.2422 Total 0.3289 1.5014 2.8379 0.0135 1.1338 7.8900e- 003 1.1417 0.3036 7.3200e- 003 0.3109 1,392.957 6 1,392.957 6 0.0547 1,394.324 3 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.8404 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 6.0321 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 16 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0582 0.0323 0.4759 1.7600e- 003 0.2012 1.2600e- 003 0.2025 0.0534 1.1600e- 003 0.0545 175.3649 175.3649 3.3400e- 003 175.4484 Total 0.0582 0.0323 0.4759 1.7600e- 003 0.2012 1.2600e- 003 0.2025 0.0534 1.1600e- 003 0.0545 175.3649 175.3649 3.3400e- 003 175.4484 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 5.8404 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 6.0321 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 17 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0582 0.0323 0.4759 1.7600e- 003 0.2012 1.2600e- 003 0.2025 0.0534 1.1600e- 003 0.0545 175.3649 175.3649 3.3400e- 003 175.4484 Total 0.0582 0.0323 0.4759 1.7600e- 003 0.2012 1.2600e- 003 0.2025 0.0534 1.1600e- 003 0.0545 175.3649 175.3649 3.3400e- 003 175.4484 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 0.8802 8.6098 11.6840 0.0179 0.4338 0.4338 0.4003 0.4003 1,709.992 6 1,709.992 6 0.5420 1,723.541 4 Paving 0.0983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9785 8.6098 11.6840 0.0179 0.4338 0.4338 0.4003 0.4003 1,709.992 6 1,709.992 6 0.5420 1,723.541 4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 18 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0485 0.0270 0.3966 1.4600e- 003 0.1677 1.0500e- 003 0.1687 0.0445 9.6000e- 004 0.0454 146.1374 146.1374 2.7800e- 003 146.2070 Total 0.0485 0.0270 0.3966 1.4600e- 003 0.1677 1.0500e- 003 0.1687 0.0445 9.6000e- 004 0.0454 146.1374 146.1374 2.7800e- 003 146.2070 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 0.8802 8.6098 11.6840 0.0179 0.4338 0.4338 0.4003 0.4003 0.0000 1,709.992 6 1,709.992 6 0.5420 1,723.541 4 Paving 0.0983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9785 8.6098 11.6840 0.0179 0.4338 0.4338 0.4003 0.4003 0.0000 1,709.992 6 1,709.992 6 0.5420 1,723.541 4 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 19 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile Increase Density Increase Transit Accessibility Improve Pedestrian Network 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0485 0.0270 0.3966 1.4600e- 003 0.1677 1.0500e- 003 0.1687 0.0445 9.6000e- 004 0.0454 146.1374 146.1374 2.7800e- 003 146.2070 Total 0.0485 0.0270 0.3966 1.4600e- 003 0.1677 1.0500e- 003 0.1687 0.0445 9.6000e- 004 0.0454 146.1374 146.1374 2.7800e- 003 146.2070 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 20 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 0.5774 1.8643 6.0360 0.0223 2.0425 0.0156 2.0581 0.5462 0.0145 0.5607 2,267.085 5 2,267.085 5 0.0933 2,269.418 0 Unmitigated 0.7086 2.4653 9.7933 0.0394 3.7263 0.0262 3.7525 0.9965 0.0243 1.0208 4,004.016 0 4,004.016 0 0.1545 4,007.877 6 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Apartments Mid Rise 467.84 467.84 467.84 1,598,680 876,297 General Office Building 48.99 48.99 48.99 157,832 86,514 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 516.83 516.83 516.83 1,756,513 962,811 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 21 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 0.0284 0.2431 0.1050 1.5500e- 003 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 309.9727 309.9727 5.9400e- 003 5.6800e- 003 311.8147 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0295 0.2523 0.1091 1.6100e- 003 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 321.7726 321.7726 6.1700e- 003 5.9000e- 003 323.6848 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Mid Rise 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 General Office Building 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 22 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Mid Rise 2692.5 0.0290 0.2481 0.1056 1.5800e- 003 0.0201 0.0201 0.0201 0.0201 316.7644 316.7644 6.0700e- 003 5.8100e- 003 318.6468 General Office Building 42.5699 4.6000e- 004 4.1700e- 003 3.5100e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.2000e- 004 3.2000e- 004 3.2000e- 004 3.2000e- 004 5.0082 5.0082 1.0000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 5.0380 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0295 0.2523 0.1091 1.6100e- 003 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 321.7726 321.7726 6.1700e- 003 5.9000e- 003 323.6848 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 Apartments Mid Rise 2.595 0.0280 0.2392 0.1018 1.5300e- 003 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 305.2940 305.2940 5.8500e- 003 5.6000e- 003 307.1082 General Office Building 0.0397693 4.3000e- 004 3.9000e- 003 3.2800e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 4.6787 4.6787 9.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 005 4.7065 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0284 0.2431 0.1050 1.5500e- 003 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 309.9727 309.9727 5.9400e- 003 5.6900e- 003 311.8147 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 23 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area 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 Mitigated 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Unmitigated 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 24 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 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 0.1712 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.9269 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 1.9400e- 003 0.0166 7.0600e- 003 1.1000e- 004 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 0.0000 21.1765 21.1765 4.1000e- 004 3.9000e- 004 21.3023 Landscaping 0.2138 0.0818 7.0970 3.7000e- 004 0.0393 0.0393 0.0393 0.0393 12.7762 12.7762 0.0123 13.0834 Total 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 25 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower Use Water Efficient Irrigation System 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 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 0.1712 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.9269 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 1.9400e- 003 0.0166 7.0600e- 003 1.1000e- 004 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 0.0000 21.1765 21.1765 4.1000e- 004 3.9000e- 004 21.3023 Landscaping 0.2138 0.0818 7.0970 3.7000e- 004 0.0393 0.0393 0.0393 0.0393 12.7762 12.7762 0.0123 13.0834 Total 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 26 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer Institute Recycling and Composting Services 11.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:23 AMPage 27 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Summer 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 1.70 1000sqft 0.06 1,700.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 1.50 Acre 1.50 65,340.00 0 Apartments Mid Rise 86.00 Dwelling Unit 0.70 94,450.00 246 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 8 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 30 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 2023Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 756.4 0.014CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.003N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Midway Affordable Residential Orange County, Winter CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 1 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter Project Characteristics - GHG Intensity Factors reduced by 51% to account for GHG reductions between the default year 2007 values and 2018 values. Land Use - Total project size 2.26 acres Construction Phase - Construction schedule provided by applicant. Trips and VMT - 6 vendor trips added to Demo and Grading to account for water truck emissions. Demolition - Demo - 4,590 sq ft building = 211 tons + 1 acre of paving = 1,053 tons. Total Demo = 1,264 tons Grading - Max import of 4,297 cubic yards of dirt Woodstoves - 1 natural gas only firepit in outside lounge area Energy Use - Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Water Exposed Area 2 times per day selected to account for SCAQMD Rule 403 minimum requirements. Mobile Land Use Mitigation - Urban, 36 Dwelling Units/acre, 0.01 mile to transit selected to account for OCTA Bus Stop and Improve Pedestrian Network Onsite and Connecting Offsite Energy Mitigation - Exceed Title 24 by 7% selected to account for the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 standards Water Mitigation - Install low flow fixtures and water-efficient irrigation selected to account for Title 24 Part 11 requirements Waste Mitigation - 50% reduction in waste selected to account for AB 341. CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 2 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 107.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 260.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6.00 45.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 40.00 tblFireplaces NumberGas 73.10 1.00 tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 8.60 86.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 4.30 0.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 4,297.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 86,000.00 94,450.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.04 0.06 tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.26 0.70 tblProjectCharacteristics CH4IntensityFactor 0.029 0.014 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 756.4 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.003 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 5.44 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 28.82 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 5.44 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 28.82 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 5.44 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 28.82 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 4.30 0.00 tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 4.30 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 3 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 2022 2.2567 20.3540 17.2421 0.0384 6.9210 0.8443 7.6734 3.4667 0.7889 4.1593 0.0000 3,671.540 8 3,671.540 8 0.7653 0.0000 3,684.086 6 2023 8.1830 16.4721 19.1467 0.0426 1.3350 0.6937 2.0287 0.3569 0.6674 1.0243 0.0000 4,070.520 9 4,070.520 9 0.5446 0.0000 4,083.228 1 Maximum 8.1830 20.3540 19.1467 0.0426 6.9210 0.8443 7.6734 3.4667 0.7889 4.1593 0.0000 4,070.520 9 4,070.520 9 0.7653 0.0000 4,083.228 1 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2022 2.2567 20.3540 17.2421 0.0384 3.3113 0.8443 4.0637 1.6136 0.7889 2.3062 0.0000 3,671.540 8 3,671.540 8 0.7653 0.0000 3,684.086 6 2023 8.1830 16.4721 19.1467 0.0426 1.3350 0.6937 2.0287 0.3569 0.6674 1.0243 0.0000 4,070.520 9 4,070.520 9 0.5446 0.0000 4,083.228 1 Maximum 8.1830 20.3540 19.1467 0.0426 3.3113 0.8443 4.0637 1.6136 0.7889 2.3062 0.0000 4,070.520 9 4,070.520 9 0.7653 0.0000 4,083.228 1 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 43.72 0.00 37.21 48.46 0.00 35.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 4 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Energy 0.0295 0.2523 0.1091 1.6100e- 003 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 321.7726 321.7726 6.1700e- 003 5.9000e- 003 323.6848 Mobile 0.6955 2.5381 9.3274 0.0376 3.7263 0.0263 3.7526 0.9965 0.0244 1.0209 3,828.610 6 3,828.610 6 0.1538 3,832.454 9 Total 3.0389 2.8888 16.5405 0.0397 3.7263 0.0873 3.8136 0.9965 0.0854 1.0819 0.0000 4,184.335 9 4,184.335 9 0.1726 6.2900e- 003 4,190.525 4 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 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Energy 0.0284 0.2431 0.1050 1.5500e- 003 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 309.9727 309.9727 5.9400e- 003 5.6800e- 003 311.8147 Mobile 0.5668 1.8989 5.8959 0.0213 2.0425 0.0157 2.0582 0.5462 0.0145 0.5607 2,165.679 3 2,165.679 3 0.0940 2,168.028 4 Total 2.9091 2.2404 13.1051 0.0233 2.0425 0.0759 2.1185 0.5462 0.0748 0.6210 0.0000 2,509.604 7 2,509.604 7 0.1126 6.0700e- 003 2,514.228 8 Mitigated Operational CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 5 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 3/1/2022 3/28/2022 5 20 2 Grading Grading 3/29/2022 5/30/2022 5 45 3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/1/2022 5/30/2023 5 260 4 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/1/2023 5/30/2023 5 107 5 Paving Paving 6/1/2023 7/26/2023 5 40 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 4.27 22.45 20.77 41.31 45.19 13.02 44.45 45.19 12.41 42.60 0.00 40.02 40.02 34.78 3.50 40.00 Residential Indoor: 191,261; Residential Outdoor: 63,754; Non-Residential Indoor: 2,550; Non-Residential Outdoor: 850; Striped Parking Area: 3,920 (Architectural Coating ±sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 22.5 Acres of Paving: 1.5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 6 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 8.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 2 7.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 5 13.00 6.00 125.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 4 10.00 6.00 537.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 8 90.00 20.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 7 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 1.3524 0.0000 1.3524 0.2048 0.0000 0.2048 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.6889 16.6217 13.9605 0.0241 0.8379 0.8379 0.7829 0.7829 2,323.416 8 2,323.416 8 0.5921 2,338.219 1 Total 1.6889 16.6217 13.9605 0.0241 1.3524 0.8379 2.1903 0.2048 0.7829 0.9877 2,323.416 8 2,323.416 8 0.5921 2,338.219 1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Water Exposed Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 8 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0438 1.4758 0.4594 4.5700e- 003 0.1088 4.4000e- 003 0.1132 0.0298 4.2000e- 003 0.0340 511.7747 511.7747 0.0551 513.1510 Vendor 0.0158 0.5309 0.1615 1.4300e- 003 0.0383 1.0600e- 003 0.0394 0.0110 1.0100e- 003 0.0120 155.7536 155.7536 0.0128 156.0742 Worker 0.0503 0.0283 0.3395 1.2500e- 003 0.1453 9.2000e- 004 0.1462 0.0385 8.5000e- 004 0.0394 124.6672 124.6672 2.5200e- 003 124.7301 Total 0.1099 2.0350 0.9604 7.2500e- 003 0.2925 6.3800e- 003 0.2988 0.0794 6.0600e- 003 0.0854 792.1955 792.1955 0.0704 793.9553 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 0.6086 0.0000 0.6086 0.0922 0.0000 0.0922 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.6889 16.6217 13.9605 0.0241 0.8379 0.8379 0.7829 0.7829 0.0000 2,323.416 8 2,323.416 8 0.5921 2,338.219 1 Total 1.6889 16.6217 13.9605 0.0241 0.6086 0.8379 1.4465 0.0922 0.7829 0.8750 0.0000 2,323.416 8 2,323.416 8 0.5921 2,338.219 1 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 9 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0438 1.4758 0.4594 4.5700e- 003 0.1088 4.4000e- 003 0.1132 0.0298 4.2000e- 003 0.0340 511.7747 511.7747 0.0551 513.1510 Vendor 0.0158 0.5309 0.1615 1.4300e- 003 0.0383 1.0600e- 003 0.0394 0.0110 1.0100e- 003 0.0120 155.7536 155.7536 0.0128 156.0742 Worker 0.0503 0.0283 0.3395 1.2500e- 003 0.1453 9.2000e- 004 0.1462 0.0385 8.5000e- 004 0.0394 124.6672 124.6672 2.5200e- 003 124.7301 Total 0.1099 2.0350 0.9604 7.2500e- 003 0.2925 6.3800e- 003 0.2988 0.0794 6.0600e- 003 0.0854 792.1955 792.1955 0.0704 793.9553 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive Dust 6.5631 0.0000 6.5631 3.3691 0.0000 3.3691 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.5403 16.9836 9.2202 0.0206 0.7423 0.7423 0.6829 0.6829 1,995.482 5 1,995.482 5 0.6454 2,011.616 9 Total 1.5403 16.9836 9.2202 0.0206 6.5631 0.7423 7.3054 3.3691 0.6829 4.0520 1,995.482 5 1,995.482 5 0.6454 2,011.616 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 10 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0836 2.8178 0.8772 8.7300e- 003 0.2078 8.3900e- 003 0.2161 0.0569 8.0300e- 003 0.0649 977.1484 977.1484 0.1051 979.7762 Vendor 0.0158 0.5309 0.1615 1.4300e- 003 0.0383 1.0600e- 003 0.0394 0.0110 1.0100e- 003 0.0120 155.7536 155.7536 0.0128 156.0742 Worker 0.0387 0.0217 0.2612 9.6000e- 004 0.1118 7.1000e- 004 0.1125 0.0296 6.5000e- 004 0.0303 95.8979 95.8979 1.9400e- 003 95.9463 Total 0.1381 3.3704 1.2999 0.0111 0.3579 0.0102 0.3680 0.0975 9.6900e- 003 0.1072 1,228.799 9 1,228.799 9 0.1199 1,231.796 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 Fugitive Dust 2.9534 0.0000 2.9534 1.5161 0.0000 1.5161 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.5403 16.9836 9.2202 0.0206 0.7423 0.7423 0.6829 0.6829 0.0000 1,995.482 5 1,995.482 5 0.6454 2,011.616 9 Total 1.5403 16.9836 9.2202 0.0206 2.9534 0.7423 3.6957 1.5161 0.6829 2.1990 0.0000 1,995.482 5 1,995.482 5 0.6454 2,011.616 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 11 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.0836 2.8178 0.8772 8.7300e- 003 0.2078 8.3900e- 003 0.2161 0.0569 8.0300e- 003 0.0649 977.1484 977.1484 0.1051 979.7762 Vendor 0.0158 0.5309 0.1615 1.4300e- 003 0.0383 1.0600e- 003 0.0394 0.0110 1.0100e- 003 0.0120 155.7536 155.7536 0.0128 156.0742 Worker 0.0387 0.0217 0.2612 9.6000e- 004 0.1118 7.1000e- 004 0.1125 0.0296 6.5000e- 004 0.0303 95.8979 95.8979 1.9400e- 003 95.9463 Total 0.1381 3.3704 1.2999 0.0111 0.3579 0.0102 0.3680 0.0975 9.6900e- 003 0.1072 1,228.799 9 1,228.799 9 0.1199 1,231.796 7 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.8555 14.6040 14.3533 0.0250 0.7022 0.7022 0.6731 0.6731 2,289.281 3 2,289.281 3 0.4417 2,300.323 0 Total 1.8555 14.6040 14.3533 0.0250 0.7022 0.7022 0.6731 0.6731 2,289.281 3 2,289.281 3 0.4417 2,300.323 0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 12 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0527 1.7697 0.5383 4.7600e- 003 0.1278 3.5200e- 003 0.1313 0.0368 3.3700e- 003 0.0401 519.1786 519.1786 0.0428 520.2473 Worker 0.3485 0.1957 2.3506 8.6500e- 003 1.0060 6.3900e- 003 1.0124 0.2668 5.8800e- 003 0.2727 863.0809 863.0809 0.0174 863.5163 Total 0.4012 1.9654 2.8889 0.0134 1.1338 9.9100e- 003 1.1437 0.3036 9.2500e- 003 0.3128 1,382.259 5 1,382.259 5 0.0602 1,383.763 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 1.8555 14.6040 14.3533 0.0250 0.7022 0.7022 0.6731 0.6731 0.0000 2,289.281 3 2,289.281 3 0.4417 2,300.323 0 Total 1.8555 14.6040 14.3533 0.0250 0.7022 0.7022 0.6731 0.6731 0.0000 2,289.281 3 2,289.281 3 0.4417 2,300.323 0 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 13 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0527 1.7697 0.5383 4.7600e- 003 0.1278 3.5200e- 003 0.1313 0.0368 3.3700e- 003 0.0401 519.1786 519.1786 0.0428 520.2473 Worker 0.3485 0.1957 2.3506 8.6500e- 003 1.0060 6.3900e- 003 1.0124 0.2668 5.8800e- 003 0.2727 863.0809 863.0809 0.0174 863.5163 Total 0.4012 1.9654 2.8889 0.0134 1.1338 9.9100e- 003 1.1437 0.3036 9.2500e- 003 0.3128 1,382.259 5 1,382.259 5 0.0602 1,383.763 6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 1.7136 13.6239 14.2145 0.0250 0.6136 0.6136 0.5880 0.5880 2,289.523 3 2,289.523 3 0.4330 2,300.347 9 Total 1.7136 13.6239 14.2145 0.0250 0.6136 0.6136 0.5880 0.5880 2,289.523 3 2,289.523 3 0.4330 2,300.347 9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 14 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0401 1.3321 0.4946 4.6100e- 003 0.1278 1.7100e- 003 0.1295 0.0368 1.6400e- 003 0.0384 503.6185 503.6185 0.0395 504.6067 Worker 0.3310 0.1776 2.1887 8.3200e- 003 1.0060 6.2800e- 003 1.0123 0.2668 5.7800e- 003 0.2726 829.9425 829.9425 0.0158 830.3371 Total 0.3711 1.5097 2.6833 0.0129 1.1338 7.9900e- 003 1.1418 0.3036 7.4200e- 003 0.3110 1,333.561 0 1,333.561 0 0.0553 1,334.943 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 1.7136 13.6239 14.2145 0.0250 0.6136 0.6136 0.5880 0.5880 0.0000 2,289.523 3 2,289.523 3 0.4330 2,300.347 9 Total 1.7136 13.6239 14.2145 0.0250 0.6136 0.6136 0.5880 0.5880 0.0000 2,289.523 3 2,289.523 3 0.4330 2,300.347 9 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 15 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0401 1.3321 0.4946 4.6100e- 003 0.1278 1.7100e- 003 0.1295 0.0368 1.6400e- 003 0.0384 503.6185 503.6185 0.0395 504.6067 Worker 0.3310 0.1776 2.1887 8.3200e- 003 1.0060 6.2800e- 003 1.0123 0.2668 5.7800e- 003 0.2726 829.9425 829.9425 0.0158 830.3371 Total 0.3711 1.5097 2.6833 0.0129 1.1338 7.9900e- 003 1.1418 0.3036 7.4200e- 003 0.3110 1,333.561 0 1,333.561 0 0.0553 1,334.943 8 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Archit. Coating 5.8404 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 6.0321 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 16 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0355 0.4377 1.6600e- 003 0.2012 1.2600e- 003 0.2025 0.0534 1.1600e- 003 0.0545 165.9885 165.9885 3.1600e- 003 166.0674 Total 0.0662 0.0355 0.4377 1.6600e- 003 0.2012 1.2600e- 003 0.2025 0.0534 1.1600e- 003 0.0545 165.9885 165.9885 3.1600e- 003 166.0674 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 5.8404 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Total 6.0321 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 17 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0355 0.4377 1.6600e- 003 0.2012 1.2600e- 003 0.2025 0.0534 1.1600e- 003 0.0545 165.9885 165.9885 3.1600e- 003 166.0674 Total 0.0662 0.0355 0.4377 1.6600e- 003 0.2012 1.2600e- 003 0.2025 0.0534 1.1600e- 003 0.0545 165.9885 165.9885 3.1600e- 003 166.0674 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Off-Road 0.8802 8.6098 11.6840 0.0179 0.4338 0.4338 0.4003 0.4003 1,709.992 6 1,709.992 6 0.5420 1,723.541 4 Paving 0.0983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9785 8.6098 11.6840 0.0179 0.4338 0.4338 0.4003 0.4003 1,709.992 6 1,709.992 6 0.5420 1,723.541 4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 18 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0552 0.0296 0.3648 1.3900e- 003 0.1677 1.0500e- 003 0.1687 0.0445 9.6000e- 004 0.0454 138.3238 138.3238 2.6300e- 003 138.3895 Total 0.0552 0.0296 0.3648 1.3900e- 003 0.1677 1.0500e- 003 0.1687 0.0445 9.6000e- 004 0.0454 138.3238 138.3238 2.6300e- 003 138.3895 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 0.8802 8.6098 11.6840 0.0179 0.4338 0.4338 0.4003 0.4003 0.0000 1,709.992 6 1,709.992 6 0.5420 1,723.541 4 Paving 0.0983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.9785 8.6098 11.6840 0.0179 0.4338 0.4338 0.4003 0.4003 0.0000 1,709.992 6 1,709.992 6 0.5420 1,723.541 4 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 19 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile Increase Density Increase Transit Accessibility Improve Pedestrian Network 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day 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 0.0552 0.0296 0.3648 1.3900e- 003 0.1677 1.0500e- 003 0.1687 0.0445 9.6000e- 004 0.0454 138.3238 138.3238 2.6300e- 003 138.3895 Total 0.0552 0.0296 0.3648 1.3900e- 003 0.1677 1.0500e- 003 0.1687 0.0445 9.6000e- 004 0.0454 138.3238 138.3238 2.6300e- 003 138.3895 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 20 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 0.5668 1.8989 5.8959 0.0213 2.0425 0.0157 2.0582 0.5462 0.0145 0.5607 2,165.679 3 2,165.679 3 0.0940 2,168.028 4 Unmitigated 0.6955 2.5381 9.3274 0.0376 3.7263 0.0263 3.7526 0.9965 0.0244 1.0209 3,828.610 6 3,828.610 6 0.1538 3,832.454 9 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Apartments Mid Rise 467.84 467.84 467.84 1,598,680 876,297 General Office Building 48.99 48.99 48.99 157,832 86,514 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 516.83 516.83 516.83 1,756,513 962,811 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 21 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 0.0284 0.2431 0.1050 1.5500e- 003 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 309.9727 309.9727 5.9400e- 003 5.6800e- 003 311.8147 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0295 0.2523 0.1091 1.6100e- 003 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 321.7726 321.7726 6.1700e- 003 5.9000e- 003 323.6848 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Mid Rise 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 General Office Building 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 22 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 6.0 Area Detail 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Apartments Mid Rise 2692.5 0.0290 0.2481 0.1056 1.5800e- 003 0.0201 0.0201 0.0201 0.0201 316.7644 316.7644 6.0700e- 003 5.8100e- 003 318.6468 General Office Building 42.5699 4.6000e- 004 4.1700e- 003 3.5100e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.2000e- 004 3.2000e- 004 3.2000e- 004 3.2000e- 004 5.0082 5.0082 1.0000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 5.0380 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0295 0.2523 0.1091 1.6100e- 003 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 0.0204 321.7726 321.7726 6.1700e- 003 5.9000e- 003 323.6848 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 Apartments Mid Rise 2.595 0.0280 0.2392 0.1018 1.5300e- 003 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 0.0193 305.2940 305.2940 5.8500e- 003 5.6000e- 003 307.1082 General Office Building 0.0397693 4.3000e- 004 3.9000e- 003 3.2800e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 3.0000e- 004 4.6787 4.6787 9.0000e- 005 9.0000e- 005 4.7065 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0284 0.2431 0.1050 1.5500e- 003 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 0.0196 309.9727 309.9727 5.9400e- 003 5.6900e- 003 311.8147 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 23 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area 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 Mitigated 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Unmitigated 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 24 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 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 0.1712 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.9269 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 1.9400e- 003 0.0166 7.0600e- 003 1.1000e- 004 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 0.0000 21.1765 21.1765 4.1000e- 004 3.9000e- 004 21.3023 Landscaping 0.2138 0.0818 7.0970 3.7000e- 004 0.0393 0.0393 0.0393 0.0393 12.7762 12.7762 0.0123 13.0834 Total 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 25 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower Use Water Efficient Irrigation System 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 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 0.1712 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.9269 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 1.9400e- 003 0.0166 7.0600e- 003 1.1000e- 004 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 1.3400e- 003 0.0000 21.1765 21.1765 4.1000e- 004 3.9000e- 004 21.3023 Landscaping 0.2138 0.0818 7.0970 3.7000e- 004 0.0393 0.0393 0.0393 0.0393 12.7762 12.7762 0.0123 13.0834 Total 2.3139 0.0984 7.1041 4.8000e- 004 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0406 0.0000 33.9527 33.9527 0.0127 3.9000e- 004 34.3857 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 26 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter Institute Recycling and Composting Services 11.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:24 AMPage 27 of 27 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Winter     Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim   Appendix  B    APPENDIX B    EMFAC2017 Model Printouts    EM F A C 2 0 1 7  (v 1 . 0 . 2 )  Em i s s i o n s  In v e n t o r y Re g i o n  Ty p e :  Ai r  Ba s i n Re g i o n :  SO U T H  CO A S T Ca l e n d a r  Ye a r :  20 2 2 Se a s o n :  An n u a l Ve h i c l e  Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n :  EM F A C 2 0 0 7  Ca t e g o r i e s Un i t s :  mi l e s / d a y  fo r  VM T ,  tr i p s / d a y  fo r  Tr i p s ,  to n s / d a y  fo r  Em i s s i o n s ,  10 0 0  ga l l o n s / d a y  fo r  Fu e l  Co n s u m p t i o n .  No t e  'd a y '  in  th e  un i t  is  op e r a t i o n  da y . Re g i o n C a l e n d a r  Y e Ve h i c l e  Ca t Mo d e l  Ye a S p e e d F u e l P o p u l a t i o n V M T T r i p s F u e l  Co n s u m p t i o n SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 H H D T A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 7 7 . 1 9 5 8 1 7 7 9 0 . 4 0 3 5 2 1 5 4 4 . 5 3 4 1 . 8 7 5 6 8 8 2 8 7 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L D A A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 6 3 7 0 8 8 3 2 4 6 4 0 4 3 1 9 . 3 3 0 1 0 1 2 5 3 7 9 8 9 . 7 0 0 5 3 1 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L D T 1 A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 7 1 6 3 9 7 . 4 2 6 5 6 3 6 7 4 . 6 9 3 3 0 5 3 0 1 1 0 0 3 . 1 8 1 7 1 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L D T 2 A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 2 1 8 2 0 0 2 8 2 3 8 1 2 4 0 . 2 3 1 0 2 3 4 3 0 1 3 3 3 9 . 8 8 6 9 4 2 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L H D T 1 A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 1 7 1 3 5 8 . 6 6 1 3 8 9 2 8 . 5 1 2 2 5 5 2 9 8 8 5 8 3 . 2 2 8 1 3 4 5 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L H D T 2 A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 2 9 0 4 9 . 2 9 1 0 0 9 2 1 5 . 7 6 7 4 3 2 7 9 1 . 1 1 1 0 . 1 2 6 0 0 5 3 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 M C Y A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 2 8 8 7 5 6 . 3 1 9 9 4 2 4 9 . 2 6 5 5 7 7 5 1 2 . 7 5 4 . 9 2 2 1 6 1 2 4 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 M D V A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 1 5 3 0 6 4 6 5 4 1 0 5 4 6 9 . 8 6 7 0 7 7 0 2 4 2 7 0 4 . 4 4 7 5 6 3 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 M H A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 3 4 0 9 0 . 7 6 3 2 4 2 5 3 . 0 8 2 7 3 4 1 0 . 4 3 9 6 2 . 9 6 1 1 8 6 7 9 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 M H D T A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 2 4 7 8 3 . 3 4 1 3 1 6 4 7 2 . 6 1 9 4 9 5 8 6 5 2 5 9 . 3 9 1 8 8 7 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 O B U S A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 5 8 3 2 . 0 5 1 2 4 0 7 9 4 . 9 0 1 1 1 6 6 8 7 . 7 4 7 . 7 7 3 1 2 6 7 9 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 S B U S A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 2 5 6 3 . 0 7 3 1 0 2 7 0 7 . 6 0 5 9 1 0 2 5 2 . 2 9 1 1 . 2 6 5 7 2 5 4 3 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 U B U S A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d GA S 9 5 2 . 1 4 6 8 9 2 5 5 . 9 9 8 1 8 3 8 0 8 . 5 8 4 1 8 . 4 0 0 8 5 6 2 9 ve h i c l e  mi l e s  pe r  da y  (A l l  Ca t e g o r i e s ) 4 2 0 6 7 8 3 7 2 1 6 , 1 8 7                                              1, 0 0 0  ga l l  pe r  da y 16 , 1 8 7 , 1 6 2                              ga l l o n s  pe r  da y Fl e e t  Av g  Mi l e s  pe r  ga l l o n 2 6 . 0                              EM F A C 2 0 1 7  (v 1 . 0 . 2 )  Em i s s i o n s  In v e n t o r y Re g i o n  Ty p e :  Ai r  Ba s i n Re g i o n :  SO U T H  CO A S T Ca l e n d a r  Ye a r :  20 2 2 Se a s o n :  An n u a l Ve h i c l e  Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n :  EM F A C 2 0 0 7  Ca t e g o r i e s Un i t s :  mi l e s / d a y  fo r  VM T ,  tr i p s / d a y  fo r  Tr i p s ,  to n s / d a y  fo r  Em i s s i o n s ,  10 0 0  ga l l o n s / d a y  fo r  Fu e l  Co n s u m p t i o n .  No t e  'd a y '  in  th e  un i t  is  op e r a t i o n  da y . Re g i o n C a l e n d a r  Y V e h i c l e  Ca t Mo d e l  Ye a S p e e d F u e l P o p u l a t i o n V M T T r i p s F u e l  Co n s u m p t i o n SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 H H D T A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 9 8 5 0 7 . 9 3 1 1 7 9 5 1 1 9 . 1 8 9 9 4 2 2 4 . 5 2 7 8 1 7 6 2 . 9 8 6 5 3 5 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L D A A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 5 7 4 4 3 2 3 0 4 1 3 6 . 2 3 8 2 7 2 8 2 3 . 0 3 0 2 4 7 . 3 9 1 5 9 1 4 6 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L D T 1 A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 3 7 8 . 1 2 0 9 8 8 0 9 . 0 9 8 6 2 2 1 3 1 9 . 1 1 0 7 9 9 0 . 3 9 1 1 7 2 5 4 9 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L D T 2 A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 1 3 8 5 4 . 2 5 9 2 6 4 2 . 9 6 3 8 6 8 3 0 8 . 9 5 1 3 7 1 6 . 6 5 0 7 0 8 3 9 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L H D T 1 A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 1 1 5 7 8 8 . 9 4 6 8 1 4 4 7 . 4 5 5 1 4 5 6 4 7 8 . 3 1 8 2 1 7 . 1 1 3 4 0 1 9 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 L H D T 2 A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 4 5 9 0 9 . 3 2 1 8 0 9 1 9 2 . 2 9 3 5 7 7 4 8 1 . 5 0 3 4 9 2 . 8 8 6 6 0 9 7 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 M D V A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 3 2 4 1 7 . 6 1 1 3 0 5 8 7 2 . 9 2 7 1 5 8 9 4 8 . 6 8 8 9 4 7 . 8 0 3 3 2 8 6 3 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 M H A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 1 2 1 9 8 . 8 4 1 1 7 4 8 8 . 2 6 8 1 2 1 9 . 8 8 3 9 3 8 1 1 . 1 2 0 2 3 5 9 1 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 M H D T A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 1 1 9 7 9 6 7 7 1 6 0 3 4 . 1 2 6 1 2 0 1 9 4 1 . 5 7 1 7 2 0 . 1 6 0 2 7 3 1 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 O B U S A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 4 1 4 9 . 6 7 4 3 1 6 4 0 4 . 3 1 5 4 0 4 4 1 . 5 7 9 8 1 3 7 . 4 5 9 1 7 9 8 9 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 S B U S A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 6 3 5 4 . 4 6 5 2 0 0 7 8 6 . 3 1 5 8 7 3 3 2 9 . 6 4 4 4 2 2 6 . 4 1 7 4 7 3 4 SO U T H  CO A 20 2 2 U B U S A g g r e g a t e d Ag g r e g a t e d DS L 1 4 . 1 4 1 4 2 1 4 7 8 . 0 8 5 6 8 3 5 6 . 5 6 5 6 7 3 2 3 0 . 2 4 6 7 9 6 1 9 8 Di e s e l  Tr u c k  (H H D T ,  MD V ,  MH D T )  ve h i c l e  mi l e s  pe r  da y 2 0 , 8 1 7 , 0 2 6      2, 5 3 1                          1, 0 0 0  ga l l  pe r  da y 2, 5 3 0 , 9 5 0          ga l l o n s  pe r  da y Di e s e l  Tr u c k  Fl e e t  Av g  Mi l e s  pe r  ga l l o n 8 . 2                                        Midway Affordable Residential Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis  City of Anaheim   Appendix  C    APPENDIX C    CalEEMod Model Annual Printouts                1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 1.70 1000sqft 0.06 1,700.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 1.50 Acre 1.50 65,340.00 0 Apartments Mid Rise 86.00 Dwelling Unit 0.70 94,450.00 246 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Climate Zone Urban 8 Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 30 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data 1.0 Project Characteristics Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 2023Operational Year CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 756.4 0.014CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.003N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Midway Affordable Residential Orange County, Annual CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 1 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual Project Characteristics - GHG Intensity Factors reduced by 51% to account for GHG reductions between the default year 2007 values and 2018 values. Land Use - Total project size 2.26 acres Construction Phase - Construction schedule provided by applicant. Trips and VMT - 6 vendor trips added to Demo and Grading to account for water truck emissions. Demolition - Demo - 4,590 sq ft building = 211 tons + 1 acre of paving = 1,053 tons. Total Demo = 1,264 tons Grading - Max import of 4,297 cubic yards of dirt Woodstoves - 1 natural gas only firepit in outside lounge area Energy Use - Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Water Exposed Area 2 times per day selected to account for SCAQMD Rule 403 minimum requirements. Mobile Land Use Mitigation - Urban, 36 Dwelling Units/acre, 0.01 mile to transit selected to account for OCTA Bus Stop and Improve Pedestrian Network Onsite and Connecting Offsite Energy Mitigation - Exceed Title 24 by 7% selected to account for the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 standards Water Mitigation - Install low flow fixtures and water-efficient irrigation selected to account for Title 24 Part 11 requirements Waste Mitigation - 50% reduction in waste selected to account for AB 341. CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 2 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 2.0 Emissions Summary Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 107.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 260.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6.00 45.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 40.00 tblFireplaces NumberGas 73.10 1.00 tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 8.60 86.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 4.30 0.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 4,297.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 86,000.00 94,450.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.04 0.06 tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.26 0.70 tblProjectCharacteristics CH4IntensityFactor 0.029 0.014 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 756.4 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.003 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 6.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 6.39 5.44 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 2.46 28.82 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.86 5.44 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.05 28.82 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.65 5.44 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.03 28.82 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 4.30 0.00 tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 4.30 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 3 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 2022 0.2253 1.9167 1.7071 3.9900e- 003 0.2572 0.0798 0.3371 0.1037 0.0757 0.1793 0.0000 350.6577 350.6577 0.0564 0.0000 352.0667 2023 0.4560 1.0554 1.2682 2.6800e- 003 0.0735 0.0458 0.1193 0.0197 0.0437 0.0634 0.0000 232.2222 232.2222 0.0345 0.0000 233.0853 Maximum 0.4560 1.9167 1.7071 3.9900e- 003 0.2572 0.0798 0.3371 0.1037 0.0757 0.1793 0.0000 350.6577 350.6577 0.0564 0.0000 352.0667 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr 2022 0.2253 1.9167 1.7071 3.9900e- 003 0.1686 0.0798 0.2484 0.0608 0.0757 0.1365 0.0000 350.6574 350.6574 0.0564 0.0000 352.0664 2023 0.4560 1.0554 1.2682 2.6800e- 003 0.0735 0.0458 0.1193 0.0197 0.0437 0.0634 0.0000 232.2220 232.2220 0.0345 0.0000 233.0851 Maximum 0.4560 1.9167 1.7071 3.9900e- 003 0.1686 0.0798 0.2484 0.0608 0.0757 0.1365 0.0000 350.6574 350.6574 0.0564 0.0000 352.0664 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 26.81 0.00 19.43 34.73 0.00 17.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 4 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 0.4097 0.0104 0.8872 5.0000e- 005 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 0.0000 1.6889 1.6889 1.4000e- 003 0.0000 1.7252 Energy 5.3800e- 003 0.0461 0.0199 2.9000e- 004 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 0.0000 178.7296 178.7296 3.3400e- 003 1.4700e- 003 179.2525 Mobile 0.1230 0.4694 1.7224 6.9300e- 003 0.6663 4.7700e- 003 0.6710 0.1784 4.4200e- 003 0.1829 0.0000 639.7757 639.7757 0.0253 0.0000 640.4091 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.3511 0.0000 8.3511 0.4935 0.0000 20.6894 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.8735 40.5532 42.4267 0.1932 4.7000e- 003 48.6581 Total 0.5380 0.5258 2.6295 7.2700e- 003 0.6663 0.0134 0.6797 0.1784 0.0131 0.1915 10.2246 860.7474 870.9720 0.7168 6.1700e- 003 890.7343 Unmitigated Operational Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 3-1-2022 5-31-2022 0.6995 0.6995 2 6-1-2022 8-31-2022 0.6167 0.6167 3 9-1-2022 11-30-2022 0.6112 0.6112 4 12-1-2022 2-28-2023 0.7280 0.7280 5 3-1-2023 5-31-2023 0.8000 0.8000 6 6-1-2023 8-31-2023 0.1933 0.1933 Highest 0.8000 0.8000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 5 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 0.4097 0.0104 0.8872 5.0000e- 005 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 0.0000 1.6889 1.6889 1.4000e- 003 0.0000 1.7252 Energy 5.1900e- 003 0.0444 0.0192 2.8000e- 004 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 0.0000 176.2124 176.2124 3.3000e- 003 1.4400e- 003 176.7228 Mobile 0.0994 0.3504 1.0820 3.9200e- 003 0.3652 2.8400e- 003 0.3680 0.0978 2.6300e- 003 0.1004 0.0000 362.2495 362.2495 0.0154 0.0000 362.6348 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.1755 0.0000 4.1755 0.2468 0.0000 10.3447 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.4988 34.4124 35.9112 0.1546 3.7700e- 003 40.8995 Total 0.5143 0.4052 1.9884 4.2500e- 003 0.3652 0.0114 0.3766 0.0978 0.0111 0.1090 5.6743 574.5632 580.2375 0.4215 5.2100e- 003 592.3269 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 4.42 22.94 24.38 41.54 45.19 15.42 44.60 45.19 14.77 43.11 44.50 33.25 33.38 41.20 15.56 33.50 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 6 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 3/1/2022 3/28/2022 5 20 2 Grading Grading 3/29/2022 5/30/2022 5 45 3 Building Construction Building Construction 6/1/2022 5/30/2023 5 260 4 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/1/2023 5/30/2023 5 107 5 Paving Paving 6/1/2023 7/26/2023 5 40 OffRoad Equipment Residential Indoor: 191,261; Residential Outdoor: 63,754; Non-Residential Indoor: 2,550; Non-Residential Outdoor: 850; Striped Parking Area: 3,920 (Architectural Coating ±sqft) Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 22.5 Acres of Paving: 1.5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 7 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 8.00 231 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts 2 7.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 8.00 9 0.56 Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42 Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 132 0.36 Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Demolition 5 13.00 6.00 125.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 4 10.00 6.00 537.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 8 90.00 20.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 8 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0135 0.0000 0.0135 2.0500e- 003 0.0000 2.0500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0169 0.1662 0.1396 2.4000e- 004 8.3800e- 003 8.3800e- 003 7.8300e- 003 7.8300e- 003 0.0000 21.0777 21.0777 5.3700e- 003 0.0000 21.2120 Total 0.0169 0.1662 0.1396 2.4000e- 004 0.0135 8.3800e- 003 0.0219 2.0500e- 003 7.8300e- 003 9.8800e- 003 0.0000 21.0777 21.0777 5.3700e- 003 0.0000 21.2120 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Water Exposed Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 9 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 4.3000e- 004 0.0150 4.4800e- 003 5.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 4.0000e- 005 1.1100e- 003 2.9000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 3.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6844 4.6844 4.9000e- 004 0.0000 4.6968 Vendor 1.5000e- 004 5.4000e- 003 1.5500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 1.4337 1.4337 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 1.4365 Worker 4.5000e- 004 2.9000e- 004 3.4800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4400e- 003 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.1482 1.1482 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1488 Total 1.0300e- 003 0.0207 9.5100e- 003 7.0000e- 005 2.8800e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.9400e- 003 7.8000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 8.5000e- 004 0.0000 7.2663 7.2663 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 7.2821 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 6.0900e- 003 0.0000 6.0900e- 003 9.2000e- 004 0.0000 9.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0169 0.1662 0.1396 2.4000e- 004 8.3800e- 003 8.3800e- 003 7.8300e- 003 7.8300e- 003 0.0000 21.0777 21.0777 5.3700e- 003 0.0000 21.2119 Total 0.0169 0.1662 0.1396 2.4000e- 004 6.0900e- 003 8.3800e- 003 0.0145 9.2000e- 004 7.8300e- 003 8.7500e- 003 0.0000 21.0777 21.0777 5.3700e- 003 0.0000 21.2119 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 10 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.2 Demolition - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 4.3000e- 004 0.0150 4.4800e- 003 5.0000e- 005 1.0700e- 003 4.0000e- 005 1.1100e- 003 2.9000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 3.4000e- 004 0.0000 4.6844 4.6844 4.9000e- 004 0.0000 4.6968 Vendor 1.5000e- 004 5.4000e- 003 1.5500e- 003 1.0000e- 005 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 1.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 1.4337 1.4337 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 1.4365 Worker 4.5000e- 004 2.9000e- 004 3.4800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.4400e- 003 3.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 1.1482 1.1482 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.1488 Total 1.0300e- 003 0.0207 9.5100e- 003 7.0000e- 005 2.8800e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.9400e- 003 7.8000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 8.5000e- 004 0.0000 7.2663 7.2663 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 7.2821 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.1477 0.0000 0.1477 0.0758 0.0000 0.0758 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0347 0.3821 0.2075 4.6000e- 004 0.0167 0.0167 0.0154 0.0154 0.0000 40.7311 40.7311 0.0132 0.0000 41.0604 Total 0.0347 0.3821 0.2075 4.6000e- 004 0.1477 0.0167 0.1644 0.0758 0.0154 0.0912 0.0000 40.7311 40.7311 0.0132 0.0000 41.0604 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 11 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 1.8500e- 003 0.0646 0.0192 2.0000e- 004 4.6000e- 003 1.9000e- 004 4.7900e- 003 1.2600e- 003 1.8000e- 004 1.4400e- 003 0.0000 20.1244 20.1244 2.1200e- 003 0.0000 20.1774 Vendor 3.5000e- 004 0.0122 3.4800e- 003 3.0000e- 005 8.5000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.7000e- 004 0.0000 3.2258 3.2258 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 3.2322 Worker 7.8000e- 004 5.0000e- 004 6.0300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.4700e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.4900e- 003 6.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 6.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.9873 1.9873 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.9883 Total 2.9800e- 003 0.0773 0.0288 2.5000e- 004 7.9200e- 003 2.3000e- 004 8.1500e- 003 2.1700e- 003 2.1000e- 004 2.3800e- 003 0.0000 25.3374 25.3374 2.4200e- 003 0.0000 25.3978 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 0.0665 0.0000 0.0665 0.0341 0.0000 0.0341 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0347 0.3821 0.2075 4.6000e- 004 0.0167 0.0167 0.0154 0.0154 0.0000 40.7311 40.7311 0.0132 0.0000 41.0604 Total 0.0347 0.3821 0.2075 4.6000e- 004 0.0665 0.0167 0.0832 0.0341 0.0154 0.0495 0.0000 40.7311 40.7311 0.0132 0.0000 41.0604 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 12 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.3 Grading - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 1.8500e- 003 0.0646 0.0192 2.0000e- 004 4.6000e- 003 1.9000e- 004 4.7900e- 003 1.2600e- 003 1.8000e- 004 1.4400e- 003 0.0000 20.1244 20.1244 2.1200e- 003 0.0000 20.1774 Vendor 3.5000e- 004 0.0122 3.4800e- 003 3.0000e- 005 8.5000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 8.7000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.7000e- 004 0.0000 3.2258 3.2258 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 3.2322 Worker 7.8000e- 004 5.0000e- 004 6.0300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.4700e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.4900e- 003 6.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 6.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.9873 1.9873 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.9883 Total 2.9800e- 003 0.0773 0.0288 2.5000e- 004 7.9200e- 003 2.3000e- 004 8.1500e- 003 2.1700e- 003 2.1000e- 004 2.3800e- 003 0.0000 25.3374 25.3374 2.4200e- 003 0.0000 25.3978 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.1420 1.1172 1.0980 1.9100e- 003 0.0537 0.0537 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 158.8753 158.8753 0.0307 0.0000 159.6416 Total 0.1420 1.1172 1.0980 1.9100e- 003 0.0537 0.0537 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 158.8753 158.8753 0.0307 0.0000 159.6416 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 13 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.9200e- 003 0.1378 0.0394 3.7000e- 004 9.6300e- 003 2.6000e- 004 9.9000e- 003 2.7800e- 003 2.5000e- 004 3.0300e- 003 0.0000 36.5592 36.5592 2.8900e- 003 0.0000 36.6315 Worker 0.0239 0.0154 0.1844 6.7000e- 004 0.0756 4.9000e- 004 0.0761 0.0201 4.5000e- 004 0.0205 0.0000 60.8106 60.8106 1.2300e- 003 0.0000 60.8413 Total 0.0278 0.1531 0.2238 1.0400e- 003 0.0852 7.5000e- 004 0.0860 0.0229 7.0000e- 004 0.0236 0.0000 97.3698 97.3698 4.1200e- 003 0.0000 97.4728 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 0.1420 1.1172 1.0980 1.9100e- 003 0.0537 0.0537 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 158.8751 158.8751 0.0307 0.0000 159.6414 Total 0.1420 1.1172 1.0980 1.9100e- 003 0.0537 0.0537 0.0515 0.0515 0.0000 158.8751 158.8751 0.0307 0.0000 159.6414 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 14 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.4 Building Construction - 2022 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 3.9200e- 003 0.1378 0.0394 3.7000e- 004 9.6300e- 003 2.6000e- 004 9.9000e- 003 2.7800e- 003 2.5000e- 004 3.0300e- 003 0.0000 36.5592 36.5592 2.8900e- 003 0.0000 36.6315 Worker 0.0239 0.0154 0.1844 6.7000e- 004 0.0756 4.9000e- 004 0.0761 0.0201 4.5000e- 004 0.0205 0.0000 60.8106 60.8106 1.2300e- 003 0.0000 60.8413 Total 0.0278 0.1531 0.2238 1.0400e- 003 0.0852 7.5000e- 004 0.0860 0.0229 7.0000e- 004 0.0236 0.0000 97.3698 97.3698 4.1200e- 003 0.0000 97.4728 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0917 0.7289 0.7605 1.3400e- 003 0.0328 0.0328 0.0315 0.0315 0.0000 111.1206 111.1206 0.0210 0.0000 111.6460 Total 0.0917 0.7289 0.7605 1.3400e- 003 0.0328 0.0328 0.0315 0.0315 0.0000 111.1206 111.1206 0.0210 0.0000 111.6460 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 15 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.0900e- 003 0.0723 0.0256 2.5000e- 004 6.7400e- 003 9.0000e- 005 6.8200e- 003 1.9400e- 003 8.0000e- 005 2.0300e- 003 0.0000 24.7951 24.7951 1.8800e- 003 0.0000 24.8420 Worker 0.0158 9.7500e- 003 0.1201 4.5000e- 004 0.0529 3.4000e- 004 0.0532 0.0140 3.1000e- 004 0.0144 0.0000 40.8942 40.8942 7.8000e- 004 0.0000 40.9137 Total 0.0179 0.0821 0.1457 7.0000e- 004 0.0596 4.3000e- 004 0.0600 0.0160 3.9000e- 004 0.0164 0.0000 65.6893 65.6893 2.6600e- 003 0.0000 65.7557 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 0.0917 0.7289 0.7605 1.3400e- 003 0.0328 0.0328 0.0315 0.0315 0.0000 111.1205 111.1205 0.0210 0.0000 111.6458 Total 0.0917 0.7289 0.7605 1.3400e- 003 0.0328 0.0328 0.0315 0.0315 0.0000 111.1205 111.1205 0.0210 0.0000 111.6458 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 16 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.4 Building Construction - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 2.0900e- 003 0.0723 0.0256 2.5000e- 004 6.7400e- 003 9.0000e- 005 6.8200e- 003 1.9400e- 003 8.0000e- 005 2.0300e- 003 0.0000 24.7951 24.7951 1.8800e- 003 0.0000 24.8420 Worker 0.0158 9.7500e- 003 0.1201 4.5000e- 004 0.0529 3.4000e- 004 0.0532 0.0140 3.1000e- 004 0.0144 0.0000 40.8942 40.8942 7.8000e- 004 0.0000 40.9137 Total 0.0179 0.0821 0.1457 7.0000e- 004 0.0596 4.3000e- 004 0.0600 0.0160 3.9000e- 004 0.0164 0.0000 65.6893 65.6893 2.6600e- 003 0.0000 65.7557 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 0.3125 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0103 0.0697 0.0969 1.6000e- 004 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 0.0000 13.6599 13.6599 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 13.6803 Total 0.3227 0.0697 0.0969 1.6000e- 004 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 0.0000 13.6599 13.6599 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 13.6803 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 17 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.1700e- 003 1.9500e- 003 0.0240 9.0000e- 005 0.0106 7.0000e- 005 0.0106 2.8100e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.8700e- 003 0.0000 8.1789 8.1789 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 8.1827 Total 3.1700e- 003 1.9500e- 003 0.0240 9.0000e- 005 0.0106 7.0000e- 005 0.0106 2.8100e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.8700e- 003 0.0000 8.1789 8.1789 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 8.1827 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Archit. Coating 0.3125 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0103 0.0697 0.0969 1.6000e- 004 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 0.0000 13.6599 13.6599 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 13.6803 Total 0.3227 0.0697 0.0969 1.6000e- 004 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 3.7900e- 003 0.0000 13.6599 13.6599 8.2000e- 004 0.0000 13.6803 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 18 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.5 Architectural Coating - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.1700e- 003 1.9500e- 003 0.0240 9.0000e- 005 0.0106 7.0000e- 005 0.0106 2.8100e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.8700e- 003 0.0000 8.1789 8.1789 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 8.1827 Total 3.1700e- 003 1.9500e- 003 0.0240 9.0000e- 005 0.0106 7.0000e- 005 0.0106 2.8100e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.8700e- 003 0.0000 8.1789 8.1789 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 8.1827 Mitigated Construction Off-Site 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Off-Road 0.0176 0.1722 0.2337 3.6000e- 004 8.6800e- 003 8.6800e- 003 8.0100e- 003 8.0100e- 003 0.0000 31.0256 31.0256 9.8300e- 003 0.0000 31.2714 Paving 1.9700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0196 0.1722 0.2337 3.6000e- 004 8.6800e- 003 8.6800e- 003 8.0100e- 003 8.0100e- 003 0.0000 31.0256 31.0256 9.8300e- 003 0.0000 31.2714 Unmitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 19 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.9000e- 004 6.1000e- 004 7.4800e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.2900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.3100e- 003 8.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 8.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.5479 2.5479 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.5491 Total 9.9000e- 004 6.1000e- 004 7.4800e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.2900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.3100e- 003 8.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 8.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.5479 2.5479 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.5491 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 0.0176 0.1722 0.2337 3.6000e- 004 8.6800e- 003 8.6800e- 003 8.0000e- 003 8.0000e- 003 0.0000 31.0256 31.0256 9.8300e- 003 0.0000 31.2714 Paving 1.9700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0196 0.1722 0.2337 3.6000e- 004 8.6800e- 003 8.6800e- 003 8.0000e- 003 8.0000e- 003 0.0000 31.0256 31.0256 9.8300e- 003 0.0000 31.2714 Mitigated Construction On-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 20 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile Increase Density Increase Transit Accessibility Improve Pedestrian Network 3.6 Paving - 2023 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 9.9000e- 004 6.1000e- 004 7.4800e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.2900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.3100e- 003 8.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 8.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.5479 2.5479 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.5491 Total 9.9000e- 004 6.1000e- 004 7.4800e- 003 3.0000e- 005 3.2900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.3100e- 003 8.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 8.9000e- 004 0.0000 2.5479 2.5479 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.5491 Mitigated Construction Off-Site CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 21 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 0.0994 0.3504 1.0820 3.9200e- 003 0.3652 2.8400e- 003 0.3680 0.0978 2.6300e- 003 0.1004 0.0000 362.2495 362.2495 0.0154 0.0000 362.6348 Unmitigated 0.1230 0.4694 1.7224 6.9300e- 003 0.6663 4.7700e- 003 0.6710 0.1784 4.4200e- 003 0.1829 0.0000 639.7757 639.7757 0.0253 0.0000 640.4091 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Apartments Mid Rise 467.84 467.84 467.84 1,598,680 876,297 General Office Building 48.99 48.99 48.99 157,832 86,514 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 516.83 516.83 516.83 1,756,513 962,811 Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 General Office Building 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.4 Fleet Mix CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 22 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 124.8930 124.8930 2.3100e- 003 5.0000e- 004 125.0984 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 125.4565 125.4565 2.3200e- 003 5.0000e- 004 125.6629 NaturalGas Mitigated 5.1900e- 003 0.0444 0.0192 2.8000e- 004 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 0.0000 51.3195 51.3195 9.8000e- 004 9.4000e- 004 51.6244 NaturalGas Unmitigated 5.3800e- 003 0.0461 0.0199 2.9000e- 004 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 0.0000 53.2731 53.2731 1.0200e- 003 9.8000e- 004 53.5896 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Mid Rise 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 General Office Building 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.563406 0.043070 0.209298 0.109958 0.015015 0.005784 0.026182 0.017546 0.001775 0.001524 0.004941 0.000598 0.000904 Historical Energy Use: N CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 23 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, 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 Apartments Mid Rise 982762 5.3000e- 003 0.0453 0.0193 2.9000e- 004 3.6600e- 003 3.6600e- 003 3.6600e- 003 3.6600e- 003 0.0000 52.4439 52.4439 1.0100e- 003 9.6000e- 004 52.7556 General Office Building 15538 8.0000e- 005 7.6000e- 004 6.4000e- 004 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.8292 0.8292 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.8341 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 5.3800e- 003 0.0460 0.0199 2.9000e- 004 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 3.7200e- 003 0.0000 53.2731 53.2731 1.0300e- 003 9.8000e- 004 53.5896 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 Apartments Mid Rise 947175 5.1100e- 003 0.0436 0.0186 2.8000e- 004 3.5300e- 003 3.5300e- 003 3.5300e- 003 3.5300e- 003 0.0000 50.5448 50.5448 9.7000e- 004 9.3000e- 004 50.8452 General Office Building 14515.8 8.0000e- 005 7.1000e- 004 6.0000e- 004 0.0000 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.7746 0.7746 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.7792 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 5.1900e- 003 0.0444 0.0192 2.8000e- 004 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 3.5800e- 003 0.0000 51.3195 51.3195 9.8000e- 004 9.4000e- 004 51.6244 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 24 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 6.0 Area Detail 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Apartments Mid Rise 341876 117.2967 2.1700e- 003 4.7000e- 004 117.4896 General Office Building 23783 8.1599 1.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 8.1733 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 125.4565 2.3200e- 003 5.0000e- 004 125.6629 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr Apartments Mid Rise 340794 116.9254 2.1600e- 003 4.6000e- 004 117.1177 General Office Building 23222.5 7.9676 1.5000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 7.9807 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 124.8930 2.3100e- 003 4.9000e- 004 125.0984 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 25 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 6.0 Area 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 Mitigated 0.4097 0.0104 0.8872 5.0000e- 005 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 0.0000 1.6889 1.6889 1.4000e- 003 0.0000 1.7252 Unmitigated 0.4097 0.0104 0.8872 5.0000e- 005 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 0.0000 1.6889 1.6889 1.4000e- 003 0.0000 1.7252 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 26 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 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 0.0313 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.3517 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 2.0000e- 005 2.1000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2401 0.2401 0.0000 0.0000 0.2416 Landscaping 0.0267 0.0102 0.8871 5.0000e- 005 4.9100e- 003 4.9100e- 003 4.9100e- 003 4.9100e- 003 0.0000 1.4488 1.4488 1.3900e- 003 0.0000 1.4836 Total 0.4097 0.0104 0.8872 5.0000e- 005 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 0.0000 1.6889 1.6889 1.3900e- 003 0.0000 1.7252 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 27 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower Use Water Efficient Irrigation System 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.0 Water Detail 6.2 Area by SubCategory ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0313 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.3517 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 2.0000e- 005 2.1000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2401 0.2401 0.0000 0.0000 0.2416 Landscaping 0.0267 0.0102 0.8871 5.0000e- 005 4.9100e- 003 4.9100e- 003 4.9100e- 003 4.9100e- 003 0.0000 1.4488 1.4488 1.3900e- 003 0.0000 1.4836 Total 0.4097 0.0104 0.8872 5.0000e- 005 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 4.9300e- 003 0.0000 1.6889 1.6889 1.3900e- 003 0.0000 1.7252 Mitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 28 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category MT/yr Mitigated 35.9112 0.1546 3.7700e- 003 40.8995 Unmitigated 42.4267 0.1932 4.7000e- 003 48.6581 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Apartments Mid Rise 5.60325 / 3.53248 40.2751 0.1833 4.4600e- 003 46.1877 General Office Building 0.302147 / 0.185187 2.1516 9.8800e- 003 2.4000e- 004 2.4704 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 42.4267 0.1932 4.7000e- 003 48.6581 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 29 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Institute Recycling and Composting Services 7.2 Water by Land Use Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal MT/yr Apartments Mid Rise 4.4826 / 3.317 34.0918 0.1467 3.5800e- 003 38.8249 General Office Building 0.241718 / 0.173891 1.8194 7.9100e- 003 1.9000e- 004 2.0746 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 35.9112 0.1546 3.7700e- 003 40.8995 Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 30 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e MT/yr Mitigated 4.1755 0.2468 0.0000 10.3447 Unmitigated 8.3511 0.4935 0.0000 20.6894 Category/Year 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Apartments Mid Rise 39.56 8.0303 0.4746 0.0000 19.8948 General Office Building 1.58 0.3207 0.0190 0.0000 0.7946 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 8.3511 0.4935 0.0000 20.6894 Unmitigated CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 31 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 8.2 Waste by Land Use Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons MT/yr Apartments Mid Rise 19.78 4.0152 0.2373 0.0000 9.9474 General Office Building 0.79 0.1604 9.4800e- 003 0.0000 0.3973 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 4.1755 0.2468 0.0000 10.3447 Mitigated 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 32 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual 11.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 5/4/2021 10:22 AMPage 33 of 33 Midway Affordable Residential - Orange County, Annual THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix B: Biological Resources Constraints Analysis THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Memorandum Date: May 10, 2021 To: Andy Uk, Associate Planner, City of Anaheim From: Alec Villanueva, Staff Biologist Subject: Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Memorandum for the Midway Townhomes Project, Anaheim, California FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) conducted a biological resources due diligence-level assessment for the Midway Townhomes Project (proposed project) and provided regulatory compliance information for the City of Anaheim and other applicable State and federal regulations pertaining to biological resources. This memorandum documents any biological resource constraints that were identified and recommends measures as appropriate to avoid or minimize potential project impacts on sensitive and protected biological resources. A literature review was conducted to assist in determining the existence or potential occurrence of special-status plant and animal species within the study area and in the project vicinity, followed by a reconnaissance-level field survey. PROJECT LOCATION The proposed project is located at 110 West Midway Drive, in the City of Anaheim, in Orange County, California (Exhibit 1). The 2.26-acre project site consists of Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 082-185- 01, 082-185-47, 082-185-52, and 082-185-59. The project site is located in the south-central portion of the City of Anaheim. It is located at the southwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and West Midway Drive, and east of a proposed townhome development and Interstate 5 (I-5) (Exhibit 2). PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project would include the demolition of all existing structures on the project site and the development of 86 housing units in a 4-story building (Exhibit 3). The proposed project would include 29 one-bedroom units, 35 two-bedroom units, and 22 three-bedroom units. The proposed project would also provide amenities including a pool, a playground, a dog park, a public flex space used for community programs, and a leasing office. The proposed project would include 129 parking spaces. The proposed project would provide 1,700 square feet of public flex space on the ground floor, providing for a variety of uses for the community. The ground floor would also contain a 3,300 square foot community center, which would include a clubroom for youth programs, as well as a leasing office. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 2 The proposed project would include an outdoor recreational courtyard with a tot lot, community gardens, a swimming pool, an outdoor fireplace lounge area, restrooms, and a dog park. In total, the proposed project would include 22,220 square feet of common open spaces and 6,172 square feet of private open space. Los Angeles OrangeCounty SanBernardinoCounty Orange County Los Angeles County 91 83 91 55 57 241 261 241 405 5 Orange C ounty Riverside County 60 110 710 5 605 10 5 405 22 133 1 1 210 P a c i f i c O c e a n Prado FloodControl Basin SantiagoReservoir ClevelandNationalForest San Dimas CovinaAlhambraEl Monte Pomona OntarioEast LosAngeles Walnut ChinoCommerce Whittier Norwalk Yorba LindaFullerton Anaheim OrangeLong Beach Garden Grove Seal Beach Santa Ana FountainValleyHuntingtonBeach Costa Mesa Irvine Lake Forest Newport Beach Laguna Hills Laguna Niguel San JuanCapistrano Bell Chino Hills UplandClaremont Montclair Laguna Woods Exhibit 1Regional Location Map Text Project Site Source: Census 2000 Data, The California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL). CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS 00550086 • 05/2021 | 1_regional.mxd Project Site Miles 0 5 102.5 00550086 • 05/2021 | 2_local_aerial.mxd Exhibit 2Local Vicinity MapAerial Base Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery. CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS Cerritos Ave West Midway Dr Guinida Ln A n a h e i m B l v d Ball Rd Winston Rd O l i v e S t Katella Ave L e w i s S t Anaheim Blvd Disney Way 72 V e r m o n t A v e 5 Legend Project Site Feet 0 1,000 2,000500 00550086 05/2021 | 3_site_plan.cdr• Source: KTGY Architecture & Planning, March 26, 2020. CITY OF ANAHEIM MIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECT BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS Exhibit 3 Site Plan W E S T M I D W A Y D R I V E A N A H E I M B O U L E V A R D Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 6 REGULATORY SETTING This section provides an overview of the laws and regulations that are applicable to the proposed project. Federal Regulations Endangered Species Act The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has jurisdiction over species listed as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA). Section 9 of FESA protects listed species from “take,” which is broadly defined as actions taken to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” FESA protects threatened and endangered plants and animals and their critical habitat. Candidate species are those proposed for listing; these species are usually treated by resource agencies as if they were actually listed during the environmental review process. Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) implements international treaties between the United States and other nations devised to protect migratory birds, their parts, eggs, and nests from activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing, selling, and shipping, unless expressly authorized in the regulations or by permit. The State of California has incorporated the protection of birds of prey in Sections 3800, 3513, and 3503.5 of the Fish and Game Code. All raptors and their nests are protected from take or disturbance under the MBTA (16 United States Code [USC] § 703, et seq.) and California statute (Fish and Game Code [FGC] § 3503.5). State Regulations CEQA Guidelines The following California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G checklist questions serve as thresholds of significance when evaluating the potential impacts of a proposed project on biological resources. Impacts are considered significant if a project would: • Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as being a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or USFWS. • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 7 • Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. California Endangered Species Act The State of California enacted the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) in 1984. CESA is similar to FESA but pertains to State-listed endangered and threatened species. CESA requires State agencies to consult with the CDFW when preparing CEQA documents to ensure that the State lead agency actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat essential to the continued existence of those species if there are reasonable and prudent alternatives available (FGC § 2080). CESA directs agencies to consult with the CDFW on projects or actions that could affect listed species, directs the CDFW to determine whether jeopardy would occur, and allows the CDFW to identify “reasonable and prudent alternatives” to the project consistent with conserving the species. CESA allows the CDFW to authorize exceptions to the State’s prohibition against take of a listed species if the “take” of a listed species is incidental to carrying out an otherwise lawful project that has been approved under CEQA (FGC § 2081). California Fish and Game Code Under CESA, the CDFW has the responsibility for maintaining a list of endangered and threatened species (FGC § 2070). Fish and Game Code Sections 2050 through 2098 outline the protection provided to California’s rare, endangered, and threatened species. Fish and Game Code Section 2080 prohibits the taking of plants and animals listed under the CESA. Fish and Game Code Section 2081 established an incidental take permit program for state-listed species. The CDFW maintains a list of “candidate species,” which it formally notices as being under review for addition to the list of endangered or threatened species. In addition, the Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (NPPA) (FGC § 1900, et seq.) prohibits the taking, possessing, or sale within the State of any plants with a State designation of rare, threatened, or endangered (as defined by the CDFW). An exception to this prohibition in the NPPA allows landowners, under specified circumstances, to take listed plant species, provided that the owners first notify CDFW and give the agency at least 10 days to come and retrieve (and presumably replant) the plants before they are plowed under or otherwise destroyed. Fish and Game Code Section 1913 exempts from “take” prohibition “the removal of endangered or rare native plants from a canal, lateral ditch, building site, or road, or other right of way.” Project impacts to these species are not considered significant unless the species are known to have a high potential to occur within the area of disturbance associated with construction of the proposed project. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 8 In addition to formal listing under FESA and CESA, some species receive additional consideration by the CDFW and local lead agencies during the CEQA process. Species that may be considered for review are those listed as a “Species of Special Concern.” The CDFW maintains lists of “Species of Special Concern” that serve as species “watch lists.” Species with this status may have limited distributions or limited populations, and/or the extent of their habitats has been reduced substantially, such that their populations may be threatened. Thus, their populations are monitored, and they may receive special attention during environmental review. While they do not have statutory protection, they may be considered rare under CEQA and specific protection measures may be warranted. In addition to Species of Special Concern, the CDFW Special Animals List identifies animals that are tracked by the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and may be potentially vulnerable but warrant no federal interest and no legal protection. Sensitive species that would qualify for listing but are not currently listed are afforded protection under CEQA. CEQA Guidelines Section 15065 (Mandatory Findings of Significance) requires that a substantial reduction in numbers of a rare or endangered species be considered a significant effect. CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 (Rare or Endangered Species) provides for the assessment of unlisted species as rare or endangered under CEQA if the species can be shown to meet the criteria for listing. Unlisted plant species on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List ranked 1A, 1B, and 2 would typically require evaluation under CEQA. Fish and Game Code Sections 3500 to 5500 outline protection for fully protected species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. Species that are fully protected by these sections may not be taken or possessed at any time. The CDFW cannot issue permits or licenses that authorize the take of any fully protected species, except under certain circumstances such as scientific research and live capture and relocation of such species pursuant to a permit for the protection of livestock. Under Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5, it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders of Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto. To comply with the requirements of CESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state-listed endangered or threatened species may be present in the project study area and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, the CDFW encourages informal consultation on any proposed project that may impact a candidate species. Project-related impacts to species on the CESA endangered or threatened list would be considered significant. State-listed species are fully protected under the mandates of CESA. “Take” of protected species incidental to otherwise lawful management activities may be authorized under Fish and Game Code Section 206.591. Authorization from the CDFW would be in the form of an Incidental Take Permit. Fish and Game Code Section 1602 requires any entity to notify the CDFW before beginning any activity that “may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake” or “deposit debris, waste, or other materials that Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 9 could pass into any river, stream, or lake.” “River, stream, or lake” includes waters that are episodic and perennial and ephemeral streams, desert washes, and watercourses with a subsurface flow. A Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement will be required if the CDFW determines that project activities may substantially adversely affect fish or wildlife resources through alterations to a covered body of water. California Native Plant Society The CNPS maintains a rank of plant species that are native to California and that have low population numbers, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Following are the definitions of the CNPS ranks: • Rank 1A: Plants presumed Extinct in California • Rank 1B: Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere • Rank 2: Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more numerous elsewhere • Rank 3: Plants about which we need more information—A Review List • Rank 4: Plants of limited distribution—A Watch List Potential impacts to populations of CNPS ranked plants receive consideration under CEQA review. All plants appearing as CNPS Rank 1 or 2 are considered to meet the CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 criteria. While only some of the plants ranked 3 and 4 meet the definitions of threatened or endangered species, potential impacts to these species or their habitats should be analyzed during the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, as they may meet the definition of Rare or Endangered under the CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 criteria. Local Regulations City of Anaheim Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 11.12 Designation Of Landmark Trees 11.12.020 Removal Of Landmark Trees Prohibited. No landmark tree shall be removed without prior approval of the City Council, which approval shall be based upon one or more of the following findings: .010 The landmark tree poses a threat to the public health or safety due to its general condition, the potential of the tree falling, the tree's proximity to existing or proposed structures, the tree's interference with utility services, and/or the tree's status as a host for parasitic plants, pests or diseases endangering other species of trees or plants with infection or infestations; .020 Removal is necessary to allow construction of improvements or otherwise allow economic or other reasonable enjoyment of adjoining property; .030 The landmark tree has or will have an adverse effect on soil retention, water retention, and/or diversion or increased surface water; Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 10 .040 Removal of the landmark tree will not have an adverse effect on shade areas, air pollution, historic values, scenic beauty and the general welfare of the City as a whole given the number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area of the landmark tree; and .050 Removal of the landmark tree is consistent with good forestry practices such as, but not limited to, consideration of the number of healthy trees a given parcel of land will support. Chapter 13.12 Street Trees 13.12.060 Street Tree Replacement Plan. Any street tree removed shall be replaced if a replacement is deemed possible. The replacement specie shall be selected in accordance with the Official Tree Species List and Tree Master Plan. In addition to replacing all removed street trees whenever possible, it is the responsibility of the Director of Community Services to ensure all vacant street tree locations are planted within the City of Anaheim. These vacancies are to be planted in accordance with the Official Tree Species List and Tree Master Plan. 13.12.080 Interference With Street Trees—Permission Required. .010 No person shall top or in any other manner injure or damage any street tree. For purposes of this section, the term "top" shall mean to damage a tree by the practice of severely cutting back large diameter branches and/or the trunk of a tree which results in substantially reducing the overall size of the tree and/or destroying the symmetrical appearance or structural shape of the tree. .020 No person shall cut, trim, prune, plant, remove, spray, or in any other manner interfere with any street tree within the City of Anaheim without first having secured written permission from the Director of Community Services or his or her designee. .030 Any person obtaining written permission to cut, trim or prune a street tree shall do so in accordance with the standards adopted by the International Society of Arboriculture. Any private business performing cutting, trimming or pruning operations on street trees shall employ an ISA certified arborist on staff and shall perform all work on street trees in accordance with the standards adopted by the International Society of Arboriculture. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 11 METHODOLOGY Literature Review Topographic Maps and Aerial Photographs Current topographic maps and aerial photographs were reviewed during the preliminary analysis of the existing conditions within the project site and immediate vicinity. Information obtained from the review of the topographic maps included elevation range, general watershed information, and potential drainage feature locations.1 Aerial photographs (Google Earth) were reviewed to provide a perspective of recent and historical site conditions relative to on-site and off-site land uses, preliminary plant community locations, and potential locations of wildlife movement corridors.2 Soil Surveys The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey was queried to determine soil series (i.e., group of soils with similar profiles) and soil mapping units occurring at the project site.3 Habitat requirements pertaining to soils and substrates for special-status species were evaluated to determine whether on-site conditions are suitable for occurrence of special-status plant and wildlife species. Special-status Species Database Search A records search of the following databases was conducted: the CDFW CNDDB, the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system, and the California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California database for the Anaheim, California United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map and its eight neighboring quads. 4,5,6 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Watershed Assessment, Tracking and Environmental Results System (WATERS) database and aerial photography was queried to identify potential natural drainage features and water bodies.7 In general, all surface drainage features identified 1 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2020. Watershed Assessment, Tracking and Environmental Results System (WATERS). Website: https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-watershed-assessment-tracking-environmental-results-system. Accessed January 6, 2021. 2 Google Earth. 2021. 200 W. Midway Dr. Anaheim, CA 92805. Website: https://www.google.com/earth/. Accessed January 6, 2021. 3 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2020. Web Soil Survey. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Website: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed January 6, 2021. 4 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2021. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for Special- Status Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view /RareFind.aspx. Accessed January 6, 2021. 5 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021 Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Website: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed January 6, 2021. 6 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2020. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory (CNPSEI). Website: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed January 6, 2021. 7 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2021. Watershed Assessment, Tracking and Environmental Results System (WATERS). Website: https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-watershed-assessment-tracking-environmental-results-system. Accessed January 6, 2021. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 12 as blue-line streams on USGS maps and linear patches of vegetation are expected to exhibit evidence of flows and considered potentially subject to State and federal regulatory authority as waters of the United States and/or State. Protected Trees Any applicable City and County ordinances pertaining to tree preservation and protective measures and their tree replacement conditions or permits required were reviewed. Habitat Conservation Plan As part of the literature review, FCS also took into consideration whether the proposed project is located within the boundaries of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or State HCP and whether any such plan would be applicable to the proposed project. Reconnaissance-Level Field Survey A reconnaissance-level field survey was conducted on April 27, 2021, by FCS Biologist, Alec Villanueva. Weather conditions during the field survey were partly cloudy, with an approximate temperature of 65°F (degrees Fahrenheit). Wind speeds averaged 2 miles per hour (mph). Notes were taken on general site conditions, vegetation, and suitability of habitat for various special-status elements. Site photographs are provided in Attachment A. A preliminary assessment was conducted to determine the location of any existing drainages and the limits of project-related grading activities, to aid in determining whether a formal delineation of waters of the United States or State would be necessary. RESULTS Existing Conditions The project site is currently occupied by a single-story, 4,590-square-foot office structure. The remainder of the site is covered by gravel and is occasionally used as an industrial storage yard. Vegetation present on-site consists of some ornamental landscaping, ruderal grass, and 14 trees. Soils and Topography The topography of the site and the surrounding area is generally flat and lies at an approximate elevation of 140 feet above sea level. Soils on-site were sampled for the Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Geotechnical Evaluation), completed by EEI Engineering Solutions. The Geotechnical Evaluation identified the on-site sampled soils as gravel and gravelly soils, as well as sand and sandy soils. The Geotechnical Evaluation also stated that the site is underlain by an approximately 5-foot-thick layer of trash-laden fill soils, and Quaternary age alluvial deposits. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 13 According to the NRCS, soils on the site are mapped as Metz loamy sand and San Emigdio fine sandy loam, which cover approximately 1.18 acre and 1.07 acre of the northwestern and southeastern half of the project site, respectively.8 However, little of the native soils cover remains exposed due to the developed state of the project site, which predominantly consists of hardscape and imported fill (e.g., gravel) (Exhibit 4). Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Urban/Developed–2.03 Acres Developed land is characterized by permanent or semi-permanent structures, pavement, or hardscape, and landscaped areas that often require irrigation. The urban/developed vegetation community includes land that has been constructed upon or otherwise covered with a permanent man-made surface. Areas where no natural land is evident, or because large amounts of debris or other materials have been placed upon it, may also be considered. Vegetation within the urban/developed land consists of ornamental landscape vegetation with little to no native species observed. The majority of the project site has been developed and almost entirely covered by hardscape such as concrete and asphalt (Exhibit 5). Ruderal/Disturbed–0.23 Acres Ruderal habitat is classified as areas that have been physically disturbed (by previous human activity) and are no longer recognizable as a native or naturalized vegetation association but continue to retain a soil substrate. Typically, if any vegetation is present in this land cover type, it is nearly exclusively composed of non-native plant species such as ornamentals or ruderal exotic species that take advantage of disturbance, or show signs of past or present animal usage that precludes them from providing viable natural habitat for uses other than dispersal. A small triangular shaped area of ruderal vegetation and ornamental trees can be found bordering Anaheim Boulevard. Plant species observed in this area include 12 Mexican fan palm trees (Washingtonia robusta), two Peruvian pepper trees (Schinus molle), and several weeds including cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), annual bluegrass (Poa annua), sow thistle (Sonchus oleraceus) and redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium) (Attachment A). Wildlife The site may provide habitat for generalist and opportunistic wildlife species that are able to tolerate high levels of habitat disturbance and human modified environments. Wildlife activity during the field survey was low. Species observed on-site during the field survey included killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) and Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae). The ornamental trees present on the project site as well as on the adjacent properties could provide suitable habitat for nesting birds; however, no active bird nests were observed. 8 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2020. Soil Survey Official Soil Series Descriptions. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Website: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed January 6, 2021. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 14 Special-status Species The CNDDB and CNPS Inventory results included 43 special-status plant species and 45 special-status animal species that have been recorded within the vicinity of the project site (Attachment B). The likelihood and rationale for these species to occur are discussed in the paragraphs below. No special- status plants or animal species were observed during the field survey. Special-status Plants Forty-three special-status plant species have been recorded in the project vicinity, including chaparral sand-verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita), Horn's milk-vetch (Astragalus hornii var. hornii), Gambel's water cress (Nasturtium gambelii), and salt spring checkerbloom (Sidalcea neomexicana). The recorded species require specific habitat conditions associated with certain vegetation communities, including coastal sage scrub, chaparral, cismontane woodlands, or wetland habitats. None of these habitat types are present. Therefore, no special-status plants are expected to occur on the project site. The developed state of the project site does not provide suitable habitat for any special-status species recorded in the CNDDB or CNPS searches due the lack of natural vegetation communities and lack of suitable natural substrate. Special-status Wildlife The database results included 45 species-status wildlife species that are known to occur within the vicinity of the project site (Attachment B). The overwhelming majority of these species are not expected to occur due to the lack of suitable habitat on the project site, the project site being situated outside of their known geographic range or have been have locally extirpated due to extensive urbanization and habitat modification of the surrounding area. Many species recorded in the vicinity of the project including Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni), western, yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis), steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino), Southern California legless lizard (Anniella stebbinsi), and coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) are all believe to be locally extirpated due to extensive urbanization of the surrounding area. Many bird special-status bird species such California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus) and California least tern (Sternula antillarum browni) are uncommon in the region and unlikely to occur on- site due the lack of suitable nesting and foraging habitat in the form of coastal wetlands. The project site contains little suitable foraging habitat for any special-status bird species. . Suitable nesting trees are present on-site on the ruderal parcel bordering Anaheim Boulevard. As a result, there is still potential, albeit very low potential, that special-status birds may choose to nest on-site or within its immediate vicinity. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 15 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands No wetlands or other hydrological features that meet criteria as waters of the United States or waters of the State were observed within the project site during the reconnaissance-level survey. Wildlife Movement Corridors Wildlife movement corridors link areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. Urbanization and the resulting fragmentation of open space areas create isolated “islands” of wildlife habitat, forming separated populations. Corridors act as an effective link between populations. The project site was evaluated for evidence of wildlife movement corridors during the field survey. However, the scope of the survey did not include a formal wildlife movement corridor study utilizing track plates, camera stations, scent stations, or snares. The project site is entirely developed and is surrounded on all sides by urban development and roadways and other man-made structures that serve as barriers to wildlife movement. Protected Trees FCS reviewed the Anaheim Municipal Code regarding any applicable ordinances regarding tree preservation.9 The project site is not located within one of several “Overlay Zones” within the City of Anaheim where additional tree preservation ordinances would apply.10 The project site does not contain any “Landmark Trees” as defined by the Municipal Code. Two palm trees and two Peruvian pepper trees are located along the sidewalk bordering Anaheim Boulevard. These trees could meet the City’s definition as a “Street Tree” and be subject to the City’s Street Tree Ordinance.11 Orange County Transportation Authority NCCP/HCP The project site is located within the boundaries of the Orange County Transportation Authority NCCP/HCP; however, the NCCP/HCP only covers discrete linear or energy projects within its boundaries.12 The proposed project does not fall into either of these categories. Therefore, the proposed project is not subject to this plan. 9 Anaheim Municipal Code. 2021. City of Anaheim. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/overview. Accessed January 6, 2021. 10 City of Anaheim. 2021. Zoning Map. Website: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/1871/Zoning-Map?bidId=. Accessed January 14, 2021. 11 Anaheim Municipal Code. 2021. Chapter 13.12 STREET TREES*. City of Anaheim. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/overview. Accessed January 14, 2021. 12 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2020. NCCP Plan Summaries. Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/conservation/planning/nccp/plans. Accessed January 6, 2021. 00550086 • 05/2021 | 4_soils.mxd Exhibit 4Soils Map Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery. USDA Soils Data Mart, Orange. CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS West Midway Dr A n a h e i m B l v d Palais Rd Guinida Ln Cerritos Ave 163 196 5 Legend Project SiteSoils Classification 163 - METZ LOAMY SAND 1.18 acres 196 - SAN EMIGDIO FINE SANDY LOAM, MODERATELY FINE SUBSTRATUM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES 1.07 acres Feet 0 200 400100 00550086 • 05/2021 | 5_land_cover.mxd Exhibit 5Land Cover Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery. CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS West Midway Dr A n a h e i m B l v d Palais Rd Guinida Ln Cerritos Ave 5 Legend Project Site Ruderal 0.23 acre Urban/Developed 2.03 acres Feet 0 200 400100 Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 18 BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS This biological constraints analysis determined the following: • The project site does not contain suitable habitat for any special-status plants. • The project site does not contain suitable habitat for any special-status wildlife species, aside from nesting birds. • The project site does not contain potentially jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States or waters of the State. • The proposed project would not significantly impact any known wildlife corridors. • The proposed project has the potential to impact at least one street tree regulated under the Anaheim Municipal Code. • The proposed project is not subject to any adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. The following section recommends measures that would result in avoidance or minimization of potential project-related impacts to regulated biological resources on-site, including potential project design features, conditions of approval, or Best Management Practices (BMPs): Pre-construction Surveys for Nesting Birds Several native migratory or resident birds that are protected under the MBTA and/or Fish and Game Code could nest in the few trees, hedges and buildings that are found on the project site or within its immediate vicinity. During nesting season, the development of the proposed project has the potential to impact protected bird nests due to the removal of this vegetation, or could indirectly harm birds though the generation of noise, lights, and other man-made disturbances that could result in the abandonment of eggs or young. Out of an abundance of caution, if work takes place during nesting season, we recommend that the project implement the following measures to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds out: • Limit tree and vegetation removal to outside the nesting season (nesting season is generally February 1 to August 15). • During nesting season, conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds prior to the start of construction. • Establish construction exclusion (buffer) zones around any occupied nest(s), including those present on adjacent properties. Andy Uk, Associate Planner City of Anaheim May 10, 2021 Page 19 Tree Removal and Replacement Two palm trees and two Peruvian pepper trees are located along the sidewalk bordering Anaheim Boulevard. These trees could meet the City’s definition as a “Street Tree” and would be subject to the City’s Street Tree Ordinance. Should the Applicant deem that trimming or removal of these trees would be necessary to accommodate the proposed project, we recommend the following actions, in accordance with Chapter 13.12 of the Anaheim Municipal Code:13 • The Applicant shall secure written permission from the Director of Community Services or his or her designee. • Any person obtaining written permission to cut, trim or prune a street tree shall do so in accordance with the standards adopted by the International Society of Arboriculture. Any private business performing cutting, trimming, or pruning operations on street trees shall employ an International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified Arborist on staff and shall perform all work on street trees in accordance with the standards adopted by the ISA. • Any street tree removed shall be replaced if replacement is deemed possible. The replacement species shall be selected in accordance with the Official Tree Species List and Tree Master Plan. 13 Anaheim Municipal Code. 2021. Chapter 13.12 STREET TREES. City of Anaheim. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/anaheim/latest/overview. Accessed January 14, 2021. Attachment A: Site Photographs City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Biological Resources Constraints Analysis Attachment A FirstCarbon Solutions https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Bio Constraints/appendices/Appendix A Site Photos (3).docx Photograph 1: Looking south from north end of ruderal parcel. Photograph 2: Looking north from south end of ruderal parcel. Photograph 3: Looking south along Anaheim Boulevard. Photograph 4: Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) observed on-site. Attachment B: Database Search Results Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Abronia villosa var. aurita chaparral sand-verbena PDNYC010P1 None None G5T2?S2 1B.1 Accipiter cooperii Cooper's hawk ABNKC12040 None None G5 S4 WL Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird ABPBXB0020 None Threatened G2G3 S1S2 SSC Aimophila ruficeps canescens southern California rufous-crowned sparrow ABPBX91091 None None G5T3 S3 WL Ammodramus savannarum grasshopper sparrow ABPBXA0020 None None G5 S3 SSC Anniella stebbinsi Southern California legless lizard ARACC01060 None None G3 S3 SSC Aphanisma blitoides aphanisma PDCHE02010 None None G3G4 S2 1B.2 Ardea herodias great blue heron ABNGA04010 None None G5 S4 Asio otus long-eared owl ABNSB13010 None None G5 S3?SSC Aspidoscelis hyperythra orange-throated whiptail ARACJ02060 None None G5 S2S3 WL Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri coastal whiptail ARACJ02143 None None G5T5 S3 SSC Astragalus hornii var. hornii Horn's milk-vetch PDFAB0F421 None None GUT1 S1 1B.1 Astragalus pycnostachyus var. lanosissimus Ventura Marsh milk-vetch PDFAB0F7B1 Endangered Endangered G2T1 S1 1B.1 Athene cunicularia burrowing owl ABNSB10010 None None G4 S3 SSC Atriplex coulteri Coulter's saltbush PDCHE040E0 None None G3 S1S2 1B.2 Atriplex pacifica south coast saltscale PDCHE041C0 None None G4 S2 1B.2 Atriplex parishii Parish's brittlescale PDCHE041D0 None None G1G2 S1 1B.1 Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii Davidson's saltscale PDCHE041T1 None None G5T1 S1 1B.2 Bombus crotchii Crotch bumble bee IIHYM24480 None Candidate Endangered G3G4 S1S2 Quad<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(Anaheim (3311778)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Whittier (3311881)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>La Habra (3311788)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Yorba Linda (3311787)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Los Alamitos (3311871)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Orange (3311777)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Seal Beach (3311861)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Newport Beach (3311768)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Tustin (3311767)) Query Criteria: Report Printed on Wednesday, January 06, 2021 Page 1 of 6Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2021 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2021 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Branchinecta sandiegonensis San Diego fairy shrimp ICBRA03060 Endangered None G2 S2 Buteo regalis ferruginous hawk ABNKC19120 None None G4 S3S4 WL Buteo swainsoni Swainson's hawk ABNKC19070 None Threatened G5 S3 California Walnut Woodland California Walnut Woodland CTT71210CA None None G2 S2.1 Calochortus plummerae Plummer's mariposa-lily PMLIL0D150 None None G4 S4 4.2 Calochortus weedii var. intermedius intermediate mariposa-lily PMLIL0D1J1 None None G3G4T2 S2 1B.2 Calystegia felix lucky morning-glory PDCON040P0 None None G1Q S1 1B.1 Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus sandiegensis coastal cactus wren ABPBG02095 None None G5T3Q S3 SSC Catostomus santaanae Santa Ana sucker AFCJC02190 Threatened None G1 S1 Centromadia parryi ssp. australis southern tarplant PDAST4R0P4 None None G3T2 S2 1B.1 Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus western snowy plover ABNNB03031 Threatened None G3T3 S2S3 SSC Chelonia mydas green turtle ARAAA02010 Threatened None G3 S4 Chloropyron maritimum ssp. maritimum salt marsh bird's-beak PDSCR0J0C2 Endangered Endangered G4?T1 S1 1B.2 Choeronycteris mexicana Mexican long-tongued bat AMACB02010 None None G4 S1 SSC Cicindela hirticollis gravida sandy beach tiger beetle IICOL02101 None None G5T2 S2 Cicindela latesignata latesignata western beach tiger beetle IICOL02113 None None G2G4T1T2 S1 Cicindela senilis frosti senile tiger beetle IICOL02121 None None G2G3T1T3 S1 Coccyzus americanus occidentalis western yellow-billed cuckoo ABNRB02022 Threatened Endangered G5T2T3 S1 Coelus globosus globose dune beetle IICOL4A010 None None G1G2 S1S2 Coturnicops noveboracensis yellow rail ABNME01010 None None G4 S1S2 SSC Crotalus ruber red-diamond rattlesnake ARADE02090 None None G4 S3 SSC Report Printed on Wednesday, January 06, 2021 Page 2 of 6Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2021 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2021 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Danaus plexippus pop. 1 monarch - California overwintering population IILEPP2012 None None G4T2T3 S2S3 Dudleya multicaulis many-stemmed dudleya PDCRA040H0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite ABNKC06010 None None G5 S3S4 FP Emys marmorata western pond turtle ARAAD02030 None None G3G4 S3 SSC Eremophila alpestris actia California horned lark ABPAT02011 None None G5T4Q S4 WL Eriastrum densifolium ssp. sanctorum Santa Ana River woollystar PDPLM03035 Endangered Endangered G4T1 S1 1B.1 Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii San Diego button-celery PDAPI0Z042 Endangered Endangered G5T1 S1 1B.1 Eumops perotis californicus western mastiff bat AMACD02011 None None G5T4 S3S4 SSC Euphydryas editha quino quino checkerspot butterfly IILEPK405L Endangered None G5T1T2 S1S2 Falco peregrinus anatum American peregrine falcon ABNKD06071 Delisted Delisted G4T4 S3S4 FP Glyptostoma gabrielense San Gabriel chestnut IMGASB1010 None None G2 S2 Habroscelimorpha gabbii western tidal-flat tiger beetle IICOL02080 None None G2G4 S1 Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishii Los Angeles sunflower PDAST4N102 None None G5TX SX 1A Icteria virens yellow-breasted chat ABPBX24010 None None G5 S3 SSC Isocoma menziesii var. decumbens decumbent goldenbush PDAST57091 None None G3G5T2T3 S2 1B.2 Lasionycteris noctivagans silver-haired bat AMACC02010 None None G5 S3S4 Lasiurus cinereus hoary bat AMACC05030 None None G5 S4 Lasiurus xanthinus western yellow bat AMACC05070 None None G5 S3 SSC Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields PDAST5L0A1 None None G4T2 S2 1B.1 Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus California black rail ABNME03041 None Threatened G3G4T1 S1 FP Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii Robinson's pepper-grass PDBRA1M114 None None G5T3 S3 4.3 Report Printed on Wednesday, January 06, 2021 Page 3 of 6Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2021 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2021 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Microtus californicus stephensi south coast marsh vole AMAFF11035 None None G5T1T2 S1S2 SSC Myotis yumanensis Yuma myotis AMACC01020 None None G5 S4 Nama stenocarpa mud nama PDHYD0A0H0 None None G4G5 S1S2 2B.2 Nasturtium gambelii Gambel's water cress PDBRA270V0 Endangered Threatened G1 S1 1B.1 Navarretia prostrata prostrate vernal pool navarretia PDPLM0C0Q0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata coast woolly-heads PDPGN0G011 None None G3G4T2 S2 1B.2 Nyctinomops femorosaccus pocketed free-tailed bat AMACD04010 None None G4 S3 SSC Nyctinomops macrotis big free-tailed bat AMACD04020 None None G5 S3 SSC Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 10 steelhead - southern California DPS AFCHA0209J Endangered None G5T1Q S1 Orcuttia californica California Orcutt grass PMPOA4G010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Pandion haliaetus osprey ABNKC01010 None None G5 S4 WL Panoquina errans wandering (=saltmarsh) skipper IILEP84030 None None G4G5 S2 Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi Belding's savannah sparrow ABPBX99015 None Endangered G5T3 S3 Pentachaeta aurea ssp. allenii Allen's pentachaeta PDAST6X021 None None G4T1 S1 1B.1 Perognathus longimembris pacificus Pacific pocket mouse AMAFD01042 Endangered None G5T1 S1 SSC Phacelia stellaris Brand's star phacelia PDHYD0C510 None None G1 S1 1B.1 Phrynosoma blainvillii coast horned lizard ARACF12100 None None G3G4 S3S4 SSC Polioptila californica californica coastal California gnatcatcher ABPBJ08081 Threatened None G4G5T2Q S2 SSC Rallus obsoletus levipes light-footed Ridgway's rail ABNME05014 Endangered Endangered G5T1T2 S1 FP Riparia riparia bank swallow ABPAU08010 None Threatened G5 S2 Rynchops niger black skimmer ABNNM14010 None None G5 S2 SSC Report Printed on Wednesday, January 06, 2021 Page 4 of 6Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2021 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2021 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Salvadora hexalepis virgultea coast patch-nosed snake ARADB30033 None None G5T4 S2S3 SSC Senecio aphanactis chaparral ragwort PDAST8H060 None None G3 S2 2B.2 Setophaga petechia yellow warbler ABPBX03010 None None G5 S3S4 SSC Sidalcea neomexicana salt spring checkerbloom PDMAL110J0 None None G4 S2 2B.2 Sorex ornatus salicornicus southern California saltmarsh shrew AMABA01104 None None G5T1?S1 SSC Southern California Arroyo Chub/Santa Ana Sucker Stream Southern California Arroyo Chub/Santa Ana Sucker Stream CARE2330CA None None GNR SNR Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest CTT61310CA None None G4 S4 Southern Coastal Salt Marsh Southern Coastal Salt Marsh CTT52120CA None None G2 S2.1 Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest CTT61330CA None None G3 S3.2 Southern Dune Scrub Southern Dune Scrub CTT21330CA None None G1 S1.1 Southern Foredunes Southern Foredunes CTT21230CA None None G2 S2.1 Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland CTT62400CA None None G4 S4 Southern Willow Scrub Southern Willow Scrub CTT63320CA None None G3 S2.1 Spea hammondii western spadefoot AAABF02020 None None G3 S3 SSC Sternula antillarum browni California least tern ABNNM08103 Endangered Endangered G4T2T3Q S2 FP Streptocephalus woottoni Riverside fairy shrimp ICBRA07010 Endangered None G1G2 S1S2 Suaeda esteroa estuary seablite PDCHE0P0D0 None None G3 S2 1B.2 Symphyotrichum defoliatum San Bernardino aster PDASTE80C0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Taxidea taxus American badger AMAJF04010 None None G5 S3 SSC Trigonoscuta dorothea dorothea Dorothy's El Segundo Dune weevil IICOL51021 None None G1T1 S1 Tryonia imitator mimic tryonia (=California brackishwater snail) IMGASJ7040 None None G2 S2 Report Printed on Wednesday, January 06, 2021 Page 5 of 6Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2021 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2021 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant Rank/CDFW SSC or FP Vireo bellii pusillus least Bell's vireo ABPBW01114 Endangered Endangered G5T2 S2 Record Count: 104 Report Printed on Wednesday, January 06, 2021 Page 6 of 6Commercial Version -- Dated January, 1 2021 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 7/1/2021 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database 1/6/2021 CNPS Inventory Results www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3311881:3311788:3311787:3311871:3311778:3311777:3311861:3311768:3311767#cdisp=1,2,3,4,1…1/6 Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants*The database used to provide updates to the Online Inventory is under construction. View updates and changes made since May 2019 here. Plant List 43 matches found. Click on scientific name for details Search Criteria Found in Quads 3311881, 3311788, 3311787, 3311871, 3311778, 3311777, 3311861 3311768 and 3311767; Modify Search Criteria Export to Excel Modify Columns Modify Sort Display Photos Scientific Name Common Name Family Lifeform Federal Listing Status State Listing Status CA Rare Plant Rank Habitats Lowest Elevation Highest Elevation Blooming Period Abronia maritima red sand- verbena Nyctaginaceae perennial herb 4.2 • Coastal dunes 0 m 100 m Feb-Nov Abronia villosa var. aurita chaparral sand-verbena Nyctaginaceae annual herb 1B.1 • Chaparral • Coastal scrub • Desert dunes 75 m 1600 m (Jan)Mar- Sep Aphanisma blitoides aphanisma Chenopodiaceae annual herb 1B.2 • Coastal bluff scrub • Coastal dunes • Coastal scrub 1 m 305 m Feb-Jun Astragalus pycnostachyus var. lanosissimus Ventura marsh milk- vetch Fabaceae perennial herb FE CE 1B.1 • Coastal dunes • Coastal scrub • Marshes and swamps (edges, coastal salt or brackish) 1 m 35 m (Jun)Aug- Oct Atriplex coulteri Coulter's saltbush Chenopodiaceae perennial herb 1B.2 • Coastal bluff scrub • Coastal dunes • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland 3 m 460 m Mar-Oct Atriplex pacifica South Coast saltscale Chenopodiaceae annual herb 1B.2 • Coastal bluff scrub • Coastal dunes • Coastal 0 m 140 m Mar-Oct 1/6/2021 CNPS Inventory Results www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3311881:3311788:3311787:3311871:3311778:3311777:3311861:3311768:3311767#cdisp=1,2,3,4,1…2/6 scrub • Playas Atriplex parishii Parish's brittlescale Chenopodiaceae annual herb 1B.1 • Chenopod scrub • Playas • Vernal pools 25 m 1900 m Jun-Oct Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii Davidson's saltscale Chenopodiaceae annual herb 1B.2 • Coastal bluff scrub • Coastal scrub 10 m 200 m Apr-Oct Calochortus catalinae Catalina mariposa lily Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 4.2 • Chaparral • Cismontane woodland • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland 15 m 700 m (Feb)Mar- Jun Calochortus plummerae Plummer's mariposa lily Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 4.2 • Chaparral • Cismontane woodland • Coastal scrub • Lower montane coniferous forest • Valley and foothill grassland 100 m 1700 m May-Jul Calochortus weedii var. intermedius intermediate mariposa lily Liliaceae perennial bulbiferous herb 1B.2 • Chaparral • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland 105 m 855 m May-Jul Calystegia felix lucky morning-glory Convolvulaceae annual rhizomatous herb 1B.1 • Meadows and seeps (sometimes alkaline) • Riparian scrub (alluvial) 30 m 215 m Mar-Sep Camissoniopsis lewisii Lewis' evening- primrose Onagraceae annual herb 3 • Coastal bluff scrub • Cismontane woodland • Coastal dunes • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland 0 m 300 m Mar- May(Jun) Centromadia parryi ssp. australis southern tarplant Asteraceae annual herb 1B.1 • Marshes and swamps (margins) • Valley and foothill grassland (vernally mesic) 0 m 480 m May-Nov 1/6/2021 CNPS Inventory Results www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3311881:3311788:3311787:3311871:3311778:3311777:3311861:3311768:3311767#cdisp=1,2,3,4,1…3/6 • Vernal pools Chloropyron maritimum ssp. maritimum salt marsh bird's-beak Orobanchaceae annual herb (hemiparasitic)FE CE 1B.2 • Coastal dunes • Marshes and swamps (coastal salt) 0 m 30 m May- Oct(Nov) Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina San Fernando Valley spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb FC CE 1B.1 • Coastal scrub (sandy) • Valley and foothill grassland 150 m 1220 m Apr-Jul Convolvulus simulans small- flowered morning-glory Convolvulaceae annual herb 4.2 • Chaparral (openings) • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland 30 m 740 m Mar-Jul Deinandra paniculata paniculate tarplant Asteraceae annual herb 4.2 • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland • Vernal pools 25 m 940 m (Mar)Apr- Nov(Dec) Dudleya multicaulis many- stemmed dudleya Crassulaceae perennial herb 1B.2 • Chaparral • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland 15 m 790 m Apr-Jul Dudleya stolonifera Laguna Beach dudleya Crassulaceae perennial stoloniferous herb FT CT 1B.1 • Chaparral • Cismontane woodland • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland 10 m 260 m May-Jul Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii San Diego button-celery Apiaceae annual / perennial herb FE CE 1B.1 • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland • Vernal pools 20 m 620 m Apr-Jun Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishii Los Angeles sunflower Asteraceae perennial rhizomatous herb 1A • Marshes and swamps (coastal salt and freshwater) 10 m 1525 m Aug-Oct Hordeum intercedens vernal barley Poaceae annual herb 3.2 • Coastal dunes • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland (saline flats and depressions) 5 m 1000 m Mar-Jun 1/6/2021 CNPS Inventory Results www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3311881:3311788:3311787:3311871:3311778:3311777:3311861:3311768:3311767#cdisp=1,2,3,4,1…4/6 • Vernal pools Juglans californica Southern California black walnut Juglandaceae perennial deciduous tree 4.2 • Chaparral • Cismontane woodland • Coastal scrub • Riparian woodland 50 m 900 m Mar-Aug Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii southwestern spiny rush Juncaceae perennial rhizomatous herb 4.2 • Coastal dunes (mesic) • Meadows and seeps (alkaline seeps) • Marshes and swamps (coastal salt) 3 m 900 m (Mar)May- Jun Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields Asteraceae annual herb 1B.1 • Marshes and swamps (coastal salt) • Playas • Vernal pools 1 m 1220 m Feb-Jun Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii Robinson's pepper-grass Brassicaceae annual herb 4.3 • Chaparral • Coastal scrub 1 m 885 m Jan-Jul Nama stenocarpa mud nama Namaceae annual / perennial herb 2B.2 • Marshes and swamps (lake margins, riverbanks) 5 m 500 m Jan-Jul Nasturtium gambelii Gambel's water cress Brassicaceae perennial rhizomatous herb FE CT 1B.1 • Marshes and swamps (freshwater or brackish) 5 m 330 m Apr-Oct Navarretia prostrata prostrate vernal pool navarretia Polemoniaceae annual herb 1B.1 • Coastal scrub • Meadows and seeps • Valley and foothill grassland (alkaline) • Vernal pools 3 m 1210 m Apr-Jul Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata coast woolly- heads Polygonaceae annual herb 1B.2 • Coastal dunes 0 m 100 m Apr-Sep Orcuttia californica California Orcutt grass Poaceae annual herb FE CE 1B.1 • Vernal pools 15 m 660 m Apr-Aug Phacelia hubbyi Hubby's phacelia Hydrophyllaceae annual herb 4.2 • Chaparral • Coastal scrub • Valley and foothill grassland 0 m 1000 m Apr-Jul Phacelia ramosissima var. austrolitoralis south coast branching phacelia Hydrophyllaceae perennial herb 3.2 • Chaparral • Coastal dunes • Coastal 5 m 300 m Mar-Aug 1/6/2021 CNPS Inventory Results www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3311881:3311788:3311787:3311871:3311778:3311777:3311861:3311768:3311767#cdisp=1,2,3,4,1…5/6 scrub • Marshes and swamps (coastal salt) Phacelia stellaris Brand's star phacelia Hydrophyllaceae annual herb 1B.1 • Coastal dunes • Coastal scrub 1 m 400 m Mar-Jun Quercus engelmannii Engelmann oak Fagaceae perennial deciduous tree 4.2 • Chaparral • Cismontane woodland • Riparian woodland • Valley and foothill grassland 50 m 1300 m Mar-Jun Ribes divaricatum var. parishii Parish's gooseberry Grossulariaceae perennial deciduous shrub 1A • Riparian woodland 65 m 300 m Feb-Apr Romneya coulteri Coulter's matilija poppy Papaveraceae perennial rhizomatous herb 4.2 • Chaparral • Coastal scrub 20 m 1200 m Mar- Jul(Aug) Sagittaria sanfordii Sanford's arrowhead Alismataceae perennial rhizomatous herb (emergent) 1B.2 • Marshes and swamps (assorted shallow freshwater) 0 m 650 m May- Oct(Nov) Senecio aphanactis chaparral ragwort Asteraceae annual herb 2B.2 • Chaparral • Cismontane woodland • Coastal scrub 15 m 800 m Jan- Apr(May) Sidalcea neomexicana salt spring checkerbloom Malvaceae perennial herb 2B.2 • Chaparral • Coastal scrub • Lower montane coniferous forest • Mojavean desert scrub • Playas 15 m 1530 m Mar-Jun Suaeda esteroa estuary seablite Chenopodiaceae perennial herb 1B.2 • Marshes and swamps (coastal salt) 0 m 5 m (May)Jul- Oct(Jan) Symphyotrichum defoliatum San Bernardino aster Asteraceae perennial rhizomatous herb 1B.2 • Cismontane woodland • Coastal scrub • Lower montane coniferous forest • Meadows and seeps • Marshes and swamps • Valley and foothill grassland (vernally mesic) 2 m 2040 m Jul- Nov(Dec) 1/6/2021 CNPS Inventory Results www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3311881:3311788:3311787:3311871:3311778:3311777:3311861:3311768:3311767#cdisp=1,2,3,4,1…6/6 Search the Inventory Simple Search Advanced Search Glossary Information About the Inventory About the Rare Plant Program CNPS Home Page About CNPS Join CNPS Contributors The Calflora Database The California Lichen Society California Natural Diversity Database The Jepson Flora Project The Consortium of California Herbaria CalPhotos Questions and Comments rareplants@cnps.org Suggested Citation California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2021. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 06 January 2021]. © Copyright 2010-2018 California Native Plant Society. All rights reserved. 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 1/13 IPaC resource list This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly a 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 2/13 Endangered species This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts. The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of in 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 3/13 Flowering Plants Critical habitats Potential e 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 4/13 The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 5/13 Costa's Hummingbird Calypte costae This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9470 Breeds Jan 15 to Jun 10 Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in o 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 6/13 Probability of Presence Summary The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence () Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey e 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 7/13  no data survey e 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 8/13 Costa's Hummingbird BCC - BCR (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA) Golden Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable (This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in o 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 9/13 Rufous Hummingbird BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.) Short-billed Dowitcher BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.) Song Sparrow BCC - BCR (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA) SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Spotted Towhee BCC - BCR (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA) Willet BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.) 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 10/13 Wrentit BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.) Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds. Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site. What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my speci 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 11/13 What are the levels of concern for migratory birds? Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern: 1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Paci 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 12/13 Facilities National Wildlife Refuge lands Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns. THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION. Fish hatcheries THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION. Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District. THERE ARE NO KNOWN WETLANDS AT THIS LOCATION. Data limitations The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identi 5/5/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/APICRNNTXZGMDBMLKRX35RTA4I/resources 13/13 Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuber THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix C: Cultural Resources Supporting Information THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 00550083 • 02/2021 | 00550083_record_search_results_map.mxd Record Search MapResults Map Source: Source: USGS Anaheim 7.5' Quadrangle / Land Grant: San Juan Cajon de Santa Ana (USGS Publication Date: 1981) CITY OF ANEHEIMANAHEIM LEGACY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTRECORDS SEARCH RESULTS MAP OR-03373 (dashed blue line) OR-2506 OR-04610 OR-00814 OR-01898 OR-02904 2,000 0 2,0001,000 Feet Legend Project Area Half-Mile Radius Reports within the project area: 06 additional reports within the 1-mile radius: OR-02904, OR-01898, OR-03373, OR-2506,OR-00814, OR-04610 _________________________________________________________________________________________ California Historical Resources Information System CHRIS Data Request Form ACCESS AND USE AGREEMENT NO.:_______________ IC FILE NO.:________________________ To: ___________________________________________________________________ Information Center Print Name: ____________________________________________________ Date: _____________________ Affiliation: ________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________________________________ City: _________________________________________ State: ________________ Zip: __________________ Phone: __________________ Fax: __________________ Email: ____________________________________ Billing Address (if different than above): _________________________________________________________ Billing Email: _______________________________________________ Billing Phone: ___________________ Project Name / Reference: ___________________________________________________________________ Project Street Address: ______________________________________________________________________ County or Counties: ________________________________________________________________________ Township/Range/UTMs: _____________________________________________________________________ USGS 7.5’ Quad(s): ________________________________________________________________________ PRIORITY RESPONSE (Additional Fee): yes / no TOTAL FEE NOT TO EXCEED: $___________________________ (If blank, the Information Center will contact you if the fee is expected to exceed $1,000.00) Special Instructions: Information Center Use Only Date of CHRIS Data Provided for this Request: ___________________________________________________ Confidential Data Included in Response: yes / no Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________ 1 of 3 2-29-2020 Version California Historical Resources Information System CHRIS Data Request Form Mark the request form as needed. Attach a PDF of your project area (with the radius if applicable) mapped on a 7.5’ USGS topographic quadrangle to scale 1:24000 ratio 1:1 neither enlarged nor reduced and include a shapefile of your project area, if available. Shapefiles are the current CHRIS standard for submitting digital spatial data for your project area or radius. Check with the appropriate IC for current availability of digital data products. •Documents will be provided in PDF format. Paper copies will only be provided if PDFs are not available at the time of the request or under specially arranged circumstances. •Location information will be provided as a digital map product (Custom Maps or GIS data) unless the area has not yet been digitized. In such circumstances, the IC may provide hand drawn maps. •In addition to the $150/hr. staff time fee, client will be charged the Custom Map fee when GIS is required to complete the request [e.g., a map printout or map image/PDF is requested and no GIS Data is requested, or an electronic product is requested (derived from GIS data) but no mapping is requested]. For product fees, see the CHRIS IC Fee Structure on the OHP website. 1. Map Format Choice: Select One: Custom GIS Maps GIS Data Custom GIS Maps and GIS Data No Maps  Any selection below left unmarked will be considered a "no. " Location Information: Within project area Within radius ______ ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Locations1 yes / no yes / no NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Locations yes / no yes / no Report Locations1 yes / no yes / no “Other” Report Locations2 yes / no yes / no 3. Database Information: (contact the IC for product examples, or visit the SSJVIC website for examples) Within project area Within radius______ ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Database1 List (PDF format)yes / no yes / no Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Database List (PDF format)yes / no yes / no Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no Report Database1 List (PDF format)yes / no yes / no Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no Include “Other” Reports 2 yes / no yes / no 4. Document PDFs (paper copy only upon request): Within project area Within radius ______ ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Records1 yes / no yes / no NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Records yes / no yes / no Reports1 yes / no yes / no “Other” Reports2 yes / no yes / no 2 of 3 2-29-2020 Version California Historical Resources Information System CHRIS Data Request Form 5. Eligibility Listings and Documentation: Within project area Within radius______ OHP Built Environment Resources Directory3: Directory listing only (Excel format) yes / no yes / no Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no OHP Archaeological Resources Directory1,5: Directory listing only (Excel format) yes / no yes / no Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no California Inventory of Historic Resources (1976): Directory listing only (PDF format) yes / no yes / no Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no 6. Additional Information: The following sources of information may be available through the Information Center. However, several of these sources are now available on the OHP website and can be accessed di rectly. The Office of Historic Preservation makes no guarantees about the availability, completeness, or accuracy of the information provided through these sources. Indicate below if the Information Center should review and provide documentation (if available) of any of the following sources as part of this request. Caltrans Bridge Survey yes / no Ethnographic Information yes / no Historical Literature yes / no Historical Maps yes / no Local Inventories yes / no GLO and/or Rancho Plat Maps yes / no Shipwreck Inventory yes / no Soil Survey Maps yes / no 1 In order to receive archaeological information, requestor must meet qualifications as specified in Section III of the current version of the California Historical Resources Information System Information Center Rules of Operation Manual and be identified as an Authorized User or Conditional User under an active CHRIS Access and Use Agreement. 2 “Other” Reports GIS layer consists of report study areas for which the report content is almost entirely non-fieldwork related (e.g., local/regional history, or overview) and/or for which the presentation of the study area boundary may or may not add value to a record search. 3 Provided as Excel spreadsheets with no cost for the rows; the only cost for this component is IC staff time. Includes, but not limited to, information regarding National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, California State Historical Landmarks, California State Points of Historical Interest, and historic building surveys. Previously known as the HRI and then as the HPD, it is now known as the Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD). The Office of Historic Preservation compiles this documentation and it is the source of the official status codes for evaluated resources. 4 Associated documentation will vary by resource. Contact the IC for further details. 5 Provided as Excel spreadsheets with no cost for the rows; the only cost for this component is IC staff time. Previously known as the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, now it is known as the Archaeological Resources Directory (ARD) . The Office of Historic Preservation compiles this documentation and it is the source of the official status codes for evaluated resources. 3 of 3 2-29-2020 Version South Central Coastal Information Center California State University, Fullerton Department of Anthropology MH-426 800 North State College Boulevard Fullerton, CA 92834-6846 657.278.5395 / FAX 657.278.5542 sccic@fullerton.edu California Historical Resources Information System Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura Counties _____________________________________________________________________________ 2/18/2021 Records Search File No.: 22031.8198 Stefanie Griffin FirstCarbon Solutions 250 Commerce #250 Irvine CA 92602 Re: Records Search Results for the Anaheim Legacy Project The South Central Coastal Information Center received your records search request for the project area referenced above, located on the Anaheim, CA USGS 7.5’ quadrangle. Due to the COVID-19 emergency, we have temporarily implemented new records search protocols. With the exception of some reports that have not yet been scanned, we are operationally digital for Los Angeles, Orange, and Ventura Counties. See attached document for your reference on what data is available in this format. The following reflects the results of the records search for the project area and a ½-mile radius: As indicated on the data request form, the locations of resources and reports are provided in the following format: ☐ custom GIS maps ☒ shape files ☐ hand drawn maps Resources within project area: 0 None Resources within ½-mile radius: 0 None Reports within project area: 0 None Reports within ½-mile radius: 6 SEE ATTACHED LIST Resource Database Printout (list): ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Resource Database Printout (details): ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Resource Digital Database (spreadsheet): ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Database Printout (list): ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Database Printout (details): ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Digital Database (spreadsheet): ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed Resource Record Copies: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Report Copies: ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed OHP Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD) 2019: ☒ available online; please go to https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30338 Archaeo Determinations of Eligibility 2012: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Historical Maps: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Ethnographic Information: ☒ not available at SCCIC Historical Literature: ☒ not available at SCCIC GLO and/or Rancho Plat Maps: ☒ not available at SCCIC Caltrans Bridge Survey: ☒ not available at SCCIC; please go to http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/structur/strmaint/historic.htm Shipwreck Inventory: ☒ not available at SCCIC; please go to http://shipwrecks.slc.ca.gov/ShipwrecksDatabase/Shipwrecks_Database.asp Soil Survey Maps: (see below) ☒ not available at SCCIC; please go to http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Please forward a copy of any resulting reports from this project to the office as soon as possible. Due to the sensitive nature of archaeological site location data, we ask that you do not include resource location maps and resource location descriptions in your report if the report is for public distribution. If you have any questions regarding the results presented herein, please contact the office at the phone number listed above. The provision of CHRIS Data via this records search response does not in any way constitute public disclosure of records otherwise exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act or any other law, including, but not limited to, records related to archeological site information maintained by or on behalf of, or in the possession of, the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, State Historic Preservation Officer, Office of Historic Preservation, or the State Historical Resources Commission. Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area. Additionally, Native American tribes have historical resource information not in the CHRIS Inventory, and you should contact the California Native American Heritage Commission for information on local/regional tribal contacts. Should you require any additional information for the above referenced project, reference the record search number listed above when making inquiries. Requests made after initial invoicing will result in the preparation of a separate invoice. Thank you for using the California Historical Resources Information System, Michelle Galaz Assistant Coordinator Enclosures: (X) Emergency Protocols for LA, Orange, and Ventura County BULK Processing Standards – 2 pages (X) GIS Shapefiles – 6 shapes (X) Report Database Printout (list) – 1 page (X) Report Database Printout (details) – 6 pages (X) Report Digital Database (spreadsheet) – 6 lines (X) Report Copies – (all) – 722 pages (X) Invoice #22031.8198 Emergency Protocols for LA, Orange, and Ventura County BULK or SINGLE PROJECT Records Searches IF YOU HAVE A GIS PERSON ON STAFF ONLY!! These instructions are for qualified consultants with a valid Access and Use Agreement. WE ARE ONLY PROVIDING DATA THAT IS ALREADY DIGITAL AT THIS TIME. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY IS NOT DIGITAL AND THESE INSTRUCTIONS DO NOT APPLY. Some of you have a fully digital operation and have GIS staff on board who can process a fully digital deliverable from the Information Center. IF you can accept shape file data and do not require a custom map made for you by the SCCIC, and you are willing to sort the data we provide to you then these instructions are for you. Read further to be sure. You may have only one project at this time or some of you have a lot of different search locations that can be processed all at once. This may save you a lot of time getting results back and if we process your jobs in bulk, and you may enjoy significant cost savings as well. If you need individual invoice or summaries for each search location, then bulk processing is not for you and you need to submit a data request form for each search location. Bulk processing will work for you if you have a GIS person on staff who can sort bulk data for you and make you any necessary project maps. This type of job can have as many job locations as you want but the point is that we will do them in bulk – at the same time - not one at a time. We send all the bulk data back to you and you sort it. This will work if you need searches in LA, Orange, or Ventura AND if they all have the same search radius and if all the other search criteria is the same– no exceptions. This will not work for San Bernardino County because we are not fully digital for San Bernardino County. You must submit all your shape files for each location at the same time and this will count as one search. If you have some that need a different radius, or different search criteria, then you should submit that job separately with its own set of instructions. INSTRUCTIONS FOR BULK PROCESSING: Please send in your requests via email using the data request form along with the associated shape files and pdf maps of the project area(s) at 1-24k scale. PDFs must be able to be printed out on 8.5X 11 paper. We check your shape file data against the pdf maps. This is where we find discrepancies between your shape files and your maps. This is required. Please use this data request form and make sure you fill it out properly. http://web.sonoma.edu/nwic/docs/CHRISDataRequestForm.pdf DELIVERABLES: 1. A copy of the Built Environment Resources Directory or BERD for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, or San Bernardino County can now be found at the OHP Website for you to do your own research. This replaces the old Historic Properties Directory or HPD. We will not be searching this for you at this time but you can search it while you are waiting for our results to save time. You will only get shapefiles back, which means that you will have to make your own maps for each project location. WARNING! If you don’t request the shape files, you won’t be able to tell which reports are in the project area or the search radius. Please note that you are charged for each map feature even if you opt out of receiving shape files. You cannot get secondary products such as bibliographies or pdfs of records in the project area or search radius if you don’t pay for the primary products (shape files) as this is the scaffolding upon which the secondary products are derived. If you do not understand the digital fee structure, ask before we process your request and send you data. You can find the digital fee structure on the OHP website under the CHRIS tab. In order to keep costs down, you must be willing to make adjustments to the search radius or what you are expecting to receive as part of the search. Remember that some areas are loaded with data and others are sparse – our fees will reflect that. 2. You will get a bulk processed bibliographies for resources and reports as selected; you will not get individual bibliographies for each project location. 3. You will get pdfs of resources and reports if you request them, provided that they are in digital formats. We will not be scanning records or reports at this time. 4. You will get one invoice for the bulk data processing. We can’t bill this as individual jobs on separate invoices for you. If there are multiple project names, we are willing to reference all the job names on the invoice if needed. If there a lot of job id’s we may ask you to send them in an email so that we can copy and paste it into the invoice details. If you need to bill your clients for the data, you can refer to our fee schedule on the OHP website under the CHRIS tab and apply the fees accordingly. 5. We will be billing you at the staff rate of $150 per hour and you will be charged for all resources and report locations according to the CHRIS Fee Structure. ($12 per GIS shape file; 0.15 per pdf page, or 0.25 per excel line; quad fees will apply if your research includes more than 2 quads). Discounts offered early on in our Covid-19 response will no longer be offered on any records searched submitted after October 5th, 2020. 6. Your packet will be sent to you electronically via Dropbox. We use 7-zip to password protect the files so you will need both on your computers. We email you the password. If you can’t use Dropbox for some reason, then you will need to provide us with your Fed ex account number and we will ship you a disc with the results. As a last resort, we will ship on a disc via the USPS. You may be billed for our shipping and handling costs. I may not have been able to cover every possible contingency in this set of instructions and will update it if necessary. You can email me with questions at sccic@fullerton.edu Thank you, Stacy St. James South Central Coastal Information Center Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, and San Bernardino Counties Report List Report No.Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s)ResourcesOther IDs OR-00814 1982 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT for the Route I-5 Santa Ana Transportation Corridor, Route 405 in Orange County to Route 605 in Los Angeles County Pm 21.30/44.38; 0.00/6.85 CaltransRomani, John F. OR-01898 1990 Finding of Effect Widening of Interstate 5 and Reconstruction of Interchanges Between State Routes 22/57 and 91 in the Cities of Santa Ana, Orange, Anaheim, Fullerton and Buena Park CaltransAnonymous 30-161815, 30-161816 OR-02506 1978 Historic Property Survey, Haster Street Overcrossing Caltrans District 7Webb, Lois M. and Gene Huey OR-02904 2002 Cultural Resource Assessment for Cingular Wireless Facility Sm189-01, City of Anaheim, Orange County, California Kyle ConsultingKyle, Carolyn E. OR-03373 2006 Cultural Resources Final Report of Monitoring and Findings for the Qwest Network Construction Project State of California: Volumes I and Ii SWCA Environmental Consultants, Inc.Arrington, Cindy and Nancy Sikes OR-04610 2017 Cultural Resources Assessment, Anaheim Boulevard Hotel Development, City of Anaheim, Orange County, California First Carbon SolutionsBrandman, Jason and So, Cecilia Page 1 of 1 SCCIC 2/9/2021 11:23:31 AM Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request Native American Heritage Commission 1550 Harbor Blvd, Suite 100 West Sacramento, CA 95691 916-373-3710 916-373-5471 – Fax nahc@nahc.ca.gov Type of List Requested ☐ CEQA Tribal Consultation List (AB 52) – Per Public Resources Code § 21080.3.1, subs. (b), (d), (e) and 21080.3.2 ☐ General Plan (SB 18) - Per Government Code § 65352.3. Local Action Type: ___ General Plan ___ General Plan Element ___ General Plan Amendment ___ Specific Plan ___ Specific Plan Amendment ___ Pre-planning Outreach Activity Required Information Project Title:____________________________________________________________________________ Local Government/Lead Agency: ___________________________________________________________ Contact Person: __________________________________________________________________________ Street Address: ___________________________________________________________________________ City:_____________________________________________________ Zip:__________________________ Phone:____________________________________ Fax:_________________________________________ Email:_____________________________________________ Specific Area Subject to Proposed Action County:________________________________ City/Community: ___________________________ Project Description: Additional Request ☐ Sacred Lands File Search - Required Information: USGS Quadrangle Name(s):____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Township:___________________ Range:___________________ Section(s):___________________ STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION Page 1 of 2 January 25, 2021 Stefanie Griffin City of Anaheim Via Email to: sgriffin@fcs-intl.com & spignotti@fcs-intl.com Re: Native American Tribal Consultation, Pursuant to the Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014), Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 (m), 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2 and 21084.3, Legacy Anaheim Project, Orange County Dear Ms. Griffin: Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (c), attached is a consultation list of tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the above-listed project. Please note that the intent of the AB 52 amendments to CEQA is to avoid and/or mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources, (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)) (“Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource.”) Public Resources Code sections 21080.3.1 and 21084.3(c) require CEQA lead agencies to consult with California Native American tribes that have requested notice from such agencies of proposed projects in the geographic area that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribes on projects for which a Notice of Preparation or Notice of Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration has been filed on or after July 1, 2015. Specifically, Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (d) provides: Within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or a tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation pursuant to this section. The AB 52 amendments to CEQA law does not preclude initiating consultation with the tribes that are culturally and traditionally affiliated within your jurisdiction prior to receiving requests for notification of projects in the tribe’s areas of traditional and cultural affiliation. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) recommends, but does not require, early consultation as a best practice to ensure that lead agencies receive sufficient information about cultural resources in a project area to avoid damaging effects to tribal cultural resources. The NAHC also recommends, but does not require that agencies should also include with their notification letters, information regarding any cultural resources assessment that has been completed on the area of potential effect (APE), such as: 1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to: CHAIRPERSON Laura Miranda Luiseño VICE CHAIRPERSON Reginald Pagaling Chumash SECRETARY Merri Lopez-Keifer Luiseño PARLIAMENTARIAN Russell Attebery Karuk COMMISSIONER William Mungary Paiute/White Mountain Apache COMMISSIONER Julie Tumamait-Stenslie Chumash COMMISSIONER [Vacant] COMMISSIONER [Vacant] COMMISSIONER [Vacant] EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Christina Snider Pomo NAHC HEADQUARTERS 1550 Harbor Boulevard Suite 100 West Sacramento, California 95691 (916) 373-3710 nahc@nahc.ca.gov NAHC.ca.gov Page 2 of 2 • A listing of any and all known cultural resources that have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE, such as known archaeological sites; • Copies of any and all cultural resource records and study reports that may have been provided by the Information Center as part of the records search response; • Whether the records search indicates a low, moderate, or high probability that unrecorded cultural resources are located in the APE; and • If a survey is recommended by the Information Center to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present. 2. The results of any archaeological inventory survey that was conducted, including: • Any report that may contain site forms, site significance, and suggested mitigation measures. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for public disclosure in accordance with Government Code section 6254.10. 3. The result of any Sacred Lands File (SLF) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission was negative. 4. Any ethnographic studies conducted for any area including all or part of the APE; and 5. Any geotechnical reports regarding all or part of the APE. Lead agencies should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS are not exhaustive and a negative response to these searches does not preclude the existence of a tribal cultural resource. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding the existence of a tribal cultural resource. This information will aid tribes in determining whether to request formal consultation. In the event that they do, having the information beforehand will help to facilitate the consultation process. If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance, we can assure that our consultation list remains current. If you have any questions, please contact me at my email address: Andrew.Green@nahc.ca.gov. Sincerely, Andrew Green Cultural Resources Analyst Attachment Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians Ralph Goff, Chairperson 36190 Church Road, Suite 1 Campo, CA, 91906 Phone: (619) 478 - 9046 Fax: (619) 478-5818 rgoff@campo-nsn.gov Diegueno Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians Michael Garcia, Vice Chairperson 4054 Willows Road Alpine, CA, 91901 Phone: (619) 445 - 6315 Fax: (619) 445-9126 michaelg@leaningrock.net Diegueno Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians Robert Pinto, Chairperson 4054 Willows Road Alpine, CA, 91901 Phone: (619) 445 - 6315 Fax: (619) 445-9126 wmicklin@leaningrock.net Diegueno Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation Andrew Salas, Chairperson P.O. Box 393 Covina, CA, 91723 Phone: (626) 926 - 4131 admin@gabrielenoindians.org Gabrieleno Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians Anthony Morales, Chairperson P.O. Box 693 San Gabriel, CA, 91778 Phone: (626) 483 - 3564 Fax: (626) 286-1262 GTTribalcouncil@aol.com Gabrieleno Gabrielino /Tongva Nation Sandonne Goad, Chairperson 106 1/2 Judge John Aiso St., #231 Los Angeles, CA, 90012 Phone: (951) 807 - 0479 sgoad@gabrielino-tongva.com Gabrielino Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Robert Dorame, Chairperson P.O. Box 490 Bellflower, CA, 90707 Phone: (562) 761 - 6417 Fax: (562) 761-6417 gtongva@gmail.com Gabrielino Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe Charles Alvarez, 23454 Vanowen Street West Hills, CA, 91307 Phone: (310) 403 - 6048 roadkingcharles@aol.com Gabrielino Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation - Belardes Matias Belardes, Chairperson 32161 Avenida Los Amigos San Juan Capisttrano, CA, 92675 Phone: (949) 293 - 8522 kaamalam@gmail.com Juaneno La Posta Band of Diegueno Mission Indians Javaughn Miller, Tribal Administrator 8 Crestwood Road Boulevard, CA, 91905 Phone: (619) 478 - 2113 Fax: (619) 478-2125 jmiller@LPtribe.net Diegueno La Posta Band of Diegueno Mission Indians Gwendolyn Parada, Chairperson 8 Crestwood Road Boulevard, CA, 91905 Phone: (619) 478 - 2113 Fax: (619) 478-2125 LP13boots@aol.com Diegueno 1 of 2 This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1 for the proposed Legacy Anaheim Project, Orange County. PROJ-2021- 000448 01/25/2021 03:19 PM Native American Heritage Commission Tribal Consultation List Orange County 1/25/2021 Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Nation Angela Elliott Santos, Chairperson P.O. Box 1302 Boulevard, CA, 91905 Phone: (619) 766 - 4930 Fax: (619) 766-4957 Diegueno Mesa Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians Michael Linton, Chairperson P.O Box 270 Santa Ysabel, CA, 92070 Phone: (760) 782 - 3818 Fax: (760) 782-9092 mesagrandeband@msn.com Diegueno Pala Band of Mission Indians Shasta Gaughen, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Rd. Pala, CA, 92059 Phone: (760) 891 - 3515 Fax: (760) 742-3189 sgaughen@palatribe.com Cupeno Luiseno Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair P.O. Box 391820 Anza, CA, 92539 Phone: (951) 659 - 2700 Fax: (951) 659-2228 lsaul@santarosa-nsn.gov Cahuilla Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians Scott Cozart, Chairperson P. O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92583 Phone: (951) 654 - 2765 Fax: (951) 654-4198 jontiveros@soboba-nsn.gov Cahuilla Luiseno Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation Cody Martinez, Chairperson 1 Kwaaypaay Court El Cajon, CA, 92019 Phone: (619) 445 - 2613 Fax: (619) 445-1927 ssilva@sycuan-nsn.gov Kumeyaay 2 of 2 This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1 for the proposed Legacy Anaheim Project, Orange County. PROJ-2021- 000448 01/25/2021 03:19 PM Native American Heritage Commission Tribal Consultation List Orange County 1/25/2021   4/5/21 (R:\AHM1804.03\Cover memo CT.docx)      CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California  92507     951.781.9310     www.lsa.net  LSA is a business name of LSA Associates, Inc.    MEMORANDUM  DATE: April 5, 2021  TO: Stephen Stoewer, Senior Project Manager, City of Anaheim FROM: Laura Carias, M.A., Architectural Historian  SUBJECT: Section 106 Compliance for the Anaheim Midway Affordable Housing Project, 200  West Midway Drive, City of Anaheim, California (LSA Project Number AHM1804.03)  LSA completed a historical evaluation of the property at 200 West Midway Drive (Assessor’s Parcel  Number 082‐182‐01) in Anaheim, California. The evaluation was documented on Department of  Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523A (Primary Record) and 523B (Building, Structure, and Object  Record) forms and the property was identified on a DPR Location Map (attached).  As a result of that evaluation, which included archival research and an intensive‐level field survey, it  was determined that the 1966 office building for “Midway Trailer City,” now “Anaheim RV Park”  does not appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under any criteria.  It has sustained a few alterations (new windows and front door) that have compromised its  integrity, it is not the work of a master or associated with any historically significant people, and is  not individually significant for its association with the Tourism, Suburbanization, and Industrial  Growth Context or the mobile/trailer park historic context statement.  For these reasons, the commercial building at 200 West Midway Drive does not qualify as a “historic  property” pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and, for  purposes of this project, the City may make a finding of “no effect” with regard to historic  properties.  Attachment: DPR Forms  DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code 6Z Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 11 Resource Name or #: 200 West Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 P1. Other Identifier: Anaheim Resort RV Park *P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted *a. County: Orange and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Anaheim Date: 1981, 2020 T 04S ; R 10W ; S.B.B.M. c. Address: 200 West Midway Drive City: Anaheim Zip: 92805 d. UTM: Zone: 11; mE/ mN (G.P.S.) e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, etc., as appropriate): Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 082-182-01 *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The subject property is a one-story, commercial building located on the southeast corner of West Midway Drive and South Zeyn Street. It is a concrete masonry unit (CMU) utilitarian commercial building in the vernacular designed with smooth concrete blocks on all four elevations and flared CMU blocks along the parapet on the north and west elevations. It has a rectangular floorplan, flat roof, and sits on a concrete slab. The main entrance is located at an angle at the northwest corner. Large, metal roll-up doors (likely large enough to accommodate RVs) are located on the southern end of the west elevation and eastern end of the north elevation. Replacement iodized aluminum windows are located on the north and west elevations beneath contemporary cloth awnings. A well-maintained planting bed is located along the north elevation. A cabinet sign reading “ANAHEIM RESORT RV PARK OFFICE” is located above the main entrance on the west elevation. The property has been recently vacated and is in good condition. *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP6. Commercial Building *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) North (left) and west (right) elevations, view southeast *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: Historic Prehistoric Both 1966, City of Anaheim *P7. Owner and Address: City of Anaheim 200 S Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California 92805 *P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address) Laura Carias, M.A. LSA Associates, Inc. 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200 Riverside, California 92507 *P9. Date Recorded: April 3, 2021 *P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Section 106 compliance intensive pedestrian survey *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") None *Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record  Other (List): P5a. Photo or Drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.) Figure 1. See Continuation Sheet DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 11 *NRHP Status Code 6Z *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 200 West Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 B1. Historic Name: Midway Trailer City B2. Common Name: Anaheim Resort RV Park B3. Original Use: Business office B4. Present Use: vacant *B5. Architectural Style: None *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) 1966 City of Anaheim GIS data 1997 Tenant improvement, reroof, Permit Number 49754 1997 Install new wall sign (8’0” × 6’10”), Permit Number 47947 *B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: None B9a. Architect: None found b. Builder: None found *B10. Significance: Theme: Architecture Area: Anaheim Period of Significance: 1966 Property Type: Commercial building Applicable Criteria: N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) In summary, the project area is developed with a one-story utilitarian commercial building in the vernacular constructed in 1966. The subject property is not associated with any historical events that have made significant contributions to local history, is not associated with a person or people that have made contributions to local history, does not possess high artistic value, and is not likely to yield information important to history or prehistory. Therefore, it is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. (Continued page 3) B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, page 8. B13. Remarks: *B14. Evaluator: Laura Carias, M.A., LSA Associates, Inc., 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507 *Date of Evaluation: April 2021 (This space reserved for official comments.) (Sketch Map with north arrow required.) Refer to Location Map DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 3 of 11 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 200 W Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: April 5, 2021 X Continuation Update P5. Photos       Figure 2: West elevation, view east (LSA  2021)   Figure 3: South elevation, view north (LSA  2021)        Figure 4: East elevation (left) and north  elevation (right), view southwest (LSA  2021)   Figure 5: North elevation, view south (LSA  2021)  DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 4 of 11 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 200 W Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: April 5, 2021 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance continued from page 2: Historic Context: According to the City’s Historic Preservation Plan, Anaheim’s history is generally divided into three periods: Founding and Early Agriculture (1857–1905); Early Suburbanization and the Ebb of Agriculture (1906–1949); and Tourism, Suburbanization, and Industrial Growth (1950–1970). The subject property was constructed during the Tourism, Suburbanization, and Industrial Growth period. For that reason, the discussion of the earlier periods is brief. FOUNDING AND EARLY AGRICULTURE (1857–1905) Anaheim, which was founded in 1857 by German immigrants and incorporated in 1876, had its start as an agricultural community that produced grapes, wine, walnuts, lemons, and Anaheim chili peppers (City of Anaheim 2004 and 2010). The grape and wine industry collapsed after the blight of 1885 and was virtually eliminated by 1889, when Orange County was established (City of Anaheim 2010). In 1901, the project area consisted of undeveloped land approximately two miles southeast of Anaheim (USGS 1901). EARLY SUBURBANIZATION AND THE EBB OF AGRICULTURE (1906–1949) By the early 20th century, Anaheim was a flourishing community with “four theaters, an opera house, a Carnegie public library, and a hospital” as well as a “thriving commercial district” supported by “stops on the Southern Pacific and Santa Fe railroad lines,” (City of Anaheim 2010:9; USGS 1895). Although agriculture remained the economic base of the City, in the early 1900s, farmers in the central part of town (about 2 miles northwest of the project area) began subdividing their land for residential development. These subdivisions were laid out in grid patterns and developed with single-family residences designed in the popular architectural styles of the time (City of Anaheim 2010). The period from 1905 to 1907 “marked the beginning of the new commercial district,” but progress slowed during World War I (1914–1918) and anti-German sentiment caused the community to change street and business names (Deneau and Marsh 1978:7). In 1920, the Grand Opera House was opened on East Center Street (now Lincoln Avenue) (Deneau and Marsh 1978). The following year, the 1,300-seat California Theater and business block was built at the northeast corner of West Center Street and North Clementine Street, “beginning an east-west building war that lasted throughout the 1920s” (Deneau and Marsh 1978:8; Sanborn Fire Insurance Map 1922). The “building war” resulted in the construction of the Anaheim City Hall; the Kraemer Building, which had an automatic elevator; the Angelina Kraemer Hotel, which was advertised as the first fire-proof hotel in the country; Rust’s open-air market; the SQR Store, which was a three-story emporium that featured a pneumatic tube system; and a seven-story office building that was the Orange County’s first skyscraper and its tallest building until the 1950s (Deneau and Marsh 1978:8). The last major commercial construction before the 1929 Depression consisted of the Pickwick Stage Company Building and the two-story El Torre Hotel at South Los Angeles Street and Chestnut Street (Ibid.). As is well documented, the 1930s were a period of severe economic depression throughout the country. Unemployment skyrocketed, development was nearly at a standstill and dust storms in the Great Plains states caused thousands of people to abandon their farms and migrate west to California and other states. As part of the New Deal of 1933, numerous federal and State relief programs were established in an effort to stop the economic freefall. On March 10, 1933, a magnitude 6.4 earthquake occurred in the Long Beach area. “Although only moderate in terms of magnitude, this earthquake caused serious damage to weak masonry structures on land fill from Los Angeles south to Laguna Beach,” including Anaheim (Geology.com 2005–2021). In 1941, the United States entered World War II (WWII) and moratoriums on construction were in place across the country to conserve resources needed for the war effort. During the war years, an estimated 7 million soldiers spent time in California, which led the nation in the number of new military facilities constructed during the war (California Department of Transportation 2011:9). “California ranked first among the states in government contracts for shipbuilding (17.3 percent of all contracts) and aircraft (15.6 percent) in addition to the construction and expansion of military facilities (11.1 percent)” (Ibid.). These facts played a critical role in the post-war population boom, which was disproportionately high in the Western states, and especially in California. (See Continuation Sheet) DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 5 of 11 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 200 W Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: April 5, 2021 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance continued from page 4: In 1900, California ranked 21st most populous state in the union, just ahead of Kansas, but behind Mississippi (U.S. Census). “The population of the United States grew by more than 50 percent between 1940 and 1970, from about 132 million residents to just over 203 million,” but between 1950 and 1970 California’s population grew by 88 percent (California Department of Transportation 2011:15). During that same period, California almost tripled from 7 million to 20 million (U.S. Census). Many servicemen who had been stationed in California chose to return to California rather than their home states and others from across the country were attracted by the booming defense industry. The baby boom added even more people to the state’s exploding population and by 1962, 1 in 12 Americans lived in California (California Department of Transportation 2011). “Anaheim grew tremendously in both land area and population in the decades after World War II” with the annexation process gaining momentum in the 1950s as population increased from 14,556 in the early 1950s to 104,184 by 1960 (City of Anaheim 2010:10, 11). Industry, including defense-related and electronics manufacturing, became an important part of the City’s economy during this period (City of Anaheim 2010). To support the population growth, former agricultural properties miles from the City’s core were annexed and soon subdivided into residential tracts resulting in “multiple centers of activity” and a “pulling away from the historic downtown” (Ibid.:11). Prior to the 1950s, recreational opportunities in Anaheim, as well as many other places, were fairly small-scale due in part to transportation options and distances between towns. In Anaheim, recreation options were mainly limited to a few theaters, City Park (now Pearson Park), La Palma Park, and Dee Fee Field (City of Anaheim 2010:19). By the 1950s, thanks to earlier labor laws limiting work hours, higher post-war incomes, and improved transportation, people had more leisure time, disposable income, and freedom of movement, resulting in increased tourism and demand for recreation. This was especially true in southern California with its temperate climate that allows year-around outdoor activity. In 1952, Anaheim’s first big-scale tourist attraction, Jack Dutton’s Jungle Garden, opened with the tropic-themed Palms Restaurant, a zoo, a park, and a nightclub (City of Anaheim n.d.). Located on six acres at Orangethorpe and Raymond Avenues, north of present-day Anaheim Resort, it “was the place to be seen;” however, despite its reported popularity, throughout the 1950s, it did not receive much media attention and does not appear to have made more than a negligible impact on local development (Los Angeles Times 2008; City of Anaheim n.d.). In March 1954, it was reported that Walt Disney’s movie studio and the American Broadcasting Company (ABC) had entered into an agreement making Disney “the first major film studio to enter the television field” (Los Angeles Times 1954a). As part of the agreement, Disney planned to “produce both live and cartoon pictures for the television network” and ABC would be a partner in the planned “$6,000,000 miniature world’s fair, Disneyland, which the cartoon maker plans to build” (Ibid.). In May 1954, it was announced that Disney had purchased 160 acres of land in Anaheim for $1,000,000 from about 15 owners (Pomona Progress Bulletin 1954). This followed a survey by the Stanford Research Institute, which identified Anaheim as the best area for Disney’s new project (Ibid.). Mr. Disney stated construction would begin soon and he expected 5,000,000 people a year to visit Disneyland (Los Angeles Times 1954b). Adding to the interest, it was also reported that Disney would begin a one-hour television program on ABC in the fall and that filming would eventually occur at Disneyland (Pomona Progress Bulletin 1954). In June 1954, news articles proclaimed that “A world-wide tourist Mecca unmatched by any of the many visitor attractions in Southern California—including even the movie studios—will open its gates on July 1, 1955” (Valley Times 1954). Disneyland would feature four different “lands”—Fantasyland, Frontierland, Tomorrowland, and Adventureland—and the one-hour television shows would be based on aspects of each of these lands (Ibid.). The project was billed as a “place for people to find happiness and knowledge … a place for parents and children to share pleasant times [together] … a place for teachers and pupils to discover greater ways of understanding and education … [a place where] the older generation can recapture the nostalgia of days gone by, and the younger generation can savor the challenge of the future” (Ibid.). In other words, a happy place for everyone. DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 6 of 11 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 200 W Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: April 5, 2021 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance continued from page 5: The exceptional marketing by Disney and ABC created tremendous excitement and anticipation. By July 1954, real estate advertisements for land, existing homes, and new housing tracts were already using proximity to Disneyland as a selling point (Los Angeles Times 1954a, 1954b, 1954c). By January, 1955, Disney was predicting that 8 million people would visit Disneyland annually and announced plans to start construction on “the largest hotel and motor hotel to have been built in California since before World War II. The cost $10,000,000!” (Valley Times 1955). The project, financed by Disneyland, Inc. and led by Jack Wrather, was proposed to have 500 rooms, several restaurants, a shopping center, and be the first hotel to have a color television in every room (Ibid.). The noteworthy architectural and engineering firm of Pereira & Luckman and contractors H.M. Hodges and Byron E. Vandegrift were hired to design and build the hotel (Los Angeles Times 1955). This project was instrumental in opening the door for other hoteliers to invest in the burgeoning resort area, which at that time only had about 100 hotel rooms (City of Anaheim n.d.). Disneyland had a profound impact on the development of Anaheim, propelling it from a small, relatively unknown town to a worldwide destination. Numerous famous people visited Disneyland in the late 1950s including President Truman, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the King of Morocco, the King of Jordan, the King of Belgium, and the Crown Prince of Ethiopia (City of Anaheim n.d.). In 1959, while visiting Los Angeles, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev expressed a desire to visit Disneyland, but was denied by the U.S. government for security reasons (History 2020). This displeased Khrushchev and caused a minor political incident (Ibid.). On December 31, 1957, not quite 18 months after opening (July 17, 1955), Disneyland welcomed its 10 millionth visitor (City of Anaheim n.d.). From 1954 to 1970, the City embraced the Googie architecture that characterized Disney’s Tomorrowland (City of Anaheim n.d.). In the early 1960s, industrialist and president of Best Western, Al Stovall built five “cosmic-themed” motels near Disneyland and advertised them as “Moon Level Luxury at Down To Earth Rates” (Designyoutrust 2018). Stovall’s designs, which were inspired by the daily news stories about the space race, further popularized Googie architecture and the resort theme in Anaheim. In 1961, the Anaheim/Orange County Visitor & Convention Bureau (now Visit Anaheim) was established to promote Anaheim as a resort destination (VisitAnaheim.org 2020). In 1965, Tom Liegler was hired to manage Anaheim stadium and the $12,000,000 municipal convention center adjacent to Disneyland (Anaheim Stadium 1966). In July 1967, Anaheim Stadium hosted the MLB All-Star game and the Convention Center opened (Baseball Reference n.d.; VisitAnaheim.org 2020). Some of the events the Convention Center hosted the first year were the Orange County Home and Decorator Show, a wrestling exhibition, the Republican Central Committee, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and a diverse variety of concerts including Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, the Supremes, Wayne Newton, the Bee Gees, and Joan Baez (City of Anaheim n.d.). In its first year, the Convention Center hosted 45,000 delegates and the City became a premier destination for conventions, meetings, and special events (Ibid.). Throughout the 1970s, Disneyland continued to attract famous and noteworthy people and influence the flavor of the City as evidenced by the 1972 opening of the Sheraton Anaheim, designed as a medieval castle (City of Anaheim n.d.). In 1973, Elvis played the Anaheim Convention Center and the following year, just seven years after opening, 135,000 square feet were added to the Center (Ibid.). Thanks in large part to the early and continued success of Disneyland, the City has become a premiere destination for tourism and recreation. Today, the Anaheim Resort area (located west of the subject property) consists of 1,078 acres designated for recreation and tourist/convention-related activities and supporting uses (City of Anaheim 2019–2020). It includes Disneyland, Anaheim Convention Center, hotels, restaurants, and shops, employs more than 30,000 people, and generates 27 percent (after City services and other expenses) of Anaheim’s annual general fund (Ibid.). MOBILE/TRAILER HOMES (1930–1950) The first mobile trailers were built in the 1930s and used primarily by middle-class families to go “auto-camping” (Adkins 2019). The trailers were meant for travel, not full-time permanent living and were therefore small and could be attached to the back of an automobile. Trailers were frequently made by common people with an imagination, but there were several companies that began to manufacture the product (Adkins 2019). Arthur G. Sherman, the president at a pharmaceutical company, was unhappy with a camping trip he had recently taken and in 1929 decided to invest $10,000 of his own money and begin his own trailer company, creating The Covered Wagon (Adkins 2019). Sherman sold 117 campers in 1931 and, by 1936, he had sold over 10,000 trailers, making over three million dollars in sales (Adkins 2019). The trailer industry exploded and by 1937 the Trailer Coach Manufacturers Association was created (Adkins 2019). Soon there were more trailers than there were trailer parks and unfortunately, trailer parks developed a reputation for being unkempt, dirty, and loud (Hurley 2012). This created a negative stereotype about those that lived in trailer homes (Adkins 2019). DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 7 of 11 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 200 W Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: April 5, 2021 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance continued from page 6: Work slowed down in the 1940s, but came back to life during World War II. Defense plants set up overnight in remote areas that did not, at the time, have any housing for employees. Trailer companies came together and petitioned the government to recognize them as an essential industry and offered to construct trailers as temporary housing for employees (Hurley 2012). Again after the war, the trailer manufacturers were able to provide housing, an estimated 60,000 trailers, to returning soldiers and their families as new homes were constructed (Adkins 2019). Given the negative history that trailer parks had, the dilemma of where to establish new parks became a problem. Trailer home park developers recall the difficulties City zoning employees gave them when applying for permits. They were usually granted land near railroad tracks, in industrial areas, near slaughterhouses, and/or near highways. It was not until trailer and mobile home parks became profitable that park developers were able to buy land in better areas of the neighborhood (Adkins 2019). Trailer and mobile home parks began setting up maintenance regulations and expectations, creating tidy and well-manicured parks. Instead of complaints, neighbors now had nothing but pleasant things to say about having trailer and mobile home parks as their neighbors (Hurley 2012). MIDWAY TRAILER CITY Midway Trailer City was established in 1956 by L.V. and Miriam Bostwick. L.V. was born in Missouri in 1906 and moved to Colorado in 1925 where he met his wife Miriam (Purpose Driven Investments n.d.). L.V. opened up a barbershop and later moved to California with his family. L.V. did not have more than an eighth grade education, but Miriam attended “business college” and so, with his entrepreneurial spirit and her training, they jumped head-first into many different business ventures (Purpose Driven Investments n.d.). Upon moving to California, they began buying, remodeling, and flipping hotels throughout the state in cities such as Needles, Bakersfield, Venice, and Long Beach (Purpose Driven Investments n.d.). In 1946, L.V. and Miriam purchased a 60-unit colonial motel in Long Beach on Pacific Coast Highway. It was a large undertaking and the entire family was involved in helping run the business (Purpose Driven Investments n.d.). Miriam’s mother and sister owned an RV trailer park in Los Angeles and L.V. became interested in investing in something similar. He found a mobile home park called Shady Acres for sale in Anaheim located about a mile west of Disneyland and bought it in 1956. At that time, the mobile home park was bound by Interstate 5 to the west, orange groves immediately to the north and south, and single family homes to the east (UCSB 1953). L.V. renamed the park Midway Trailer City. After selling the Colonial Motel, L.V. slowly began to buy the homes to the east as they became available and expanded the park. As the park became popular, L.V. erected a new business office at 200 West Midway Drive in 1966 on the southeast corner of West Midway Drive and South Zeyn Street (Purpose Driven Investments n.d.). Soon the family opened a new business operated by L.V.s children, Beth and Paul. It was located across the street to the north to service and repair RVs; at that same location L.V. opened up a dealership selling trailers. By the late 1990s, the park had deteriorated and needed many upgrades. In hopes of updating their image, Midway Trailer City changed its name to Anaheim Resort RV Park to match Disneyland’s updated name (Purpose Driven Investments n.d.). They removed the mobile homes and focused on making room for large RVs. However, the expansion of Interstate 5 took 150 feet of land to the west, which removed some of the park’s amenities such as the pool and clubhouse. RV sales and service slowed down considerably and the repair and service shop closed in 1999. The family was split as to whether keep the park or sell it (Purpose Driven Investments n.d.). It was in 2008 that Vern Mangels, Beth’s son, decided to join the family business. A retired sergeant with the La Habra Police Department, Vern thought he could help (Purpose Driven Investments n.d.). He updated the aging infrastructure, updated the reception desk to modern business amenities, created a concierge desk, added a café for travelers, and established a direct link with Disneyland and Anaheim Resort RV Park. Visitors were now able to purchase Disneyland park tickets at the front desk and shuttles were provided. By 2016, Mangels had invested over $1.5 million in improvements and was thrilled with the positive reviews by visitors (RVwest 2016). Anaheim RV Park permanently closed September 2020 likely due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the related temporary closure of Disneyland and other neighboring tourist attractions (Yelp n.d.). . DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 8 of 11 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 200 W Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: April 5, 2021 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance continued from page 7: SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION Under Criterion A, the subject property is most closely associated with the tourism, suburbanization, and industrial growth context of the City of Anaheim. However, the property is not part of a tract or a larger development that made significant contributions to the broad patterns of local history. Its association with Disneyland did not materialize until after Verne Mangels took over operations in 2008, which is too close to our recent past to be evaluated. Therefore, Midway Trailer City does not appear eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A. Under Criterion B, Midway Trailer City is associated with L.V. Bostnick, who was an entrepreneur that made his way from Missouri, to Colorado, and settled in Anaheim. Despite his savvy business sense and success in establishing Midway Trailer City, service and repair center, and dealership, there was no other information found in research to suggest he was significant to the history of Anaheim or mobile/RV parks. Therefore, the subject property is not eligible under Criterion B. Under Criterion C, the property would need to be a representative example of an architectural style and embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or region or method of construction or represent the work of a master or possess high artistic values. The subject property is a utilitarian commercial building in the vernacular that has been altered and lacks integrity of materials and therefore is not eligible under Criterion C. Under Criterion D the commercial building was constructed using common materials and construction practices. It does not have the potential to yield information important to the history or prehistory of the local area, California, or the nation and therefore not eligible under Criterion D. B12. References: (continued from page 2) Adkins, Crystal 2019 The History of Mobile Homes is Fascinating. Accessed online March 2021 at: https://mobilehomeliving.org/the-history-of- mobile-homes/. Anaheim Stadium 1966 The Inaugural Year. The Complete Story of Anaheim Stadium, the Angeles and Their Fans. Accessed online in March 2020 at: http://louspirito.com/baseball/angels/1966_Angels_Program.pdf. Baseball Reference n.d. 1967 All=Star Game Box Score, July 11. Accessed online in April 2020 at: https://www.baseball-reference.com/allstar/1967-allstar-game.shtml. California Department of Transportation 2011 Tract Housing in California, 1945–1973. A Context for National Register Evaluation. Caltrans Division of Environmental Analysis, Sacramento. City of Anaheim n.d. A History of The Anaheim Resort Area (Draft). On file in the City archives at Angels Stadium. 2004 General Plan/Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report. Prepared by the Planning Center. On file at the Anaheim Planning Department. 2010 Citywide Historic Preservation Plan. Prepared by Architectural Resources Group. On file at the City of Anaheim Planning Department 2019–20 The Anaheim Resort Fact Sheet. Accessed online in March 2020 at: https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/30151/Anaheim-Resort-fact-sheetwinter-2019-20. Deneau, Andrew L., and Diann Marsh 1978 National Register of Historic Places Inventory – Nomination Form for Historic Resources of Anaheim Colony (OHP No. 041201). Provided by the South Central Coastal Information Center located at California State University, Fullerton. DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 9 of 11 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 200 W Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: April 5, 2021 X Continuation Update B12. References: (continued from page 8) Designyoutrust 2018 Moon Level Luxury At Down To Earth Rates: Al Stovall’s 1960s Space Age Lodge in Anaheim, California. Article dated August 27, accessed online in March 2020 at: https://designyoutrust.com/2018/08/moon-level-luxury-at-down-to-earth-rates-al-stovalls-1960s-space-age-lodge-in-anaheim-california/. Geology.com 2005-2021 California Earthquake Map Collection. Long Beach Earthquake, 1933. Accessed online in April 2021 at: https://geology.com/earthquake/california.shtml#:~:text=Long%20Beach%20Earthquake%2C%201933%3A%20Although,and%20115%20people%20were%20killed. History 2020 This Day in History, September 19, 1959. Khrushchev barred from visiting Disneyland. Accessed online in March 2020 at: https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/khrushchev-barred-from-visiting-disneyland. Hurley, Andrew 2012 Suburbs on Wheels. Accessed online 2021 at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nfYb_SZztg. Los Angeles Times 1954a Real Estate Advertisements. “Disneyland 1, 3, 5, 8, 20 acres.” August 28, page 28. 1954b Real Estate Advertisements. “Anaheim Living Near Disneyland.” July 23, page 41. 1954c Real Estate Advertisements. “Golden West Park.” August 1, page 126. 1955 Big Project’s Start Slated. March 6, page 125. 2008 Closed Anaheim Club is all the Rage – for its Real Estate. January 19, page 104 (B9). Pomona Progress Bulletin 1954 Disneyland Plans Told By Creator. May 11, page 13. Purpose Driven Investments N.D. One Family’s American Legacy. N.d. Accessed online in April 2021 at: https://www.purposedriveninvestments.com/about. RVwest 2016 Anaheim Park is expanding in response to increasing consumer demand. Accessed online April 2021 at: https://www.rvwest.com/article/rvwestinsider/anaheim_rv_park_is_expanding_in_response_to_increasing_consumer_demand. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 1922 City of Anaheim, page 27. Accessed online in March 2016 via the Los Angeles Public Library website at: http://www.lapl.org/collections-resources/research-and-homework. UCSB 1953 Historic aerials accessed March 2021 at: https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. U.S. Census 1900 1900 Census Documents. Volume 1: Population: Population of States and Territories http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/33405927v1.zip. USGS (United States Geological Survey) 1895 Anaheim, California 15-minute topographic quadrangle. 1901 Anaheim, California 15-minute topographic quadrangle. DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 10 of 11 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 200 W Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date: April 5, 2021 X Continuation Update B12. References: (continued from page 9) Valley Times 1954 Expect Disneyland To Be Tourist Mecca. June 10, page 21. 1955 Listening Post and TV Review. January 21, 1955. Visitanaheim.org 2020 About Visit Anaheim. Accessed online in April 2020 at: https://visitanaheim.org/about-us. Yelp n.d. Anaheim RV Park. Accessed online April 2021 at: https://www.yelp.com/biz/anaheim-rv-park-anaheim. Service Layer Credits: Copyright:© 2013National Geographic Society, i-cubed I:\AHM1804.03\GIS\MXD\Cultural\DPR_200WMidwayDr.mxd (4/5/2021)DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information Page 11 of 11 *Map Name: *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of Map: 1981, 2020 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder)200 W Midway Drive Primary # HRI #Trinomial State of California - Resource AgencyDEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATIONLOCATION MAP A n a h e i m B o u l e v a r d W Midway Drive S Z e y n S t r e e t APN 082-182-01200 W Midway Drive Anaheim, CA 7.5' USGS; Nearmap Kenneth L. Finger, Ph.D. Consulting Paleontologist 18208 Judy St., Castro Valley, CA 94546-2306 510.305.1080 klfpaleo@comcast.net January 13, 2021 Dana DePietro FirstCarbon Solutions 1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 380 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 Re: Paleontological Records Search: Legacy Anaheim Project (0055.0083), City of Anaheim, Orange County Dear Dr. DePietro: As per the request of Spencer Pignotti, I have performed a records search on the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) database for the proposed Legacy Anaheim project in the City of Anaheim. The project site comprises 6.4 acres on the south side of 200 W. Midway Drive, where the existing recreational vehicle park would be replaced by 156 three‐story residential townhomes. Its PRS location is S½, NE¼, Sec. 22, T4S, R10W, Anaheim quadrangle (USGS 7.5'- series topographic map). Geologic Mapping The proposed project site is on the floodplain of the Santa Ana River. As shown here on part of the geologic map by Morton (2004), the surface of the entire project site (yellow outline at center) and the surrounding half- mile search area (dashed outline) consists solely of Holocene alluvial fan deposits (Qyf). The earlier map of Morton and Miller (1965) simply identifies this unit as Holocene alluvium (Qal). No older units are mapped in the vicinity. Paleontological Records Search The paleontological records search on the UCMP database focused on the Pleistocene deposits in the Anaheim quadrangle, which presumably underly the Holocene layer. The results were negative — no recorded vertebrate or plant localities were revealed. Paleontological Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations A preconstruction paleontological walkover survey of the proposed Legacy Anaheim project site is not recommended because its natural surface is Holocene and heavily disturbed by prior development. I also do not recommend paleontological monitoring of earth-disturbing construction activities because Holocene alluvium is too young to be fossiliferous and no significant paleontological resources are recorded from the Anaheim quadrangle. Furthermore, the Holocene layer in this area is very thick, so potentially fossiliferous Pleistocene deposits would be buried Paleontological Records Search: Legacy Anaheim Project (0055.0083) K.L. Finger 2 well below the depth of project-related excavations. In accordance with CEQA guidelines, therefore, this report concludes the paleontological mitigation for this project. Additional Comment It is worth noting that from 2001–2002, I monitored construction of The Disney Resort (California Adventure) site in the former main parking lot of Disneyland, where all excavations were in alluvial sands. The only paleontological resource unearthed was a partial fish skeleton in a small slab of mudstone. That allochthonous fossil was transported by the Santa Ana River from the upper Miocene Puente Formation in the Puente Hills, which is as close as five miles to the north. Although highly unlikely, a similar find is possible at the Legacy Anaheim site. Fossils salvaged in Orange County should be deposited in the John D. Cooper Archaeological and Paleontological Center in Santa Ana, where they will be properly curated and made available for future research. Sincerely, References Cited Morton, D.M., 2004, Preliminary digital geologic map of the Santa Ana 30'X60' quadrangle, southern California, version 2.1. U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 99-172, scale 1:100,000. Morton, P.K., and Miller, R.V., 1981, Geologic map of Orange County, California showing mines and mineral deposits: California Division of Mines and Geology Bull. 204, scale 1:48,000. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix D: Geotechnical Evaluation Report THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 1938 Kellogg Avenue, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92008 * Ph: 760-431-3747 www.eeitiger.com GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development SWC W. Midway Drive and South Anaheim Boulvard Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 April 15, 2021 4/30/2021, 9:50:35 AM ANAH-OTH2021-01362 Esperanza Rios TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope of Services ........................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Subject Property Description ..................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Topography…............ .................................................................................................................. 2 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION, SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING ................................... 2 3.1 Field Exploration ......................................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Laboratory Testing ...................................................................................................................... 3 4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 3 4.1 Geologic Setting .......................................................................................................................... 3 4.2 Site Geology ................................................................................................................................ 4 4.2.1 Alluvium (Qaf)............................................................................................................. 4 4.2.2 Alluvium (Qal) ............................................................................................................. 4 4.3 Groundwater .............................................................................................................................. 4 5.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ............................................................................................................................... 5 5.1 Seismic Design Values ................................................................................................................ 5 Table 1 – ASCE 7-10 Seismic Design Values ..................................................................................... 5 5.2 Faulting and Surface Rupture ..................................................................................................... 5 Table 2 – Nearby Active Faults ......................................................................................................... 6 5.3 Landslides and Slope Stability .................................................................................................... 6 5.4 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement ....................................................................................... 6 5.5 Flooding…………. .......................................................................................................................... 6 5.6 Expansive Soil and Subsidence ................................................................................................... 7 6.0 CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 7 7.0 GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................ 8 7.1 General ....................................................................................................................................... 8 7.2 Site Preparation and Grading ..................................................................................................... 8 7.3 Remedial Earthwork ................................................................................................................... 9 7.4 Yielding Subgrade Conditions ................................................................................................... 10 7.5 Shrinkage and Bulking .............................................................................................................. 11 7.6 Temporary Site Excavations ..................................................................................................... 11 7.7 Slopes ....................................................................................................................................... 11 8.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 11 8.1 General ..................................................................................................................................... 11 8.2 Shallow Conventional Foundations .......................................................................................... 12 8.3 Footing Setbacks ....................................................................................................................... 12 8.4 Interior Slabs-on-Grade ............................................................................................................ 12 8.5 Exterior Slabs-on-Grade ........................................................................................................... 13 8.6 Pool Design ............................................................................................................................... 14 8.7 Conventional Retaining Walls................................................................................................... 14 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 8.7.1 Foundations ............................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Lateral Earth Pressure ................................................................................................... 14 8.8 Corrosivity ................................................................................................................................ 15 9.0 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 15 Table 3 – Preliminary Pavement Design Recommendations ......................................................... 16 10.0 DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 16 10.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting ................................................................................... 16 10.2 Site Drainage .......................................................................................................................... 17 10.3 Site Runoff Considertatins – Stormwater Disposal System .................................................... 17 Table 4 – Summary of Percolation Testing..................................................................................... 17 10.4 Structure Setback from Retention Devices ............................................................................ 18 10.5 Additional Site Improvements ................................................................................................ 18 10.6 Utility Trench Backfill .............................................................................................................. 18 11.0 PLAN REVIEW ..................................................................................................................................... 19 12.0 LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 19 FIGURES Figure 1 – Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 – Aerial Site Map Figure 3 – Geotechnical Map APPENDICES Appendix A – Soil Classification Chart and Boring Logs Appendix B - Laboratory Test Data Appendix C- Field Percolation Data Appendix D – Earthwork and Grading Guidelines Distribution: (1) Addressee via an electronic copy Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this Geotechnical Evaluation Report is to provide geotechnical information to National Community Renaissance (“Client”) regarding the subject property in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California. The information gathered in this Geotechnical Evaluation is intended to provide the Client with an understanding of the physical conditions of site-specific subsurface soils, groundwater, and the regional geologic setting which could affect the cost or design of the proposed development at the property (Site Vicinity Map-Figure 1, Aerial Site Map-Figure 2). This Geotechnical Evaluation has been conducted in general accordance with accepted geotechnical engineering principles as well as in general conformance with the approved proposal and cost estimate for the project by EEI, dated February 20, 2021. EEI conducted an onsite field exploration which consisted of the drilling, sampling and logging of six (6) hollow stem auger exploratory borings and six (6) backhoe test excavation trenches on March 23, 2021 and March 24, 2021, respectively. This Geotechnical Evaluation report has been prepared for the sole use of National Community Renaissance. Other parties, without the express written consent of EEI and Cadance Acquisition should not rely upon this Geotechnical Evaluation Report. 1.2 Project Description Based on our review of the conceptual development plans prepared by ktgy Architectue + Planning (January 29, 2020), it is our understanding that the proposed development of the subject property will involve construction of up to four story , 86 units of multi-family residential structures with associated parking and carport areas, flatworks, utilities, and landscape areas. Construction of a pool and some ancillary buildings are also planned. No other information regarding the proposed site development is known at this time. No detailed grading plans were provided to EEI at the time of our preparation of this report. However, grading of the subject property is anticipated to include cuts and fills on the order of one to two feet (exclusive of remedial grading) to provide for site drainage. No foundation plans were provided to EEI at the time of preparation of this report. However, foundation loads assumed by EEI for the engineering analysis are up to 4000 pounds per lineal foot and 200 kips for wall and column loads respectively. 1.3 Scope of Services The scope of our services included: • A review of the readily available data pertinent to the subject property and immediate vicinity, including published and unpublished geologic reports/maps and soils data for the area. • Conducting a geotechnical reconnaissance of the subject property and nearby vicinity. • Coordination with Underground Service Alert North (USA) to identify the presence of underground utilities for clearance of the proposed exploratory boring locations. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 2 • Drilling and logging of six (6) hollow stem auger (HSA) (8” diameter) exploratory borings (B-1 through B-6) and six (6) backhoe test trenches. Borings were advanced to depths ranging from approximately 11.5 to 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface on March 23, 2021 by use of an Ingersoll-Rand A300 truck-mounted drilling rig. Backhoe test trenches were excavated to the approximate depths of 4 to 5 feet below the existing grade on March 24, 2021. A John Deere 35 D track mounted mini excavator was utilized for this purpose. Subsurface materials encountered in our exploratory borings consisted of approximately 5 feet thick of trash laden fill soils underlain by Quaternary age alluvial deposits to the maximum depths explored. Excavation refusal was not encountered in any of our exploratory borings and test trenches. (Geotechnical Map, Figure 3). • Performing two (2) Percolation testing (B4/P1 and B5/P2) to provide preliminary information to evaluate the feasibility of the installation of an onsite storm water disposal system. • Completion of laboratory testing of representative earth materials encountered onsite to determine their pertinent soils engineering properties, including corrosion potential (Appendix B). • The preparation of this report which presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the proposed development. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 Subject Property Description The site is located at the southwest corner of W. Midway Drive and South Anaheim Boulvard in the City of Anaheim, Califirnia (Site Vicinity Map, Figure 1; Aerial Site Map, Figure 2). The property includes a single parcel, totaling roughly 2.26-acres. The subject property is currently developed primarily as an industrial storage yard, with a single commercial structure located at its northwest corner. It is our understanding that the existing improvements at the site will be demolished prior to construction of the proposed improvements. The Latitude and Longitude of the site are approximately 33.8121° N and 117.9072° W, respectively. 2.2 Topography The subject property is located on the United States Geological Survey (USGS), 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Map, Anaheim, California Quadrangle. The property elevation is approximately 140 feet above mean sea level (amsl). 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION, SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING 3.1 Field Exploration Field work for our Geotechnical Evaluation was conducted on March 23 and 24, 2020. Our field investigation consisted of drilling six (6) exploratory borings ans excavating six (6) backhoe test trenches. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 3 Six (6) hollow stem (8” diameter) exploratory borings (designated B-1 through B-6) were advanced at the subject property to depths of 11.5 to 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface in readily accessible areas on March 23, 2021. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 3. A truck mounted Mobile B-57 hollow stem auger (HSA) drill rig was used to advance all five exploratory borings. Blow count values were determined utilizing a 140-pound hammer, falling 30-inches onto a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) split-spoon sampler and a Modified California split-tube sampler. The blows per 6-inch increment required to advance the 18-inch long SPT and 18-inch long Modified California split-tube samplers were measured at various depth intervals are recorded on the boring logs, and are presented in Appendix A (Soil Classification Chart and Boring Logs). Relatively “undisturbed “samples were collected in a 2.42-inch (inside diameter) California Modified split-tube sampler for visual examination and laboratory testing. Representative bulk samples were collected from the exploratory borings for appropriate laboratory testing. The soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487). Six (6) backhoe test trenches were excavated to the approximate depths of 4 to 5 feet below the existing grade on March 24, 2021. A John Deere 35 D track mounted mini excavator was utilized for this purpose. Additionally, two (2) percolation testing in borings B4/P-1 and B5/P-2 were performed on March 24, 2021. Percolation testing were performed provide preliminary information to evaluate the feasibility of the installation of an onsite storm water disposal system. 3.2 Laboratory Testing Selected samples obtained from our borings were tested to evaluate pertinent soil classification and engineering properties and enable development of geotechnical conclusions and recommendations. The laboratory tests consisted of: • Moisture Content and Dry Density • Grain Size Distribution • Direct Shear • Corrosivity The results of the laboratory tests, and brief explanations of test procedures, are presented in Appendix B. It should be understood that the results provided in Appendix B are based upon pre- development conditions. Verification testing is recommended at the conclusion of grading on samples collected at or near finish grade. 4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4.1 Geologic Setting The Latitude and Longitude of the site area are approximately 33.8121° N and -117.9072° W, respectively. The project area is relatively flat with approximate elevation of 140 feet above mean sea level. The site is depicted on the Anaheim; CA 7.5-Minute Topographic Quad Map dated 2018. The subject property lies within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of southern California. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 4 This province consists of a series of ranges separated by northwest trending valleys; sub parallel to branches of the San Andreas Fault (CGS, 2002). The Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province, one of the largest geomorphic units in western North America, extends from the Transverse Ranges Geomorphic Province and the Los Angeles Basin, south to Baja California. It is bound on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the south by the Gulf of California and on the east by the Colorado Desert Province. The Peninsular Ranges are essentially a series of northwest-southeast oriented fault blocks (CGS, 2002). Major fault zones and subordinate fault zones found in the Peninsular Ranges Province typically trend in a northwest-southeast direction. More regionally speaking, the subject property is located in the southern part of the Los Angeles Basin: a broad sedimentary basin that is bordered by the Pacific Ocean to the west and south; the Santa Ana Mountains to the east; and the Santa Monica Mountains and Whittier Hills to the north. Ephemeral streams and rivers traverse the basin from north to south – one of them being the San Gabriel River, which is located approximately one mile to the west of the subject property. Regional geologic maps indicate the subject property overlies Quaternary-age Young Alluvial Deposits consisting of poorly consolidated mixtures of sand, silty sand, silt, and clay. 4.2 Site Geology Information obtained from our subsurface investigation indicated that the site is underlain by approximately 5 feet thich of trash laden fill soils and Quaternary age alluvial deposits to the maximum depths explored. 4.2.1 Artificial Fill (Qaf) Up to five (5) foot thick layer of trash laden artificial fill soils were encounterd within our excavations. Fill soils generally consisted of light to dark brown silty sandy soils with abundant past construction debris such as concrete, caly and metal pipe, and decomposed wood fragments. 4.2.2 Alluvium (Qal) Alluvial deposits were encountered in our borings and test excavations below the fill layers and consisted of tan to light gray and yellowish brown, medium dens, fine to coarse grained sands and silty sands to approximately 25 feet below grade, underlain by approximately 10 foot thick layer of brown, medium stiff sandy silt layer. Below 35 feet the alluvial deposits generally consisted of medium dense to dense layers of sands and silty sands to the maximum depth of exploration of 51.5 feet. 4.3 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory excavations during our site investigation. Our research of the existing data indicated that the historic groundwater is greater than 50 feet below the ground surface (CDMG, 1998). Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 5 5.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5.1 Seismic Design Values EEI utilized seismic design criteria provided in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC, 2019) and ASCE 7-16. Final selection of the appropriate seismic design coefficients should be made by the structural consultant based on the local laws and ordinances, expected building response, and desired level of conservatism. The site coefficients and adjusted maximum considered earthquake spectral response accelerations in accordance with ASCE 7-16 are presented in Table 1. 5.2 Faulting and Surface Rupture A risk common to all areas of southern California that should not be overlooked is the potential for damage resulting from seismic events (earthquakes). The site is located within a seismically active area, as is all of southern California. Although we are not aware of any active or potentially active faults on or within the immediate vicinity of the site, earthquakes generated on large regional faults could affect this site. The closest known active fault to the site is the Puente Hills (Coyote Hills) Fault and is located approximately 4.2 miles (6.7 km) west of the site. This fault is thought to be capable of a maximum 6.9 moment magnitude earthquake. . The major faults that are likely to affect the site are listed below in Table 2. Table 1 ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Values Parameter Value Site Coordinates Latitude 33.8121° Longitude -117.9072° Mapped Spectral Acceleration Value at Short Period: Ss 1.433g. Mapped Spectral Acceleration Value at 1-Second Period: S1 0.507g. Site Soil Classification D Short Period Site Coefficient: Fa 1.000 1-Second Period Site Coefficient: Fv 1.793 Adjusted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period: SMS 1.433g. Adjusted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period: SM1 0.909g. Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods: SDS 0.955g. Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period: SD1 0.606g. Peak Ground Acceleration Adjusted For Site Class Effects: PGAM 0.667g. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 6 The subject property is not located within a currently designated State of California Earthquake Fault Zone. Based on a review of the existing geologic information, no major surface fault crosses through or extends toward the site. The potential for surface rupture resulting from the movement of nearby major faults is not known with certainty but is considered low. TABLE 2 Nearby Active Faults Fault Distance in Miles (Kilometers)1 Maximum Magnitude1 Puente Hills (Coyote Hills) 4.18 (6.72) 6.90 San Joaquin Hills 8.15 (13.12) 7.10 Elsinore;W+GI+T 8.68 (13.96) 7.48 Elsinore;W+GI 8.68 (13.96) 7.27 Elsinore;W+GI+T+J+CM 8.68 (13.96) 7.85 1. USGS Online Fault Search (2008) 5.3 Landslides and Slope Stability Seismically induced landslides and other slope failures are common occurrences during or soon after earthquakes. However, due to the presence of the very low on-site gradient, the potential for seismically induced landsliding to occur is very low. Additionally; according to the Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, the site is also not mapped within a zone of potential seismically induced landsliding. 5.4 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement Liquefaction is a sudden loss of strength of saturated, cohesionless soil caused by cyclic loading (e.g., earthquake shaking). Generally, liquefaction occurs in predominantly poorly consolidated granular soil where the groundwater depth is less than 50 feet. It is our opinion that due to the absence of shallow ground water, the potential for liquefaction to occur is considered negligible, and liquefaction is not a significant geotechnical concern at the subject property. Additionally, according to the Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, the site is not mapped within a zone of potential liquefaction. The potential for liquefaction induced lateral spreading and seismic induced settlement to occur at the subject property is considered negligible. 5.5 Flooding The subject property is not located within a Tsunami Evacuation Area; therefore, damage due to tsunami is considered low. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 7 EEI reviewed the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Hazard Map online database (FEMA, 2019) to determine if the subject property was located within an area designated as a Flood Hazard Zone. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Map No. 06059C0128J, effective December 3, 2009, the subject property is located within an area of minimal flood hazard, identified as Flood Zone X. Additionally; the potential for earthquake-induced flooding at the site, caused by the failure of dams or other water-retaining structures as a result of earthquakes is considered very low. The risk of seiches affecting the site during a nearby seismic event is also considered low. 5.6 Expansive Soil and Subsidence The near-surface onsite soils encountered in our borings are sands and silty sands. The expansion potential of these materials is not considered to pose a hazard for the proposed site development. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on our field exploration, laboratory testing and engineering and geologic analysis, it is our opinion that the subject property is suitable for the proposed residential development project from geotechnical engineering and geologic viewpoint provided the recommendations presented in our geotechnical report are incorporated into the design and construction phase of the project. However, there are existing geotechnical conditions associated with the property that will warrant mitigation and/or consideration during planning stages. If site plans and/or the proposed building location are revised, additional field studies may be warranted to address proposed site-specific conditions. The main geotechnical conclusions for the project are presented in the following text. • Six (6) hollow stem (8” diameter) exploratory borings (designated B-1 through B-6) were advanced at the subject property to depths of 11.5 to 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface in readily accessible areas on March 23, 2021. Additionally, six (6) backhoe test trenches were also excavated to the approximate depths of 4 to 5 feet below the existing grade on March 24, 2021. Subsurface materials encountered in our exploratory borings consisted of approximately 5 feet thich of trash laden fill soils underlain by Quaternary age alluvial deposits to the maximum depths explored. Excavation refusal was not encountered in any of our exploratory borings and test trenches. • Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory excavations during our site investigation. Our research of the existing data indicated that the historic groundwater is greater than 50 feet below the ground surface (CDMG, 1998). • The subject property is located within an area of southern California recognized as having a number of active and potentially-active faults located nearby. Our literature and database review indicate that there are no known active faults mapped as crossing the subject property and the potential for surface rupture is low, however, several nearby and regional faults are capable of causing strong ground shaking at the property. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 8 • Earth materials underlying the site for the proposed residential development are not considered susceptible to liquefaction or significant amounts of seismic settlement. Liquefaction induced lateral spreading also does not appear to be a concern at the subject property. • The expansion potential of the near surface soils is not considered to pose a hazard for the proposed site development. • The alluvial deposits appear to be suitable for use as a structural fill provided that they are moisture conditioned (as needed) and meet EEI’s recommendations for size (Section 7.3) and are properly compacted. • The existing alluvial deposits are excavatable with conventional construction equipment. However, localized areas that contain dense and hard caliche-cemented zones that may require heavy ripping should be anticipated. • A conventional shallow foundation system in conjunction with a concrete slab-on-grade floor appears to be suitable for support of the proposed commercial building. 7.0 GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS Earthwork Considerations 7.1 General The proposed site development should be constructed in general conformance with the guidelines presented herein, as well as the California Building Code (CBC 2019) and the requirements of local jurisdictions. Additionally, general Earthwork and Grading Guidelines are provided herein as Appendix D. During earthwork operations, removals and reprocessing of fill soils and unsuitable materials, as well as general grading procedures of the contractor should be observed, and the fill placed should be tested by representatives of EEI. If any unusual or unexpected conditions are exposed in the field, they should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer and if warranted, modified and/or additional recommendations will be offered. Specific guidelines and comments pertinent to the planned development are provided herein. The recommendations presented herein are based on the preliminary information provided to us regarding site development. EEI should be provided with grading and foundation plans once they are available so that we can determine if the recommendations provided in this report remain applicable. 7.2 Site Preparation and Grading Debris and other deleterious material, such as organic soils, tree root balls and/or environmentally impacted earth materials (if any) should be removed from the subject property prior to the start of grading. All of the existing fill materials and loose and disturbed alluvial deposits should be removed to the contact with the firm underlying alluvial materials and recompacted. Alluvial removals should extend Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 9 to minimum 2 feet below the bottom elevation of the proposed foundation system. A minimum of 5 foot of removal and recompaction should be anticipated. Areas to receive fill should be properly scarified and/or benched in accordance with current industry standards of practice and guidelines specified in the CBC (2019) and the requirements of the local jurisdiction. Abandoned trenches should be properly backfilled and tested. If unanticipated subsurface improvements (utility lines, septic systems, wells, utilities, etc.) are encountered during earthwork construction, the Geotechnical Engineer should be informed and appropriate remedial recommendations would then be provided. The on-site alluvial soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill and backfill. Site alluvial soils are generally free of organic materials (less than 2% by weight) and do not appear to contain oversized particles (greater than 6-inches in largest dimension). Additionally, site alluvial soils do not possess expansive characteristics. The import fill and select backfill material should be free of perishable material and should meet the following criteria: a. Maximum particle size 1 inch b. Maximum Liquid Limit (LL) 20% c. Maximum Plasticity Index (PI) 10% d. Maximum percentage passing No. 200 sieve 30% e. Minimum sand equivalent 30 f. Maximum Expansive Index (EI), (ASTM D-4829) 20 g. Maximum Soluble Sulfate Concentration ≤1,000 ppm 7.3 Remedial Earthwork Areas to be graded should be cleared of all the existing vegetation and fill soils, remnants of past construction, loose soils within the trench excavations, and other unsuitable materials. The existing soils should be excavated to the contact with the firm underlying alluvial deposits. These removals should extend to a minimum depth of 5 feet below the existing ground surface or 2-feet below the bottom elevations of the proposed foundation systems, whichever is deeper. The area of site preparation should extend at least five feet beyond any proposed improvements. Following removal, the bottom of the resulting excavation(s) should be observed by a representative of EEI to check that unsuitable materials have been sufficiently removed. It should be understood that based on the observations of the field representative, localized deeper removals may be recommended. This remedial earthwork should extend at least five feet beyond the area to receive fill or equal to the vertical depth of fill measured horizontally (whichever is greater). Note that vertical sides exceeding five feet in depth may be prone to sloughing and may require laying back to an inclination of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical). Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 10 After removal of the unsuitable soils and observation of the excavation bottoms, the upper 6 to 8 inches of surface exposed by the excavation should be scarified and moisture-conditioned to 2 to 4 percent over optimum moisture content, and compacted to minimum 95 percent relative compaction1. Subsequent fill placement required during the grading phase should be placed in layers less than 8 inches in loose thickness and moisture conditioned to at least 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted by mechanical methods to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by (ASTM D1557). Fill material should be free of organic matter (less than 2 percent organics by weight) and other deleterious material. Fill material should not contain rocks greater than 6-inches in maximum dimension. If localized areas of relatively loose soil prevent proper compaction, over-excavation and re-scarified compaction will be necessary. Subgrade materials should not be allowed to desiccate between the grading and the construction phases of the concrete slabs, foundations, and pavements. The subgrade should be thoroughly and uniformly moistened prior to placing concrete. The grading operations should be performed under the observation and testing of an EEI representative. If import soils are needed, the earthwork contractor should ensure that all proposed fill materials are approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to use. Representative soil samples should be made available for testing at least ten (10) working days prior to import to the property to allow for laboratory testing. 7.4 Yielding Subgrade Conditions The soils encountered at the subject property can exhibit “pumping” or yielding if they become saturated. This can often occur in response to periods of significant precipitation, such as during the winter rainy season. If this occurs and in order to help stabilize the yielding subgrade soils within the bottom of the removal areas, the contractor can consider the placement of stabilization fabric or geo- grid over the yielding areas, depending on the relative severity. Mirafi 600X (or approved equivalent) stabilization fabric may be used for areas with low to moderate yielding conditions. Geo-grid such as Tensar TX-5 (or approved equivalent) may be used for areas with moderate to severe yielding conditions. Uniform sized, ¾- to 2-inch crushed rock, should be placed over the stabilization fabric or geo-grid. A 12-inch thick section of crushed rock will typically be necessary to stabilize yielding ground. A filter fabric should be placed over the crushed rock/gravel to prevent migration of fines into the gravel and subsequent settlement of the overlying fill. Fill soils, which should be placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations presented herein, should then be placed over the filter fabric until design finish grades are reached. The crushed rock/gravel and stabilization fabric or geo-grid should extend at least 5 feet laterally beyond the limits of the yielding areas. These operations should be performed under the observation and testing of a representative of EEI in order to evaluate the effectiveness of these measures and to provide additional recommendations for mitigation, as necessary. 1 Relative compaction refers to the in-place dry density of soil expressed as a percentage of the maximum dry density of the same material, as determined by the ASTM (D1557) test method. Optimum moisture content corresponding to the maximum dry density, as determined by the ASTM (D557) test method. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 11 After preparation of the subgrade by removal and replacement with compacted fill, we do not anticipate that any significant subgrade yielding will occur except for normal settlement due to the applied loads. 7.5 Shrinkage and Bulking Several factors will impact earthwork balancing on the subject property, including shrinkage, bulking, subsidence, trench spoils from utilities and footing excavations, and final pavement section thickness as well as the accuracy of topography. Shrinkage, bulking and subsidence are primarily dependent upon the degree of compactive effort achieved during construction. Shrinkage, bulking and subsidence should be considered by the project civil engineer relative to final site balancing. It is recommended that the site development be planned to include an area that could be raised or lowered to accommodate final site balancing. 7.6 Temporary Site Excavations It is anticipated that excavations in the onsite materials can be achieved with conventional earthwork equipment in good working order. Temporary excavations within the alluvial materials (considered to be a Type B soil per OSHA guidelines) should be stable at 1. 5H: 1V inclinations for short durations during construction, and where cuts do not exceed 10 feet in height. Some sloughing of surface soils should be anticipated. Temporary excavations 4 feet deep or less can be made vertically. The faces of temporary slopes should be inspected daily by the contractor’s Competent Person before personnel are allowed to enter the excavation. Any zones of potential instability, sloughing or raveling should be brought to the attention of the Engineer and corrective action implemented before personnel begin working in the excavation. Excavated soils should not be stockpiled behind temporary excavations within a distance equal to the depth of the excavation. EEI should be notified if other surcharge loads are anticipated so that lateral load criteria can be developed for the specific situation. If temporary slopes are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are recommended along the tops of slopes to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and eroding the slope faces. 7.7 Slopes Permanent slopes should be constructed at an inclination of 2:1 H: V or flatter. Faces of fill slopes should be compacted either by rolling with a sheep-foot roller or other suitable equipment, or by overfilling and cutting back to design grade. All slopes are susceptible to surficial slope failure and erosion. Water should not be allowed to flow over the top of slopes. Additionally, slopes should be planted with vegetation that will reduce the potential for erosion. 8.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1 General The foundation recommendations provided herein are based on the proposed development information provided by the Client. EEI should be provided with the final grading and foundation plans once they are available so that we can determine if the recommendations provided in this report remain applicable. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 12 Recommendations by the project's design-structural engineer or architect may exceed the following minimum recommendations. However; if analyses by the structural engineer result in less critical details than are provided herein as minimums, the minimums presented herein should be adopted. Based on our subsurface investigation and laboratory test data as well as our engineering analysis we judge that a conventional shallow foundation system in conjunction with a concrete slab-on-grade floor appears to be suitable for support of the proposed residential buildings. 8.2 Shallow Conventional Foundations Foundation support for the proposed development could be derived by utilizing a conventional, shallow foundation system embedded within the properly compacted fill soils in accordance with the following criteria: • Minimum depth measured from lowest adjacent grade ......................................................... 2 feet • Minimum footing width ........................................................................................................ 1.5 feet • Allowable bearing capacity (pounds per square foot), (FS > 3) a. Sustained loads ................................................................................................ 2,000 psf b. Total loads (1/3 allowable increase for wind and seismic) ............................. 2,650 psf • Resistance to lateral loads a. Passive soils resistance (pounds per cubic foot) ................................................ 200 psf b. Coefficient of sliding friction ................................................................................... 0.40 Footings can be designed to resist lateral loads by using a combination of sliding friction and passive resistance. The coefficient of friction should be applied to dead load forces only; and passive resistance should be reduced by one third. For foundations with no sliding friction at the base (foundations resisting uplift loads), 100% of passive resistance could be utilizes. The upper one foot of passive resistance should be neglected where the soil is not confined by the slabs or pavement. For the properly constructed foundations in accordance with the foregoing criteria, total static post- construction settlement from the anticipated structural loads is estimated to be on the order of 1 inch. Differential settlement on the order of ½ of total settlement should be anticipated over a distance of 40 feet. 8.3 Footing Setbacks Footings adjacent to unlined drainage swales or underground utilities (if any) should be deepened to a minimum of 6-inches below the invert of the adjacent unlined swale or utilities. This distance is measured from the footing face at the bearing elevation. Footings for structures adjacent to retaining walls should be deepened so as to extend below a 1:1 projection from the heel of the wall. Alternatively, walls may be designed to accommodate structural loads from buildings or appurtenances. 8.4 Interior Slabs-on-Grade The project structural engineer should design the interior concrete slab-on-grade floor. However; as a minimum, it is recommended that a minimum of 5-inch thick slab, reinforced with No. 4 bars located at 18 inches on center, both ways, be constructed. A layer of free draining, clean (washed) ¾ -inch crushed rock, at least 6 inches thick layer should be placed below the slab. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 13 Subgrade materials should not be allowed to desiccate between grading and the construction of the concrete slabs. The floor slab subgrade should be thoroughly and uniformly moistened prior to placing concrete. A moisture vapor retarder/barrier should be placed beneath slabs where moisture sensitive floor coverings will be installed. The vapor barrier should comply with the requirements of ASTM E1745 (Class “A”), and should be installed in accordance with ASTM E1643. The vapor barrier should be at least 15-mil thick and should be sealed at all splices, around the plumbing, and at the perimeter of slab areas, Every effort should be made to provide a continuous barrier and care should be taken not to puncture the membrane. Current construction practice typically includes placement of a 2-inch thick sand cushion between the bottom of the concrete slab and the moisture vapor retarder/barrier. This cushion can provide some protection to the vapor retarder/barrier during construction and may assist in reducing the potential for edge curling in the slab during curing. However, the sand layer also provides a source of moisture vapor to the underside of the slab that can increase the time required to reduce moisture vapor emissions to limits acceptable for the type of floor covering placed on top of the slab. The slab can be placed directly on the vapor retarder/barrier. The floor covering manufacturer should be contacted to determine the volume of moisture vapor allowable and any treatment needed to reduce moisture vapor emissions to acceptable limits for the particular type of floor covering installed. The project architect should determine the appropriate treatment for the specific application. 8.5 Exterior Slabs-on-Grade It is recommended that a minimum 4-inch slab reinforced with No. 3 bars located at 12 inches on center, both ways, be constructed. At the exterior edges of the flatwork, a thickened edge is recommended. A layer of free-draining, clean (washed) crushed rock, at least 4 inches thick beneath the slab is also recommended. Subgrade materials should not be allowed to desiccate between grading and the construction of the concrete slabs. The floor slab subgrade should be thoroughly and uniformly moistened prior to placing concrete. Slabs should be provided with weakened plane joints. Joints should be placed in accordance with the American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. Proper control joints should be provided to reduce the potential for damage resulting from shrinkage movement of the slabs adjacent to the structures, and can be mitigated by doweling slabs to the perimeter footings. As an option to doweling, an architectural separation could be provided between the main structure and the abutting appurtenant improvements. All dedicated exterior flatwork should conform to standards provided by the governing agency including section composition, supporting material thickness and any requirements for reinforcing steel. Concrete mix proportions and construction techniques, including the addition of water and improper curing, can adversely affect the finished quality of the concrete and result in cracking and spalling of the slab. We recommend that all placement and curing be performed in accordance with procedures outlined by the American Concrete Institute and/or Portland Cement Association. Special consideration should be given to concrete placed and cured during hot or cold weather conditions. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 14 8.6 Pool Design The new pool and pool deck should be designed according to the following criteria: • Design shell as free standing. • Utilize 65 pcf equivalent fluid pressures for static active lateral soil loading plus a 60 pcf expansive soil surcharge in the upper six feet. • Decking commonly becomes separated from the pool shell, tilts, and/or heaves above the coping in response to expansive soil action. It is recommended that pool decking be designed in accordance with “Exterior Slabs- on- Grade” criteria presented in this report. • Provide for hydrostatic pressure relief. • In the case of a spa being planned structurally continuous with the pool shell, the spa should either be designed to be entirely supported by the pool shell (i.e., cantilevered) or the spa support should be derived at a depth comparable to that of the pool. 8.7 Conventional Retaining Walls 8.7.1 Foundations The recommendations provided in the foundation sections of this report are also applicable to conventional retaining walls. 8.7.2 Lateral Earth Pressure The following parameters are based on the use of low-expansion potential backfill materials within a 1:1 (H: V) line projected from the heel of the retaining wall. The active earth pressure for the design of unrestrained earth retaining structures with level backfills can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 40 pcf. The at-rest earth pressure for the design of restrained earth retaining structures with level backfills can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 60 pcf. An additional 20 pcf should be added to these values for walls with a 2:1(H: V) sloping backfill. The above values assume a granular and drained backfill condition. Higher lateral earth pressures would apply if walls retain expansive clay soils. An increase in earth pressure equivalent to an additional 2 feet of retained soil can be used to account for surcharge loads from light traffic. Surcharge due to other loading within an approximate 1½:1 (H: V) projection from the back of the wall will increase the lateral pressures provided above and should be incorporated into the wall design. Where required, seismic earth pressures can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 25 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). The resultant force will be acting at 1/3 H feet from top of the wall. This value is for level backfill conditions and do not include a factor of safety. The seismic pressure is in addition to the static lateral earth pressures. Retaining walls should be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures or be provided with a back-drain to reduce the accumulation of hydrostatic pressures. Back-drains may consist of a two-foot wide zone of ¾-inch crushed rock. The back-drain should be separated from the adjacent soils using a non-woven filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent. A perforated pipe (Schedule 40 PVC) should be installed Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 15 at the base of the back-drain and sloped to discharge to a suitable storm drain facility. As an alternative, a geo-composite drainage system such as Miradrain 6000 or equivalent placed behind the wall and connected to a suitable storm drain facility can be used. The project architect should provide waterproofing specifications and details. 8.8 Corrosivity One sample of the onsite soils was tested to provide a preliminary indication of the corrosion potential of the onsite soils. The test results are presented in Appendix B. A brief discussion of the corrosion test results is provided in the following section. • The sample tested had a soluble sulfate concentration of 30 parts per million (ppm), which indicates the sample has a negligible sulfate corrosion potential relative to concrete. It should be noted that soluble sulfate in the irrigation water supply, and/or the use of fertilizer may cause the sulfate content in the surficial soils to increase with time. This may result in a higher sulfate exposure than that indicated by the test results reported herein. Studies have shown that the use of improved cements in the concrete, and a low water-cement ratio will improve the resistance of the concrete to sulfate exposure. Therefore; as a minimum we recommend that the concrete should utilize typeII cement with maximum 0.50 water/cement ratio. Concrete mix design, materials, placement, curing, and finishing should be in conformance with the California Building Code (2019), and American Concrete Institute (ACI) specifications. • The sample tested had a chloride concentration of 20 ppm, which indicates the sample has a moderate chloride corrosion potential relative to metal. • The sample tested had a minimum resistivity of 6300 ohm-cm, which indicates the sample is non corrosive to ferrous metals. • The sample tested had a pH of 7.8, which indicates the sample is generally neutral. Additional testing should be performed after grading to evaluate the as-graded corrosion potential of the onsite soils. We are not corrosion engineers. A corrosion consultant should be retained to provide corrosion control recommendations if deemed necessary. 9.0 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Deleterious material, excessively wet or dry pockets, concentrated zones of oversized rock fragments, and any other unsuitable yielding materials encountered during grading should be removed. Once compacted fill and/or native soils are brought to the proposed pavement subgrade elevations, the subgrade should be proof-rolled in order to check for a uniform firm and unyielding surface. Representatives of the project geotechnical engineer should observe all grading and fill placement. The upper 24-inches of pavement subgrade soils should be scarified; moisture conditioned to at least 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the laboratory standard (ASTM D1557). If loose or yielding materials are encountered during subgrade preparation, evaluation should be performed by EEI. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 16 Aggregate base materials should be properly prepared (i.e., processed and moisture conditioned) and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. All pavement section changes should be properly transitioned. Although not anticipated, if adverse conditions are encountered during the preparation of subgrade materials, special construction methods may need to be employed. A representative of the project geotechnical engineer should be present for the preparation of subgrade and aggregate base. For preliminary design purposes, we have assumed an R-Value of 15 for the materials likely to be exposed at subgrade. For design purposes we have assumed a Traffic Index (TI) of 5.0 for the parking stalls and a Traffic Index (TI) of 6.0 for drive areas. This assumed TI should be verified as necessary by the Civil Engineer or Traffic Engineer. TABLE 3 Preliminary Pavement Design Recommendations Traffic Index (TI) / Intended Use Pavement Surface Aggregate Base Material (1) 5 3.0-inches Asphalt Concrete 8.0-inches 6 3.0-inches Asphalt Concrete 11.0-inches Concrete Pavement Section 6.0-inches Portland Cement Concrete 6.0-inches (1) R-Value of 78 for Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base The recommended pavement sections provided in Table 3 are intended as a minimum guideline. If thinner or highly variable pavement sections are constructed, increased maintenance and repair could be expected. If the actual traffic index (TI) increases beyond our assumed values, increased maintenance and repair could be required for the pavement section. Final pavement design should be verified by testing of soils exposed at subgrade after grading has been completed. Thicker pavement sections could result if R-Value testing indicates lower values. 10.0 DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 10.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting Water is known to decrease the physical strength of earth materials, significantly reducing stability by high moisture conditions. Surface drainage away from foundations and graded slopes should be maintained. Only the volume and frequency of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be applied. Consideration should be given to selecting lightweight, deep rooted types of landscape vegetation which require low irrigation that are capable of surviving the local climate. From a soils engineering viewpoint, “leaching” of the onsite soils is not recommended for establishing landscaping. If landscape soils are processed for the addition of amendments, the processed soils should be re-compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557). Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 17 10.2 Site Drainage Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled over slopes. Runoff should be channeled away from slopes and structures and not allowed to pond and/or seep uncontrolled into the ground. Pad drainage should be directed toward an acceptable outlet. Consideration should be given to eliminating open bottom planters directly adjacent to proposed structures for a minimum distance of 10 feet. As an alternative, closed-bottom type planters could be utilized, with a properly designed drain outlet placed in the bottom of the planter. Final surface grades around structures should be designed to collect and direct surface water away from structures and toward appropriate drainage facilities. The ground around the structure should be graded so that surface water flows rapidly away from the structure without ponding. In general, we recommend that the ground adjacent to the structure slope away at a gradient of at least 2 percent. Densely vegetated areas where runoff can be impaired should have a minimum gradient of at least 5 percent within the first 5 feet from the structure. Roof gutters with downspouts that discharge directly into a closed drainage system are recommended on structures. Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the proposed structures. 10.3 Site Runoff Considerations - Stormwater Disposal Systems To comply with the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requirements it is our understanding that an onsite water retention system for the proposed development is contemplated. For this reason we performed percolation testing at the site in order to provide a preliminary indication of the infiltration characteristics of the onsite materials. Percolation tests were performed in borings B-4/P-1 and B-5/P-2. The approximate locations of the percolation wells are identified on Boring Location Map (Figure 3). Percolation test wells were constructed by inserting 3-inch-diameter perforated PVC pipe in the borings and backfilling the annular space with ⅜-inch gravel to prevent caving during the percolation test. Following construction of the percolation test wells, they were filled with water and pre-saturated. Percolation testing was then performed, and consisted of refilling the test wells with water to approximate referenced elevation and taking a reading of drop in water level every ten minutes for a period of approximately one hour. Table 4 presents the measured percolation and corresponding infiltration rates calculated for the test holes. TABLE 4 Summary of Percolation Testing Location Depth (ft.) Pre-Adjusted Percolation Rate (in/hr.) Infiltration Rate (in/hr.) B-4/P-1 11.3 480 90 B-5/P-2 19.15 122.4 7.95 Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 18 The percolation test results are presented in Appendix C. It must be realized that the infiltration rates presented above are as tested infiltration rates and do not include a factor of safety used for design rates. The project civil engineer should determine the appropriate factor of safety for the proposed disposal system. We note that only conceptual plans were available at the time of this evaluation, and the design and location of a storm water dissipation/retention system has not yet been determined. Therefore our percolation test was performed in soils that are generally representative of the overall property. 10.4 Structure Setback from Retention Devices We recommend that retention/disposal devices be situated at least three times their depth, or a minimum of 15 feet (whichever is greater), from the outside bottom edge of structural foundations. Structural foundations include (but are not limited to) buildings, loading docks, retaining walls, and screen walls. All stormwater disposal systems should be checked and maintained on regular intervals. Stormwater devices including bioswales that are located closer than 10 feet from any foundations/footings should be lined with an impermeable membrane to reduce the potential for saturation of foundation soils. Foundations may also need to be deepened. 10.5 Additional Site Improvements Recommendations for additional grading can be provided upon request. If in the future, additional property improvements are planned for the subject property, recommendations concerning the design and construction of improvements would be provided upon request. 10.6 Utility Trench Backfill Fill around the pipe should be placed in accordance with details shown on the drawings, and should be placed in layers not to exceed 8-inches loose (unless otherwise approved by the geotechnical engineer) and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor). The geotechnical engineer should approve all backfill material. Select material should be used when called for on the drawings, or when recommended by the geotechnical engineer. Care should be taken during backfill and compaction operations to maintain alignment and prevent damage to the joints. The backfill should be kept free from oversized material, chunks of highly plastic clay, or other unsuitable or deleterious material. Backfill soils should be non- expansive, non-corrosive, and compatible with native earth materials. Backfill materials and testing should be in accordance with the IBC (2012), and the requirements of the local governing jurisdiction. Pipe backfill areas should be graded and maintained in such a condition that erosion or saturation will not damage the pipe bedding or backfill. Flooding trench backfill is not recommended. Heavy equipment should not be operated over any pipe until it has been properly backfilled with a minimum of 2 to 3 feet of cover. The utility trench should be systematically backfilled to allow maximum time for natural settlement. Backfill should not occur over porous, wet, or spongy subgrade surfaces. Should these conditions exist, the areas should be removed, replaced and recompacted. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 19 11.0 PLAN REVIEW Once detailed grading and foundation plans are available, they should be submitted to EEI for review and comment, to reduce the potential for discrepancies between plans and recommendations presented herein. If conditions are found to differ substantially from those stated, appropriate recommendations will be provided. Additional field studies may be warranted. 12.0 LIMITATIONS This Geotechnical Evaluation has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. Findings provided herein have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. This report has been prepared for the sole use of National Community Renaissance (Client), within a reasonable time from its authorization. Subject property conditions, land use (both onsite and offsite), or other factors may change as a result of manmade influences, and additional work may be required with the passage of time. This Geotechnical Evaluation should not be relied upon by other parties without the express written consent of EEI and the Client; therefore, any use or reliance upon this Geotechnical Evaluation by a party other than the Client should be solely at the risk of such third party and without legal recourse against EEI, its employees, officers, or directors, regardless of whether the action in which recovery of damages is brought or based upon contract, tort, statue, or otherwise. The Client has the responsibility to see that all parties to the project, including the designer, contractor, subcontractor, and building official, etc. are aware of this report in its complete form. This report contains information that may be used in the preparation of contract specifications; however, the report is not designed as a specification document, and may not contain sufficient information for use without additional assessment. EEI assumes no responsibility or liability for work or testing performed by others. In addition, this report may be subject to review by the controlling authorities. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 FIGURES FIGURE 1 SITE VICINITY MAP National Community Renaissance Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim Ave Anaheim, Orange County, CA EEI Project NCO-73182.4 Scale: 1" = 4,900 feet Note: All Locations Are Approximate 4,900 ft USGS US Topo 7.5-minute map for Anaheim, CA 2018 LEGEND 9,800 ft2,450 ft0 SITE VICINITY FIGURE 2 AERIAL SITE MAP National Community Renaissance Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim Ave Anaheim, Orange County, CA EEI Project NCO-73182.4 Source: Google Earth, 2021 Scale: 1" = 64' Note: All Locations Are Approximate 64 ft 128 ft32 ft0 SUBJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARY FIGURE 3 GEOTECHNICAL MAP National Community Renaissance Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim Ave Anaheim, Orange County, CA EEI Project NCO-73182.4 Source: Google Earth, 2021 SUBJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARY Approximate locations of exploratory boringsB-1 Approximate location of percolation tests B-4/P-1 B-1 B-3 B-2 B-6 B-4/P-1 B-5/P-2 TP-6 TP-4 TP-1 TP-2 TP-3 TP-5 TP-4 Scale: 1" = 64' Note: All Locations Are Approximate 64 ft 128 ft32 ft0 Scale: 1" = 64' Note: All Locations Are Approximate 64 ft 128 ft32 ft0 Approximate location of test pits Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 APPENDIX A SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART AND BORING LOGS S o u t h M e l r o s e D r i v e SYMBOLS GRAPH LETTER TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONSMAJOR DIVISIONS GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH COARSE GRAINED SOILS GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOILS CLEAN GRAVELS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) GRAVELS WITH FINES (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO. 4 SEIVE WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND- CLAY MIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINESCLEAN SANDS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) SANDS WITH FINES SAND AND SANDY SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION REATINED ON NO. 4 SEIVE MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS LARGER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY-SANDS, SAND – SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND – CLAY MIXTURES FINE GRAINED SOILS SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS SAMPLER TYPES SPT Modified California (2.5" I.D.) Bulk Shelby Tube Rock Core OTHER TESTS COR – Corrosivity) CD – Consolidated Drained Triaxial CON – Consolidation DS – Direct Shear RV – R-Value SA – Sieve Analysis ATT – Atterberg Limit (Plasticity Index) TV – Torvane Shear UU – Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial PLASTICITY CHART P la s t ic it y I n d e x (%) 0 0 Liquid Limit (%) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 CL-ML CL “A ” L I N E CH OH & MH Water Level PENETRATION RESISTANCE (Recorded As Blows/Foot) SAND & GRAVEL SILT & CLAY Relative Density Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense Blows/Foot* N 0-4 4-10 10-30 30-50 Over 50 Consistency Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Very Stiff Blows/Foot* N 0 - 2 2 - 4 4 - 8 Over 30 8 - 15 Hard 15 - 30 Strength**(KSF) 0 – 0.5 0.5 – 1.0 1.0 – 2.0 Over 8.0 2.0 – 4.0 4.0 – 8.0 * Number of blows of 140LB hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D. (1-3/8 inch I.D.) split barrel sampler the last 12 inches of an 18-inch drive (ASTM-1586 Standard Penetration Test) 60 60 ** Undrained shear strength in kips/sq. ft. As determined by laboratory testing or approximated by the standard penetration test, pocket penetrometer, torvane, or visual observation UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION (ASTM D-2487-98) Geotechnical & Environmental Solutions LEGEND TO SOIL DESCRIPTIONS APPENDIX A EI – Expansion Index MAX – Maximum Density -#200 - Percent Passing #200 Sieve Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) dark brown, slighly moist to moist, medium dense, fine to coarsegrained with gravel and fragments of asphalt. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SP-SM) tan to light gray, slightly moist to moist, medium dense, fine tovery coarse grained. Silty SAND (SP-SM) tan to light gray, moist, dense, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) brown, moist, medium dense, very fine to medium grained, lowtomoderate plasticity. 16 1 1 2 4 6 15 SM SP-SM SP-SM SM 96 141614 1089 71014 91218 111726 91317 81619 MC MC SPT MC MC MC MC MC 116 90 113 89 101 103 114 B-1 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 2 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Silty SAND (SP-SM) tan to light gray, moist, dense, fine to coarse grained. Sandy SILT (ML) yellowish brown to greenish brown, moist, medium dense, fine tocoarse grained. Silty SAND (SP-SM) tan to light gray, moist, dense, fine to coarse grained. Total Depth: 51.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredBackfilled with native soil 9 24 4 2 SP-SM ML SP-SM 172843 71020 3550-5" 234650-5" MC MC MC MC 106 100 109 106 B-1 3/23/20213/23/2021 2 of 2 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) brown to greenish brown, slighly moist, medium dense, fine tocoarse grained with gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to very coarse. Silty SAND (SM) brown to greenish brown, moist, medium dense, very fine tomedium grained, low to moderate plasticity. Total Depth: 26.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredBackfilled with native soils 5 12 SM SM SM SM 121316 333 565 675 888 5811 71114 MC SPT SPT SPT SPT SPT MC 107 117 B-2 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SP-SM) dark brown, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained withgravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)SAND (SP) tan to dark gray, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained. SAND (SP) tan to dark gray, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to very coarse grained. Sandy SILT (ML) brown, moist, medium dense, very fine to medium grained, low tomoderate plasticity. Total Depth: 26.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredBackfilled with native soils 5 2 2 3 19 SP-SM SP SP SM ML 3711 856 91114 101216 91011 91112 7912 MC MC MC MC SPT SPT MC 113 104 101 101 109 B-3 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) light gray, slighly moist, medium dense, very fine to very coarsegrained with gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SM) greenish yellow to tan, slightly moist, medium dense, fine to verycoarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) yellowish brown to light gray, moist, loose, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) yellowish brown to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to verycoarse grained. Total Depth: 11.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredPercolation test performedBackfilled with native soils 6 SM SM SM SM 81010 544 766 788 MC SPT SPT SPT 102 B-4/P-1 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) dark brown, slighly moist to moist, medium dense, fine to coarsegrained with gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SM) brown to tan, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to very coarse grained. Total Depth: 21.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredPercolation test performedBackfilled with native soils 3 SM SM SM 7912 549 567 666 778 91314 MC SPT SPT SPT SPT SPT 133 B-5/P-2 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) brown to greenish brown, moist, medium dense,very fine to coarsegrained with gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SM) brown to greenish brown, moist, medium dense, very fine to coarsegrained. Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to very coarsegrained. Sandy SILT (ML) greenish brown to dark brown, moist, medium dense, very fine tomedium grained, low to moderate plasticity. Total Depth: 26.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredBackfilled with native soils 8 21 SP-SM SM SM ML 477 555 345 444 787 6711 5711 MC SPT SPT SPT SPT SPT MC 108 104 B-6 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST DATA Laboratory tests were performed to provide geotechnical parameters for engineering analyses. The following tests were performed: • CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. • MOISTURE CONTENT and DRY DENSITY: The in-situ moisture content and dry density of soils was determined for soil samples obtained from the exploratory borings and were determined in general accordance with ASTM D2216 and ASTM 2937, respectively. • EXPANSION INDEX: The expansion index was determined on a select near-surface sample in accordance with ASTM D4829. • DIRECT SHEAR: Direct shear testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM D3080 on a single sample with normal load increments of approximately 1,000, 1,700 and 2,500 psf. • CORROSIVITY: Corrosion testing of representative soil samples included sulfate potential by California Test 417, chloride potential by California Test 422, and soil minimum resistivity and pH by California Test 643. The sample was tested at Clarkson Laboratory and Supply, Inc. located in Chula Vista, California. Moisture-Density Determination Client:Samp Received.: W.O.:Test By: Date:Samples By: Classification Description Color Moisture Moist Dry Dry Dry Dry Moist Moist Moist Consistancy Misc. WET DENSITY Boring/Pit No. B-1 Depth (ft) Elev (ft)2.5 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 Length of Sample (L)6 5 5 6 6 5 6 6 Total Wet Weight (T)1210.3 860.3 888.4 900.1 997.5 964.1 1189.7 1072.5 Total Ring Wt. (R)252 330 210 252 252 330 252 252 Total Soil (S) [T-R]958.3 530.3 678.4 648.1 745.5 634.1 937.7 820.5 Average Wt. (A) [S/L] 159.71667 106.06 135.68 108.01667 124.25 126.82 156.28333 136.75 GMS to LBS [A/453.6]0.3521091 0.2338183 0.2991182 0.238132 0.2739198 0.2795855 0.34454 0.3014771 LBS to CF3 (.00256 cf)134.39277 91.33529 114.16724 90.890069 104.54952 109.2131 131.50381 115.06758 Wet Density (pcf)134.4 91.3 114.2 90.9 104.5 109.2 131.5 115.1 MOISTURE CONTENT Tare No. Wet Weight (g)144.3 148.3 157.2 128.3 123.6 132.8 148.1 145.2 Dry Weight (g)124.5 146.7 155.7 126 119.3 125 128.7 133.3 Tare (g) Water 19.8 1.6 1.5 2.3 4.3 7.8 19.4 11.9 Percent Moisture 15.9% 1.1% 1.0% 1.8% 3.6% 6.2% 15% 9% DRY DENSITY Dry Density 116.0 90.3 113.1 89.3 100.9 102.8 114.3 105.6 Maximum Density Percent Compaction Percent Saturation**98.9% 3.5% 5.5% 5.7% 15.0% 27.2% 89.4% 41.8% *Av. Ring Weight (gms)42 **Specific Gravity 2.65 Rev 8/1/2014 66 EEI 5932-E-SC 4/5/2021 3/26/2021 TR Client SM SP-SM SP SP-SM SP-SM SM SM SP-SM Dark Olive Brown Gray Gray Gray Gray Olive Brown Olive Brown Olive Brown Dense Medium DenseDense Medium Dense Dense Medium Dense Medium Dense Medium Dense Geosoils, Inc. 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad CA 92010 (760) 438-3155 PageX:\clint\EXTERNAL R-VALUE FOLDER\5932 EEI\2021\04 April\5932_NCO-73182.4_M&DMoist.-Dens. (2) Moisture-Density Determination Client:Samp Received.: W.O.:Test By: Date:Samples By: Classification Description Color Moisture Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Consistancy Misc. WET DENSITY Boring/Pit No. B-1 B-2 B-3 Depth (ft) Elev (ft)40.0 45.0 50.0 2.5 25.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Length of Sample (L)6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Total Wet Weight (T)1137.7 1057.4 1021.7 1048.4 1188.2 1098.1 1003.8 987.6 Total Ring Wt. (R)252 252 252 252 252 252 252 252 Total Soil (S) [T-R]885.7 805.4 769.7 796.4 936.2 846.1 751.8 735.6 Average Wt. (A) [S/L] 147.61667 134.23333 128.28333 132.73333 156.03333 141.01667 125.3 122.6 GMS to LBS [A/453.6]0.3254336 0.2959289 0.2828116 0.292622 0.3439888 0.3108833 0.2762346 0.2702822 LBS to CF3 (.00256 cf)124.21129 112.94995 107.94335 111.68778 131.29345 118.65775 105.43304 103.16114 Wet Density (pcf)124.2 112.9 107.9 111.7 131.3 118.7 105.4 103.2 MOISTURE CONTENT Tare No. Wet Weight (g)149.2 120.6 142.4 118.6 146.5 119.2 135.5 125 Dry Weight (g)120 116.5 139.8 113.4 130.4 113.5 133.3 122.7 Tare (g) Water 29.2 4.1 2.6 5.2 16.1 5.7 2.2 2.3 Percent Moisture 24.3% 3.5% 1.9% 4.6% 12.3% 5.0% 2% 2% DRY DENSITY Dry Density 99.9 109.1 106.0 106.8 116.9 113.0 103.7 101.3 Maximum Density Percent Compaction Percent Saturation**98.4% 18.1% 8.8% 22.2% 78.8% 28.7% 7.4% 7.8% *Av. Ring Weight (gms)42 **Specific Gravity 2.65 Rev 8/1/2014 EEI 3/26/2021 5932-E-SC TR 4/5/2021 Client ML SP-SM SP SM SM SP-SM SP SP Olive Brown Gray Gray Olive Brown Olive Brown Gray Gray Gray Dense Medium Dense Medium Dense Dense Dense Dense Dense Dense Geosoils, Inc. 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad CA 92010 (760) 438-3155 PageX:\clint\EXTERNAL R-VALUE FOLDER\5932 EEI\2021\04 April\5932_NCO-73182.4_M&DMoist.-Dens. (3) Moisture-Density Determination Client:Samp Received.: W.O.:Test By: Date:Samples By: Classification Description Color Moisture Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Consistancy Misc. WET DENSITY Boring/Pit No. B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 Depth (ft) Elev (ft)10.0 25.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 25.0 Length of Sample (L)6 6 6 6 6 6 Total Wet Weight (T)991.7 1176.1 1024.2 1231.3 1085.3 1152.9 Total Ring Wt. (R)252 252 252 252 252 252 Total Soil (S) [T-R]739.7 924.1 772.2 979.3 833.3 900.9 Average Wt. (A) [S/L] 123.28333 154.01667 128.7 163.21667 138.88333 150.15 GMS to LBS [A/453.6]0.2717887 0.3395429 0.2837302 0.3598251 0.3061802 0.3310185 LBS to CF3 (.00256 cf)103.73613 129.59653 108.29395 137.33783 116.86267 126.34295 Wet Density (pcf)103.7 129.6 108.3 137.3 116.9 126.3 MOISTURE CONTENT Tare No. Wet Weight (g)126.5 157.9 135.8 123.1 120.7 151.2 Dry Weight (g)123.2 132.8 128.4 119.3 111.6 124.5 Tare (g) Water 3.3 25.1 7.4 3.8 9.1 26.7 Percent Moisture 2.7% 18.9% 5.8% 3.2% 8.2% 21.4% DRY DENSITY Dry Density 101.0 109.0 102.4 133.1 108.1 104.0 Maximum Density Percent Compaction Percent Saturation**11.1% 96.9% 24.8% 34.8% 40.7% 96.4% *Av. Ring Weight (gms)42 **Specific Gravity 2.65 Rev 8/1/2014 EEI 3/26/2021 5932-E-SC TR 4/5/2021 Client SP ML SM SM SP-SM ML Gray Olive Brown Gray Gray Gray Olive Brown Medium Dense Dense Medium Dense Dense Dense Dense Geosoils, Inc. 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad CA 92010 (760) 438-3155 PageX:\clint\EXTERNAL R-VALUE FOLDER\5932 EEI\2021\04 April\5932_NCO-73182.4_M&DMoist.-Dens. (4) Tested By: TR Checked By: TR Client: EEI Project: EEI Source of Sample: SHEAR Depth: 5.0 Sample Number: B-3 Proj. No.: 5932-E-SC Date Sampled: Sample Type: Undisturbed Description: Gray Sand Specific Gravity= 2.65 Remarks: Plate Sample No. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf Saturation, % Void Ratio Diameter, in. Height, in. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf Saturation, % Void Ratio Diameter, in. Height, in. Normal Stress, psf Fail. Stress, psf Strain, % Ult. Stress, psf Strain, % Strain rate, in./min. In i t i a l At T e s t Sh e a r S t r e s s , p s f 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Strain, % 0 5 10 15 20 1 2 3 Ul t . S t r e s s , p s f Fa i l . S t r e s s , p s f 0 2000 4000 6000 Normal Stress, psf 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 C, psf f, deg Tan(f) Fail. Ult. 135 41.3 0.88 83 33.5 0.66 1 2.0 103.4 8.8 0.5992 2.40 1.00 18.1 103.9 81.1 0.5928 2.40 1.00 1100 1093 3.2 818 7.5 0.005 2 2.0 103.5 8.9 0.5979 2.40 1.00 18.6 104.5 84.6 0.5836 2.40 0.99 2200 2083 3.9 1531 7.8 0.005 3 2.0 105.0 9.2 0.5753 2.40 1.00 17.6 106.1 83.2 0.5596 2.40 0.99 3300 3025 3.7 2276 10.1 0.004 Tested By: TR Checked By: TR 4-5-21 (no specification provided) PL= LL= PI= D90= D85= D60= D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= USCS= AASHTO= * Gray Sand .375 #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100.0 98.8 94.7 73.7 41.3 15.2 4.9 2.0 1.5002 1.2115 0.6153 0.5016 0.3450 0.2489 0.2096 2.94 0.92 SP NCO-73182.4 EEI EEI 5932-E-SC Soil Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Source of Sample: Sieve Depth: 10.0 Sample Number: B-1 Date: Client: Project: Project No:Plate SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS? SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) PE R C E N T F I N E R 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 GRAIN SIZE - mm. 0.0010.010.1110100 % +3"Coarse % Gravel Fine Coarse Medium % Sand Fine Silt % Fines Clay 0.0 0.0 1.2 4.1 53.4 39.3 2.0 6 i n . 3 i n . 2 i n . 1½ i n . 1 i n . ¾ i n . ½ i n . 3/ 8 i n . #4 #1 0 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #6 0 #1 0 0 #1 4 0 #2 0 0 Particle Size Distribution Report Tested By: TR Checked By: TR 4-5-21 (no specification provided) PL= LL= PI= D90= D85= D60= D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= USCS= AASHTO= * Gray Sand w/Silt .375 #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100.0 99.8 99.1 93.0 74.9 49.1 24.9 13.4 0.7136 0.5764 0.3077 0.2541 0.1709 0.0908 SP-SM NCO-73182.4 EEI EEI 5932-E-SC Soil Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Source of Sample: Sieve Depth: 45.0 Sample Number: B-1 Date: Client: Project: Project No:Plate SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS? SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) PE R C E N T F I N E R 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 GRAIN SIZE - mm. 0.0010.010.1110100 % +3"Coarse % Gravel Fine Coarse Medium % Sand Fine Silt % Fines Clay 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.7 24.2 61.5 13.4 6 i n . 3 i n . 2 i n . 1½ i n . 1 i n . ¾ i n . ½ i n . 3/ 8 i n . #4 #1 0 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #6 0 #1 0 0 #1 4 0 #2 0 0 Particle Size Distribution Report Tested By: TR Checked By: TR 4-5-21 (no specification provided) PL= LL= PI= D90= D85= D60= D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= USCS= AASHTO= * Olive Brown Silty Sand #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100.0 99.7 95.6 80.9 62.7 41.3 0.3330 0.2824 0.1383 0.1006 SM NCO-73182.4 EEI EEI 5932-E-SC Soil Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Source of Sample: Sieve Depth: 25.0 Sample Number: B-2 Date: Client: Project: Project No:Plate SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS? SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) PE R C E N T F I N E R 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 GRAIN SIZE - mm. 0.0010.010.1110100 % +3"Coarse % Gravel Fine Coarse Medium % Sand Fine Silt % Fines Clay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.4 54.3 41.3 6 i n . 3 i n . 2 i n . 1½ i n . 1 i n . ¾ i n . ½ i n . 3/ 8 i n . #4 #1 0 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #6 0 #1 0 0 #1 4 0 #2 0 0 Particle Size Distribution Report Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 APPENDIX C FIELD PERCOLATION DATA Well Installed? No Start Finish ft. ft.min. in. in./hr. 1 9:52 9:53 10.80 11.30 1 6.00 360.00 2 9:53 9:54 10.50 11.30 1 9.60 576.00 3 9:54 9:56 10.40 11.30 1.5 10.80 432.00 4 9:56 9:58 10.30 11.30 1.5 12.00 480.00 5 9:58 10:00 10.30 11.30 1.5 12.00 480.00 6 10:00 10:02 10.30 11.30 1.5 12.00 480.00 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Project "Midway Affordable"By BS Client National Community Renaissance Date 3/25/2021 Proj. No.NCO-73182.4 Page 1 of 2 PERCOLATION TEST Borehole ID B-4/P-1 Contractor EEI Equipment/Rig (HSA)/Truck-Mounted A300 Presoak Start 3/25/2021 Boring Diameter 8-inches Testing Start 3/25/2021 Boring Depth 11.3 in/hr Time Depth to Water Elapsed Time Testing Completion 3/25/2021 Yes Notes After pouring over 20 gallons into the boring hole the water was unable to hold a stable head of water. A presoak was not needed. Reading Start Finish Water Drop Perc. Rate Stabilized Percolation Rate =480.00 Well Installed? No Start Finish ft. ft.min. in. in./hr. 1 10:37 10:47 15.35 17.85 10 30.00 180.00 2 10:47 10:57 16.05 17.90 10 22.20 133.20 3 10:57 11:07 15.65 17.80 10 25.80 154.80 4 11:07 11:17 15.85 17.75 10 22.80 136.80 5 11:17 11:27 15.95 17.65 10 20.40 122.40 6 11:27 11:37 15.90 17.60 10 20.40 122.40 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Project "Midway Affordable"By BS Client National Community Renaissance Date 3/25/2021 Proj. No.NCO-73182.4 Page 2 of 2 PERCOLATION TEST Borehole ID B-5/P-2 Contractor EEI Equipment/Rig (HSA)/Truck-Mounted A300 Presoak Start 3/25/2021 Boring Diameter 8-inches Testing Start 3/25/2021 Boring Depth 19.15 in/hr Time Depth to Water Elapsed Time Testing Completion 3/25/2021 Yes Notes After pouring over 35 gallons into the boring hole the water was unable to hold a stable head of water. A presoak was not needed. Reading Start Finish Water Drop Perc. Rate Stabilized Percolation Rate =122.40 Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 APPENDIX D EARTHWORK and GRADING GUIDELINES EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES GENERAL These guidelines present general procedures and recommendations for earthwork and grading as required on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill and installation of subdrains and excavations. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report are applicable to each specific project, are part of the earthwork and grading guidelines and would supersede the provisions contained hereafter in the case of conflict. Observations and/or testing performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in revised recommendations which could supersede these guidelines or the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report. Figures A through O is provided at the back of this appendix, exhibiting generalized cross sections relating to these guidelines. The contractor is responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthworks in accordance with provisions of the project plans and specifications. The project soil engineer and engineering geologist (geotechnical consultant) or their representatives should provide observation and testing services, and geotechnical consultation throughout the duration of the project. EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Geotechnical Consultant Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant (a soil engineer and engineering geologist) should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report, the approved grading plans, and applicable grading codes and ordinances. The geotechnical consultant should provide testing and observation so that determination may be made that the work is being completed as specified. It is the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep them aware of work schedules and predicted changes, so that the consultant may schedule their personnel accordingly. All removals, prepared ground to receive fill, key excavations, and subdrains should be observed and documented by the project engineering geologist and/or soil engineer prior to placing any fill. It is the contractor’s responsibility to notify the engineering geologist and soil engineer when such areas are ready for observation. Corporate Office: 2195 Faraday Ave., Suite K, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7207  Ph: 760-431-3747 www.eeitiger.com Camarillo * Carlsbad * Pleasanton * Sacramento * Reno Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 2 Laboratory and Field Tests Maximum dry density tests to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with American Standard Testing Materials test method ASTM designation D-1557-78. Random field compaction tests should be performed in accordance with test method ASTM designations D-1556-82, D-2937 or D-2922 & D-3017, at intervals of approximately two feet of fill height per 10,000 sq. ft. or every one thousand cubic yards of fill placed. These criteria would vary depending on the soil conditions and the size of the project. The location and frequency of testing would be at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant Contractor’s Responsibility All clearing, site preparation, and earthwork performed on the project should be conducted by the contractor, with observation by geotechnical consultants and staged approval by the appropriate governing agencies. It is the contractor’s responsibility to prepare the ground surface to receive the fill to the satisfaction of the soil engineer, and to place, spread, moisture condition, mix and compact the fill in accordance with the recommendations of the soil engineer. The contractor should also remove all major deleterious material considered unsatisfactory by the soil engineer. It is the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with applicable grading guidelines, codes or agency ordinances, and approved grading plans. Sufficient watering apparatus and compaction equipment should be provided by the contractor with due consideration for the fill material, rate of placement, and climatic conditions. If, in the opinion of the geotechnical consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable weather, excessive oversized rock, deleterious material or insufficient support equipment are resulting in a quality of work that is not acceptable, the consultant will inform the contractor, and the contractor is expected to rectify the conditions, and if necessary, stop work until conditions are satisfactory. The contractor will properly grade all surfaces to maintain good drainage and prevent ponding of water. The contractor will take action to control surface water and to prevent erosion control measures that have been installed. SITE PREPARATION All vegetation including brush, trees, thick grasses, organic debris, and other deleterious material should be removed and disposed of offsite, and must be concluded prior to placing fill. Existing fill, soil, alluvium, colluvium, or rock materials determined by the soil engineer or engineering geologist as unsuitable for structural in-place support should be removed prior to fill placement. Depending upon the soil conditions, these materials may be reused as compacted fills. Any materials incorporated as part of the compacted fills should be approved by the soil engineer. Any underground structures such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells, pipelines, or other structures not located prior to grading are to be removed or treated in a manner recommended by the soil engineer. Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable ground extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition should be over excavated down to firm ground and approved by the soil engineer before compaction and filling operations continue. Over excavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed and moisture-conditioned should be recompacted to the minimum relative compaction as specified in these guidelines. Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 3 Existing ground which is determined to be satisfactory for support of the fills should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, or as directed by the soil engineer. After the scarified ground is brought to optimum moisture (or greater) and mixed, the materials should be compacted as specified herein. If the scarified zone is greater than 6 inches in depth, it may be necessary to remove the excess and place the material in lifts restricted to 6 inches in compacted thickness. Existing grind which is not satisfactory to support compacted fill should be over excavated as required in the geotechnical report or by the onsite soils engineer and/or engineering geologists. Scarification, discing, or other acceptable form of mixing should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large fragments or clods, until the working surface is reasonably uniform and free from ruts, hollows, hummocks, or other uneven features which would inhibit compaction as described above. Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical) gradient, the ground should be benched. The lowest bench, which will act as a key, should be a minimum of 12 feet wide and should be at least two feet deep into competent material, approved by the soil engineer and/or engineering geologist. In fill over cut slope conditions, the recommended minimum width of the lowest bench or key is at least 15 feet with the key excavated on competent material, as designated by the Geotechnical Consultant. As a general rule, unless superseded by the Soil Engineer, the minimum width of fill keys should be approximately equal to one-half (½) the height of the slope. Standard benching is typically four feet (minimum) vertically, exposing competent material. Benching may be used to remove unsuitable materials, although it is understood that the vertical height of the bench may exceed four feet. Pre stripping may be considered for removal of unsuitable materials in excess of four feet in thickness. All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and toe of fill benches should be observed and approved by the soil engineer and/or engineering geologist prior to placement of fill. Fills may then be properly placed and compacted until design grades are attained. COMPACTED FILLS Earth materials imported or excavated on the property may be utilized as fill provided that each soil type has been accepted by the soil engineer. These materials should be free of roots, tree branches, other organic matter or other deleterious materials. All unsuitable materials should be removed from the fill as directed by the soil engineer. Soils of poor gradation, undesirable expansion potential, or substandard strength characteristics may be designated unsuitable by the consultant and may require mixing with other earth materials to serve as a satisfactory fill material. Fill materials generated from benching operations should be dispersed throughout the fill area. Benching operations should not result in the benched material being placed only within a single equipment width away from the fill/bedrock contact. Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 4 Oversized materials, defined as rock or other irreducible materials with a maximum size exceeding 12 inches in one dimension, should not be buried or placed in fills unless the location of materials and disposal methods are specifically approved by the soil engineer. Oversized material should be taken offsite or placed in accordance with recommendations of the soil engineer in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. Oversized material should not be placed vertically within 10 feet of finish grade or horizontally within 20 feet of slope faces. To facilitate trenching, rock should not be placed within the range of foundation excavations or future utilities unless specifically approved by the soil engineer and/or the representative developers. If import fill material is required for grading, representative samples of the material should be analyzed in the laboratory by the soil engineer to determine its physical properties. If any material other than that previously analyzed is imported to the fill or encountered during grading, analysis of this material should be conducted by the soil engineer as soon as practical. Fill material should be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers that should not exceed six inches compacted in thickness. The soil engineer may approve thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved. Each layer should be spread evenly and mixed to attain uniformity of material and moisture suitable for compaction. Fill materials at moisture content less than optimum should be watered and mixed, and “wet” fill materials should be aerated by scarification, or should be mixed with drier material. Moisture conditioning and mixing of fill materials should continue until the fill materials have uniform moisture content at or above optimum moisture. After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture-conditioned and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density as determined by ASTM test designation, D 1557-78, or as otherwise recommended by the soil engineer. Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and should be reliable to efficiently achieve the required degree of compaction. Where tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill, or portion thereof, is below the required relative compaction or improper moisture content, the particular layer or portion will be reworked until the required density and/or moisture content has been attained. No additional fill will be placed in an area until the last placed lift of fill has been tested and found to meet the density and moisture requirements, and is approved by the soil engineer. Compaction of slopes should be accomplished by over-building the outside edge a minimum of three feet horizontally, and subsequently trimming back to the finish design slope configuration. Testing will be performed as the fill is horizontally placed to evaluate compaction as the fill core is being developed. Special efforts may be necessary to attain the specified compaction in the fill slope zone. Final slope shaping should be performed by trimming and removing loose materials with appropriate equipment. A final determination of fill slope compaction should be based on observation and/or testing of the finished slope face. Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 5 If an alternative to over-building and cutting back the compacted fill slope is selected, then additional efforts should be made to achieve the required compaction in the outer 10 feet of each lift of fill by undertaking the following: • Equipment consisting of a heavy short-shanked sheepsfoot should be used to roll (horizontal) parallel to the slopes continuously as fill is placed. The sheepsfoot roller should also be used to roll perpendicular to the slopes, and extend out over the slope to provide adequate compaction to the face slope. • Loose fill should not be spilled out over the face of the slope as each lift is compacted. Any loose fill spilled over a previously completed slope face should be trimmed off or be subject to re-rolling. • Field compaction tests will be made in the outer two to five feet of the slope at two to three foot vertical intervals, subsequent to compaction operations. • After completion of the slope, the slope face should be shaped with a small dozer and then re-rolled with a sheepsfoot to achieve compaction to near the slope face. Subsequent to testing to verify compaction, the slopes should be grid-rolled to achieve adequate compaction to the slope face. Final testing should be used to confirm compaction after grid rolling. • Where testing indicates less than adequate compaction, the contractor will be responsible to process, moisture condition, mix and recompact the slope materials as necessary to achieve compaction. Additional testing should be performed to verify compaction. • Erosion control and drainage devices should be designed by the project civil engineer in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agencies, and/or in accordance with the recommendations of the soil engineer or engineering geologist. EXCAVATIONS Excavations and cut slopes should be observed and mapped during grading by the engineering geologist. If directed by the engineering geologist, further excavations or over-excavation and refilling of cut areas should be performed. When fills over cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope should be observed by the engineering geologist prior to placement of the overlying fill portion of the slope. The engineering geologist should observe all cut slopes and should be notified by the contractor when cut slopes are started. If, during the course of grading, unanticipated adverse or potentially adverse geologic conditions are encountered, the engineering geologist and soil engineer should investigate, evaluate and make recommendations to mitigate (or limit) these conditions. The need for cut slope buttressing or stabilizing should be based on as-grading evaluations by the engineering geologist, whether anticipated previously or not. Unless otherwise specified in soil and geological reports, no cut slopes should be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies. Additionally, short-term stability of temporary cut slopes is the contractor’s responsibility. Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 6 Erosion control and drainage devices should be designed by the project civil engineer and should be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agencies, and/or in accordance with the recommendations of the soil engineer or engineering geologist. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdrains should be installed in accordance with the approved embedment material, alignment and details indicated by the geotechnical consultant. Subdrain locations or construction materials should not be changed or modified without approval of the geotechnical consultant. The soil engineer and/or engineering geologist may recommend and direct changes in subdrain line, grade and drain material in the field, pending exposed conditions. The location of constructed subdrains should be recorded by the project civil engineer. COMPLETION Consultation, observation and testing by the geotechnical consultant should be completed during grading operations in order to state an opinion that all cut and filled areas are graded in accordance with the approved project specifications. After completion of grading and after the soil engineer and engineering geologist have finished their observations, final reports should be submitted subject to review by the controlling governmental agencies. No additional grading should be undertaken without prior notification of the soil engineer and/or engineering geologist. All finished cut and fill slopes should be protected from erosion, including but not limited to planting in accordance with the plan design specifications and/or as recommended by a landscape architect. Such protection and/or planning should be undertaken as soon as possible after completion of grading. ATTACHMENTS Figure A – Transition Lot Detail Cut Lot Figure B – Transition Lot Detail Cut - Fill Figure C – Rock Disposal Pits Figure D – Detail for Fill Slope Toeing out on a Flat Alluviated Canyon Figure E – Removal Adjacent to Existing Fill Figure F – Daylight Cut Lot Detail Figure G – Skin Fill of Natural Ground Figure H – Typical Stabilization Buttress Fill Design Figure I – Stabilization Fill for Unstable Material Exposed in Portion of Cut Slope Figure J – Fill Over Cut Detail Figure K – Fill Over Natural Detail Figure L – Oversize Rock Disposal Figure M – Canyon Subdrain Detail Figure N – Canyon Subdrain Alternate Details Figure O – Typical Stabilization Buttress Subdrain Detail Figure P – Retaining Wall Backfill TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT LOT – MATERIAL TYPE TRANSITION 5' Minimum Pad Grade Overexcavate and Recompact Compacted Fill 3' Minimum* Unweathered Bedrock or Approved Material Typical Benching * The soils engineer and/or engineering geologist may recommend deeper overexcavation in steep cut-fill transitions. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT LOT – MATERIAL TYPE TRANSITION FIGURE A Engineering Solutions TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT – FILL – DAYLIGHT TRANSITION 5' Minimum Pad Grade Overexcavate and Recompact Compacted Fill 3' Minimum* Unweathered Bedrock or Approved Material Typical Benching * The soils engineer and/or engineering geologist may recommend deeper overexcavation in steep cut-fill transitions. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT – FILL – DAYLIGHT TRANSITION Engineering Solutions FIGURE B ROCK DISPOSAL PITS Large Rock/Boulder Fill lifts compacted over rock after embedment Granular material Compacted fill Size of excavation to be commensurate with rock size. Note: (1) Large rock is defined as having a diameter larger than 3 feet in maximum size. (2) Pit shall be excavated into compacted fill to a depth equal to half of the rock size. (3) Granular soil shall be pushed into the pit and then flooded around the rock using a sheepsfoot to help with compaction. (4) A minimum of 3 feet of compacted fill should be laid over each pit. (5) Pits shall have at least 15 feet of separation between one another, horizontally. (6) Pits shall be placed at least 20 feet from any fill slope. (7) Pits shall be used only in deep fill areas. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES ROCK DISPOSAL PITS Engineering Solutions FIGURE C DETAIL FOR FILL SLOPE TOEING OUT ON FLAT ALLUVIATED CANYON Toe of slope as shown on grading plan Original ground surface to be restored with compacted fill. Compacted fill Original ground surface Anticipated alluvial removal depth per soils engineer. Backcut varies for deep removals. A backcut shall not be made steeper than a slope of 1:1 or as necessary for safety Provide a 1:1 minimum projection from the toe of the slope as shown on considerations. the grading plan to the recommended depth. Factors such as slope height, site conditions, and/or local conditions could demand shallower projections. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES DETAIL FOR FILL SLOPE TOEING OUT ON A FLAT ALLUVIATED CANYON Engineering Solutions FIGURE D REMOVAL ADJACENT TO EXISTING FILL Adjoining Canyon Fill Compacted fill limits line Proposed additional compacted fill Temporary compacted fill for drainage only Qaf Qaf (Existing compacted fill) Qal (To be removed) To be removed before placing additional compacted fill Legend Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES REMOVAL ADJACENT TO EXISTING FILL Qaf - Artificial Fill Qal - Alluvium Engineering Solutions FIGURE E DAYLIGHT CUT LOT DETAIL Fill slope shall be recompacted at a 2:1 ratio (this may increase or decrease the area of the pad) Overexcavate and recompact fill Proposed finish grade 3' minimum blanket fill Avoid and/or clean up spillage of materials on the natural slope Bedrock or approved material Typical benching 2' minimum key depth Note: (1) Subdrain and key width requirements shall be determined based on exposed subsurface conditions and the thickness of overburden. (2) Pad overexcavation and recompaction shall be completed if determined as necessary by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES DAYLIGHT CUT LOT DETAIL Engineering Solutions FIGURE F SKIN FILL OF NATURAL GROUND 15' minimum to be maintained from proposed finish Original slope slope face to backcut Proposed finish grade 3' minimum Bedrock or approved materials Proposed finish grade 3' minimum key depth 2' minimum key depth 15' minimum key width Note: (1) The need and disposition of drains will be determined by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist based on site conditions. (2) Pad overexcavation and recompaction shall be completed if determined as necessary by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES SKIN FILL OF NATURAL GROUND Engineering Solutions FIGURE G TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS FILL DESIGN Outlets shall be spaced at 100' maximum intervals, and should extend 12" beyond the face of the slope at the finish of of rough grading 15' minimum Blanket fill if recommended by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist Design finish slope 10' minimum 25' maximum Typical benching 15' is typical Buttress or sidehill fill 4" diameter non-perforated outlet pipe and backdrain (see alternatives) 1'-2' clear Toe Heel Gravel-fabric drain material Bedrock 3' minimum key depth W = H/2 or a minimum of 15' Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS FILL DESIGN Engineering Solutions FIGURE H SKIN FILL OF NATURAL GROUND 15' minimum to be maintained from proposed finish Original slope slope face to backcut Proposed finish grade 3' minimum Bedrock or approved materials Proposed finish grade 3' minimum key depth 2' minimum key depth 15' minimum key width Note: (1) The need and disposition of drains will be determined by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist based on site conditions. (2) Pad overexcavation and recompaction shall be completed if determined as necessary by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES SKIN FILL OF NATURAL GROUND Engineering Solutions FIGURE G TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS FILL DESIGN Outlets shall be spaced at 100' maximum intervals, and should extend 12" beyond the face of the slope at the finish of of rough grading 15' minimum Blanket fill if recommended by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist Design finish slope 10' minimum 25' maximum Typical benching 15' is typical Buttress or sidehill fill 4" diameter non-perforated outlet pipe and backdrain (see alternatives) 1'-2' clear Toe Heel Gravel-fabric drain material Bedrock 3' minimum key depth W = H/2 or a minimum of 15' Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS FILL DESIGN Engineering Solutions FIGURE H STABILIZATION FILL FOR UNSTABLE MATERIAL EXPOSED IN PORTION OF CUT SLOPE Remove unstable material 15' minimum Proposed finished grade Unweathered bedrock or approved material H2 Remove: unstable material Compacted stabilization fill H1 1' minimum tilted back If recommended by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist, the remaining cut W2 portion of the slope may require removal and replacement with compacted fill. W1 Note: (1) Subdrains are required only if specified by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. (2) “W” shall be the equipment width (15') for slope heights less than 25 feet. For slopes greater than 25 feet “W” shall be determined by the project soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist. “W” shall never be less than H/2. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES STABILIZATION FILL FOR UNSTABLE MATERIAL EXPOSED IN PORTION OF CUT SLOPE Engineering Solutions FIGURE I FILL OVER CUT DETAIL Cut/Fill Contact: As shown on grading plan Maintain minimum 15' fill section from backcut to face of finish slope Compacted fill Cut/Fill Contact: As shown on as built H 3' minimum Original topography 2' minimum Cut slope Bench width may vary Lowest bench width 15' minimum or H/2 Bedrock or approved material Note: The cut sectioin shall be excavated and evaluated by the soils engineer/engineering geologist prior to constructing the fill portion. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES FILL OVER CUT DETAIL Engineering Solutions FIGURE J FILL OVER NATURAL DETAIL SIDEHILL FILL Compacted Fill Proposed Grade Maintain Minimum 15' Width Toe of slope as shown on grading plan Provide a 1:1 minimum projection from design toe of slope to toe of key as shown on as built 4' Minimum Natural slope to be restored with compacted fill Bench Width May Vary Backcut Varies 3' Minimum 15' Minimum key width 2' X 3' Minimum key depth 2' minimum in bedrock or approved material Note: (1) Special recommendations shall be provided by the soils engineer/engineering geologist where the natural slope approaches or exceeds the design slope ratio. (2) The need for and disposition of drains would be determined by the soils engineer/engineering geologist based upon exposed conditions. Note: Figures not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES FILL OVER NATURAL DETAIL SIDEHILL FILL Engineering Solutions FIGURE K OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL View Normal to Slope Face Proposed Finish Grade 10' minimum (5) (2) 15' minimum (1) (7) (6) 20' minimum 15' minimum 5' minimum (3) Bedrock or Approved Material View Parallel to Slope Face Proposed Finish Grade 10' minimum (5) (7) (4) 10' minimum 100' maximum 3' minimum (8) 5' minimum (3) Bedrock or Approved Material Note: (1) One Equipment width or a minimum of 15 feet. (2) Height and width may vary depending on rock size and type of equipment used. Length of windrow shall be no greater than 100 feet maximum. (3) If approved by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. (4) Orientation of windrows may vary but shall be as recommended by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Unless recommended staggering of windrows is not necessary. (5) Areas shall be cleared for utility trenches, foundations, and swimming pools. (6) Voids in windrows shall be filled by flooding granular soil into place. Granular soil shall be any soil which has a unified soil classification system (Universal Building Code (UBC) 29-1). Designation of SM, SP, SW, GP, or GW. (7) After fill between windrows is placed and compacted with the lift of fill covering windrow, windrow shall be proof rolled with a D-9 dozer or equivalent. (8) Oversized rock is defined as larger than 12", and less than 4 feet in size. Approximate Scale: 1" = 30' 0 FT 18 FT 30 FT 60 FT Note: All distances are approximate EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL Engineering Solutions FIGURE L CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL Type A Proposed Compacted Fill Natural ground Colluvium and alluvium (remove) Typical benching See alternatives (Figure N) Type B Proposed Compacted Fill Natural ground Colluvium and alluvium (remove) Typical benching See alternatives (Figure N) Note: Alternatives, locations, and extent of subdrains should be determined by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist during actual grading. Note: Figures not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL Engineering Solutions FIGURE M CANYON SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE DETAILS Alternate 1: Perforated Pipe and Filter Material Filter material: Minimum volume of 9 feet3/linear foot. 12" Minimum 6" diameter ABS or PVC pipe or approved substitute with minimum 6" Minimum 8 (¼” diameter) perforations per linear foot in bottom half of pipe. ASTM D 2751, SDR 35 or ASTM D 1527, Schedule 40. ASTM D 3034, SDR 35 or ASTM D 1785, Schedule 40. For continuous run in excess of 500 feet use 8" diameter pipe. 6" Minimum Filter Material 6" Minimum Sieve Size Percent Passing 1" 100 ¾” 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No. 4 25-40 No. 8 18-33 No. 30 5-15 No. 50 0-7 No. 200 0-3 Alternate 2: Perforated Pipe, Gravel and Filter Fabric Minimum Overlap Minimum Overlap 6" 6" 6" Minimum Cover Minimum Bedding 4" 4" Minimum Bedding Gravel material 9 feet3/linear foot. Perforated pipe: see alternate 1. Gravel: Clean ¾” rock or approved substitute. Filter Fabric: Mirafi 140 or approved substitute. Note: Figures not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES CANYON SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE DETAILS Engineering Solutions FIGURE N TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS SUBDRAIN DETAIL 2' minimum 3' minimum 2' minimum 4" minimum pipe 2" minimum 4" minimum pipe 2" minimum 2" minimum Filter Material: Minimum of 5 ft3/linear foot of pipe or 4 ft3/linear foot of pipe when placed in square cut trench. Alternative In Lieu Of Filter Material: Gravel may be encased in approved filter fabric. Filter fabric shall be mirafi 140 or equivalent. Filter fabric shall be lapped a minimum of 12" on all joints. Minimum 4" Diameter Pipe: ABS-ASTM D-2751, SDR 35 or ASTM D-1527 schedule 40 PVC-ASTM D-3034, SDR 35 or ASTM D-1785 schedule 40 with a crushing strength of 1,000 pounds minimum, and a minimum of 8 uniformly spaced perforations per foot of pipe installed with perforations at bottom of pipe. Provide cap at upstream end of pipe. Slope at 2% to outlet pipe. Outlet pipe shall be connected to the subdrain pipe with tee or elbow. Note: (1) Trench for outlet pipes shall be backfilled with onsite soil. (2) Backdrains and lateral drains shall be located at the elevation of every bench drain. First drain shall be located at the elevation just above the lower lot grade. Additional drains may be required at the discretion of the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Filter Material – Shall be of the following specification or an approved equivalent: Filter Material Sieve Size Percent Passing 1" 100 ¾” 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No. 4 25-40 No. 8 18-33 No. 30 5-15 No. 50 0-7 No. 200 0-3 Gravel - Shall be of the following specification or an approved equivalent: Filter Material Sieve Size Percent Passing 1½" 100 No. 4 50 No. 200 8 Sand equivalent: Minimum of 50 Note: Figures not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS SUBDRAIN DETAIL Engineering Solutions FIGURE O t _. PROVIDE .DRAINAGE SWALE 121N. 0 (t) A _. NATIVE BACKFILL COMPACTED TO 90% OF ASTM Dl557 1u- w_. w C/) DRAIN OR PROVIDE WEEP HOLES AS REQUIRED "11· • •• * OR AS REQUIRED FOR SAFETY NOTES (!) 4-INCH PERFORATED PVC SCHEDULE 40 OR APPROVED ALTERNATE. PLACE PERFORATION DOWN AND SURROUND WITH A MINIMUM OF 1 CUBIC FOOT PER LINEAL FOOT (1 FT. /FT.) OF 3/4 INCH ROCK OR APPROVED ALTERNATE AND WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC. ® PLACE DRAIN AS SHOWN WHERE MOISTURE MIGRATION THROUGH THE WALL IS UNDESIRABLE. EARTHWORK & GRADING GUIDELINES TYPICAL RETAINING WALL BACKFILL NOTE: FIGURE NOT TO SCALE EEI Engineering Solutions FIGURE P THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix E: Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment, and Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions E.1 - Phase I Environmental Site Assessment THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions E.2 - Phase II Environmental Site Assessment THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Phase II Assessment “Matrix” Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California Date: December 9, 2020 Prepared for: City of Anaheim 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003 Anaheim, California 92805 Prepared by: Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste. 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 Greg Dickinson, P.G. Principal Engineer PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING ii Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 1  2.0 PHASE II ASSESSMENT SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................... 3  2.1 SAMPLING ..................................................................................................................................................... 3  2.1.1 Soil Vapor Probes .................................................................................................................................... 3  2.1.2 Soil Samples – May 2020 ......................................................................................................................... 3  2.1.3 Soil Samples – November 2020................................................................................................................ 4  2.1.4 Soil Lithology ........................................................................................................................................... 4  2.2 ANALYTICAL RESULTS ................................................................................................................................. 4  2.2.1 Soil Vapor – Laboratory Analytical Results ............................................................................................ 4  2.2.2 Soil –Analytical Results May 2020 .......................................................................................................... 6  2.2.3 Soil –Analytical Results November 2020 ................................................................................................. 7  3.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 8  4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 10  5.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 11  FIGURES Figure1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Approximate Boring Locations Figure 3 Proposed TPH Excavation Limits TABLES Table 1 Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Soil Gas Summary (µg/m3) Table 2 Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Soil Summary (µg/kg) Table 3 TPH Soil Summary (mg/kg) Table 4 Metals Soil Summary (mg/kg) APPENDICES Appendix A Boring Logs Appendix B Millennium Environmental, Jones Environmental, and Pacific Edge Standard Operating Procedures Appendix C Soil Gas Analytical Report and Chain-of-Custody – May 16, 2020 Appendix D Soil Analytical Reports and Chain-of-Custody – May and November 2020 PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING iii Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc., under the professional supervision of Greg Dickinson, has prepared this report. The findings, conclusions, specifications, and/or professional opinions presented in this report have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice, and within the scope of the project. There is no other warranty, either expressed or implied. 1-31-22 Greg Dickinson P.G. No. 6334 Principal Engineer Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 1 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Phase II Assessment report has been prepared on behalf of the City of Anaheim for the following addresses and assessor parcel numbers: “Matrix” Property  082-185-53 (1.21 acres, 1441 South Anaheim Boulevard)  082-185-52 (0.26 acres, 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard)  082-185-47 (0.26 acres, 1445 South Anaheim Boulevard) It is our understanding that the “Matrix” Property is being redeveloped into an apartment complex that may or may not include subterranean parking. It is also our understanding that the City is in negotiations for the following property which is to be incorporated into the “Matrix” development:  082-185-01 (0.13 acres, 110/200 West Midway Drive) SITE BACKGROUND A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was completed by Gilray Enterprises, Inc. on July 29, 2002. The following recognized environmental conditions (RECs) were identified in connection with the “Matrix” property: 1. The subject property was used as a metal fabrication facility from approximately 1990 to 2001. This primary use is considered to be high in environmental risk due to potential use and storage of oils, waste oils, and solvents. Heavy slag deposits on concrete surfaces in isolated areas of the site are considered to be an environmental concern due to the potential for elevated levels of metals. 2. The subject property was used as an air-conditioning sales and refurbishing facility from 1954 to 1989 facility. This primary use is considered to be high in environmental risk due to potential use of oils, waste oils, solvents, and chlorofluorocarbons. 3. Little is known regarding the sump located on-site. This sump is considered to be high in environmental risk due to its potential as a pathway for subsurface contamination. 4. Although a permit for the removal of an underground storage tank (reported to contain automotive fuel) on the subject property was obtained in 1987, details of removal are unknown. This tank is considered to be high in environmental risk due to its potential as a pathway for subsurface contamination. Pacific Edge completed a subsurface investigation in September 2002 to address the RECs identified in Gilray’s Phase I ESA report. The results of our investigation are summarized in our draft September 30, 2002 Subsurface Investigation Report. A significant impact from release of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) or metals was not observed in site soils. No further action was recommended in our report. Pacific Edge recently recommended additional subsurface investigation based on the following concerns: PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 2 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) 1. Our September 2002 investigation did not include soil vapor. Elevated PID readings were observed in select boring logs from the 2002 investigation. VOC use is associated with the former property use (metal fabrication and AC repair). Soil vapor samples from 5 and 15 feet at various locations across the property are recommended. 2. As part of our site walk, questionable “housekeeping” was observed associated with the existing tenants use of the “Matrix” property. Equipment and material storage were observed and some surficial staining was also observed at various locations. Shallow soil sampling to assess potential impact from recent tenant use is recommended. The approximate Site location is shown on Figure 1. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 3 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) 2.0 PHASE II ASSESSMENT SCOPE OF WORK 2.1 SAMPLING 2.1.1 Soil Vapor Probes The objective of vapor sampling is to assess the potential for VOC intrusion into future apartment structures. Vapor probes were installed May 8 and 11, 2020 at ten locations (M1 through M10) on the contiguous 1441 and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard properties and at two location (M11 and M12) on the 1445 South Anaheim Boulevard property. Probes were generally installed at depths of 5 and 15 feet and 20 and 30 feet1 with a truck-mounted Geoprobe. Significant caving was encountered during installation of the vapor probes. Additional borings were drilled at M2, M4, M5, M6, M7, M8 (two feet east of the original location), M9 (two feet north of the original location), and M11 (four feet north of the original location) to allow for vapor probe installation. Actual vapor probe depths/ construction are depicted on the boring logs included in Appendix A. Approximate boring locations are depicted on Figure 2. Millennium’s SOP for Geoprobe drilling and vapor probe installation is included in Appendix B. One additional vapor probe, M13, was installed May 16, 2020 on the 1441 South Anaheim Boulevard property in response to elevated VOC odors noted during drilling of HA8 on May 12, 2020. One probe was installed at a depth of five feet in a hand auger boring. The probe was installed within a sand pack that extended from 4.5 to 5.5 feet. Dry granular bentonite was installed from 3.5 to 4.5 feet and hydrated granular bentonite was installed from the surface to a depth of 3.5 feet. 2.1.2 Soil Samples – May 2020 Soil samples were collected at three locations (HA1 and HA2 on May 11, 2020 and HA8 on May 12, 2020) where staining was observed on APN 082-185-53 (1441 South Anaheim Boulevard). Soil samples were collected at the surface and at depths of 1, 3, and 5 feet. Soil samples from the surface and a depth of 1 foot were generally collected for analysis and samples from depths of 3 and 5 feet were archived pending the results from the surface and one foot samples. Pacific Edge’s SOP for hand auger sampling is included in Appendix B. Strong solvent/paint thinner odors were noted during hand auguring at HA8. HA8 was drilled in an area where 5-gallon buckets of various chemicals were observed stored outside on the ground. The following PID readings were encountered during drilling:  337 ppm @1’  54.5 ppm @5’ 1 Probes at 20 and 30 feet installed to assess vapor concentrations 5 and 15 feet below potential subterranean parking assumed to be present at a depth of 15 feet. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 4 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) 2.1.3 Soil Samples – November 2020 Step-out samples were collected November 11 and 13, 2020 to assess the lateral and vertical extent of elevated TPH-diesel and TPH-motor oil (TPH-mo) detected at HA8. Soil borings were drilled with a hand auger ~2 and 10 feet west of HA8, 10 and 20 feet north of HA8, and 10 feet east and south of HA8. Soil samples were collected at the surface and at depths of 2 and 5 feet. 2.1.4 Soil Lithology Soil samples were inspected for texture, color, moisture content, and other distinguishing characteristics. A portion of the sample not held for analysis was placed in a zip-loc bag and allowed to sit for a minimum of 5 minutes. Head space readings were collected with a portable photo-ionization detector (PID) by placing the tip of the detector inside the plastic bag. Soil lithology was described using the Unified Soil Classification System and recorded on soil boring logs (Appendix A). The boring logs include the sample depth, geologic observations, head space PID readings, and other details as outlined in California EPA’s “Drilling, Coring, Sampling and Logging at Hazardous Substance Release Sites, Interim Final, 1994”. All sampling/logging activities were performed by a California Professional Geologist. The predominant soil type encountered was SP generally consisting of very fine to fine sand and very fine/fine to medium sand at 36% of samples logged, followed by ML generally consisting of very fine to fine sandy silt and clayey silt with some silt at 23% of samples logged, followed by SW generally consisting of fine to coarse sand at 23% of samples logged, followed by SM generally consisting of silty very fine to fine sand with some silty fine to medium sand at 17% of samples logged The predominant soil types encountered from 0 to 5 feet include SM (silty sands) at 41% and SP (well sorted sands) at 30%. Minority soil type encountered from 0 to 5 feet include ML and SW at 14% each. The predominant soil types encountered from 5 to 22 feet include SP (well sorted sands) at 53% and SW (poorly sorted sands) at 37%. Minority soil type encountered from 5 to 22 feet include SM at 9% and ML at 1%. The predominant soil types encountered from 22 feet to the maximum depth sampled of 40 feet include ML (fine sandy silts) at 59%. Minority soil type encountered from 22 to 40 feet include SM at 18%, SP at 16% and SW at 7%. 2.2 ANALYTICAL RESULTS 2.2.1 Soil Vapor – Laboratory Analytical Results Soil gas samples were collected May 16, 2020 at M1 through M13 by Jones Environmental. Soil gas samples were analyzed for VOCs using EPA Method 8260B onsite in their mobile laboratory. Jones Environmental purge and sampling procedures generally followed guidance provided in the July 2015 Advisory - Active Soil Gas Investigations. Jones Environmental mobile laboratory SOP is included in Appendix B. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 5 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) VOC concentrations in soil gas are summarized on Table 1. The analytical report and chain-of- custody documentation are included in Appendix C. Soil vapor concentrations were compared to published screening levels (DTSC Note 3 SLs or USEPA RSLs) to determine if the vapor concentrations could represent a health threat to future occupants of the site. The published screening levels are for indoor air and it is not appropriate to compare subsurface vapor concentrations to indoor air because vapor attenuation occurs as the air moves from the subsurface into the indoor air breathing zone. Vapor attenuation occurs due to 1) the processes that control vapor transport in soil (e.g., diffusion, advection, sorption, transformation reactions) and 2) the fact that dilution that occurs when the vapors enter a building and mixes with indoor air (Johnson and Ettinger, 1991). Therefore, an Attenuation factor (AF) of 0.032 (Soil Gas) was applied to the DTSC and RSL indoor air SLs to modify the indoor air SLs to account for vapor attenuation in accordance with DTSC guidance (DTSC, 2011). The following table presents the maximum concentration of detected subsurface VOCs, the location where the screening level was met/exceeded or where the maximum concentration was detected if the screening level was not exceeded, and residential RSLs and DTSC Note 3 SLs assuming an AF of 0.03: Analyte Location Maximum Concentration (µg/m3) Residential RSLs (µg/m3) Residential DTSC SLs (µg/m3) Benzene M1-30'; M8-15'; M9-30'; M10-30' 13 12 3.2 Bromodichloromethane M1-5'13 2.5 2.5 sec-Butylbenzene M13-5' 35 14,000 Chloroform M1-5'/14’; M5-5'; M9-5’/15'/20’; M10-13’/18’/30'21 4.0 Dichlorodifluoromethane M12-30' 17 3,333 n-Propylbenzene M13-5' 10 33,333 Tetrachloroethene M10-18'; M11-19'26 367 15.3 Toluene M9-30' 24 173,333 10,333 Freon-113 M12-30' 27,300 173,333 Trichloroethene M3-30'; M11-19'103 16.0 Trichlorofluoromethane M12-30' 27 43,333 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene M13-5' 12 2,100 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene M13-5' 53 2,100 4-Isopropyltoluene M13-5' 30 The following summarizes the frequency of samples exceeding screening levels: 2 Recommended attenuation factor for soil gas in the February 2020 DRAFT Supplemental Guidance: Screening and Evaluating Vapor Intrusion. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 6 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX)  Benzene – detected in 4/49 samples at concentrations ranging from 8 to 13 µg/m3. All samples exceeded the lowest screening level.  Bromodichloromethane - detected in 1/49 samples at a concentration of 13 µg/m3. All samples exceeded the screening level.  Chloroform - detected in 9/49 samples at concentrations ranging from 8 to 21 µg/m3. All samples exceeded the screening level.  Tetrachloroethene - detected in 13/49 samples at concentrations ranging from 8 to 26 µg/m3. A total of 2/49 samples exceeded the lowest screening level.  Trichloroethene - detected in 4/49 samples at concentrations ranging from 8 to 103 µg/m3. A total of 2/49 samples exceeded the screening level. 2.2.2 Soil –Analytical Results May 2020 Soil samples collected in May 2020 from the surface and a depth of 1-foot were analyzed for the following:  California Assessment Manual (CAM) metals  TPH-gasoline, TPH-diesel, and TPH-mo by Method 8015 Modified  VOCs by EPA Method 8260B The archived sample HA8-3’ was analyzed for CAM metals and VOCs based on the analytical results from the surface and 1-foot samples. Analytical reports and chain-of-custody documentation for all soil analyses are included in Appendix D. The following sections summarizes the analytical results: 2.2.2.1 VOCs VOCs were not detected in soil with the exception of HA8-0’ and HA8-1’. The following table presents the maximum concentration of VOCs detected in soil, the location where the maximum concentration was detected, and residential RSLs and DTSC Note 3 SLs: Analyte Location Maximum Concentration (µg/kg) Residential RSLs (µg/kg) Residential DTSC SLs (µg/kg) n-Butylbenzene HA8-1’ 1,300 3,900,000 2,400,000 sec-Butylbenzene HA8-1’ 270 7,800,000 2,200,000 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene HA8-1’ 510 300,000 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene HA8-1’ 480 270,000 VOC concentrations in soil are summarized on Table 2. 2.2.2.2 TPH-gas/diesel/mo TPH-gas, TPH-diesel and TPH-mo were detected at maximum concentrations of 14 mg/kg, 12,000 mg/kg, and 6,100 mg/kg, respectively. Detected TPH concentrations were compared to PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 7 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) San Francisco Region Tier 13 Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for gasoline, diesel and motor oil of 100 mg/kg, 260 mg/kg and 1,600 mg/kg, respectively (RWQCB, 2019). Detected TPH-gas concentrations were significantly below the Tier 1 ESLs. TPH-diesel and TPH-mo concentrations exceeded ESLs in HA8-0’ and HA8-1’. TPH-diesel and TPH-mo concentrations were below ESLs in HA8-3’. TPH-gas/diesel/mo concentrations are summarized on Table 3. 2.2.2.3 Metals Detected metal concentrations in soil were first compared to residential DTSCs Office of Human and Ecological Risk Note 3 (DTSC, 2019) Screening Levels (SLs) to assess human health concerns from potential exposure to residual metal concentrations. Detected metal concentrations that do not have DTSC Note 3 SLs (antimony, barium, cobalt, copper, molybdenum, selenium, thallium, and zinc) were compared to their respective USEPA 2019 residential Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) (USEPA, 2019). Metal concentrations that exceeded residential SLs or RSL were compared to industrial SLs/RSLs. Metal concentrations were below residential DTSC Note 3 SLs and RSLs for all metals except arsenic. Arsenic was detected in 4 of 7 samples analyzed at concentrations ranging from 3.4 to 16 mg/kg. The residential DTSC Note 3 SL for arsenic is 0.11 mg/kg. Arsenic concentrations exceeded the residential SL in all samples where arsenic was detected. Metal concentrations and respective DTSC Note 3 SLs and EPA RSLs are summarized on Table 4. 2.2.3 Soil –Analytical Results November 2020 Soil samples collected in November 2020 from the surface and depths of 2-foot and 5-foot were analyzed for TPH as diesel, and motor oil by Method 8015 Modified. Analytical reports and chain-of-custody documentation are included in Appendix D. TPH-diesel and TPH-mo were detected at maximum concentrations of 240 mg/kg and 720 mg/kg, respectively. Detected TPH concentrations were compared to ESLs for diesel and motor oil of 260 mg/kg and 1,600 mg/kg, respectively (RWQCB, 2019). Detected TPH-diesel and TPH-mo concentrations were below the Tier 1 ESLs. TPH concentrations are summarized on Table 3. 3 Tier 1 ESLs are based on conservative default Conceptual Site Model (CSM) scenario designed to protect sites with unrestricted land and water use, shallow soil contamination, shallow ground water, and permeable soil. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 8 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) 3.0 CONCLUSIONS The following conclusions were reached based on the findings of the soil sampling: 1. Detected TPH-gas/diesel/mo concentrations in soil were compared to Tier 1 ESLs to assess human health concerns from potential exposure to residual TPH concentrations. TPH-diesel and TPH-mo were detected at HA8 (APN 082-185-53; 1441 South Anaheim Boulevard) at maximum concentrations of 12,000 mg/kg and 6,100 mg/kg, respectively which exceeded the Tier 1 ESLs for diesel and motor oil of 260 mg/kg and 1,600 mg/kg, respectively. Step-out samples 2-feet west of HA8 and 10-feet north, east and south of HA8 were below Tier 1 ESLs for diesel and motor oil. Maximum TPH-diesel and TPH-mo concentrations at HA8 and HA8 step-out locations are depicted on Figure 3. The approximate lateral extent of TPH exceeding Tier 1 ESLs is also depicted on Figure 3. The total volume4 of soil within this area is estimated at ~612 ft3 (~23 yd3). 2. Detected metal concentrations in soil were compared to residential DTSC Note 3 SLs or RSLs to assess human health concerns from potential exposure to residual metal concentrations. Metal concentrations were below residential DTSC Note 3 SLs and RSLs for all metals except arsenic. Arsenic was detected in 4 of 7 samples analyzed at concentrations ranging from 3.4 to 16 mg/kg. The residential DTSC Note 3 SL for arsenic is 0.11 mg/kg. Arsenic concentrations exceeded the residential SL in all samples where arsenic was detected. Metals are naturally occurring in soil and arsenic is often found at background concentrations that exceeds typical risk goals. To address this issue, the DTSC has established a regional background arsenic concentration of 12 mg/kg that can be used as a screening tool for sites throughout southern California (DTSC, 2008). Detected arsenic concentrations exceeded the DTSC screening value in 1 of 7 samples (HA2-0’ located on APN 082-185-53). 3. Detected soil gas concentrations were compared to residential DTSC Note 3 SLs or USEPA RSLs to assess human health concerns from potential exposure to residual VOC concentrations. Detected VOC concentrations in soil gas were below SLs/RSLs for all analytes with the exception of the following: Analyte Location(s) Exceeding Screening Level Maximum Concentration (µg/m3) Residential RSLs (µg/m3) Residential DTSC SLs (µg/m3) Benzene M1-30'; M8-15'; M9-30'; M10-30'13 12 3.2 Bromodichloromethane M1-5’13 2.5 2.5 4 Assumes excavation area 12’ by 17’ to a depth of 3’. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 9 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) Chloroform M1-5'/14’; M5-5'; M9- 5’/15'/20’; M10-13’/18’/30' 21 4.0 Tetrachloroethene M10-18'; M11-19'26 367 15.3 Trichloroethene M3-30'; M11-19'103 16.0 All analytes exceeding screening levels were detected in soil gas probes located on APN 082-185-53 (1441 South Anaheim Boulevard). In addition, tetrachloroethene and trichloroethene were detected at concentrations exceeding screening levels in soil gas probes located on APN 082-185-47 (1445 South Anaheim Boulevard). 4. It is our opinion that the current environmental condition of the properties is adequately defined. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 10 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS It is our understanding that the “Matrix” property will be redeveloped into an apartment complex that may or may not include subterranean parking. The presence of a chemical at concentrations exceeding screening level values does not indicate that adverse impacts to human health are occurring or will occur but suggests that further evaluation of potential human health concerns is warranted. It is our recommendation that “hot spots” where arsenic, TPH-diesel, and TPH-mo exceed background/SLs be excavated. Confirmation samples should be collected and assuming the confirmation samples are below the screening levels, no further action regarding soil will be recommended. A vapor barrier or equivalent should be designed for incorporation into the proposed development to prevent migration of VOCs detected in soil gas into indoor air. This report should be provided to the appropriate regulatory agency for review. It is possible that unpermitted, undocumented, or concealed improvements to the property could exist beyond the limits explored during our limited Phase 2 investigation. Also, it is possible that variations in soil conditions exist beyond the points explored in this limited soil investigation. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING 11 Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) 5.0 REFERENCES Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2008. Determination of a Southern California Regional Background Arsenic Concentration in Soil. March DTSC. 2020. HERO HHRA Note Number: 3, DTSC-modified Screening Levels (DTSC-SLs). June. https://dtsc.ca.gov/human-health-risk-hero/ Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), San Francisco Bay. 2019. Tier 1 ESLs. July. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/programs/esl.html USEPA, 2020. Regional Screening Levels for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites, RSL Table Update. November. http://www.epa.gov/region9/superfund/prg/ PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) Figures FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION MAP – “MATRIX” AND “ANAHEIM SWAP” PROPERTIES 1441, 1445, AND 1455 S. ANAHEIM BOULEVARD, ANAHEIM, CA TARGET PROPERTIES 1455 S Anaheim Blvd 1445 S Anaheim Blvd PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) Tables Date Sampled: Table 1-Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Soil Gas Summary (μg/m3) "Matrix" Property, 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California M 1 - 5 ' M 1 - 5 ' R E P M 1 - 2 0 ' M 2 - 5 ' M 2 - 1 5 ' M 2 - 2 0 ' M 3 - 5 ' R E P M 3 - 1 5 ' M 3 - 2 0 ' M 1 - 1 4 ' M 2 - 3 0 ' M 3 - 5 ' 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/205/16/20 M 1 - 3 0 ' 5/16/20 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1-Dichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1-Dichloropropene < 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10. 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloroprop < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dibromoethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 1,2-Dichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,3-Dichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 2,2-Dichloropropane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.2-Chlorotoluene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.4-Chlorotoluene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. 4-Isopropyltoluene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Benzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.8.Bromobenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Bromodichloromethane 13.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.13.< 8. Bromoform < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Carbon tetrachloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Chlorobenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Chloroform 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.9.< 8.< 8.11.< 8.cis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.cis-1,3-Dichloropropene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Dibromochloromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Dibromomethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Dichlorodifluoromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Di-isopropylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.Ethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Ethyl-tert-butylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. Freon-113 2,410.6,000.1,180.1,410.1,740.907.1,790.1,490.4,070.2,540.932.2,140.7,420.Hexachlorobutadiene < 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.Isopropylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. m,p-Xylene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. Methylene Chloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.MTBE < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. Naphthalene < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. n-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.n-heptane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.n-hexane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80. n-Pentane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.n-Propylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.o-Xylene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. sec-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.Styrene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.tert-amylmethylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. tert-Butylalcohol < 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.tert-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.Tetrachloroethene 11.14.< 8.< 8.10.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.14.< 8.10.< 8. Toluene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.10.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.10.< 8.< 8. trans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.trans-1,3-Dichloropropene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Trichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.11.< 8.< 8.< 8. Trichlorofluoromethane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.Vinyl Chloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Tuesday, December 8, 2020 Page 1 of 4Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Date Sampled: Table 1-Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Soil Gas Summary (μg/m3) "Matrix" Property, 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California M 3 - 3 0 ' M 4 - 5 ' M 4 - 1 8 ' M 5 - 5 ' M 5 - 1 5 ' M 5 - 2 0 ' M 6 - 1 5 ' M 6 - 2 0 ' M 6 - 2 7 ' M 4 - 1 3 ' M 5 - 3 0 ' M 6 - 5 ' 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/205/16/20 M 4 - 3 0 ' 5/16/20 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1,1-Trichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1-Dichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1-Dichloropropene < 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dibromo-3-chloroprop < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,2-Dibromoethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,2-Dichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,2-Dichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 1,3-Dichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.2,2-Dichloropropane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 2-Chlorotoluene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. 4-Chlorotoluene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.4-Isopropyltoluene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Benzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Bromobenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Bromodichloromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Bromoform < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Carbon tetrachloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Chlorobenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Chloroform < 8.< 8.9.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. cis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.cis-1,3-Dichloropropene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Dibromochloromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Dibromomethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Dichlorodifluoromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Di-isopropylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. Ethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Ethyl-tert-butylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.Freon-113 1,410.4,400.1,570.1,770.2,570.6,470.8,760.9,210.4,070.3,080.6,250.4,190.8,010.Hexachlorobutadiene < 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24. Isopropylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.m,p-Xylene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.Methylene Chloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. MTBE < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.Naphthalene < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.n-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. n-heptane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.n-hexane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.n-Pentane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80. n-Propylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.o-Xylene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.sec-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. Styrene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.tert-amylmethylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.tert-Butylalcohol < 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400. tert-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. Tetrachloroethene < 8.< 8.8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.9.< 8.< 8.< 8.Toluene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.22.< 8.< 8.< 8.trans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. trans-1,3-Dichloropropene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Trichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.32.< 8.Trichlorofluoromethane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.21.20.< 16.< 16.17.< 16.< 16. Vinyl Chloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Tuesday, December 8, 2020 Page 2 of 4Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Date Sampled: Table 1-Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Soil Gas Summary (μg/m3) "Matrix" Property, 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California M 7 - 5 ' M 7 - 1 5 ' M 7 - 3 0 ' M 8 - 5 ' M 8 - 1 5 ' M 8 - 2 0 ' M 9 - 1 5 ' M 9 - 2 0 ' M 9 - 3 0 ' M 7 - 1 9 ' M 8 - 3 0 ' M 9 - 5 ' 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/205/16/20 M 7 - 3 0 ' R E P 5/16/20 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1,1-Trichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1-Dichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1-Dichloropropene < 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dibromo-3-chloroprop < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,2-Dibromoethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,2-Dichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,2-Dichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 1,3-Dichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.2,2-Dichloropropane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 2-Chlorotoluene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. 4-Chlorotoluene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.4-Isopropyltoluene < 8.10.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.10.Benzene < 8.< 8.< 8.12.< 8.< 8.< 8.10.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Bromobenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Bromodichloromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Bromoform < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Carbon tetrachloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Chlorobenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Chloroform < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.9.9.< 8.< 8.< 8.8.< 8.< 8. cis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.cis-1,3-Dichloropropene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Dibromochloromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Dibromomethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Dichlorodifluoromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.16.< 8.< 8.< 8.Di-isopropylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. Ethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Ethyl-tert-butylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.Freon-113 5,400.15,200.6,630.7,250.11,700.1,700.3,290.4,630.5,570.17,600.1,530.4,150.14,000.Hexachlorobutadiene < 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24. Isopropylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.m,p-Xylene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.Methylene Chloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. MTBE < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.Naphthalene < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.n-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. n-heptane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.n-hexane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.n-Pentane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80. n-Propylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.o-Xylene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.sec-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. Styrene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.tert-amylmethylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.tert-Butylalcohol < 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400. tert-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. Tetrachloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.9.10.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Toluene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.24.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.trans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. trans-1,3-Dichloropropene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Trichloroethene < 8.8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Trichlorofluoromethane < 16.22.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.20.< 16.< 16.18. Vinyl Chloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Wednesday, December 9, 2020 Page 3 of 4Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Date Sampled: Table 1-Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Soil Gas Summary (μg/m3) "Matrix" Property, 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California M 1 0 - 5 ' M 1 0 - 1 3 ' M 1 0 - 3 0 ' M 1 1 - 1 4 ' M 1 1 - 1 9 ' M 1 1 - 3 0 ' M 1 2 - 2 0 ' M 1 2 - 3 0 ' M 1 3 - 5 ' M 1 0 - 1 8 ' M 1 2 - 5 ' M 1 2 - 1 5 ' 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/20 5/16/205/16/20 M 1 1 - 5 ' 5/16/20 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,1-Dichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,1-Dichloropropene < 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10.< 10. 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.12.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloroprop < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dibromoethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 1,2-Dichloroethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,2-Dichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.53.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.1,3-Dichloropropane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. 2,2-Dichloropropane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.2-Chlorotoluene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.4-Chlorotoluene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12. 4-Isopropyltoluene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.30.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Benzene < 8.13.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Bromobenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Bromodichloromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Bromoform < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Carbon tetrachloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Chlorobenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Chloroform 9.21.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.9.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.cis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.cis-1,3-Dichloropropene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Dibromochloromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Dibromomethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Dichlorodifluoromethane < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.17.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Di-isopropylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.Ethylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.Ethyl-tert-butylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. Freon-113 3,860.6,810.8,490.18,300.10,600.17,600.27,300.1,430.3,960.4,950.6,720.2,700.5,010.Hexachlorobutadiene < 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.< 24.Isopropylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. m,p-Xylene < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16. Methylene Chloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.MTBE < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. Naphthalene < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. n-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.n-heptane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.n-hexane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80. n-Pentane < 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.< 80.n-Propylbenzene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.10.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.o-Xylene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. sec-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.35.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.Styrene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.tert-amylmethylether < 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40.< 40. tert-Butylalcohol < 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.< 400.tert-Butylbenzene < 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.< 12.Tetrachloroethene 12.< 8.< 8.26.9.< 8.11.< 8.20.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Toluene < 8.19.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. trans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.trans-1,3-Dichloropropene < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Trichloroethene < 8.< 8.< 8.103.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Trichlorofluoromethane < 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.27.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.< 16.Vinyl Chloride < 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8.< 8. Wednesday, December 9, 2020 Page 4 of 4Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Date Sampled: Table 2-Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Soil Summary (μg/kg) "Matrix" Property, 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California H A 1 - 0 ' H A 1 - 1 ' H A 2 - 1 ' H A 3 - 1 ' H A 4 - 0 ' H A 4 - 1 ' H A 2 - 0 ' H A 5 - 0 ' H A 5 - 1 ' 5/11/20 5/11/20 5/11/20 5/11/20 5/12/20 5/12/20 5/12/20 5/12/205/11/20 H A 3 - 0 ' 5/11/20 H A 6 - 0 ' 5/12/20 5/12/20 5/12/20 5/12/20 5/12/20 5/12/20 5/12/20 H A 6 - 1 ' H A 7 - 0 ' H A 7 - 1 ' H A 8 - 0 ' H A 8 - 1 ' H A 8 - 3 ' 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,1,1-Trichloroethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.01,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,1-Dichloroethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,1-Dichloroethene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,1-Dichloropropene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.01,2,3-Trichloropropane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 510.0 < 250.0 1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,2-Dichloroethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.01,2-Dichloropropane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 480.0 < 250.0 1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,3-Dichloropropane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 2,2-Dichloropropane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 2-Chlorotoluene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 4-Chlorotoluene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 4-Isopropyltoluene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Benzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Bromobenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0Bromodichloromethane< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Bromoform < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Bromomethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Carbon tetrachloride < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Chlorobenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Chloroethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Chloroform < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Chloromethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 DBCP < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0< 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0< 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 500.0 < 500.0 < 500.0 Dibromochloromethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Dibromomethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Dichlorodifluoromethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Di-isopropylether < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 EDB < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0Ethylbenzene< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Ethyl-tert-butylether < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Freon-113 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Hexachlorobutadiene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Isopropylbenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 m,p-Xylene < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0< 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0< 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0 < 500.0 < 500.0 < 500.0 Methylene chloride < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 MTBE < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Naphthalene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 n-Butylbenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 410.0 1,300.0 < 250.0 n-Propylbenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0o-Xylene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 PCE < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 sec-Butylbenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 270.0 < 250.0 Styrene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 TCE < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0tert-amylmethylether < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 tert-Butylalcohol < 25.0 < 25.0 < 25.0 < 25.0 < 25.0< 25.0 < 25.0 < 25.0< 25.0 < 25.0 < 25.0 < 25.0 < 25.0 < 25.0< 1,200.0< 1,200.0< 1,200.0 tert-Butylbenzene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Toluene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Trichlorofluoromethane < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Vinyl chloride < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0< 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 5.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 < 250.0 Wednesday, December 9, 2020 Page 1 of 1Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Date SampledSample ID Table 3 - TPH Summary (mg/kg) "Matrix" Property, 1441 and 1445 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California TPH Diesel TPH Gasoline TPH Motor Oil APN 082-185-53; 1441 South Anaheim Boulevard 05-11-20HA1-0'< 1 170 480 05-11-20HA1-1'< 1 27 38 05-11-20HA2-0'< 1 69 220 05-11-20HA2-1'< 1 42 100 05-12-20HA8-0'1 12,000 6,100 05-12-20HA8-1'14 7,300 4,400 05-12-20HA8-3'< 1 40 34 11-11-20HA8-2'W-0'220 700 11-11-20HA8-2'W-2'10 16 11-11-20HA8-2'W-5'< 10 12 11-11-20HA8-10'W-0'170 530 11-11-20HA8-10'W-2'< 10 15 11-11-20HA8-10'W-5'12 14 11-11-20HA8-10'N-0'41 74 11-11-20HA8-10'N-2'< 10 12 11-11-20HA8-10'N-5'< 10 < 10 11-11-20HA8-10'E-0'240 650 11-11-20HA8-10'E-2'< 10 < 10 11-13-20HA8-10'E-5'23 30 11-11-20HA8-10'S-0'240 720 11-11-20HA8-10'S-2'33 34 11-11-20HA8-10'S-5'21 22 Wednesday, December 9, 2020 Page 1 of 1Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Da t e Sa m p l e d Sa m p l e I D Ta b l e 4 - M e t a l s S o i l S u m m a r y ( m g / k g ) "M a t r i x " P r o p e r t y , 1 4 4 1 S o u t h A n a h ei m B o u l e v a r d , A n a h e i m , C a l i f o r n i a Sb A s B a B e C d C r C o C u P b H g M o N i S e A g T h V Z n AP N 0 8 2 - 1 8 5 - 5 3 ; 1 4 4 1 S o u t h A n a h e i m B o u l e v a r d 05 - 1 1 - 2 0 HA 1 - 0 ' < 2 . < 1 . 61 . < 1 . < 1 . 16 . 5. 9 13 . 5. 8 < 0 . 0 9 9 < 1 . 9. 3 < 1 . < 1.< 2.30.40. 05 - 1 1 - 2 0 HA 1 - 1 ' < 2 . < 1 . 55 . < 1 . < 1 . 12 . 5. 7 10 . 26 . < 0 . 1 < 1 . 6. 9 < 1 . < 1.< 2.24.78. 05 - 1 1 - 2 0 HA 2 - 0 ' < 2 . 16 . 66 . < 1 . < 1 . 16 . 4. 1 12 . 15 . < 0 . 1 1. 2 8. 2 < 1 . < 1.< 2.23.58. 05 - 1 1 - 2 0 HA 2 - 1 ' < 2 . < 1 . 82 . < 1 . < 1 . 17 . 8. 16 . 67 . < 0 . 0 9 9 < 1 . 12 . < 1 . < 1.< 2.33.120. 05 - 1 2 - 2 0 HA 8 - 0 ' < 2 . 3. 4 11 0 . < 1 . 1. 20 . 4. 8 15 . 13 . < 0 . 1 < 1 . 17 . < 1 . < 1.< 2.25.60. 05 - 1 2 - 2 0 HA 8 - 1 ' < 2 . 4. 5 74 . < 1 . < 1 . 7. 4 5. 3 14 . 2. 6 < 0 . 1 < 1 . 6. 6 < 1 . < 1.< 2.20.24. 05 - 1 2 - 2 0 HA 8 - 3 ' < 2 . 3. 9 68 . < 1 . < 1 . 6. 7 4. 7 12 . 2. 1 < 0 . 0 9 9 < 1 . 5. 9 < 1 . < 1.< 2.19.24. Sb - A n t i m o n y As - A r s e n i c Ba - B a r i u m Be - B e r y l l i u m Cd - C a d m i u m Cr - C h r o m i u m KE Y Co - C o b a l t Cu - C o p p e r Pb - L e a d Hg - M e r c u r y Mo - M o l y b d e n u m Ni - N i c k e l Se - S e l e n i u m Ag - S i l v e r Th - T h a l l i u m V - V a n a d i u m Zn - Z i n c We d n e s d a y , D e c e m b e r 9 , 2 0 2 0 P a g e 1 o f 1 Pa c i f i c E d g e E n g i n e e r i n g , I n c . PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) Appendix A Boring Logs PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) Appendix B Millennium, Jones Environmental, and Pacific Edge SOPs Page 1 MILLENNIUM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. STANDARD PROTOCOL FOR DIRECT PUSH DRILLING AND SAMPLING APPLICATIONS Millennium Environmental, Inc. uses Direct Push technology to conduct soil, soil vapor and groundwater grab sampling. The Direct Push unit is a rig with a hydraulic system that is used to push hollow steel rods with a sampling device at the end of the rods through the subsurface. The Direct Push rig pushes the sampling device to the targeted depth for sample retrieval. Undisturbed samples are collected using a modified piston drive sampler. SOIL SAMPLING Soil sampling can be obtained by numerous direct push tooling devices: macro-core, large bore, or dual tube. Once the sampling device is pushed to the desired sampling depth, the tip of the device is retracted inside the soil sampling probe and the probe is advanced 2.0 to 4.0-feet, depending on tooling used, to allow soil to enter the sampling device. The sampling device is lined with an acetate sleeve ranging from 1.25 to 2.75 inches in diameter. Upon retrieval of the soil sample, the acetate sleeve is retracted from the sampling device and brought to the surface for field screening and/or lab submittal preparation. The acetate sampling sleeve is cut at the representative sample depth. Each end of the sample sleeve is covered with Teflon tape and plastic end caps, labeled identifying the date and time the sample is collected and an identification designation, and placed in a cooler to be shipped to a certified analytical laboratory. The material in the remaining in the acetate is placed in an air-tight (Ziploc) bag to conduct headspace testing on the material after sufficient volatilization had occurred (approximately 5 minutes). The probe of a calibrated photoionization detector (PID) is placed inside the bag to monitor for volatile organic vapors. Following headspace measurements the sample is visually inspected by the site geologist and classified using the Unified Soil Classification System. All soil sample locations are backfilled with bentonite chips and hydrated and then capped with asphalt patch or concrete to grade. SOIL GAS SAMPLE COLLECTION AND HANDLING The soil gas sampling system is constructed of stainless-steel, Nylaflow, and Teflon components. Instrumentation associated with the sampling system includes a calibrated flow-meter and vacuum gauge. Temporary soil vapor probes are installed by advancing Direct Push rod into the subsurface to the desired depth. The rods are retracted and soil vapor probes are built bottom-up from within the open borehole. Approximately 6-inches of clean, kiln dried filter sand are emplaced in the bottom of the borehole. Nylaflow (or Teflon) tubing affixed with a porous implant tip is deployed down the open borehole and set atop the sand pack. An additional 6-inches of sand is emplaced within the open borehole to encapsulate the porous tip with 6-inches of sand above and beneath. One-foot of dry, granular bentonite is sent down the borehole followed by hydrated granular bentonite or bentonite slurry advanced at one-foot intervals until it reaches the ground surface. An additional seal around the tubing and ground surface is created with hydrated bentonite to assist in the sealing of any above ground ambient air. Page 2 Multi-depth probes are installed by similar means to the above described method. Upon emplacement of the 1-foot dry bentonite seal, hydrated bentonite or bentonite slurry is tremmie fed down the borehole to within 6-inches below the next probe depth. A sand filter pack is tremmie fed into the open borehole and an additional length of tubing with affixed porous implant is lowered into the borehole and set atop the sand pack. An additional 6-inches of sand is tremmied down the open borehole to encapsulate the porous tip with 6-inches of sand above and beneath followed by a 1- of dry bentonite seal. This process can be repeated to house multiple vapor probes within one single borehole. All soil gas sampling probe installations are in accordance with the joint LARWQCB/DTSC Advisory – Active Soil Gas Investigations published April, 2012. HYDROPUNCH GRAB GROUNDWATER SAMPLING Groundwater samples are collected using Hydropunch tooling deployed by a Direct Push rig. The rig is equipped with a hydraulic system that is used to push hollow steel rods with a sampling device at the end of the rods through the subsurface. The rig pushes the sampling device to the targeted depth for sample retrieval. Once the groundwater sampling device (Hydropunch) is at the desired interval, the Hydropunch is opened by pulling back on the body of the tool. A temporary expendable tip remains in the ground and a 4-foot long, stainless steel intake screen falls out of the lead rod, exposed to the subsurface formation. Groundwater flows through the intake screen into the sample chamber. Because the sample chamber fills from the bottom there is no aeration and minimal agitation of the sample. A disposable or stainless steel bailer is lowered through the rod string into the screen and a sample is collected. The water sample is then decanted into the appropriate glassware for the specified analyses. The screen and rod are retracted form the subsurface and all reusable tooling is decontaminated (see below). TEMPORARY PVC WELL SCREEN A 2.0 to 3.25 inch diameter borehole is created using a Direct Push Rig. The borehole is extended down into and penetrating the saturated zone a minimum of 2 feet. A ¾-inch to 1.5- inch diameter PVC well screen and well casing is lowered through the center of the hollow rod string and into the borehole to create a temporary well for the collection of groundwater. Once the well is emplaced, the rod string is careful retracted out of the borehole, leaving the well casing in place. Once enough groundwater has entered the well screen, a groundwater sample is collected using a disposable or stainless steel bailer. The groundwater is decanted into the appropriate glassware for the specified analyses. Following the collection of the groundwater samples the PVC casing and screen section are removed from the borehole and all reusable tooling is decontaminated. The well may be completed DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES Prior to sampling, all reusable sampling equipment is decontaminated by washing in a solution of non-phosphate soap and water. The equipment is then double rinsed in distilled water. The sample push rods are steam cleaned on-site between each sample location. The rinseate water is placed in Department of Transportation approved 55 gallon drums and centralized to an on-site location. Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Drawn By: MR Date: 4/22/12 Version: 1.0 Approved By: JJ Not Drawn To Scale Millennium Environmental 2936 East Coronado Street Anaheim, California 92806 Permanent/Semi-permanent Gas Probe Construction Diagram Multi-depth Gas Probe Construction Diagram Post Run Tubing Gas Probe Method Hydrated granularbentonite Drygranularbentonite Probe Tip Sand Pack To Surface Fill to the Surface Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Fill to the Surface Fill to approx. 1-ft below sand pack Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Approx. 1-ft. in thicknessDry tip Drive rod Sample tube Vaporinlet Probe Tip Sand Pack FIGURE Soil Gas Well Installation Methods Drawn By: MER Date: 4/22/12 Version: 1.0 Approved By: JJ Not Drawn To Scale Millennium Environmental 2936 East Coronado Street Anaheim, California 92806 Multi-depth Gas Probe Construction Diagram Hydrated granular bentonite Dry granular bentonite Vapor Inlet Sample Tip Sand Pack Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Fill to the Surface Fill to approx. 1-ft below sand pack Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Approx. 1-ft. in thickness Figure 1 Multi-depth Soil Gas Temporary Well Installation Diagram 15.5-ft. Vapor Inlet Sample Tip Hydrated granular bentonite Dry granular bentonite Sand Pack 14.5-ft. 13.5-ft. 5.5-ft. 4.5-ft. 3.5-ft. Poly Sample Tube Poly Sample Tube 1 1/2 to 3-inch Diameter Borehole Created with Stainless-steel Direct-Push Rod STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE AND QUALITY CONTROL FOR MOBILE LABORATORY ANALYSES OF SOIL GAS SAMPLES – JONES ENVIRONMENTAL MOBILE LABS Revision: 8/09/06 1.0 INTRODUCTION Active soil gas investigations are useful to obtain vapor phase data at sites potentially affected by volatile organic compounds (VOC’s), including chlorinated and aromatic hydrocarbons. Active soil gas investigations may also be used to investigate sites potentially affected by methane and hydrogen sulfide, and to measure fixed and biogenic gasses (e.g., oxygen, carbon dioxide, or carbon monoxide). Among other things, the data can be used to identify the source and determine the spatial distribution of VOC contamination at a site, or to estimate indoor air concentrations for risk assessment purposes. 2.0 2.0.1 Sampling Tubes: Sampling tubes should be of a small diameter (1/8 to 1/4 inch) and made of material (e.g., nylon, polyethylene, copper or stainless steel) which will not react or interact with site contaminants. For example, metal tubes should not be used for collection of hydrogen sulfide samples. A. Clean, dry tubing should be utilized at all times. If moisture, water, or an unknown material is present in the probe prior to insertion, the tubing should be replaced. B. After use at each location: 1. Non-reusable (e.g., nylon or polyethylene) sampling tubes should be discarded; or 2. The probe tip should be emplaced midway within a minimum of one (1) foot of sand pack. The sand pack should be appropriately sized (e.g., no smaller than the adjacent formation) and installed to minimize disruption of airflow to the sampling tip. See Figure 1 for more information. 3. At least one (1) foot of dry granular bentonite should be emplaced on top of each sand pack to preclude the infiltration of hydrated bentonite grout. The borehole should be grouted to the surface with hydrated bentonite. With respect to deep probe construction with multiple probe depths, the borehole should be grouted between probes. One (1) foot of dry 1 granular bentonite should be emplaced between the filter pack and the grout at each probe location. See Figure 2 for more information. C. Temporary Soil Gas Probe Emplacement Method: In general, the drive rod is driven to a predetermined depth and then pulled back to expose the inlets of the soil gas probe. After sample collection, both the drive rod and tubing are removed. 1. During installation of the probe, hydrated bentonite should be used to seal around the drive rod at ground surface to prevent ambient air intrusion from occurring. 2. The inner soil gas pathway from probe tip to the surface should be continuously sealed (e.g., a sampling tube attached to a screw adapter fitted with an o-ring and connected to the probe tip) to prevent infiltration. 2.0.2 Equilibration Time: During probe emplacement, subsurface conditions are disturbed. To allow for subsurface conditions to equilibrate, the following equilibration times are recommended: A. For probes installed with the direct push method where the drive rod remains in the ground, purge volume test, leak test, and soil gas sampling should not be conducted for at least 20 minutes following probe installation. B. For probes installed with the direct push method where the drive rod does not remain in the ground, purge volume test, leak test, and soil gas sampling should not be conducted for at least 30 minutes following probe installation. C. For probes installed with hollow stem drilling methods, purge volume test, leak test, and soil gas sampling should not be conducted for at least 48 hours (depending on site lithologic or drilling conditions) after the soil gas probe installation. D. Probe installation time should be recorded in the field log book and given to the mobile lab operator to ensure that adequate time has elapsed before sampling can commence. 2.0.3 Decontamination: After each use, drive rods and other reusable components should be properly decontaminated to prevent cross contamination. These methods include: A. 3-stage wash and rinse (e.g., wash equipment with a non-phosphate detergent, rinse with tap water, and finally rinse with distilled water); and/or B. Steam cleaning process. 2 2.1 Purge Volume Test To ensure stagnant or ambient air is removed from the sampling system and to assure samples collected are representative of subsurface conditions, a purge volume versus contaminant concentration test should be conducted as the first soil gas sampling activity at the selected purge test point. The purge volume test is conducted by collecting and analyzing a sample for target compounds after the removal of appropriate purge volumes. 2.1.1 Purge Test Locations: The purge test location should be selected as near as possible to the anticipated or confirmed contaminant source, and in an area where soil gas concentrations are expected to be greatest based on lithology (e.g., coarse-grained sediments). The first purge test location should be selected through the workplan approval process or as a field decision in conjunction with the regulatory agency. 2.1.2 Purge Volume: The purge volume or “dead space volume” can be estimated based on a summation of the volume of the sample container, internal volume of tubing used, and annular space around the probe tip (for 1” probe this is approximately 50cc3). Summa™ canisters, syringe, and Tedlar™ bags are not included in the dead space volume calculation. DTSC/RWCQB recommends step purge tests of one (1), three (3), and seven (7) purge volumes be conducted as a means to determine the purge volume to be applied at all sampling points. Additional purge volumes may be used if an increasing trend in concentrations is experienced during the purge test. A. The appropriate purge volume should be selected based on the highest concentration for the compound(s) of concern detected during the step purge tests. The purge volume should be optimized for the compound(s) of greatest concern. B. If VOCs are not detected in any of the step purge tests, a default of three (3) purge volumes should be extracted prior to sampling. C. The step purge tests and purging should be conducted at the same rate soil gas is to be sampled. D. The purge test data (e.g., calculated purge volume, rate and duration of each purge step) should be included in the report to support the purge volume selection. JEL includes this information on the chain-of-custody record and discussion part of the laboratory report. 2.1.3 Additional Purge Volume Test A. Additional purge volume tests should be performed to ensure 3 appropriate purge volumes are extracted if: 1. Widely variable or different site lithology is encountered; or 2. The default purge volume is used and a VOC is newly detected at a different location at the same depth at the site. B. If a new purge volume is selected after additional step purge tests are conducted, the soil gas investigation should be continued as follows: 1. In areas of the same or similar lithologic conditions: a. Re-sample 20 percent of the previously completed probes. This re-sampling requirement may be reduced or waived in consultation with DTSC/RWQCB staff, depending on site conditions. If re-sampling indicates higher detections (e.g., more than 50 percent difference in samples detected at greater than or equal to 10 μg/L), all other previous probes should be re-sampled using the new purge volume. b. Continue the soil gas investigation with the newly selected purge volume in the remaining areas. 2. In areas of different lithologic conditions: Continue the soil gas investigation with the newly selected purge volume in the remaining areas. 2.2 Leak Test Leakage during soil gas sampling may dilute samples with ambient air and produce results that underestimate actual site concentrations or contaminate the sample with external contaminants. Leak tests should be conducted to determine whether leakage is present (e.g., the leak check compound is detected and confirmed in the test sample after its application). 2.2.1 JEL conducts leak tests at every soil gas probe. 2.2.2 Leak Check Compounds: Tracer compounds, such as pentane, isopropanol, n-propanol, isobutene, propane, and butane, may be used as leak check compounds, if a detection limit (DL) of 1.0 μg/L or less can be achieved. Mixtures such as shaving cream should be avoided since each shaving cream product contains many compounds and it is not always certain which compound is present in the shaving cream that is being sought. 2.2.3 A leak check compound is placed at any location where ambient air could enter the sampling system or where cross contamination may occur within a few minutes of sampling. Locations of potential ambient air intrusion include: A. Sample system connections; 4 B. Surface bentonite seals (e.g., around rods and tubing); or C. Top of the Temporary Soil Gas Probe; 2.2.4 The leak test includes an analysis of the leak check compound. If a leak check compound is detected in the sample, the following actions should be followed: A. The cause of the leak should be evaluated, determined and corrected through confirmation sampling; B. If the leak check compound is suspected or detected as a sites specific contaminant, a new leak check compound should be used; C. If leakage is confirmed and the problem can not be corrected, the soil gas probe should be properly decommissioned; D. A replacement probe should be installed at least five (5) feet from the original probe decommissioned due to confirmed leakage, or consult with DTSC/RWQCB staff; and E. The leak check compound concentration detected in the soil gas sample is included and discussed in the JEL report. 2.3 Purge/Sample Flow Rate Sampling and purging flow rates should not enhance compound partitioning during soil gas sampling. Samples should not be collected if field conditions as specified in Section 2.4.4 exist. 2.3.1 The purging or sampling flow rate should be attainable in the lithology adjacent to the soil gas probe. A. To evaluate lithologic conditions adjacent to the soil gas probe (e.g., where no-flow or low-flow conditions), a vacuum gauge or similar device should be used between the soil gas sample tubing and the soil gas extraction devices (e.g., vacuum pump, Summa™ canister). B. Gas tight syringes may also be used to qualitatively determine if a high vacuum soil condition (e.g., suction is felt while the plunger is being withdrawn) is present. 2.3.2 The DTSC/RWQCB recommends purging or sampling at rates between 100 to 200 milliliters per minute (ml/min) to limit stripping, prevent ambient air from diluting the soil gas samples, and to reduce the variability of purging rates. The low flow purge rate increases the likelihood that representative samples may be collected. The purge/sample rate 5 may be modified based on conditions encountered in individual soil gas probes and the size of tubing. These modified rates are documented in the JEL soil gas report. 2.4 Soil Gas Sampling After the soil gas probe is adequately purged, samples are collected by appropriate methodologies listed in section 2.1.2. 2.4.1 Sample Container: Samples are collected in gas-tight, opaque/dark containers (e.g., syringes, glass bulbs wrapped in aluminum foil, Summa™ canisters), so that light-sensitive or halogenated VOCs (e.g., vinyl chloride) will not degrade. A. If a syringe is used, it is leak-checked before each use by closing the exit valve and attempting to force ambient air through the needle. B. If syringe samples are analyzed within five (5) minutes of collection, aluminum foil wrapping is not necessary. C. EPA Method TO-14A, TO-15, or an equivalent air analysis method, requires samples be collected in Summa™ canisters. D. If a Summa™ canister is used, a flow regulator should be placed between the probe and the Summa™ canister to ensure the Summa™ canister is filled at the flow rate. E. Tedlar™ bags should not be used to collect VOC samples except in those cases where no other sampling method is available. F. Specific requirements for methane and hydrogen sulfide sample containers are specified in Section 2.5.9. 2.4.2 Sample Collection A. Vacuum Pump: When a vacuum pump is used, samples are collected on the intake side of the vacuum pump to prevent potential contamination from the pump. Vacuum readings or qualitative evidence of a vacuum should be recorded on field data sheets for each sample. The vacuum pump must be calibrated using a certified flow meter before sampling begins each day of sampling. Periodic measurement of the flow from the pump should be performed throughout the day. B. Shallow Samples: Care needs to be observed when collecting shallow soil gas samples to avoid sample breakthrough from the surface. Extensive purging or use of large volume sample containers (e.g., Summa™ canisters) should be avoided for collection of near-surface samples [e.g., shallower than five (5) 6 feet bgs]. 2.4.3 Sample Container Cleanliness and Decontamination A. Prior to its first use at a site, each sample container should be assured clean by the analytical laboratory as follows: 1. New containers should be determined to be free of contaminants (e.g., lubricants) by either the supplier or the analytical laboratory; and 2. Reused/recycled containers: Method blank(s)/Syringe blank(s) should be used to verify sample container cleanliness. B. After each use, reusable sample containers should be properly decontaminated. 1. Glass syringes or bulbs should be disassembled and decontaminated by rinsing with distilled water, once with high purity methanol and ten times with ambient air. 2. During sampling activities using reused/recycled sampling containers (e.g., glass syringes, glass bulbs), at a minimum one (1) decontaminated sample container per 20 samples or per every 12 hours, whichever is more often, should be used as a method blank to verify and evaluate the effectiveness of decontamination procedures. C. Plastic syringes should never be used for sample collection. 2.4.4 Field Conditions: Field conditions, such as rainfall, irrigation, fine grained sediments, or drilling conditions may affect the ability to collect soil gas samples. A. Wet Conditions: If no-flow or low-flow conditions are caused by wet soils, the soil gas sampling should cease. In addition, soil gas sampling should not be conducted during or immediately after a significant rain event (e.g.,1/2 inch or greater) or onsite watering. B. If low flow conditions are determined to be from a specific lithology, a new probe should be installed at a greater depth or a new lateral location should be selected after evaluation of the site lithologic logs or in consultation with DTSC/RWQCB staff. C. If moisture or unknown material is observed in the glass bulb or syringe, soil gas sampling should cease until the cause of the problem is determined and corrected. Most of the time the water in the tube is due to over-hydrating of the bentonite seal above the sampling tube. A new probe must be installed with proper hydration in these cases. 7 D. If refusal occurs during drilling, soil gas samples should be collected as follows or in consultation with DTSC/RWQCB staff. 1. For sample depths less than five feet, collect a soil gas sample following the precautions outlined in Section 2.4.2.B. 2. For sample depths greater than five feet, collect a soil gas sample at the depth of refusal. 3. A replacement probe should be installed within five (5) feet laterally from the original probe decommissioned due to refusal. If refusal still occurs after three tries, the sampling location may be abandoned. 2.4.5 Chain of Custody Records: A chain of custody form is completed by JEL on every site to maintain the custodial integrity of a sample. Probe installation times and sample collection times are included in the soil gas report as well as sampling rates, collection device and tracer compound. 2.5 Analysis of Soil Gas Samples 2.5.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC): The analytical data should be consistent with the Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) established for the project. The regulating agency staff may inspect the field and/or laboratory QA/QC procedures. Copies of the QA/QC plan and laboratory calibration data are present in the mobile lab available for review upon request. Field QC samples are collected, stored, transported and analyzed in a manner consistent with site samples. The following QC samples should be collected to support the sampling activity: A. Sample Blanks 1. Ambient Air Blanks: Ambient air blanks are used to verify the effectiveness of decontamination procedures and to detect any possible interference from ambient air. 2. Trip Blanks for Off-site Shipments: Whenever VOC samples are shipped offsite for analysis, a minimum of one (1) trip blank per day should be collected and analyzed for the target compounds. Trip blanks, consisting of laboratory grade ultra pure air, are prepared to evaluate if the shipping and handling procedures are introducing contaminants into the samples, and if cross contamination in the form of VOC migration has occurred between the collected VOC samples. Trip blank containers and media should be the same as site samples. 3. Syringe Blanks: Each syringe or bulb used for sampling must be checked for contamination before beginning analyses. B. Duplicate Samples: At least one (1) duplicate sample per laboratory per day will be collected by the mobile lab. Duplicate samples should be collected from areas of concern. 8 1. Duplicate samples should be collected in separate sample containers, at the same location and depth. 2. Duplicate samples should be collected immediately after the original sample. C. Laboratory Control/ QC Reference Samples: In addition to normal laboratory check samples, an LCS/QC Ref sample is analyzed during each 12 hour GC/MS cycle. 2.5.2 Laboratory Certification: Although the California Department of Health Services, Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) does not certify labs for air/soil gas analyses at this time, JEL maintains soil and water certifications for all of the tests that are performed in each of its mobile labs. 2.5.3 Detection Limits for Target Compounds: Detection limits are determined according to 40 CFR 136, Appendix B and the QC section of the determinative method. A. The DL for leak check compounds should be 1.0 μg/L or less. The DL for oxygen (O2) and carbon dioxide (CO2) should be one (1) percent or less. The DLs for methane and hydrogen sulfide are specified in Section 2.5.9. B. If the investigation is being conducted to delineate the extent of contamination, a DL of 1 μg/L is appropriate for all targeted VOCs. C. If the soil gas data are to be used to support risk assessment activities, a DL of 0.02 μg/L may be appropriate for the initial screening when evaluating all targeted VOCs. Most recent soil gas surveys are implemented in order to determine the risk of putting either commercial or residential buildings on a site. The January 2005 California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSLS) along with risk models (Johnson/Etenger) must be consulted prior to performing analyses so that DL requirements will meet CHHSLS soil gas levels. See Table 1 of this document for specific DL requirements. D. Based on site-specific DQO needs, lower DLs may be required. Examples of sites requiring site-specifc DQO needs include, but are not limited to, chlorinated solvents sites, former industrial facilities and landfills. Several less common VOCs, not included on the ASGI-targeted compound list, may require lower detection limits [e.g., MTBE, fuel oxygenates, DBCP (1,2-dibromo-3- chloropropane), or ethylene dibromide] when they are known or suspected to be present. E. If the required DLs cannot be achieved by the proposed analytical method, additional sample analysis should be performed using a larger volume of sample. F. For results with a high DL reported (e.g., due to matrix interference 9 or dilution), the JEL laboratories will provide a written explanation where target compounds are all non-detect at the given dilution. Re- sampling and analyses may be required at the appropriate DL or for a specific compound. However, it must be mentioned that high volumes of contaminated samples will contaminate the Gas Chromatographic system and will cause carryover into the next sample or two so appropriate bakeout and method blank analyses must be run to clear the system between runs. 2.5.4 Sample Handling: Exposure to light, changes in temperature and pressure will accelerate sample degradation and change the volume of the gas in sample containers. To protect sample integrity: A. Soil gas samples should not be chilled; B. Soil gas samples should not be subjected to changes in ambient pressure. Shipping of sample containers by air should be avoided; and C. If condensation is observed in the sample container, the sample should be discarded and a new sample collected. 2.5.5 Holding Time: All soil gas samples (e.g., samples of VOCs, methane, fixed gases, or biogenic gases), with the exception of hydrogen sulfide samples, should be analyzed within 30 minutes by an on-site mobile laboratory. Hydrogen sulfide samples should be analyzed as specified in Section 2.5.9.B.2. Under the following conditions, holding times may be extended and analyses performed off-site: A. Soil gas samples collected in glass bulbs/syringes with surrogates added within 15 minutes of collection may be analyzed within 4 hours after collection; B. Soil gas samples collected in Summa™ canisters may be analyzed within 72 hours after collection; and C. Methane samples may be analyzed as specified in Section 2.5.9.A.2. 2.5.6 Analytical Methods A. VOC Samples: All VOC samples should be analyzed using only a Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer (GC/MS) method (e.g., EPA Method 8260B, used for analysis of soil gas samples, EPA TO- 15, or equivalent). Non-GC/MS methods are not used by JEL for determining VOC’s in soil gas samples. In some limited applications, a GC/FID may be used to determine hydrocarbon concentrations. B. Methane and Hydrogen Sulfide Samples: These gas samples should be analyzed using methods specified in Section 2.5.9. 2.5.7 Auto samplers may be used if: 10 A. One (1) sample is introduced at a time; B. The sample vials are gas-tight and never opened after the sample is added; C. Proper holding times are maintained (see Section 2.5.5); and D. All samples are secured and under proper custody. 2.5.8 Target Compounds A. VOCs 1. EPA 8260 Targeted Compounds: The interim guidance document for active soil gas investigations dated February 25, 1997) includes 23 primary and four (4) other target VOC’s. All of these compounds with the exception of Freon 113 are included in the 8260 procedure performed by JEL. All quantifiable results will be reported for those compounds not included routinely in the JEL 8260 compound list if they are discussed with JEL staff before sampling commences. The JEL target compound list is given in Table 2. 2. Others: The estimated results of all Tentatively Identified Compounds [TICs]) detected will be included in the report if requested by the client and approved by the lab. B. Leak Check Compounds: All quantifiable results should be reported as specified in Section 2.4.4.E. C. Specific Compounds: Based on the site history and conditions, analyses for specific compounds may be required. Examples include: 1. In areas where USTs or fuel pipelines are identified, soil gas samples should be analyzed for oxygenated compounds [e.g., methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME), tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA), and ethanol]; 2. At oilfield sites where semi-VOCs or Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPHs) are detected in the soil gas samples, fixed and biogenic gas (O2, CO2, and CH4) data should be obtained using a Thermal-Conductivity Detector (TCD) or a hand-held instrument; 3. At petroleum contaminated sites (including oilfields), dairies, wetlands, landfills or other sites where the presence of methane and/or hydrogen sulfide is suspected, soil gas samples should be analyzed for methane and/or hydrogen sulfide; 11 4. At sites where use of chlorinated solvents with 1,4-dioxane is suspected or known to exist, soil gas samples may be analyzed for 1,4-dioxane with a detection limit of 1 μg/L; 2.5.9 Methane and Hydrogen Sulfide Sampling Programs: A. Methane Sampling Program: Methane samples may be analyzed by a GC using modified EPA Method 8015B, EPA Method TO-3, or ASTM 3416M (EPA 3C), or by an appropriate hand-held instrument by the on-site consultant. 1. Detection Limit: The DL for methane analysis should not exceed 500 parts per million by volume (ppmV). 2. Methane Sample Containers: In addition to the gas-tight sample containers previously specified in Section 2.4.1, Tedlar™ bags may be used for collection of methane samples with a holding time of no more than 24 hours. 4. Special GC Requirements: The GC method requires calibration curves for methane at a minimum of 5 points is required. 5. Special Hand-Held Instruments Requirements: Hand-held instruments should be calibrated in accordance with the manufacture’s instructions. When a hand-held instrument is used to analyze methane samples, at least 10 percent of all positive methane samples (e.g., more than 5,000 ppmV), rounded to the nearest whole number, be confirmed by another hand-held instrument (different unit or brand) or by a GC method in the field B. Hydrogen Sulfide Sampling Program: Hydrogen sulfide may be analyzed by a GC using the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 307-91 or EPA Method 16, or by an appropriate hand-held instrument calibrated for hydrogen sulfide. 1. Detection Limit: The DL should be equal to or less than 0.5 ppmV or be sensitive enough to allow for a modeled ambient air concentration (at least one microgram per cubic meter) at the soil surface. 2. Holding Time: Hydrogen sulfide samples should be extracted directly into the analyzer within 30 minutes of collection to minimize the risk of losing the hydrogen sulfide due to reaction with active surfaces. Hydrogen sulfide samples should be analyzed as below: 12 a. Within 30 minutes of collection, using the GC procedures; or b. Within 24 hours of collection, if a surrogate is added to the samples, or 100 percent duplicate samples are collected. 3. Sample Containers: The following sample containers are recommended: a. Minimum one (1) liter black Tedlar™ bag fitted with polypropylene valves or the equivalent; b. 100-ml gas-tight syringe fitted with an inert valve and wrapped in aluminum foil; c. Gas-tight glass bulb wrapped in aluminum foil; or d. Glass-lined or silicon coated Summa™ canister. 4. Precautions a. Since hydrogen sulfide is extremely unstable in the presence of oxygen and moisture, contact of hydrogen sulfide samples with them should be avoided. b. Due to the high reactivity of hydrogen sulfide gas, contact of hydrogen sulfide samples with metallic or other non-passive surfaces should be avoided during sample collection, storage and analysis. c. Care must be taken so that GC components do not react with the sample. Typically glass-lined injection ports and TeflonTM tube packed columns are used to avoid loss of hydrogen sulfide due to reaction with active surfaces. 3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF CALIBRATION STANDARDS & LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE (LCS)/QC REFERENCE (QC REF) 3.0.1 Properly and clearly identify all calibration standards and LCS/QC Reference standards. The identification must agree with the data on record for the standards and LCS/QC Reference samples. 3.0.2 Prepare LCS/QC Reference standards from a second source standard that is totally independent from the standards used for the initial calibration. Second source means a different supplier (whenever possible) or a different lot from the same supplier. JEL uses a different supplier. 3.1 GC CONDITIONS 3.1.1 JEL uses a DB-624, 0.32u, 30 M capillary column for VOC analyses by a Varian ion trap GC/MS. The temperature program used by all GC/MS systems is as follows: 13 Temp Hold Ramp (oC/min) Initial: 50oC 0.50 min 0.00 130oC 0.00 min 10.0 220oC 2.00 min 20.0 Split Ratio: 45:1 Column Flow: 1.4 cc/min Mass Range: 35-300 amu 3.1.2 Analyze the initial calibration and daily mid-point calibration check standards, LCS/QC Reference, blank, and samples using the same GC conditions (i.e., temperature program). 3.1.3 JEL uses a GC run time that is long enough to identify and quantify all the target compounds. 3.2 INITIAL CALIBRATION 3.2.1 Perform an initial calibration: 1. for all compounds listed in Table 2; this list must include all of the compounds required by the Interim Guidance for Active Soil Gas Investigations (February 23, 1997) 2. when the GC operating conditions have changed; 3. when the daily mid-point calibration check cannot meet the requirement in Section 3.5; and 4. when specified by DTSC/RWQCB staff based on the scope and nature of the investigation. 3.2.2 At least five different concentrations of the standard in the initial calibration, with the lowest one not exceeding 10 times the DL for each compound. 3.2.3 Calculate the response factor (RF) for each compound and calibration concentration prior to analyzing any site samples. Calculate the average RF for each compound. The percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) for each target compound must not exceed 20% except for the following compounds which must not exceed 30% Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) Trichlorotrifluoromethane (Freon 113) Vinyl Chloride Fuel Oxygenates 1,4-dioxane t-Butyl Alcohol 14 3.2.4 Verify the true concentration for the standard solutions used with the LCS/QC Reference after each initial calibration. Conduct the verification using a LCS/QC Reference with a mid-point concentration within the initial calibration range. The LCS/QC Reference must include all the target compounds. The RF of each compound of each compound must be within ±20% difference from the initial calibration except for Freon 11, 12 and 113, Chloroethane, and Vinyl Chloride which must be within ±30% difference from the initial calibration. 3.3 DAILY MID-POINT CALIBRATION CHECK 3.3.1 Check the calibration using the calibration standard solution with a mid-point concentration within the linear range of the initial calibration before any sample is analyzed. 3.3.2 Include in the daily mid-point calibration check standard the following compounds and every compound expected or detected at the site: 1. 1,1-Dichloroethane 2. 1,2-Dichloroethane 3. 1,1-Dichloroethene 4. cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5. trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 6. Tetrachloroethylene 7. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 8. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 9. Trichloroethylene 10. Benzene 11. Toluene 12. Xylenes 3.3.3 Assure that the RF of each compound (except for Freons 11, 12 and 113, Chloroethane and Vinyl Chloride) is within ±20% difference from the initial calibration’s average RF. The RF for Freons 11, 12 and 113, Chloroethane and Vinyl Chloride must be within ±30%. 3.4 BLANK 3.4.1 Analyze field blank(s) to detect any possible interference from ambient air. 3.4.2 Investigate and determine the source(s) and resolve any laboratory contamination problem prior to analyzing any samples if the blank shows a measurable amount 1.0 ≥ ug/L) of the target compound(s). 3.5 SAMPLE ANALYSIS 3.5.1 Assure that the requirements for initial calibration, daily mid-point check, blank and LCS/QC Reference are met before any site samples are analyzed. 15 3.5.2 Analyze samples within 30 minutes after collection to minimize VOC loss. Longer holding time may be allowed if the laboratory uses special sampling equipment (e.g., sorbent trap, glass bulb, gas tight syringe) and demonstrates that the holding time can exceed 30 minutes with no decrease in results. 3.5.3 Assure that the concentrations of constituent(s) in a sample do not exceed 50% of the highest concentration in the calibration range. Reanalyze the sample using a smaller volume or dilution if the detected concentration exceed 50% of the highest concentration in the calibration range. 3.5.4 Attain DL of not more than 0.1 ug/L for all target compounds. If lesser sample volumes or dilutions are used to off-set possible high concentration of constituents in the initial run, use the initial run to calculate the results for constituents that are not affected by the high concentration so the DL of 0.1 ug/L for these compounds can be achieved. 3.5.5 Quantify sample results using the average RF from the most recent initial calibration. 3.5.6 Surrogate compounds are added to all samples. Assure that the surrogate compound concentration is within the initial calibration range. JEL uses the following surrogate compounds: Dibromofluoromethane, 1,2-Dichloroethane- d4, Toluene-d8, and 4-Bromofluorobenzene. 3.5.7 Calculate the surrogate recovery for each GC run. Surrogate recovery must not exceed ±30% difference from the true concentration of the surrogate. Matrix effects may influence surrogate concentrations in a given sample. If problems occur the lab report must document these problems. 3.6 COMPOUND CONFIRMATION 3.6.1 JEL uses only GC/MS techniques to identify VOC’s in soil gas samples. The only exception is the analysis of fixed gases and sulfur gases. These latter compounds do not require confirmations. 3.7 SAMPLES WITH HIGH CONCENTRATIONS 3.7.1 DL may be raised above 0.1ug/L for compounds with high result and those closely eluting compounds for which quantitation may be inferred by the high concentrations. 3.7.2 Quantify sample results for analytes which are not affected by the high concentration compounds. 3.7.3 If high VOC concentration in an area is known from previous soil gas analysis, Sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 are not necessary when analyzing samples from the area in question. 16 3.7.4 When dilution with ambient air is used for samples with high results, dilute and analyze in duplicate each day at least one sample to verify the dilution procedure. 3.8 SHORTENED ANALYSIS TIME 3.8.1 Shorten the GC run time under the following conditions only: 1. The exact number and identification of compounds are known from the previous soil and soil gas investigations; and 2. The consultant has been given permission by DTSC/Regional Board staff to analyze only for specific compounds. 3.8.2 Meet the following requirements when shortening GC run-time: 1. DTSC/Regional Board staff must approve the shortened run time; 2. The compounds must not coelute; 3. Perform initial calibration and daily mid-point calibration check and analyze LCS/QC Reference and samples under the same conditions as the shorter GC run-time; 4. Quantitate using the average RF from the initial calibration utilizing the shorter run-time; and 5. Perform a normal run-time analysis whenever peaks are detected within retention time windows where coelution, as indicated by the calibration chromatograms, is likely. 3.9 LAST GC TEST RUN PER DAY OF ANALYSIS 3.9.1 An LCS/QC Reference as the last GC run of the day is not mandatory. Include the same compounds used in the daily mid-point calibration check analysis. Attain RF for each compound within ±20% difference from the initial calibration’s average RF, except for Freon 11, 12, 113, Chloroethane and Vinyl Chloride which must be within ±30%. 3.9.2 Analyze an LCS/QC Reference sample at 10 times the detection limit concentration instead of the mid-point concentration if all samples from the same day of analysis show non-detect (ND) results. The recovery for each compound must be at least 50%. 3.10 ON-SITE EVLUATION CHECK SAMPLE 3.10.1 Analyze on-site the evaluation check sample as part of the QA/QC procedures when presented with such a check sample by DTSC/Regional Board staff. Provide preliminary results on-site. Regulatory agency may want 17 a copy of the LCS/QC Reference results. These results are routinely given by JEL. 3.11 RECORDKEEPING IN THE MOBILE LABORATORY The following records are kept in the mobile laboratory during the on-site analyses and in the project folder for review: 1. A hard copy record of calibration standards and LCS/QC Reference with the following information: a. Date of receipt b. Name of supplier c. Lot number d. Date of preparation for intermediate standards (dilution from the stock or concentrated solution from supplier) e. ID number traceable to calibration standard logbook f. Name of person who performed the dilution g. Volume of concentrated solution taken for dilution h. Final volume after dilution i. Calculated concentration after dilution 2. A hard copy of each initial calibration for each instrument used for the past few months. 3. The laboratory standard operating procedures are kept on file in each JEL mobile laboratory. 3.12 REPORTING OF SOIL GAS SAMPLE RESULTS AND QA/QC DATA 3.12.1 JEL reports all sample test results and QA/QC data using the reporting formats listed herein. Compounds may be listed by retention time for initial calibration or in alphabetical order on laboratory reports. TIC compounds are reported if requested by the client before sampling begins. 3.12.2 JEL reports the following for all calibration standards, LCS/QC Reference and environmental samples as well a chain-of-custody records: 1. Site name 2. Laboratory name 3. Date of analysis 4. Name of analysis 5. Instrument identification 6. Normal injection volume 7. Injection time 8. Any special analytical conditions/remark 18 3.12.3 Provide additional information, as specified, for different types of analyses. Tabulate and present in a clear legible format all information according to the following grouping: 1. Initial calibration a. Source of standard (STD LOT ID NO.) b. Detector for quantitation (DETECTOR) c. Retention time (RT) d. Standard mass or concentration(MASS/CONC) e. Peak area (AREA) f. Response factor (RF) g. Average response factor (RF sys) h. Standard deviation (SN n-1) of RF i.e., n [Σ(RF sys · RFj2 / (n-1)r n = number of points in initial calibration i. Percent relative standard deviation (% RSD), i.e., (SD n-1 /RF sys) x 100 (%) j. Acceptable range of %RSD (ACC RGE) 2. Daily Calibration check sample with the following information is stored on the hard drive of the mobile laboratory computer for each analytical instrument: a. Source of standard b. Detector c. Retention time (RT) d. Standard mass or concentration e. Peak area f. Response factor (RF) g. Percent difference between RF and RF sys from initial calibration (% DIFF) h. Acceptable range of %DIFF (ACC RGE) 3. LCS/QC Reference Same format as daily calibration 4. Environmental sample a. Sample identification b. Sampling depth c. Purge volume d. Sampling time e. Injection time f. Injection volume g. Dilution factor h. Retention time (RT) i. Peak area 19 j. Concentration in ug/L (CONC) k. Unidentified peaks and/or other analytical remarks (if requested) 5. Surrogate Each surrogate recovery is included for each sample analyzed. Surrogate recoveries for method blanks, ambient air blank, CCV’s, LCS/QC Reference, and MS/MSD’s are available upon request. 6. Matrix Spike/ Matrix Spike Duplicates Each batch of samples not to exceed 20 samples will include a matrix spike (MS) and matrix spike duplicate (MSD) sample. An ambient air sample is spiked with the following 6 compounds, analyzed with the same parameters as the samples and values calculated: 1,1- Dichloroethylene, Benzene, Trichloroethylene, Toluene, and Chlorobenzene. Values for each of the compounds must be within + 30% of known values with RPD’s <20%. 4.0 REFERENCES Additional information may be found in the following documents: American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), “Standard Guide for Soil Gas Monitoring in the Vadose Zone, ASTM Standard D 5314-92,” January 1993; Reapproved 2001; website http://www.astm.org 01/13/2003 - 22 - California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, “Interim Guidance for Active Soil Gas Investigation,” February 25, 1997 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, “General Laboratory Testing Requirements for Petroleum Hydrocarbon Impacted Sites,” June 22, 2000 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA Publication SW-846, Third Edition,” November 1986, as amended by Updates I (Jul. 1992), II (Sep. 1994), IIA (August 1993), IIB (Jan. 1995), III (Dec. 1996), IIIA (Apr. 1998), IVA (Jan. 1998) and IVB (Nov. 2000); website http://www.epa.gov/SW-846/main.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “U.S. EPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review, EPA 540/R-94/012,” February 1994; website http://www.epa.gov/region09/qa/superfundclp.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Soil Gas Sampling, SOP#: 2042, Revision #: 0.0,” June 1, 1996; website http://www.ert.org/respns_resrcs/sops.asp U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summa Canister Cleaning Procedures, SOP #1703, Rev. #: 0.0,” 09/01/94; website http://www.ert.org/respns_resrcs/sops.asp California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA), Office of Environmental Health Hazard (OEHHA), Toxicity Criteria Database; website http://www.oehha.ca.gov/risk/ChemicalDB/index.asp United States Environmental Protection Agency, Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Database; website http://www.epa.gov/iris/ 20 Figures – Soil Gas Probe Emplacement Methods Figure 1 – Permanent/Semi-permanent Gas Figure 2 – Multi-depth Gas Probe Probe Construction Diagram Construction Diagram 21 PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING, INC. STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES HAND AUGER SOIL SAMPLING DRILLING PROCEDURES A hand auger utilizes a small diameter (generally one- to three-inches) auger and threaded rod to manually drill to the desired sampling depth. Soil samples are obtained with an 6-inch long, 2- inch diameter sampler. The split-spoon sampler is driven into undisturbed soil ahead of the auger utilizing a slide hammer. The sampler holds brass, or stainless steel liners that are utilized to contain the soil sample. Boreholes are generally backfilled with cuttings generated during augering. All reusable drilling and sampling equipment are decontaminated prior to each use by washing in a non-phosphate solution and rinsing twice in tap water. SAMPLE COLLECTION Upon retrieval of the sampler, the brass or stainless steel sample liner is capped with TeflonTM sheets and plastic end caps. The top and bottom of the sample tube is marked. The sample tubes are labeled, placed in a cooler chilled to approximately 40C and shipped to an analytic laboratory under chain-of-custody documentation. A portion of the sample not held for analysis may be placed in a zip-loc bag and allowed to sit for a minimum of 5 minutes. Head space readings are collected with a portable photo-ionization detector by placing the tip of the detector inside the plastic bag. Head space readings are recorded on the boring log. This soil is also inspected for texture, color, moisture content, and other distinguishing characteristics. Soil lithology is described using the Unified Soil Classification System and recorded on a soil boring log. The drilling log includes the sample depth, geologic observations, head space readings, and other details as outlined in California EPA’s “Drilling, Coring, Sampling and Logging at Hazardous Substance Release Sites, Interim Final, 1994”. All sampling activities are performed by or under the oversight of a California Registered Geologist. Chain-of-custody procedures are followed to ensure field sample integrity and tracking of sample custody. Each time a sample changes hands, both the sender and the receiver signs and dates the chain of custody form. A chain of custody record is completed for each shipping container. WASTE DISPOSAL Rinseate water and soil cuttings (waste) are stored on-site in properly labeled containers (typically 55-gallon drums or roll-offs on larger projects). Drilling wastes are profiled, manifested, and disposed in accordance with applicable regulations based on soil sample analytical results. PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) Appendix C Soil Gas Analytical Report and Chain- of-Custody – May 16, 2020 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS ANALYSES REQUESTED 1. EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 Greg Dickinson Sampling –Soil Gas samples were collected in glass gas-tight syringes equipped with Teflon plungers. A tracer gas mixture of n-pentane,n-hexane,and n-heptane was placed at the tubing-surface interface before sampling.These compounds were analyzed during the 8260B analytical run to determine if there were surface leaks into the subsurface due to improper installation of the probe.No tracer was detected in any of the samples reported herein. The sampling rate was approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record,using a glass gas-tight syringe.Purging was completed using a pump set at approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record.A default of 3 purge volumes was used as recommended by July 2015 DTSC/RWQCB guidance documents. Prior to purging and sampling of soil gas at each point,a shut-in test was conducted to check for leaks in the above ground fittings.The shut-in test was performed on the above ground apparatus by evacuating the line to a vacuum of 100 inches of water, sealing the entire system and watching the vacuum for at least one minute.A vacuum gauge attached in parallel to the apparatus measured the vacuum.If there was any observable loss of vacuum,the fittings were adjusted as needed until the vacuum did not change noticeably.The soil gas sample was then taken. No flow conditions occur when a sampling rate greater than 10 mL/min cannot be maintained without applying a vacuum greater than 100 inches of water to the sampling train.The sampling train is left at a vacuum for no less than three minutes.If the vacuum does not subside appreciably after three minutes,the sample location is determined to be a no flow sample. Analytical –Soil Gas samples were analyzed using EPA Method 8260 that includes extra compounds required by DTSC/RWQCB (such as Freon 113).Instrument Continuing Calibration Verification,QC Reference Standards,Instrument Blanks and Sampling Blanks were analyzed every 12 hours as prescribed by the method.In addition,a Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)were analyzed with each batch of Soil Gas samples.A duplicate/replicate sample was analyzed each day of the sampling activity.All samples were injected into the GC/MS system within 30 minutes of collection. Page 1 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M11-5 M11-14 M11-19 M11-30 M4-5 Jones ID:D-1825-01 D-1825-02 D-1825-03 D-1825-04 D-1825-05 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Anaheim, CA 92805 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Greg Dickinson Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Mission Viejo, California 92691 Matrix Site Reporting Limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Page 2 of 12 Sample ID:M11-5 M11-14 M11-19 M11-30 M4-5 Jones ID:D-1825-01 D-1825-02 D-1825-03 D-1825-04 D-1825-05 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 5010 8490 18300*10600*1410 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 26 9 ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 103 ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 12.5 12.5 1/12.5*1/12.5*12.5 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 99%102%103%101%103% Toluene-d₈97%97%96%97%94% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 93%94%96%94%91% Batch ID:D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS QC Limits Page 3 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M3-5 M3-5 REP M3-15 M3-20 M3-30 Jones ID:D-1825-06 D-1825-07 D-1825-08 D-1825-09 D-1825-10 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 Greg Dickinson Page 4 of 12 Sample ID:M3-5 M3-5 REP M3-15 M3-20 M3-30 Jones ID:D-1825-06 D-1825-07 D-1825-08 D-1825-09 D-1825-10 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 932 907 1790 1490 4190*16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene 10 10 ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND 32 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 12.5 12.5 1/12.5* Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 101%102%104%105%103% Toluene-d₈95%96%95%95%94% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 94%94%96%93%95% Batch ID:D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits Page 5 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M13-5 M10-5 Jones ID:D-1825-11 D-1825-12 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene 35 ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 Greg Dickinson Page 6 of 12 Sample ID:M13-5 M10-5 Jones ID:D-1825-11 D-1825-12 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 1430E 2700*16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene 30 ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene 10 ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 12 ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 53 ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1/12.5* Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 101%105% Toluene-d₈93%95% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 92%95% Batch ID:D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01/D1-051820- 01* ND = Value below reporting limit E = Estimated. Value exceeds calibration range. 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits Page 7 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:051620- D1MB1 051620- D1SB1 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND 10 μg/m3 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site Reporting Limit JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units Page 8 of 12 Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:051620- D1MB1 051620- D1SB1 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 ND ND 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 104%102% Toluene-d₈94%98% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 96%94% Batch ID:D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION 60 - 140 60 - 140 QC Limits Page 9 of 12 Client: 5/21/2020 Client Address:D-1825 Attn:5/16/2020 5/16/2020 Project:5/16/2020 Project Address:Soil Gas Batch ID: Jones ID:051620-D1CCV1 Parameter RPD Acceptability Range (%)CCV Acceptability Range (%) Vinyl chloride 16.7%60 - 140 114%80 - 120 1,1-Dichloroethene 6.9%60 - 140 65%80 - 120 Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 6.6%70 - 130 117%80 - 120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.4%70 - 130 114%80 - 120 Benzene 3.1%70 - 130 114%80 - 120 Trichloroethene 0.2%70 - 130 113%80 - 120 Toluene 2.6%70 - 130 116%80 - 120 Tetrachloroethene 0.8%70 - 130 118%80 - 120 Chlorobenzene 2.1%70 - 130 110%80 - 120 Ethylbenzene 1.4%70 - 130 115%80 - 120 1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene 0.4%70 - 130 115%80 - 120 Surrogate Recovery: Dibromofluoromethane 60 - 140 92%60 - 140 Toluene-d₈60 - 140 96%60 - 140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 60 - 140 98%60 - 140 105% 117% Matrix Site Date Analyzed: 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, 109% 114% 124% 105% 110% 114%113% 63% 55% 107%105% 113% LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate RPD = Relative Percent Difference; Acceptability range for RPD is ≤ 20% LCS = Laboratory Control Sample 101%105% 94% 94%94% EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates 051620-D1LCS1 051620-D1LCSD1 110% Date Sampled: Anaheim, CA 92805 Date Received: 94% Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc.Report date: 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Greg Dickinson JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Jones Ref. No.: Mission Viejo, California 92691 Physical State: LCS Recovery (%) LCSD Recovery (%) 115% D1-051620-01 CCV = Continuing Calibration Verification 74% 59% 117% 112%115% 117% Page 10 of 12 Page 11 of 12 Page 12 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS ANALYSES REQUESTED 1. EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 Greg Dickinson Sampling –Soil Gas samples were collected in glass gas-tight syringes equipped with Teflon plungers. A tracer gas mixture of n-pentane,n-hexane,and n-heptane was placed at the tubing-surface interface before sampling.These compounds were analyzed during the 8260B analytical run to determine if there were surface leaks into the subsurface due to improper installation of the probe.No tracer was detected in any of the samples reported herein. The sampling rate was approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record,using a glass gas-tight syringe.Purging was completed using a pump set at approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record.A default of 3 purge volumes was used as recommended by July 2015 DTSC/RWQCB guidance documents. Prior to purging and sampling of soil gas at each point,a shut-in test was conducted to check for leaks in the above ground fittings.The shut-in test was performed on the above ground apparatus by evacuating the line to a vacuum of 100 inches of water, sealing the entire system and watching the vacuum for at least one minute.A vacuum gauge attached in parallel to the apparatus measured the vacuum.If there was any observable loss of vacuum,the fittings were adjusted as needed until the vacuum did not change noticeably.The soil gas sample was then taken. No flow conditions occur when a sampling rate greater than 10 mL/min cannot be maintained without applying a vacuum greater than 100 inches of water to the sampling train.The sampling train is left at a vacuum for no less than three minutes.If the vacuum does not subside appreciably after three minutes,the sample location is determined to be a no flow sample. Analytical –Soil Gas samples were analyzed using EPA Method 8260 that includes extra compounds required by DTSC/RWQCB (such as Freon 113).Instrument Continuing Calibration Verification,QC Reference Standards,Instrument Blanks and Sampling Blanks were analyzed every 12 hours as prescribed by the method.In addition,a Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)were analyzed with each batch of Soil Gas samples.A duplicate/replicate sample was analyzed each day of the sampling activity.All samples were injected into the GC/MS system within 30 minutes of collection. Page 1 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M7-5'M7-15'M7-19'M7-30'M7-30' REP Jones ID:F-0426-01 F-0426-02 F-0426-03 F-0426-04 F-0426-05 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Anaheim, CA 92805 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Greg Dickinson Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Mission Viejo, CA92691 Matrix Site Reporting Limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Page 2 of 14 Sample ID:M7-5'M7-15'M7-19'M7-30'M7-30' REP Jones ID:F-0426-01 F-0426-02 F-0426-03 F-0426-04 F-0426-05 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 4150 5400 5570 15200 14000 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND 10 10 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND 8 ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND 22 18 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 117%115%115%116%115% Toluene-d₈92%90%93%93%91% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 90%90%88%88%87% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS QC Limits Page 3 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M6-5'M6-15'M6-20'M6-27'M8-5' Jones ID:F-0426-06 F-0426-07 F-0426-08 F-0426-09 F-0426-10 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 Greg Dickinson Page 4 of 14 Sample ID:M6-5'M6-15'M6-20'M6-27'M8-5' Jones ID:F-0426-06 F-0426-07 F-0426-08 F-0426-09 F-0426-10 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 6250 6470 8760 9210 6630 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane 17 ND 21 20 ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 116%116%115%115%116% Toluene-d₈91%92%92%91%92% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 92%90%90%91%87% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits Page 5 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M8-15'M8-20'M8-30'M4-13'M4-18' Jones ID:F-0426-11 F-0426-12 F-0426-13 F-0426-14 F-0426-15 Analytes: Benzene 12 ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 16 ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 Greg Dickinson Page 6 of 14 Sample ID:M8-15'M8-20'M8-30'M4-13'M4-18' Jones ID:F-0426-11 F-0426-12 F-0426-13 F-0426-14 F-0426-15 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 7250 11700 17600 4070 4440 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 20 ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 114%117%117%115%116% Toluene-d₈90%90%90%92%92% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 88%90%89%89%91% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits Page 7 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M4-30'M12-5'M12-15'M12-20'M12-30' Jones ID:F-0426-16 F-0426-17 F-0426-18 F-0426-19 F-0426-20 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND 17 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Reporting Limit Units Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 Page 8 of 14 Sample ID:M4-30'M12-5'M12-15'M12-20'M12-30' Jones ID:F-0426-16 F-0426-17 F-0426-18 F-0426-19 F-0426-20 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 8010 4950 6720 17600 27300 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND 11 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND 27 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 114%116%114%117%115% Toluene-d₈92%92%91%93%91% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 90%87%90%86%88% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 60 - 140 ND = Value below reporting limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Page 9 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:051620- F1MB1 051620- F1SB1 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND 10 μg/m3 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site Reporting Limit JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units Page 10 of 14 Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:051620- F1MB1 051620- F1SB1 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 ND ND 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 115%115% Toluene-d₈93%92% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 94%91% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION 60 - 140 60 - 140 QC Limits Page 11 of 14 Client: 5/21/2020 Client Address:F-0426 Attn:5/16/2020 5/16/2020 Project:5/16/2020 Project Address:Soil Gas Batch ID: Jones ID:051620-F1CCV1 Parameter RPD Acceptability Range (%)CCV Acceptability Range (%) Vinyl chloride 6.6%60 - 140 89%80 - 120 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.5%60 - 140 99%80 - 120 Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.5%70 - 130 9290%80 - 120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1.7%70 - 130 103%80 - 120 Benzene 1.0%70 - 130 84%80 - 120 Trichloroethene 0.4%70 - 130 93%80 - 120 Toluene 17.1%70 - 130 85%80 - 120 Tetrachloroethene 4.5%70 - 130 112%80 - 120 Chlorobenzene 4.3%70 - 130 89%80 - 120 Ethylbenzene 4.4%70 - 130 88%80 - 120 1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene 6.7%70 - 130 91%80 - 120 Surrogate Recovery: Dibromofluoromethane 60 - 140 112%60 - 140 Toluene-d₈60 - 140 92%60 - 140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 60 - 140 97%60 - 140 95% 88% Matrix Site Date Analyzed: 1445 S Anaheim Blvd 103% 91% 88% 97% 108% 83%80% 107% 88% 86%82% 82% LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate RPD = Relative Percent Difference; Acceptability range for RPD is ≤ 20% LCS = Laboratory Control Sample 112%113% 92% 95%96% EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates 051620-F1LCS1 051620-F1LCSD1 83% Date Sampled: Anaheim, CA 92805 Date Received: 91% Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc.Report date: 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Greg Dickinson JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Jones Ref. No.: Mission Viejo, CA92691 Physical State: LCS Recovery (%) LCSD Recovery (%) 90% F1-051620-01 CCV = Continuing Calibration Verification 100% 88% 86% 91%77% 81% Page 12 of 14 Page 13 of 14 Page 14 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas ANALYSES REQUESTED 1. EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Sampling –Soil Gas samples were collected in glass gas-tight syringes equipped with Teflon plungers. A tracer gas mixture of n-pentane,n-hexane,and n-heptane was placed at the tubing-surface interface before sampling.These compounds were analyzed during the 8260B analytical run to determine if there were surface leaks into the subsurface due to improper installation of the probe.No tracer was detected in any of the samples reported herein. The sampling rate was approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record,using a glass gas-tight syringe.Purging was completed using a pump set at approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record.A default of 3 purge volumes was used as recommended by July 2015 DTSC/RWQCB guidance documents. Prior to purging and sampling of soil gas at each point,a shut-in test was conducted to check for leaks in the above ground fittings.The shut-in test was performed on the above ground apparatus by evacuating the line to a vacuum of 100 inches of water, sealing the entire system and watching the vacuum for at least one minute.A vacuum gauge attached in parallel to the apparatus measured the vacuum.If there was any observable loss of vacuum,the fittings were adjusted as needed until the vacuum did not change noticeably.The soil gas sample was then taken. No flow conditions occur when a sampling rate greater than 10 mL/min cannot be maintained without applying a vacuum greater than 100 inches of water to the sampling train.The sampling train is left at a vacuum for no less than three minutes.If the vacuum does not subside appreciably after three minutes,the sample location is determined to be a no flow sample. Analytical –Soil Gas samples were analyzed using EPA Method 8260 that includes extra compounds required by DTSC/RWQCB (such as Freon 113).Instrument Continuing Calibration Verification,QC Reference Standards,Instrument Blanks and Sampling Blanks were analyzed every 12 hours as prescribed by the method.In addition,a Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)were analyzed with each batch of Soil Gas samples.A duplicate/replicate sample was analyzed each day of the sampling activity.All samples were injected into the GC/MS system within 30 minutes of collection. Page 1 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M9-5'M9-15'M9-20'M9-30'M5-5' Jones ID:G-0138-01 G-0138-02 G-0138-03 G-0138-04 G-0138-05 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND 10 ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform 8 9 9 ND 9 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site Reporting Limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units 1441 S Anaheim Blvd JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Greg Dickinson Pacific Edge Engineering Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Anaheim, California Page 2 of 14 Sample ID:M9-5'M9-15'M9-20'M9-30'M5-5' Jones ID:G-0138-01 G-0138-02 G-0138-03 G-0138-04 G-0138-05 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 1530 1700 3290E 4630 1570 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 9 10 8 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND 24 ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 110%119%113%114%115% Toluene-d₈96%94%96%93%95% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 98%101%100%103%100% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 QC Limits ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Page 3 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M5-15'M5-20'M5-30'M1-5'M1-5' REP Jones ID:G-0138-06 G-0138-07 G-0138-08 G-0138-09 G-0138-10 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND 13 13 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND 11 8 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 4 of 14 Sample ID:M5-15'M5-20'M5-30'M1-5'M1-5' REP Jones ID:G-0138-06 G-0138-07 G-0138-08 G-0138-09 G-0138-10 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 1770 2570 3080 2140 2410 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 9 10 11 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 22 ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 116%117%114%112%113% Toluene-d₈94%95%93%97%97% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 105%100%100%97%100% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit QC Limits 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 5 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M1-14'M1-20'M1-30'M2-5'M2-15' Jones ID:G-0138-11 G-0138-12 G-0138-13 G-0138-14 G-0138-15 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform 9 ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 6 of 14 Sample ID:M1-14'M1-20'M1-30'M2-5'M2-15' Jones ID:G-0138-11 G-0138-12 G-0138-13 G-0138-14 G-0138-15 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 4070E 6000*7420E 1180 1410 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND 14 ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1/125*1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 113%115%105%114%114% Toluene-d₈97%95%97%96%94% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 101%104%101%99%104% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01/D1-051820- 01* G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 QC Limits ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 7 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M2-20'M2-30'M10-13'M10-18'M10-30' Jones ID:G-0138-16 G-0138-17 G-0138-18 G-0138-19 G-0138-20 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND 13 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 9 9 21 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Reporting Limit Units Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Page 8 of 14 Sample ID:M2-20'M2-30'M10-13'M10-18'M10-30' Jones ID:G-0138-16 G-0138-17 G-0138-18 G-0138-19 G-0138-20 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 1740 2540 3860 3960*6810E 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene 10 14 12 20 ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND 19 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND 11 ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1/12.5*1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 113%109%110%98%110% Toluene-d₈96%96%94%95%96% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 103%101%98%100%104% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01/D1-051820- 01* G1-051620- 01 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 60 - 140 ND = Value below reporting limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits 60 - 140 60 - 140 Page 9 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:052620- G1MB1 052620- G1SB1 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND 10 μg/m3 Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Greg Dickinson Matrix Site Reporting Limit Page 10 of 14 Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:052620- G1MB1 052620- G1SB1 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 ND ND 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 117%116% Toluene-d₈101%99% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 105%102% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION 60 - 140 60 - 140 QC Limits EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 11 of 14 Client: 5/20/2020 Client Address:G-0138 Attn:5/16/2020 5/16/2020 Project:5/16/2020 Project Address:Soil Gas Batch ID: Jones ID: Parameter RPD Acceptability Range (%)CCV Acceptability Range (%) Vinyl chloride 1.1%60 - 140 76%80 - 120 1,1-Dichloroethene 13.2%60 - 140 100%80 - 120 Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 7.1%70 - 130 94%80 - 120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 12.0%70 - 130 100%80 - 120 Benzene 6.0%70 - 130 94%80 - 120 Trichloroethene 10.8%70 - 130 92%80 - 120 Toluene 8.6%70 - 130 93%80 - 120 Tetrachloroethene 14.0%70 - 130 90%80 - 120 Chlorobenzene 10.6%70 - 130 91%80 - 120 Ethylbenzene 16.9%70 - 130 96%80 - 120 1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene 15.1%70 - 130 103%80 - 120 Surrogate Recovery: Dibromofluoromethane 60 - 140 110%60 - 140 Toluene-d₈60 - 140 98%60 - 140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 60 - 140 104%60 - 140 85% 79% G1-051620-01 CCV = Continuing Calibration Verification 77% 101% 99% 83%90% Jones Ref. No.: Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Physical State: LCS Recovery (%) LCSD Recovery (%) Date Received: 94% Pacific Edge Engineering Report date: 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Greg Dickinson JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION 94% 102%104% EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates 051620-G1LCS1 051620-G1LCSD1 93% Date Sampled: 88%80% 98% LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate RPD = Relative Percent Difference; Acceptability range for RPD is ≤ 20% LCS = Laboratory Control Sample 113%112% 92% 88% 100% 102% 80% 101%85% 051620-G1CCV1 90% 93% Matrix Site Date Analyzed: 1441 S Anaheim Blvd 78% 88% Anaheim, California Page 12 of 14 Page 13 of 14 Page 14 of 14 PACIFIC EDGE ENGINEERING Phase 2 Report_Matrix_rev Dec 2020 (949) 470-1937; (949) 470-0943 (FAX) Appendix D Soil Analytical Reports and Chain-of- Custody – May and November 2020 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 May 19, 2020 Pacific Edge Engineering Greg Dickinson Attention: Greg Dickinson RE:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Workorder No.:N040607FAX:949 470 0943 TEL:949 470 1937 26431 Crown Valley Plant Ste 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Thank you for the opportunity to service the needs of your company. Please feel free to call me at (562) 219-7435 if I can be of further assistance to your company. Sincerely, Andrew Garaniel Laboratory Director Enclosed are the results for sample(s) received on May 12, 2020 by ASSET Laboratories. The sample(s) are tested for the parameters as indicated in the enclosed chain of custody in accordance with the applicable laboratory certifications. The cover letter is an integral part of this analytical report. This Laboratory Report cannot be reproduced in part or in its entirety without written permission from the client and ASSET Laboratories - California. 1 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-May-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 CASE NARRATIVE SAMPLE RECEIVING/GENERAL COMMENTS: All sample containers were received intact with proper chain of custody documentation. Information on sample receipt conditions including discrepancies can be found in attached Sample Receipt Checklist Form. Cooler temperature and sample preservation were verified upon receipt of samples if applicable. Samples were analyzed within method holding time. Analytical comments for EPA 8015B DRO/ORO: Matrix Spike (MS) and Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) are outside recovery and RPD criteria in QC samples N040607-01A-MS/MSD and N040612-05A-MS/MSD possibly due to matrix interferences. The associated Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) recovery was acceptable. Analytical comments for EPA 8260B: Dilution was necessary for samples N040607-029 and N040607-030 due to high concentration of non- target analytes. Surrogate, 4-Bromofluorobenzene, recovery in sample N040607-029 was above the laboratory acceptable limit possibly due to matrix interference. Reanalysis confirms high recovery caused by matrix effect. Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) recovery biased high for m,p-xylene in batch CA20VS070. Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCS) recovery biased high for 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene in batch CA20VS072. Sample results were non-detect (ND) for these analytes therefore reanalysis of the samples was not necessary. Matrix Spike (MS) and Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) are outside recovery and RPD criteria in QC samples N040607-01B-MS/MSD possibly due to matrix interference. The associated Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) recovery was acceptable. Analytical comments for EPA 6010B: 2 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 CASE NARRATIVE Matrix Spike (MS) and Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) are outside recovery criteria on some analytes possibly due to matrix interference. The associated Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) recovery was acceptable. 3 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-May-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 Work Order Sample Summary Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection DateMatrix Date Received Contract No: Date Reported N040607-001AHA1-0'5/11/2020 11:17:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-001BHA1-0'5/11/2020 11:17:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-002AHA1-1'5/11/2020 11:18:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-002BHA1-1'5/11/2020 11:18:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-003AHA1-3'5/11/2020 11:20:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-004AHA1-5'5/11/2020 11:22:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-005AHA2-0'5/11/2020 11:05:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-005BHA2-0'5/11/2020 11:05:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-006AHA2-1'5/11/2020 11:06:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-006BHA2-1'5/11/2020 11:06:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-007AHA2-3'5/11/2020 11:08:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-008AHA2-5'5/11/2020 11:10:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-009AHA3-0'5/11/2020 10:11:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-009BHA3-0'5/11/2020 10:11:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-010AHA3-1'5/11/2020 10:16:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-010BHA3-1'5/11/2020 10:16:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-011AHA3-3'5/12/2020 10:19:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-012AHA3-5'5/12/2020 10:23:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-013AHA4-0'5/12/2020 10:33:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-013BHA4-0'5/12/2020 10:33:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-014AHA4-1'5/12/2020 10:36:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-014BHA4-1'5/12/2020 10:36:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-015AHA4-3'5/12/2020 10:38:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-016AHA4-5'5/12/2020 10:41:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-017AHA5-0'5/12/2020 10:51:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-017BHA5-0'5/12/2020 10:51:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-018AHA5-1'5/12/2020 10:55:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-018BHA5-1'5/12/2020 10:55:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-019AHA5-3'5/12/2020 10:59:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil 4 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 Work Order Sample Summary Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection DateMatrix Date Received Contract No: Date Reported N040607-020AHA5-5'5/12/2020 11:02:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-021AHA6-0'5/12/2020 11:11:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-021BHA6-0'5/12/2020 11:11:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-022AHA6-1'5/12/2020 11:14:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-022BHA6-1'5/12/2020 11:14:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-023AHA6-3'5/12/2020 11:17:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-024AHA6-5'5/12/2020 11:19:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-025AHA7-0'5/12/2020 11:27:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-025BHA7-0'5/12/2020 11:27:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-026AHA7-1'5/12/2020 11:32:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-026BHA7-1'5/12/2020 11:32:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-027AHA7-3'5/12/2020 11:35:00 AM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-028AHA8-0'5/12/2020 12:03:00 PM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-029AHA8-1'5/12/2020 12:09:00 PM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-029BHA8-1'5/12/2020 12:09:00 PM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-030AHA8-3'5/12/2020 12:12:00 PM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-030BHA8-3'5/12/2020 12:12:00 PM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil N040607-031AHA8-5'5/12/2020 12:15:00 PM 5/12/2020 5/19/2020Soil 5 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA1-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:17:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-001 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 6 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA1-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:17:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-001 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 01:58 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 01:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 01:58 PM70-156 %REC 1109 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 01:58 PM73-129 %REC 1110 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 01:58 PM73-146 %REC 185.5 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 01:58 PM80-120 %REC 184.4 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200514B 79271QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 DRO 5/15/2020 08:34 AM10mg/Kg 1170 ORO 5/15/2020 08:34 AM10mg/Kg 1480 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 7 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA1-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:17:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-001 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200514B 79271QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/15/2020 08:34 AM56-133 %REC 195.0 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 02:46 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 02:46 PM47-163 %REC 196.9 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 09:48 AM0.099 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 05:03 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Barium 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 161 Beryllium 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 116 Cobalt 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 15.9 Copper 5/14/2020 05:03 PM2.0 mg/Kg 113 Lead 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 15.8 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 19.3 Selenium 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 11:28 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 05:03 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 130 Zinc 5/14/2020 05:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 140 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 8 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA1-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:18:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-002 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 9 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA1-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:18:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-002 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 07:23 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 07:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 07:23 PM70-156 %REC 1113 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 07:23 PM73-129 %REC 188.6 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 07:23 PM73-146 %REC 197.6 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 07:23 PM80-120 %REC 192.3 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/13/2020 08:40 PM10mg/Kg 127 ORO 5/13/2020 08:40 PM10mg/Kg 138 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 10 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA1-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:18:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-002 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/13/2020 08:40 PM56-133 %REC 196.6 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 04:18 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 04:18 PM47-163 %REC 1102 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 09:32 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 05:55 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Barium 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 155 Beryllium 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 112 Cobalt 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 15.7 Copper 5/14/2020 05:55 PM2.0 mg/Kg 110 Lead 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 126 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.9 Selenium 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 05:55 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 124 Zinc 5/14/2020 05:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 178 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 11 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA2-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:05:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-005 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 12 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA2-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:05:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-005 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 03:37 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 03:37 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 03:37 PM70-156 %REC 190.0 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 03:37 PM73-129 %REC 197.6 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 03:37 PM73-146 %REC 183.0 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 03:37 PM80-120 %REC 191.1 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200514B 79271QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 DRO 5/15/2020 09:05 AM10mg/Kg 169 ORO 5/15/2020 09:05 AM10mg/Kg 1220 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 13 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA2-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:05:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-005 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200514B 79271QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/15/2020 09:05 AM56-133 %REC 196.7 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 04:49 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 04:49 PM47-163 %REC 184.6 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 09:52 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 06:01 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 116 Barium 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 166 Beryllium 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 116 Cobalt 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 14.1 Copper 5/14/2020 06:01 PM2.0 mg/Kg 112 Lead 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 115 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 11.2 Nickel 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 18.2 Selenium 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 06:01 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 123 Zinc 5/14/2020 06:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 158 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 14 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA2-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:06:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-006 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 15 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA2-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:06:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-006 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 04:02 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 04:02 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 04:02 PM70-156 %REC 1101 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:02 PM73-129 %REC 190.1 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:02 PM73-146 %REC 182.2 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 04:02 PM80-120 %REC 181.0 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/13/2020 09:44 PM10mg/Kg 142 ORO 5/13/2020 09:44 PM10mg/Kg 1100 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 16 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA2-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 11:06:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-006 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/13/2020 09:44 PM56-133 %REC 1104 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 05:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 05:20 PM47-163 %REC 1105 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 09:55 AM0.099 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 06:07 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Barium 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 182 Beryllium 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 117 Cobalt 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 18.0 Copper 5/14/2020 06:07 PM2.0 mg/Kg 116 Lead 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 167 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 112 Selenium 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 06:07 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 133 Zinc 5/14/2020 06:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1120 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 17 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA3-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 10:11:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-009 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 18 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA3-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 10:11:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-009 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 04:27 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 04:27 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 04:27 PM70-156 %REC 197.4 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:27 PM73-129 %REC 188.4 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:27 PM73-146 %REC 188.0 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 04:27 PM80-120 %REC 186.1 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/13/2020 10:16 PM10mg/Kg 117 ORO 5/13/2020 10:16 PM10mg/Kg 140 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 19 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA3-0' Collection Date:5/11/2020 10:11:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-009 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/13/2020 10:16 PM56-133 %REC 1106 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 05:50 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 05:50 PM47-163 %REC 1114 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:05 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 06:14 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1190 Barium 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 150 Beryllium 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 113 Cobalt 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.1 Copper 5/14/2020 06:14 PM2.0 mg/Kg 18.3 Lead 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 117 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 17.5 Selenium 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 06:14 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 126 Zinc 5/14/2020 06:14 PM1.0 mg/Kg 164 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 20 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA3-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 10:16:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-010 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 21 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA3-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 10:16:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-010 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 04:53 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 04:53 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 04:53 PM70-156 %REC 184.9 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 04:53 PM73-129 %REC 187.5 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 04:53 PM73-146 %REC 179.7 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 04:53 PM80-120 %REC 181.5 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/13/2020 10:48 PM10mg/Kg 118 ORO 5/13/2020 10:48 PM10mg/Kg 137 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 22 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA3-1' Collection Date:5/11/2020 10:16:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-010 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/13/2020 10:48 PM56-133 %REC 195.8 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 06:21 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 06:21 PM47-163 %REC 1115 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:09 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 06:20 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 173 Barium 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 163 Beryllium 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 117 Cobalt 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 18.6 Copper 5/14/2020 06:20 PM2.0 mg/Kg 113 Lead 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 14.1 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 110 Selenium 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 06:20 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 137 Zinc 5/14/2020 06:20 PM1.0 mg/Kg 147 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 23 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA4-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:33:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-013 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 24 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA4-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:33:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-013 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 05:18 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 05:18 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 05:18 PM70-156 %REC 193.8 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 05:18 PM73-129 %REC 188.1 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 05:18 PM73-146 %REC 174.4 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 05:18 PM80-120 %REC 183.0 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/13/2020 11:19 PM10mg/Kg 126 ORO 5/13/2020 11:19 PM10mg/Kg 155 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 25 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA4-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:33:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-013 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/13/2020 11:19 PM56-133 %REC 1101 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 08:30 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 08:30 PM47-163 %REC 198.7 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:12 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 06:26 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 197 Barium 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 168 Beryllium 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 112 Cobalt 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 15.5 Copper 5/14/2020 06:26 PM2.0 mg/Kg 18.4 Lead 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 140 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.5 Selenium 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 06:26 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 124 Zinc 5/14/2020 06:26 PM1.0 mg/Kg 194 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 26 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA4-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:36:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-014 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200519A CA20VS072QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 27 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA4-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:36:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-014 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200519A CA20VS072QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/19/2020 11:17 AM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/19/2020 11:17 AM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/19/2020 11:17 AM70-156 %REC 1109 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/19/2020 11:17 AM73-129 %REC 196.9 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/19/2020 11:17 AM73-146 %REC 1108 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/19/2020 11:17 AM80-120 %REC 187.5 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/13/2020 11:51 PM10mg/Kg 1ND ORO 5/13/2020 11:51 PM10mg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 28 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA4-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:36:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-014 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/13/2020 11:51 PM56-133 %REC 1113 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 09:00 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 09:00 PM47-163 %REC 1111 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:16 AM0.099 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 06:32 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 158 Barium 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 143 Beryllium 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 111 Cobalt 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.2 Copper 5/14/2020 06:32 PM2.0 mg/Kg 16.2 Lead 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 12.3 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 17.0 Selenium 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 06:32 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 125 Zinc 5/14/2020 06:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 138 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 29 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA5-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:51:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-017 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 30 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA5-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:51:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-017 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 06:33 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 06:33 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 06:33 PM70-156 %REC 1114 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:33 PM73-129 %REC 186.0 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 06:33 PM73-146 %REC 1101 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 06:33 PM80-120 %REC 191.5 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/14/2020 12:23 AM9.9 mg/Kg 1ND ORO 5/14/2020 12:23 AM9.9 mg/Kg 118 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 31 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA5-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:51:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-017 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/14/2020 12:23 AM56-133 %REC 188.8 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 09:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 09:31 PM47-163 %REC 1113 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:19 AM0.099 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 06:38 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 156 Barium 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 177 Beryllium 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 112 Cobalt 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 15.4 Copper 5/14/2020 06:38 PM2.0 mg/Kg 18.4 Lead 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1140 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.8 Selenium 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 06:38 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 124 Zinc 5/14/2020 06:38 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1120 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 32 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA5-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:55:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-018 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 33 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA5-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:55:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-018 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/15/2020 04:50 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/15/2020 04:50 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/15/2020 04:50 PM70-156 %REC 1113 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:50 PM73-129 %REC 1102 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/15/2020 04:50 PM73-146 %REC 188.7 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/15/2020 04:50 PM80-120 %REC 180.0 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/14/2020 12:54 AM10mg/Kg 1ND ORO 5/14/2020 12:54 AM10mg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 34 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA5-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:55:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-018 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/14/2020 12:54 AM56-133 %REC 192.4 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 10:02 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 10:02 PM47-163 %REC 1106 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:22 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 06:55 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 17.9 Barium 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 153 Beryllium 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 113 Cobalt 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 17.0 Copper 5/14/2020 06:55 PM2.0 mg/Kg 17.5 Lead 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 13.6 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 18.0 Selenium 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 06:55 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 130 Zinc 5/14/2020 06:55 PM1.0 mg/Kg 141 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 35 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA6-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:11:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-021 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 36 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA6-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:11:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-021 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/15/2020 05:16 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/15/2020 05:16 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/15/2020 05:16 PM70-156 %REC 1105 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:16 PM73-129 %REC 195.4 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/15/2020 05:16 PM73-146 %REC 191.4 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/15/2020 05:16 PM80-120 %REC 189.4 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/14/2020 01:26 AM10mg/Kg 1ND ORO 5/14/2020 01:26 AM10mg/Kg 112 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 37 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA6-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:11:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-021 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/14/2020 01:26 AM56-133 %REC 1109 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 10:32 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 10:32 PM47-163 %REC 1112 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:26 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 07:01 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 155 Barium 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 128 Beryllium 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 18.4 Cobalt 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 14.2 Copper 5/14/2020 07:01 PM2.0 mg/Kg 15.4 Lead 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 11.9 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 15.4 Selenium 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 07:01 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 118 Zinc 5/14/2020 07:01 PM1.0 mg/Kg 122 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 38 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA6-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:14:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-022 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 39 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA6-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:14:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-022 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/15/2020 04:23 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/15/2020 04:23 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/15/2020 04:23 PM70-156 %REC 190.8 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/15/2020 04:23 PM73-129 %REC 1100 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/15/2020 04:23 PM73-146 %REC 198.8 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/15/2020 04:23 PM80-120 %REC 191.2 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/14/2020 04:04 AM10mg/Kg 1ND ORO 5/14/2020 04:04 AM10mg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 40 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA6-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:14:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-022 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/14/2020 04:04 AM56-133 %REC 192.3 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 11:03 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 11:03 PM47-163 %REC 1111 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:29 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 07:07 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 12.0 Barium 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 150 Beryllium 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 113 Cobalt 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.5 Copper 5/14/2020 07:07 PM2.0 mg/Kg 16.7 Lead 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 12.9 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 17.4 Selenium 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 07:07 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 128 Zinc 5/14/2020 07:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 138 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 41 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA7-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:27:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-025 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 42 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA7-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:27:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-025 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/15/2020 05:43 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/15/2020 05:43 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/15/2020 05:43 PM70-156 %REC 1115 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/15/2020 05:43 PM73-129 %REC 194.4 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/15/2020 05:43 PM73-146 %REC 1102 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/15/2020 05:43 PM80-120 %REC 193.1 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/14/2020 04:35 AM10mg/Kg 1ND ORO 5/14/2020 04:35 AM10mg/Kg 115 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 43 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA7-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:27:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-025 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/14/2020 04:35 AM56-133 %REC 1121 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/13/2020 11:33 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/13/2020 11:33 PM47-163 %REC 1110 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:33 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 07:13 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 148 Barium 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 146 Beryllium 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 116 Cobalt 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.7 Copper 5/14/2020 07:13 PM2.0 mg/Kg 19.1 Lead 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 13.7 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 19.9 Selenium 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 07:13 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 128 Zinc 5/14/2020 07:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 140 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 44 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA7-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:32:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-026 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM10µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Benzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromobenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromodichloromethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromoform 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Bromomethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chlorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloroform 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Chloromethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 45 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA7-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:32:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-026 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200518B CA20VS071QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromochloromethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dibromomethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Ethylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Freon-113 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Isopropylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND m,p-Xylene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM10µg/Kg 1ND Methylene chloride 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND MTBE 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND n-Propylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Naphthalene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND o-Xylene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Styrene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tert-Butanol 5/18/2020 06:58 PM25µg/Kg 1ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Tetrachloroethene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Toluene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichloroethene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Vinyl chloride 5/18/2020 06:58 PM5.0 µg/Kg 1ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/18/2020 06:58 PM70-156 %REC 1112 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/18/2020 06:58 PM73-129 %REC 199.7 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/18/2020 06:58 PM73-146 %REC 1104 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/18/2020 06:58 PM80-120 %REC 194.1 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/14/2020 05:06 AM9.9 mg/Kg 1ND ORO 5/14/2020 05:06 AM9.9 mg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 46 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA7-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:32:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-026 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/14/2020 05:06 AM56-133 %REC 1110 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200513B E20VS073QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/14/2020 12:04 AM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/14/2020 12:04 AM47-163 %REC 1105 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:36 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 07:19 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 152 Barium 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 151 Beryllium 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 112 Cobalt 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.5 Copper 5/14/2020 07:19 PM2.0 mg/Kg 17.3 Lead 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 12.4 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 17.5 Selenium 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 07:19 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 128 Zinc 5/14/2020 07:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 136 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 47 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:09:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-029 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50510 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM500µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50480 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Benzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromobenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromodichloromethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromoform 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromomethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chlorobenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloroethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloroform 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloromethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 48 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:09:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-029 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dibromochloromethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dibromomethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Ethylbenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Freon-113 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Isopropylbenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND m,p-Xylene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM500µg/Kg 50ND Methylene chloride 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND MTBE 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND n-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 501300 n-Propylbenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Naphthalene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND o-Xylene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50270 Styrene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tert-Butanol 5/15/2020 06:35 PM1200µg/Kg 50ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tetrachloroethene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Toluene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Trichloroethene 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Vinyl chloride 5/15/2020 06:35 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/15/2020 06:35 PM70-156 %REC 5099.4 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene S 5/15/2020 06:35 PM73-129 %REC 50133 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/15/2020 06:35 PM73-146 %REC 5096.8 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/15/2020 06:35 PM80-120 %REC 50104 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_200518A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/18/2020 12:48 PM100mg/Kg 107300 ORO 5/14/2020 05:38 AM10mg/Kg 14400 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 49 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-1' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:09:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-029 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_200518A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/14/2020 05:38 AM56-133 %REC 187.0 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200515A E20VS075QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/15/2020 10:23 PM1.0 mg/Kg 114 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/15/2020 10:23 PM47-163 %REC 168.5 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:46 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 07:25 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 14.5 Barium 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 174 Beryllium 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 17.4 Cobalt 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 15.3 Copper 5/14/2020 07:25 PM2.0 mg/Kg 114 Lead 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 12.6 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.6 Selenium 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 07:25 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 120 Zinc 5/14/2020 07:25 PM1.0 mg/Kg 124 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 50 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-3' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:12:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-030 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM500µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Benzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromobenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromodichloromethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromoform 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromomethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chlorobenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloroethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloroform 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloromethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 51 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-3' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:12:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-030 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200515A CA20VS070QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dibromochloromethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dibromomethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Ethylbenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Freon-113 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Isopropylbenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND m,p-Xylene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM500µg/Kg 50ND Methylene chloride 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND MTBE 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND n-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND n-Propylbenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Naphthalene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND o-Xylene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Styrene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tert-Butanol 5/15/2020 07:00 PM1200µg/Kg 50ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tetrachloroethene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Toluene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Trichloroethene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Vinyl chloride 5/15/2020 07:00 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/15/2020 07:00 PM70-156 %REC 5096.5 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/15/2020 07:00 PM73-129 %REC 50112 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/15/2020 07:00 PM73-146 %REC 5087.0 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/15/2020 07:00 PM80-120 %REC 50103 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 DRO 5/14/2020 06:09 AM10mg/Kg 140 ORO 5/14/2020 06:09 AM10mg/Kg 134 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 52 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-3' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:12:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040607 DF Lab ID:N040607-030 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_200513A 79251QC Batch:PrepDate:5/13/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/14/2020 06:09 AM56-133 %REC 1111 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200515A E20VS075QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/15/2020 11:24 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/15/2020 11:24 PM47-163 %REC 1110 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200514A 79269QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Mercury 5/14/2020 10:50 AM0.099 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200514C 79266QC Batch:PrepDate:5/14/2020 Antimony 5/14/2020 07:31 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 13.9 Barium 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 168 Beryllium 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Chromium 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 16.7 Cobalt 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 14.7 Copper 5/14/2020 07:31 PM2.0 mg/Kg 112 Lead 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 12.1 Molybdenum 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 15.9 Selenium 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/14/2020 07:31 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 119 Zinc 5/14/2020 07:31 PM1.0 mg/Kg 124 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 53 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-May-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:6010_S Sample ID:MB-79266 Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144329 SeqNo:3778498 MBLKSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Antimony 2.0ND Arsenic 1.0ND Barium 1.0ND Beryllium 1.0ND Cadmium 1.0ND Chromium 1.0ND Cobalt 1.0ND Copper 2.00.992 Lead 1.0ND Molybdenum 1.0ND Nickel 1.0ND Selenium 1.0ND Thallium 2.0ND Vanadium 1.0ND Zinc 1.0ND Sample ID:LCS-79266 Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144329 SeqNo:3778499 LCSSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Antimony 25.00 89.9 80 1202.0 022.472 Arsenic 25.00 88.8 80 1201.0 022.201 Barium 25.00 95.6 80 1201.0 023.892 Beryllium 25.00 94.8 80 1201.0 023.688 Cadmium 25.00 95.5 80 1201.0 023.872 Chromium 25.00 97.0 80 1201.0 024.257 Cobalt 25.00 97.0 80 1201.0 024.245 Copper 25.00 97.1 80 1202.0 024.284 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 54 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:6010_S Sample ID:LCS-79266 Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144329 SeqNo:3778499 LCSSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Lead 25.00 91.7 80 1201.0 022.936 Molybdenum 25.00 93.4 80 1201.0 023.341 Nickel 25.00 97.8 80 1201.0 024.441 Selenium 25.00 90.5 80 1201.0 022.613 Thallium 25.00 96.1 80 1202.0 024.013 Vanadium 25.00 98.5 80 1201.0 024.627 Zinc 25.00 94.4 80 1201.0 023.588 Sample ID:N040607-001A-MS Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144329 SeqNo:3778507 MSSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Antimony 24.94 59.2 75 125 S2.0 014.757 Arsenic 24.94 82.5 75 1251.0 020.578 Barium 24.94 92.9 75 1251.0 61.2084.379 Beryllium 24.94 80.4 75 1251.0 020.048 Cadmium 24.94 88.8 75 1251.0 0.406722.548 Chromium 24.94 88.3 75 1251.0 15.6037.606 Cobalt 24.94 84.7 75 1251.0 5.93227.064 Copper 24.94 81.2 75 1252.0 12.9033.160 Lead 24.94 82.4 75 1251.0 5.76626.306 Molybdenum 24.94 86.2 75 1251.0 0.844622.339 Nickel 24.94 84.9 75 1251.0 9.31430.484 Selenium 24.94 76.3 75 1251.0 019.023 Thallium 24.94 77.8 75 1252.0 019.413 Vanadium 24.94 97.0 75 1251.0 29.9254.104 Zinc 24.94 82.8 75 1251.0 40.0960.730 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 55 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:6010_S Sample ID:N040607-001A-MSD Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144329 SeqNo:3778508 MSDSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Antimony 24.99 59.1 75 125 20 S2.0 0 14.76 0.0064714.756 Arsenic 24.99 84.9 75 125 201.0 0 20.58 3.0621.218 Barium 24.99 93.2 75 125 201.0 61.20 84.38 0.12484.483 Beryllium 24.99 83.1 75 125 201.0 0 20.05 3.5620.774 Cadmium 24.99 84.5 75 125 201.0 0.4067 22.55 4.6921.514 Chromium 24.99 89.0 75 125 201.0 15.60 37.61 0.61737.839 Cobalt 24.99 87.8 75 125 201.0 5.932 27.06 2.9527.875 Copper 24.99 83.6 75 125 202.0 12.90 33.16 1.8833.789 Lead 24.99 86.0 75 125 201.0 5.766 26.31 3.5127.247 Molybdenum 24.99 89.2 75 125 201.0 0.8446 22.34 3.5423.144 Nickel 24.99 80.1 75 125 201.0 9.314 30.48 3.8929.322 Selenium 24.99 77.1 75 125 201.0 0 19.02 1.2219.256 Thallium 24.99 80.6 75 125 202.0 0 19.41 3.6520.135 Vanadium 24.99 101 75 125 201.0 29.92 54.10 1.9155.147 Zinc 24.99 71.7 75 125 20 S1.0 40.09 60.73 4.5958.003 Sample ID:MB-79266 Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144350 SeqNo:3778725 MBLKSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Silver 1.0ND Sample ID:LCS-79266 Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144350 SeqNo:3778726 LCSSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Silver 25.00 88.0 80 1201.0 022.009 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 56 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:6010_S Sample ID:N040607-001A-MS Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144329 SeqNo:3778818 MSSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Silver 24.94 75.2 75 1251.0 018.761 Sample ID:N040607-001A-MSD Batch ID:79266 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144329 SeqNo:3778819 MSDSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Silver 24.99 76.5 75 125 201.0 0 18.76 1.9319.126 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 57 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:7471_S Sample ID:MB-79269 Batch ID:79269 TestNo:EPA 7471A Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144323 SeqNo:3778024 MBLKSampType:TestCode:7471_S Mercury 0.10ND Sample ID:LCS-79269 Batch ID:79269 TestNo:EPA 7471A Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144323 SeqNo:3778025 LCSSampType:TestCode:7471_S Mercury 0.4167 105 80 1200.10 00.438 Sample ID:N040607-002A-MS Batch ID:79269 TestNo:EPA 7471A Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144323 SeqNo:3778029 MSSampType:TestCode:7471_S Mercury 0.4160 114 75 1250.10 00.475 Sample ID:N040607-002A-MSD Batch ID:79269 TestNo:EPA 7471A Analysis Date:5/14/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144323 SeqNo:3778030 MSDSampType:TestCode:7471_S Mercury 0.4167 112 75 125 200.10 0 0.4750 1.600.468 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 58 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8015_S_DM H Sample ID:MB-79251 Batch ID:79251 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/13/2020 Prep Date:5/13/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144311 SeqNo:3777767 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 106.402 ORO 109.805 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 118 56 13394.336 Sample ID:LCS-79251 Batch ID:79251 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/13/2020 Prep Date:5/13/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144311 SeqNo:3777768 LCSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1000 96.4 69 123100964.000 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 105 56 13384.203 Sample ID:N040607-001A-MS Batch ID:79251 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/13/2020 Prep Date:5/13/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144311 SeqNo:3777770 MSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1001 14.1 46 142 S1025.70167.327 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.08 12.4 56 133 S9.961 Sample ID:N040607-001A-MSD Batch ID:79251 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/13/2020 Prep Date:5/13/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144311 SeqNo:3777771 MSDSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1001 26.4 46 142 20 SR1025.70 167.3 53.8290.410 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.08 25.2 56 133 S020.177 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 59 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8015_S_DM H Sample ID:MB-79271 Batch ID:79271 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144348 SeqNo:3778682 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 106.123 ORO 106.876 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 120 56 13395.800 Sample ID:LCS-79271_DRO Batch ID:79271 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144348 SeqNo:3778683 LCSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1000 100 69 1231001004.564 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 112 56 13389.412 Sample ID:N040612-005A-MS_D Batch ID:79271 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144348 SeqNo:3779962 MSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1007 -65.7 46 142 S101170508.231 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.56 16.8 56 133 S13.541 Sample ID:N040612-005A-MSD_ Batch ID:79271 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date:5/14/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144348 SeqNo:3779963 MSDSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1002 -64.5 46 142 20 S101170508.2 3.11524.297 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.16 14.5 56 133 S011.627 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 60 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8015GAS_S Sample ID:E200513LCS Batch ID:E20VS073 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/13/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144299 SeqNo:3777582 LCSSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 110 72 1361.0 05.477 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 97.4 47 16397.399 Sample ID:E200513MB Batch ID:E20VS073 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/13/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144299 SeqNo:3777583 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 1.0ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 83.1 47 16383.077 Sample ID:N040607-001AMS Batch ID:E20VS073 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/13/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144299 SeqNo:3777585 MSSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 76.6 43 1531.0 03.829 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 99.1 47 16399.071 Sample ID:N040607-001AMSD Batch ID:E20VS073 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/13/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144299 SeqNo:3777586 MSDSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 70.2 43 153 201.0 0 3.829 8.723.509 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 97.2 47 163 097.201 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 61 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8015GAS_S Sample ID:E200515LCS Batch ID:E20VS075 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144376 SeqNo:3780324 LCSSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 105 72 1361.0 05.230 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 91.2 47 16391.249 Sample ID:E200515MB Batch ID:E20VS075 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144376 SeqNo:3780325 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 1.0ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 93.1 47 16393.057 Sample ID:N040558-046AMS Batch ID:E20VS075 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144376 SeqNo:3780327 MSSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 109 43 1531.0 05.474 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 116 47 163116.497 Sample ID:N040558-046AMSD Batch ID:E20VS075 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144376 SeqNo:3780328 MSDSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 107 43 153 201.0 0 5.474 1.865.373 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 115 47 163 0114.562 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 62 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200515-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779679 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 105 78 1275.0 042.090 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 101 75 1285.0 040.350 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 88.9 78 1265.0 035.560 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 99.9 80 1205.0 039.960 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 93.6 65 1365.0 037.430 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 93.8 66 1345.0 037.500 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 123 79 1285.0 049.140 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 120 80 1205.0 047.860 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 95.5 79 1235.0 038.210 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 117 74 1215.0 046.960 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 109 79 1285.0 043.550 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 97.8 65 13110039.110 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 102 79 1245.0 040.970 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 107 80 1205.0 042.740 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 108 80 1205.0 043.370 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 107 80 1205.0 042.780 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 119 76 1295.0 047.660 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 107 80 1205.0 042.770 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 101 80 1205.0 040.390 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 1205.0 042.010 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 100 66 1365.0 040.120 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 118 78 1245.0 047.370 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 117 79 1255.0 046.730 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 121 75 1305.0 048.560 Benzene 40.00 104 80 1205.0 041.630 Bromobenzene 40.00 105 80 1205.0 042.030 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 104 80 1275.0 041.460 Bromoform 40.00 104 67 1365.0 041.420 Bromomethane 40.00 90.7 45 1485.0 036.290 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 109 75 1375.0 043.410 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 63 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200515-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779679 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Chlorobenzene 40.00 106 80 1205.0 042.420 Chloroethane 40.00 91.0 64 1455.0 036.390 Chloroform 40.00 92.0 75 1205.0 036.820 Chloromethane 40.00 88.4 58 1395.0 035.340 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 86.4 76 1205.0 034.540 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 104 77 1285.0 041.660 Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 95.1 63 1385.0 038.030 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 104 79 1245.0 041.630 Dibromomethane 40.00 104 80 1205.0 041.650 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 102 64 1375.0 040.990 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 82.3 59 1375.0 032.910 Ethylbenzene 40.00 114 79 1205.0 045.710 Freon-113 40.00 105 58 1415.0 042.060 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 114 72 1265.0 045.730 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 106 62 1305.0 042.210 m,p-Xylene 80.00 124 80 124 S10099.560 Methylene chloride 40.00 91.4 65 1365.0 036.580 MTBE 40.00 90.8 65 1305.0 036.300 n-Butylbenzene 40.00 124 76 1335.0 049.710 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 117 76 1315.0 046.870 Naphthalene 40.00 97.4 58 1275.0 038.970 o-Xylene 40.00 106 75 1215.0 042.200 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 122 76 1335.0 048.630 Styrene 40.00 113 80 1205.0 045.030 Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 107 69 1285.0 042.730 Tert-Butanol 200.0 88.7 36 158250177.430 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 110 73 1305.0 043.820 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 111 77 1245.0 044.530 Toluene 40.00 110 79 1205.0 043.800 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 90.4 72 1295.0 036.150 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 64 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200515-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779679 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Trichloroethene 40.00 106 80 1205.0 042.500 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 110 66 1465.0 043.870 Vinyl chloride 40.00 97.6 68 1415.0 039.020 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 85.3 70 15642.650 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 113 73 12956.490 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 84.9 73 14642.470 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 106 80 12053.150 Sample ID:CA200515-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779680 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 104 78 127 205.0 0 42.09 1.2041.590 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 101 75 128 205.0 0 40.35 0.024840.360 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 93.7 78 126 205.0 0 35.56 5.2337.470 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 101 80 120 205.0 0 39.96 1.4440.540 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 98.6 65 136 205.0 0 37.43 5.2339.440 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 96.8 66 134 205.0 0 37.50 3.2338.730 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 116 79 128 205.0 0 49.14 5.3746.570 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 112 80 120 205.0 0 47.86 6.6344.790 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 90.7 79 123 205.0 0 38.21 5.1536.290 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 113 74 121 205.0 0 46.96 4.0445.100 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 104 79 128 205.0 0 43.55 4.4641.650 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 108 65 131 2010039.11 10.343.350 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 97.4 79 124 205.0 0 40.97 5.0338.960 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 104 80 120 205.0 0 42.74 2.4641.700 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 106 80 120 205.0 0 43.37 2.5742.270 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 93.2 80 120 205.0 0 42.78 13.837.260 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 116 76 129 205.0 0 47.66 2.5346.470 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 106 80 120 205.0 0 42.77 0.84542.410 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 65 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200515-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779680 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 105 80 120 205.0 0 40.39 3.7741.940 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 101 80 120 205.0 0 42.01 3.6640.500 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 96.6 66 136 205.0 0 40.12 3.7838.630 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 113 78 124 205.0 0 47.37 4.8445.130 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 115 79 125 205.0 0 46.73 1.9445.830 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 119 75 130 205.0 0 48.56 1.8947.650 Benzene 40.00 101 80 120 205.0 0 41.63 3.0240.390 Bromobenzene 40.00 101 80 120 205.0 0 42.03 3.7840.470 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 98.6 80 127 205.0 0 41.46 4.9439.460 Bromoform 40.00 103 67 136 205.0 0 41.42 0.33941.280 Bromomethane 40.00 91.2 45 148 205.0 0 36.29 0.46736.460 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 109 75 137 205.0 0 43.41 0.55143.650 Chlorobenzene 40.00 106 80 120 205.0 0 42.42 0.21242.510 Chloroethane 40.00 93.9 64 145 205.0 0 36.39 3.1637.560 Chloroform 40.00 90.3 75 120 205.0 0 36.82 1.9736.100 Chloromethane 40.00 91.2 58 139 205.0 0 35.34 3.1736.480 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 86.7 76 120 205.0 0 34.54 0.37634.670 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 102 77 128 205.0 0 41.66 2.5540.610 Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 96.7 63 138 205.0 0 38.03 1.6938.680 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 107 79 124 205.0 0 41.63 3.0542.920 Dibromomethane 40.00 99.1 80 120 205.0 0 41.65 4.9239.650 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 100 64 137 205.0 0 40.99 2.3940.020 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 83.0 59 137 205.0 0 32.91 0.84733.190 Ethylbenzene 40.00 115 79 120 205.0 0 45.71 0.89346.120 Freon-113 40.00 102 58 141 205.0 0 42.06 3.1140.770 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 110 72 126 205.0 0 45.73 3.9943.940 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 104 62 130 205.0 0 42.21 1.6741.510 m,p-Xylene 80.00 124 80 124 2010099.56 0.54499.020 Methylene chloride 40.00 91.7 65 136 205.0 0 36.58 0.21836.660 MTBE 40.00 94.8 65 130 205.0 0 36.30 4.3937.930 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 66 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200515-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779680 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL n-Butylbenzene 40.00 123 76 133 205.0 0 49.71 1.4049.020 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 113 76 131 205.0 0 46.87 3.3245.340 Naphthalene 40.00 96.7 58 127 205.0 0 38.97 0.79938.660 o-Xylene 40.00 105 75 121 205.0 0 42.20 0.80941.860 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 122 76 133 205.0 0 48.63 0.53348.890 Styrene 40.00 113 80 120 205.0 0 45.03 0.20045.120 Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 109 69 128 205.0 0 42.73 2.1843.670 Tert-Butanol 200.0 96.9 36 158 20250177.4 8.86193.880 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 107 73 130 205.0 0 43.82 2.7542.630 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 106 77 124 205.0 0 44.53 4.9942.360 Toluene 40.00 107 79 120 205.0 0 43.80 2.0342.920 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 91.6 72 129 205.0 0 36.15 1.2936.620 Trichloroethene 40.00 102 80 120 205.0 0 42.50 3.7140.950 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 113 66 146 205.0 0 43.87 2.7445.090 Vinyl chloride 40.00 102 68 141 205.0 0 39.02 4.2640.720 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 89.9 70 156 044.930 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 113 73 129 056.270 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 91.7 73 146 045.870 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 102 80 120 050.830 Sample ID:CA200515-MB2 Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779681 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5.0ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 67 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200515-MB2 Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779681 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1-Dichloropropene 5.0ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5.0ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.0ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 10ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5.0ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5.0ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.0ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5.0ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5.0ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5.0ND Benzene 5.0ND Bromobenzene 5.0ND Bromodichloromethane 5.0ND Bromoform 5.0ND Bromomethane 5.0ND Carbon tetrachloride 5.0ND Chlorobenzene 5.0ND Chloroethane 5.0ND Chloroform 5.0ND Chloromethane 5.0ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.0ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.0ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 68 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200515-MB2 Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779681 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Di-isopropyl ether 5.0ND Dibromochloromethane 5.0ND Dibromomethane 5.0ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.0ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5.0ND Ethylbenzene 5.0ND Freon-113 5.0ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5.0ND Isopropylbenzene 5.0ND m,p-Xylene 10ND Methylene chloride 5.0ND MTBE 5.0ND n-Butylbenzene 5.0ND n-Propylbenzene 5.0ND Naphthalene 5.0ND o-Xylene 5.0ND sec-Butylbenzene 5.0ND Styrene 5.0ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5.0ND Tert-Butanol 25ND tert-Butylbenzene 5.0ND Tetrachloroethene 5.0ND Toluene 5.0ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.0ND Trichloroethene 5.0ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5.0ND Vinyl chloride 5.0ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 91.4 70 15645.710 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 103 73 12951.260 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 89.5 73 14644.770 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 69 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200515-MB2 Batch ID:CA20VS070 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/15/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144366 SeqNo:3779681 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 101 80 12050.560 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 70 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200518-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780795 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 99.4 78 1275.0 039.760 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 98.0 75 1285.0 039.210 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 87.6 78 1265.0 035.040 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 91.0 80 1205.0 036.410 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 86.2 65 1365.0 034.460 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 93.7 66 1345.0 037.480 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 107 79 1285.0 042.790 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 113 80 1205.0 045.290 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 91.1 79 1235.0 036.440 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 115 74 1215.0 046.000 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 108 79 1285.0 043.080 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 105 65 13110041.830 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 97.0 79 1245.0 038.780 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 103 80 1205.0 041.250 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 99.6 80 1205.0 039.830 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 93.5 80 1205.0 037.410 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 117 76 1295.0 046.700 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 103 80 1205.0 041.300 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 99.8 80 1205.0 039.930 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 101 80 1205.0 040.460 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 95.5 66 1365.0 038.210 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 113 78 1245.0 045.050 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 114 79 1255.0 045.680 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 119 75 1305.0 047.410 Benzene 40.00 96.3 80 1205.0 038.530 Bromobenzene 40.00 102 80 1205.0 040.970 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 94.8 80 1275.0 037.930 Bromoform 40.00 98.6 67 1365.0 039.460 Bromomethane 40.00 85.1 45 1485.0 034.030 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 103 75 1375.0 041.200 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 71 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200518-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780795 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Chlorobenzene 40.00 101 80 1205.0 040.200 Chloroethane 40.00 92.8 64 1455.0 037.130 Chloroform 40.00 88.3 75 1205.0 035.320 Chloromethane 40.00 87.6 58 1395.0 035.030 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 87.7 76 1205.0 035.090 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 99.2 77 1285.0 039.670 Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 99.4 63 1385.0 039.740 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 98.4 79 1245.0 039.350 Dibromomethane 40.00 95.8 80 1205.0 038.310 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 98.1 64 1375.0 039.230 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 84.7 59 1375.0 033.880 Ethylbenzene 40.00 112 79 1205.0 044.830 Freon-113 40.00 98.8 58 1415.0 039.520 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 113 72 1265.0 045.120 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 107 62 1305.0 042.720 m,p-Xylene 80.00 119 80 12410095.340 Methylene chloride 40.00 91.4 65 1365.0 036.550 MTBE 40.00 96.5 65 1305.0 038.590 n-Butylbenzene 40.00 124 76 1335.0 049.590 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 115 76 1315.0 046.080 Naphthalene 40.00 97.9 58 1275.0 039.170 o-Xylene 40.00 104 75 1215.0 041.730 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 121 76 1335.0 048.380 Styrene 40.00 110 80 1205.0 043.900 Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 107 69 1285.0 042.830 Tert-Butanol 200.0 86.8 36 158250173.620 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 108 73 1305.0 043.140 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 99.3 77 1245.0 039.710 Toluene 40.00 102 79 1205.0 040.910 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 93.3 72 1295.0 037.330 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 72 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200518-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780795 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Trichloroethene 40.00 101 80 1205.0 040.540 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 102 66 1465.0 040.990 Vinyl chloride 40.00 99.0 68 1415.0 039.600 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 91.3 70 15645.640 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 111 73 12955.470 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 87.5 73 14643.760 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 103 80 12051.520 Sample ID:CA200518-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780796 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5.0ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5.0ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.0ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 10ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5.0ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5.0ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.0ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 73 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200518-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780796 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,3-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5.0ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5.0ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5.0ND Benzene 5.0ND Bromobenzene 5.0ND Bromodichloromethane 5.0ND Bromoform 5.0ND Bromomethane 5.0ND Carbon tetrachloride 5.0ND Chlorobenzene 5.0ND Chloroethane 5.0ND Chloroform 5.0ND Chloromethane 5.0ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.0ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.0ND Di-isopropyl ether 5.0ND Dibromochloromethane 5.0ND Dibromomethane 5.0ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.0ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5.0ND Ethylbenzene 5.0ND Freon-113 5.0ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5.0ND Isopropylbenzene 5.0ND m,p-Xylene 10ND Methylene chloride 5.0ND MTBE 5.0ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 74 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200518-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780796 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL n-Butylbenzene 5.0ND n-Propylbenzene 5.0ND Naphthalene 5.03.830 o-Xylene 5.0ND sec-Butylbenzene 5.0ND Styrene 5.0ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5.0ND Tert-Butanol 25ND tert-Butylbenzene 5.0ND Tetrachloroethene 5.0ND Toluene 5.0ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.0ND Trichloroethene 5.0ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5.0ND Vinyl chloride 5.0ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 85.4 70 15642.680 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 107 73 12953.260 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 85.2 73 14642.580 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 99.6 80 12049.810 Sample ID:N040607-001B-MS Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780800 MSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 114 55 1335.0 045.710 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 128 52 1405.0 051.260 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 98.0 55 1365.0 039.200 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 114 65 1325.0 045.570 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 117 43 1445.0 046.670 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 118 44 1485.0 047.040 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 75 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:N040607-001B-MS Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780800 MSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 147 59 137 S5.0 058.920 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 110 46 1325.0 044.150 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 93.9 66 1365.0 037.550 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 112 42 1295.0 044.810 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 112 51 1345.0 044.720 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 116 59 14210046.220 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 115 68 1335.0 046.150 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 109 54 1235.0 043.770 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 127 66 1295.0 050.940 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 109 62 1265.0 043.700 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 121 50 1365.0 048.570 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 109 51 1255.0 043.790 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 110 72 1265.0 043.800 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 107 51 1235.0 042.810 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 131 40 1505.0 052.340 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 123 50 1315.0 049.200 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 117 51 1305.0 046.740 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 124 45 1395.0 049.650 Benzene 40.00 122 62 1275.0 048.680 Bromobenzene 40.00 106 59 1205.0 042.460 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 117 61 1325.0 046.760 Bromoform 40.00 114 61 1385.0 045.470 Bromomethane 40.00 109 31 1475.0 043.680 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 134 51 1485.0 053.470 Chlorobenzene 40.00 116 60 1215.0 046.220 Chloroethane 40.00 110 42 1535.0 044.180 Chloroform 40.00 107 55 1245.0 042.960 Chloromethane 40.00 111 41 1425.0 044.250 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 116 58 1235.0 046.380 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 120 56 1365.0 047.920 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 76 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:N040607-001B-MS Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780800 MSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 113 43 1495.0 045.210 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 114 65 1295.0 045.400 Dibromomethane 40.00 121 69 1275.0 048.580 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 122 45 1525.0 048.720 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 118 45 1435.0 047.370 Ethylbenzene 40.00 126 54 125 S5.0 050.220 Freon-113 40.00 128 40 1475.0 051.290 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 106 42 1285.0 042.510 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 109 41 1355.0 043.520 m,p-Xylene 80.00 138 54 132 S102.670113.260 Methylene chloride 40.00 108 51 1395.0 043.050 MTBE 40.00 111 59 1375.0 044.270 n-Butylbenzene 40.00 129 41 1395.0 051.690 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 119 48 1375.0 047.570 Naphthalene 40.00 96.5 47 1315.0 038.580 o-Xylene 40.00 111 53 1255.0 2.75047.300 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 128 47 1405.0 051.210 Styrene 40.00 123 53 1275.0 049.080 Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 123 60 1335.0 049.230 Tert-Butanol 200.0 102 50 145250204.010 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 113 50 1335.0 045.130 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 121 52 1345.0 048.350 Toluene 40.00 128 57 124 S5.0 051.390 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 116 50 1385.0 046.600 Trichloroethene 40.00 125 62 1335.0 049.830 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 140 48 1465.0 055.910 Vinyl chloride 40.00 118 49 1445.0 047.350 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 112 70 15655.840 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 126 73 12962.780 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 111 73 14655.320 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 77 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:N040607-001B-MS Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780800 MSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 131 80 120 S65.380 Sample ID:N040607-001B-MSD Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780801 MSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 103 55 133 205.0 0 45.71 10.141.310 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 115 52 140 205.0 0 51.26 11.245.830 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 88.4 55 136 205.0 0 39.20 10.435.340 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 97.2 65 132 205.0 0 45.57 15.838.890 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 105 43 144 205.0 0 46.67 10.242.130 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 109 44 148 205.0 0 47.04 7.4543.660 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 127 59 137 205.0 0 58.92 15.050.710 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 98.2 46 132 205.0 0 44.15 11.739.260 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 93.5 66 136 205.0 0 37.55 0.40037.400 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 97.0 42 129 205.0 0 44.81 14.338.820 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 100 51 134 205.0 0 44.72 11.140.020 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 105 59 142 2010046.22 9.5242.020 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 105 68 133 205.0 0 46.15 9.8441.820 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 96.4 54 123 205.0 0 43.77 12.738.540 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 106 66 129 205.0 0 50.94 18.642.290 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 98.6 62 126 205.0 0 43.70 10.339.420 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 108 50 136 205.0 0 48.57 12.043.070 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 100 51 125 205.0 0 43.79 9.0739.990 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 100 72 126 205.0 0 43.80 8.7240.140 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 96.8 51 123 205.0 0 42.81 10.138.700 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 112 40 150 205.0 0 52.34 15.344.900 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 109 50 131 205.0 0 49.20 12.143.570 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 111 51 130 205.0 0 46.74 5.0744.430 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 105 45 139 205.0 0 49.65 16.841.960 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 78 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:N040607-001B-MSD Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780801 MSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Benzene 40.00 105 62 127 205.0 0 48.68 14.442.150 Bromobenzene 40.00 96.9 59 120 205.0 0 42.46 9.0938.770 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 102 61 132 205.0 0 46.76 13.240.970 Bromoform 40.00 104 61 138 205.0 0 45.47 8.6741.690 Bromomethane 40.00 96.7 31 147 205.0 0 43.68 12.138.680 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 116 51 148 205.0 0 53.47 14.446.270 Chlorobenzene 40.00 106 60 121 205.0 0 46.22 8.6942.370 Chloroethane 40.00 102 42 153 205.0 0 44.18 8.1040.740 Chloroform 40.00 96.2 55 124 205.0 0 42.96 11.038.500 Chloromethane 40.00 100 41 142 205.0 0 44.25 9.9140.070 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 89.9 58 123 20 R5.0 0 46.38 25.335.960 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 100 56 136 205.0 0 47.92 18.040.010 Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 101 43 149 205.0 0 45.21 11.240.420 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 109 65 129 205.0 0 45.40 4.2543.510 Dibromomethane 40.00 105 69 127 205.0 0 48.58 14.941.830 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 110 45 152 205.0 0 48.72 10.144.040 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 85.4 45 143 20 R5.0 0 47.37 32.534.140 Ethylbenzene 40.00 118 54 125 205.0 0 50.22 6.0347.280 Freon-113 40.00 116 40 147 205.0 0 51.29 10.146.340 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 85.4 42 128 20 R5.0 0 42.51 21.834.150 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 99.1 41 135 205.0 0 43.52 9.3139.650 m,p-Xylene 80.00 124 54 132 20102.670 113.3 10.4102.030 Methylene chloride 40.00 95.2 51 139 205.0 0 43.05 12.238.090 MTBE 40.00 99.2 59 137 205.0 0 44.27 11.039.670 n-Butylbenzene 40.00 107 41 139 205.0 0 51.69 19.042.700 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 109 48 137 205.0 0 47.57 8.9843.480 Naphthalene 40.00 91.8 47 131 205.0 0 38.58 4.9936.700 o-Xylene 40.00 99.7 53 125 205.0 2.750 47.30 10.442.620 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 108 47 140 205.0 0 51.21 17.143.150 Styrene 40.00 114 53 127 205.0 0 49.08 7.1345.700 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 79 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:N040607-001B-MSD Batch ID:CA20VS071 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/18/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144402 SeqNo:3780801 MSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 107 60 133 205.0 0 49.23 14.442.610 Tert-Butanol 200.0 89.9 50 145 20250204.0 12.6179.840 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 96.8 50 133 205.0 0 45.13 15.338.720 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 106 52 134 205.0 0 48.35 13.242.350 Toluene 40.00 107 57 124 205.0 0 51.39 18.242.830 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 106 50 138 205.0 0 46.60 9.0442.570 Trichloroethene 40.00 108 62 133 205.0 0 49.83 14.243.240 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 120 48 146 205.0 0 55.91 15.547.860 Vinyl chloride 40.00 104 49 144 205.0 0 47.35 12.541.800 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 83.2 70 156 041.610 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 93.7 73 129 046.860 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 75.0 73 146 037.480 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 77.5 80 120 S038.770 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 80 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781785 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 100 78 1275.0 040.110 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 107 75 1285.0 042.740 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 98.8 78 1265.0 039.510 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 96.7 80 1205.0 038.660 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 104 65 1365.0 041.790 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 98.8 66 1345.0 039.520 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 115 79 1285.0 045.940 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 119 80 1205.0 047.570 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 98.2 79 1235.0 039.300 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 117 74 1215.0 046.930 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 110 79 1285.0 043.920 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 114 65 13110045.460 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 106 79 1245.0 042.390 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 1205.0 041.930 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 107 80 1205.0 042.610 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 99.0 80 1205.0 039.610 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 117 76 1295.0 046.900 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 106 80 1205.0 042.430 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 102 80 1205.0 040.620 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 1205.0 041.950 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 134 66 1365.0 053.510 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 118 78 1245.0 047.370 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 118 79 1255.0 047.200 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 123 75 1305.0 049.080 Benzene 40.00 102 80 1205.0 040.980 Bromobenzene 40.00 104 80 1205.0 041.420 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 96.6 80 1275.0 038.640 Bromoform 40.00 98.5 67 1365.0 039.400 Bromomethane 40.00 93.9 45 1485.0 037.560 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 117 75 1375.0 046.650 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 81 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781785 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Chlorobenzene 40.00 101 80 1205.0 040.400 Chloroethane 40.00 98.8 64 1455.0 039.510 Chloroform 40.00 112 75 1205.0 044.640 Chloromethane 40.00 97.7 58 1395.0 039.090 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 107 76 1205.0 042.980 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 105 77 1285.0 041.840 Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 102 63 1385.0 040.630 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 101 79 1245.0 040.510 Dibromomethane 40.00 105 80 1205.0 042.150 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 105 64 1375.0 041.920 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 104 59 1375.0 041.790 Ethylbenzene 40.00 109 79 1205.0 043.710 Freon-113 40.00 99.3 58 1415.0 039.720 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 111 72 1265.0 044.320 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 108 62 1305.0 043.070 m,p-Xylene 80.00 116 80 12410093.160 Methylene chloride 40.00 94.0 65 1365.0 037.590 MTBE 40.00 101 65 1305.0 040.370 n-Butylbenzene 40.00 125 76 1335.0 049.980 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 118 76 1315.0 047.360 Naphthalene 40.00 103 58 1275.0 041.330 o-Xylene 40.00 102 75 1215.0 040.750 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 123 76 1335.0 049.370 Styrene 40.00 107 80 1205.0 042.920 Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 113 69 1285.0 045.110 Tert-Butanol 200.0 106 36 158250212.630 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 108 73 1305.0 043.380 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 99.3 77 1245.0 039.730 Toluene 40.00 108 79 1205.0 043.080 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 95.7 72 1295.0 038.270 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 82 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781785 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Trichloroethene 40.00 106 80 1205.0 042.210 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 108 66 1465.0 043.330 Vinyl chloride 40.00 106 68 1415.0 042.550 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 92.1 70 15646.060 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 107 73 12953.460 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 94.3 73 14647.130 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 103 80 12051.340 Sample ID:CA200519-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781786 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 103 78 127 205.0 0 40.11 2.4141.090 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 108 75 128 205.0 0 42.74 0.88543.120 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 94.6 78 126 205.0 0 39.51 4.3737.820 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 100 80 120 205.0 0 38.66 3.6640.100 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 103 65 136 205.0 0 41.79 1.3541.230 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 98.8 66 134 205.0 0 39.52 0.050639.500 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 116 79 128 205.0 0 45.94 1.2846.530 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 120 80 120 20 S5.0 0 47.57 1.1948.140 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 98.1 79 123 205.0 0 39.30 0.17839.230 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 120 74 121 205.0 0 46.93 2.0047.880 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 107 79 128 205.0 0 43.92 2.9342.650 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 114 65 131 2010045.46 0.24245.570 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 109 79 124 205.0 0 42.39 2.8143.600 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 103 80 120 205.0 0 41.93 1.4241.340 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 111 80 120 205.0 0 42.61 4.2344.450 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 103 80 120 205.0 0 39.61 3.9841.220 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 113 76 129 205.0 0 46.90 3.4045.330 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 120 205.0 0 42.43 1.0941.970 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 83 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781786 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 103 80 120 205.0 0 40.62 1.7341.330 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 100 80 120 205.0 0 41.95 4.6840.030 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 129 66 136 205.0 0 53.51 3.9851.420 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 117 78 124 205.0 0 47.37 1.3246.750 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 117 79 125 205.0 0 47.20 0.46746.980 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 117 75 130 205.0 0 49.08 4.5646.890 Benzene 40.00 102 80 120 205.0 0 40.98 0.83340.640 Bromobenzene 40.00 104 80 120 205.0 0 41.42 0.096541.460 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 99.0 80 127 205.0 0 38.64 2.5039.620 Bromoform 40.00 103 67 136 205.0 0 39.40 4.2241.100 Bromomethane 40.00 92.1 45 148 205.0 0 37.56 1.9136.850 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 122 75 137 205.0 0 46.65 4.7348.910 Chlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 120 205.0 0 40.40 3.7941.960 Chloroethane 40.00 93.4 64 145 205.0 0 39.51 5.6237.350 Chloroform 40.00 117 75 120 205.0 0 44.64 4.3246.610 Chloromethane 40.00 92.6 58 139 205.0 0 39.09 5.3337.060 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 111 76 120 205.0 0 42.98 3.3244.430 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 107 77 128 205.0 0 41.84 2.2242.780 Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 103 63 138 205.0 0 40.63 1.6441.300 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 109 79 124 205.0 0 40.51 7.1943.530 Dibromomethane 40.00 103 80 120 205.0 0 42.15 2.4741.120 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 102 64 137 205.0 0 41.92 2.3940.930 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 111 59 137 205.0 0 41.79 5.8144.290 Ethylbenzene 40.00 114 79 120 205.0 0 43.71 3.8845.440 Freon-113 40.00 105 58 141 205.0 0 39.72 5.1341.810 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 111 72 126 205.0 0 44.32 0.090244.360 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 106 62 130 205.0 0 43.07 1.8042.300 m,p-Xylene 80.00 119 80 124 2010093.16 2.5195.530 Methylene chloride 40.00 94.3 65 136 205.0 0 37.59 0.29237.700 MTBE 40.00 106 65 130 205.0 0 40.37 5.2142.530 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 84 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781786 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL n-Butylbenzene 40.00 122 76 133 205.0 0 49.98 2.7448.630 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 115 76 131 205.0 0 47.36 3.0245.950 Naphthalene 40.00 107 58 127 205.0 0 41.33 3.5942.840 o-Xylene 40.00 105 75 121 205.0 0 40.75 3.4242.170 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 118 76 133 205.0 0 49.37 4.0747.400 Styrene 40.00 114 80 120 205.0 0 42.92 6.3445.730 Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 114 69 128 205.0 0 45.11 1.4745.780 Tert-Butanol 200.0 115 36 158 20250212.6 7.47229.140 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 108 73 130 205.0 0 43.38 0.11543.330 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 107 77 124 205.0 0 39.73 7.4442.800 Toluene 40.00 107 79 120 205.0 0 43.08 0.67542.790 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 100 72 129 205.0 0 38.27 4.7940.150 Trichloroethene 40.00 106 80 120 205.0 0 42.21 0.094742.250 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 115 66 146 205.0 0 43.33 5.5645.810 Vinyl chloride 40.00 103 68 141 205.0 0 42.55 3.4941.090 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 96.6 70 156 048.290 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 110 73 129 054.930 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 91.4 73 146 045.710 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 103 80 120 051.300 Sample ID:CA200519-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781787 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5.0ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 85 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781787 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1-Dichloropropene 5.0ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5.0ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.01.900 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 10ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5.0ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5.0ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.0ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5.0ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5.0ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5.0ND Benzene 5.0ND Bromobenzene 5.0ND Bromodichloromethane 5.0ND Bromoform 5.0ND Bromomethane 5.0ND Carbon tetrachloride 5.0ND Chlorobenzene 5.0ND Chloroethane 5.0ND Chloroform 5.0ND Chloromethane 5.0ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.0ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.0ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 86 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781787 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Di-isopropyl ether 5.0ND Dibromochloromethane 5.0ND Dibromomethane 5.0ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.0ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5.0ND Ethylbenzene 5.0ND Freon-113 5.0ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5.0ND Isopropylbenzene 5.0ND m,p-Xylene 10ND Methylene chloride 5.0ND MTBE 5.0ND n-Butylbenzene 5.0ND n-Propylbenzene 5.0ND Naphthalene 5.03.880 o-Xylene 5.0ND sec-Butylbenzene 5.0ND Styrene 5.0ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5.0ND Tert-Butanol 25ND tert-Butylbenzene 5.0ND Tetrachloroethene 5.0ND Toluene 5.0ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.0ND Trichloroethene 5.0ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5.0ND Vinyl chloride 5.0ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 104 70 15652.250 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 109 73 12954.580 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 89.4 73 14644.720 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 87 of 88 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040607 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781787 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 98.4 80 12049.190 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 88 of 88 N040607-01 -02 -03 -04 -05 -06 -07 -08 -09 -10 N040607-11 -12 -13 -14 -15 -16 -17 -18 -19 -20 N040607-21 -22 -23 -24 -25 -26 -27 -28 -29 -30 N040607-31 ASSET Laboratories Please review the checklist below. Any NO signifies non-compliance. Any non-compliance will be noted and must be understood as having an impact on the quality of the data. All tests will be performed as requested regardless of any compliance issues. If you have any questions or further instruction, please contact our Project Coordinator at (702) 307-2659. Carrier name:ASSET Cooler Received/Opened On:5/12/2020 Rep sample Temp (Deg C):4.0 IR Gun ID:1 Temp Blank:Yes No Last 4 digits of Tracking No.:NA Cooling process:Ice Ice Pack Dry Ice Other None Packing Material Used:None Workorder:N040607 Sample Receipt Checklist 4. Chain of custody present?Yes No 6. Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received?Yes No 7. Chain of custody agrees with sample labels?Yes No 8. Samples in proper container/bottle?Yes No 9. Sample containers intact?Yes No 10. Sufficient sample volume for indicated test?Yes No 11. All samples received within holding time?Yes No Yes No NA13. Water - VOA vials have zero headspace? 14. Water - pH acceptable upon receipt?Yes No NA Example: pH > 12 for (CN,S); pH<2 for Metals 1. Shipping container/cooler in good condition?Yes No Not Present 2. Custody seals intact, signed, dated on shippping container/cooler?Yes No Not Present 3. Custody seals intact on sample bottles?Yes No Not Present 5. Sampler's name present in COC?Yes No 12. Temperature of rep sample or Temp Blank within acceptable limit?Yes No NA Yes No NA15. Did the bottle labels indicate correct preservatives used? 16. Were there Non-Conformance issues at login? Yes No NA Was Client notified?Yes No NA Comments:Rec'd at LV Lab on 5/13/20 GSO#3167 at 4.2°C IR#2. Checklist Completed By:MCS Reviewed By: Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 13-May-20 WorkOrder:N040607 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/12/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040607-001A HA1-0'5/11/2020 11:17:00 AM 5/19/2020 Soil EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-001B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-002A HA1-1'5/11/2020 11:18:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-002B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-003A HA1-3'5/11/2020 11:20:00 AM WS N040607-004A HA1-5'5/11/2020 11:22:00 AM WS N040607-005A HA2-0'5/11/2020 11:05:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 1 of 8Page Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 13-May-20 WorkOrder:N040607 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/12/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040607-005A HA2-0'5/11/2020 11:05:00 AM 5/19/2020 Soil EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-005B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-006A HA2-1'5/11/2020 11:06:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-006B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-007A HA2-3'5/11/2020 11:08:00 AM WS N040607-008A HA2-5'5/11/2020 11:10:00 AM WS N040607-009A HA3-0'5/11/2020 10:11:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 2 of 8Page Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 13-May-20 WorkOrder:N040607 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/12/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040607-009A HA3-0'5/11/2020 10:11:00 AM 5/19/2020 Soil MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-009B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-010A HA3-1'5/11/2020 10:16:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-010B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-011A HA3-3'5/12/2020 10:19:00 AM WS N040607-012A HA3-5'5/12/2020 10:23:00 AM WS N040607-013A HA4-0'5/12/2020 10:33:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 3 of 8Page Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 13-May-20 WorkOrder:N040607 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/12/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040607-013A HA4-0'5/12/2020 10:33:00 AM 5/19/2020 Soil EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-013B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-014A HA4-1'5/12/2020 10:36:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-014B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-015A HA4-3'5/12/2020 10:38:00 AM WS N040607-016A HA4-5'5/12/2020 10:41:00 AM WS N040607-017A HA5-0'5/12/2020 10:51:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 4 of 8Page Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 13-May-20 WorkOrder:N040607 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/12/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040607-017A HA5-0'5/12/2020 10:51:00 AM 5/19/2020 Soil EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-017B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-018A HA5-1'5/12/2020 10:55:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-018B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-019A HA5-3'5/12/2020 10:59:00 AM WS N040607-020A HA5-5'5/12/2020 11:02:00 AM WS N040607-021A HA6-0'5/12/2020 11:11:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5 of 8Page Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 13-May-20 WorkOrder:N040607 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/12/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040607-021A HA6-0'5/12/2020 11:11:00 AM 5/19/2020 Soil EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-021B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-022A HA6-1'5/12/2020 11:14:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-022B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-023A HA6-3'5/12/2020 11:17:00 AM WS N040607-024A HA6-5'5/12/2020 11:19:00 AM WS N040607-025A HA7-0'5/12/2020 11:27:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 6 of 8Page Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 13-May-20 WorkOrder:N040607 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/12/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040607-025A HA7-0'5/12/2020 11:27:00 AM 5/19/2020 Soil EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-025B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-026A HA7-1'5/12/2020 11:32:00 AM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-026B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-027A HA7-3'5/12/2020 11:35:00 AM WS N040607-028A HA8-0'5/12/2020 12:03:00 PM WS N040607-029A HA8-1'5/12/2020 12:09:00 PM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS 7 of 8Page Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 13-May-20 WorkOrder:N040607 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/12/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040607-029B HA8-1'5/12/2020 12:09:00 PM 5/19/2020 Soil EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-030A HA8-3'5/12/2020 12:12:00 PM 5/19/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/19/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/19/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/19/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/19/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040607-030B 5/19/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040607-031A HA8-5'5/12/2020 12:15:00 PM WS N040607-032A FOLDER 5/19/2020 5/19/2020 Folder Folder LAB 5/19/2020 Folder Folder LAB 8 of 8Page NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 May 22, 2020 Pacific Edge Engineering Greg Dickinson Attention: Greg Dickinson RE:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Workorder No.:N040705FAX:949 470 0943 TEL:949 470 1937 26431 Crown Valley Plant Ste 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 This is an amended report. Please disregard all previous documentation that corresponds to the page(s) enclosed. Thank you for the opportunity to service the needs of your company. Please feel free to call me at (562) 219-7435 if we can be of further assistance to your company. Sincerely, Andrew Garaniel Laboratory Director Enclosed are the results for sample(s) received on May 20, 2020 by ASSET Laboratories. The sample(s) are tested for the parameters as indicated in the enclosed chain of custody in accordance with the applicable laboratory certifications. 1 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 22-May-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 CASE NARRATIVE SAMPLE RECEIVING/GENERAL COMMENTS: All sample containers were received intact with proper chain of custody documentation. Information on sample receipt conditions including discrepancies can be found in attached Sample Receipt Checklist Form. Cooler temperature and sample preservation were verified upon receipt of samples if applicable. Samples were analyzed within method holding time. Analytical comments for EPA 8015B GRO: Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) is outside recovery criteria in QC sample N040705-06A-MSD possibly due to matrix interference. The associated Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) recovery was acceptable. Analytical comments for EPA 8015B DRO/ORO: Matrix Spike (MS) and Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) are outside recovery criteria for Diesel in QC samples N040705-06A-MS/MSD since the analyte concentration in the sample is disproportionate to the spike level. The associated Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) recovery was acceptable. Analytical comments for EPA 8260B: Dilution was necessary due to sample matrix. Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD) recovery biased high for 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene in batch CA20VS072. Sample results were non-detect (ND) for this analyte therefore reanalysis of the samples was not necessary. Analytical comments for EPA 6010B: Matrix Spike (MS) and Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) are outside recovery criteria on analyte Antimony possibly due to matrix interference. The associated Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) recovery was acceptable. 2 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 22-May-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 Work Order Sample Summary Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection DateMatrix Date Received Contract No: Date Reported N040705-001AHA3-3'5/12/2020 10:19:00 AM 5/20/2020 5/22/2020Soil N040705-002AHA3-5'5/12/2020 10:23:00 AM 5/20/2020 5/22/2020Soil N040705-003AHA4-3'5/12/2020 10:38:00 AM 5/20/2020 5/22/2020Soil N040705-004AHA4-5'5/12/2020 10:41:00 AM 5/20/2020 5/22/2020Soil N040705-005AHA7-3'5/12/2020 11:35:00 AM 5/20/2020 5/22/2020Soil N040705-006AHA8-0'5/12/2020 12:03:00 PM 5/20/2020 5/22/2020Soil N040705-006BHA8-0'5/12/2020 12:03:00 PM 5/20/2020 5/22/2020Soil 3 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA3-3' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:19:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 DF Lab ID:N040705-001 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:22-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200520A 79331QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 Arsenic 5/20/2020 11:51 AM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 4 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA3-5' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:23:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 DF Lab ID:N040705-002 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:22-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200520A 79331QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 Arsenic 5/20/2020 12:07 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 5 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA4-3' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:38:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 DF Lab ID:N040705-003 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:22-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200520A 79331QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 Arsenic 5/20/2020 12:13 PM1.0 mg/Kg 18.6 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 6 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA4-5' Collection Date:5/12/2020 10:41:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 DF Lab ID:N040705-004 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:22-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200520A 79331QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 Arsenic 5/20/2020 12:19 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 7 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA7-3' Collection Date:5/12/2020 11:35:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 DF Lab ID:N040705-005 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:22-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200520A 79331QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 Arsenic 5/20/2020 12:34 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 8 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:03:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 DF Lab ID:N040705-006 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:22-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200519A CA20VS072QC Batch:PrepDate: 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,1-Dichloropropene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM500µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Benzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromobenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromodichloromethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromoform 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Bromomethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Carbon tetrachloride 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chlorobenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloroethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloroform 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Chloromethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 9 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:03:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 DF Lab ID:N040705-006 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:22-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS EPA 8260B Analyst:AWRunID:CA01638-MS10_200519A CA20VS072QC Batch:PrepDate: Di-isopropyl ether 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dibromochloromethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dibromomethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Ethylbenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Freon-113 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Isopropylbenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND m,p-Xylene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM500µg/Kg 50ND Methylene chloride 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND MTBE 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND n-Butylbenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50410 n-Propylbenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Naphthalene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND o-Xylene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND sec-Butylbenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Styrene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tert-Butanol 5/19/2020 08:27 PM1200µg/Kg 50ND tert-Butylbenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Tetrachloroethene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Toluene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Trichloroethene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Vinyl chloride 5/19/2020 08:27 PM250µg/Kg 50ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 5/19/2020 08:27 PM70-156 %REC 50102 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 5/19/2020 08:27 PM73-129 %REC 50117 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 5/19/2020 08:27 PM73-146 %REC 5082.9 Surr: Toluene-d8 5/19/2020 08:27 PM80-120 %REC 5099.8 DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_200521B 79353QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 DRO 5/21/2020 09:06 PM100mg/Kg 1012000 ORO 5/21/2020 09:06 PM100mg/Kg 106100 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 10 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-0' Collection Date:5/12/2020 12:03:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N040705 DF Lab ID:N040705-006 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:22-May-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:MG EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_200521B 79353QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 Surr: p-Terphenyl 5/21/2020 09:06 PM56-133 %REC 1099.7 GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:BHRunID:NV00922-GC4_200520A E20VS077QC Batch:PrepDate: GRO 5/20/2020 09:31 AM1.0 mg/Kg 11.4 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 5/20/2020 09:31 AM47-163 %REC 176.1 TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE EPA 7471A Analyst:DJRunID:NV00922-AA2_200520A 79332QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 Mercury 5/20/2020 10:02 AM0.10 mg/Kg 1ND TOTAL METALS BY ICP EPA 6010B Analyst:DJ EPA 3050B RunID:NV00922-ICP2_200520A 79331QC Batch:PrepDate:5/20/2020 Antimony 5/20/2020 12:40 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Arsenic 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 13.4 Barium 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1110 Beryllium 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Cadmium 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 11.0 Chromium 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 120 Cobalt 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 14.8 Copper 5/20/2020 12:40 PM2.0 mg/Kg 115 Lead 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 113 Molybdenum 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Nickel 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 117 Selenium 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Silver 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 1ND Thallium 5/20/2020 12:40 PM2.0 mg/Kg 1ND Vanadium 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 125 Zinc 5/20/2020 12:40 PM1.0 mg/Kg 160 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 11 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 22-May-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:6010_S Sample ID:MB-79331 Batch ID:79331 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144451 SeqNo:3782949 MBLKSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Antimony 2.0ND Arsenic 1.0ND Barium 1.0ND Beryllium 1.0ND Cadmium 1.0ND Chromium 1.0ND Cobalt 1.0ND Copper 2.0ND Lead 1.0ND Molybdenum 1.0ND Nickel 1.0ND Selenium 1.0ND Silver 1.0ND Thallium 2.0ND Vanadium 1.0ND Zinc 1.0ND Sample ID:LCS-79331 Batch ID:79331 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144451 SeqNo:3782950 LCSSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Antimony 25.00 100 80 1202.0 025.003 Arsenic 25.00 98.9 80 1201.0 024.719 Barium 25.00 99.6 80 1201.0 024.894 Beryllium 25.00 101 80 1201.0 025.224 Cadmium 25.00 97.7 80 1201.0 024.433 Chromium 25.00 99.4 80 1201.0 024.855 Cobalt 25.00 103 80 1201.0 025.782 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 12 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:6010_S Sample ID:LCS-79331 Batch ID:79331 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144451 SeqNo:3782950 LCSSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Copper 25.00 98.5 80 1202.0 024.634 Lead 25.00 99.6 80 1201.0 024.894 Molybdenum 25.00 98.8 80 1201.0 024.695 Nickel 25.00 104 80 1201.0 025.933 Selenium 25.00 97.7 80 1201.0 024.434 Silver 25.00 99.2 80 1201.0 024.799 Thallium 25.00 98.3 80 1202.0 024.581 Vanadium 25.00 98.3 80 1201.0 024.569 Zinc 25.00 101 80 1201.0 025.344 Sample ID:N040670-005A-MS Batch ID:79331 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144451 SeqNo:3782954 MSSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Antimony 24.96 67.7 75 125 S2.0 016.904 Arsenic 24.96 80.9 75 1251.0 020.194 Barium 24.96 96.9 75 1251.0 58.6982.889 Beryllium 24.96 87.2 75 1251.0 021.766 Cadmium 24.96 87.5 75 1251.0 021.844 Chromium 24.96 88.4 75 1251.0 11.3233.395 Cobalt 24.96 92.6 75 1251.0 6.64629.751 Copper 24.96 95.8 75 1252.0 7.43831.351 Lead 24.96 91.4 75 1251.0 1.42724.247 Molybdenum 24.96 88.5 75 1251.0 022.088 Nickel 24.96 85.8 75 1251.0 6.48327.907 Selenium 24.96 77.7 75 1251.0 019.402 Silver 24.96 76.8 75 1251.0 019.179 Thallium 24.96 84.5 75 1252.0 021.089 Vanadium 24.96 101 75 1251.0 31.9557.088 Zinc 24.96 78.8 75 1251.0 28.3247.984 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 13 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:6010_S Sample ID:N040670-005A-MSD Batch ID:79331 TestNo:EPA 6010B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144451 SeqNo:3782955 MSDSampType:TestCode:6010_S EPA 3050B Antimony 24.99 67.0 75 125 20 S2.0 0 16.90 1.0116.735 Arsenic 24.99 80.3 75 125 201.0 0 20.19 0.59220.075 Barium 24.99 108 75 125 201.0 58.69 82.89 3.3185.682 Beryllium 24.99 86.4 75 125 201.0 0 21.77 0.85021.582 Cadmium 24.99 86.5 75 125 201.0 0 21.84 1.1121.602 Chromium 24.99 92.3 75 125 201.0 11.32 33.40 2.9634.397 Cobalt 24.99 90.5 75 125 201.0 6.646 29.75 1.6629.263 Copper 24.99 95.0 75 125 202.0 7.438 31.35 0.58431.168 Lead 24.99 90.0 75 125 201.0 1.427 24.25 1.3623.920 Molybdenum 24.99 87.3 75 125 201.0 0 22.09 1.2721.810 Nickel 24.99 84.3 75 125 201.0 6.483 27.91 1.3227.540 Selenium 24.99 76.3 75 125 201.0 0 19.40 1.7019.074 Silver 24.99 76.6 75 125 201.0 0 19.18 0.20919.139 Thallium 24.99 84.0 75 125 202.0 0 21.09 0.48620.987 Vanadium 24.99 94.7 75 125 201.0 31.95 57.09 2.6355.604 Zinc 24.99 76.4 75 125 201.0 28.32 47.98 1.2247.403 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 14 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:7471_S Sample ID:MB-79332 Batch ID:79332 TestNo:EPA 7471A Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144449 SeqNo:3782792 MBLKSampType:TestCode:7471_S Mercury 0.10ND Sample ID:LCS-79332 Batch ID:79332 TestNo:EPA 7471A Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144449 SeqNo:3782793 LCSSampType:TestCode:7471_S Mercury 0.4167 107 80 1200.10 00.444 Sample ID:N040670-006B-MS Batch ID:79332 TestNo:EPA 7471A Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144449 SeqNo:3782797 MSSampType:TestCode:7471_S Mercury 0.4139 108 75 1250.099 00.445 Sample ID:N040670-006B-MSD Batch ID:79332 TestNo:EPA 7471A Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144449 SeqNo:3782798 MSDSampType:TestCode:7471_S Mercury 0.4153 112 75 125 200.10 0 0.4454 4.160.464 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 15 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8015_S_DM H Sample ID:MB-79353 Batch ID:79353 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/21/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144512 SeqNo:3786096 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 107.687 ORO 109.806 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 99.1 56 13379.260 Sample ID:N040705-006A-MS Batch ID:79353 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/21/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144512 SeqNo:3786097 MSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 999.0 306 46 142 S1001234015393.776 Surr: p-Terphenyl 79.92 103 56 13382.507 Sample ID:LCS-79353 Batch ID:79353 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/21/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144512 SeqNo:3786098 LCSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1000 101 69 1231001006.607 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 107 56 13385.570 Sample ID:N040705-006A-MSD Batch ID:79353 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/21/2020 Prep Date:5/20/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144512 SeqNo:3786100 MSDSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 991.1 176 46 142 20 S9912340153908.9114081.368 Surr: p-Terphenyl 79.29 107 56 133 085.223 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 16 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8015GAS_S Sample ID:E200520LCS Batch ID:E20VS077 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144457 SeqNo:3783312 LCSSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 112 72 1361.0 05.580 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 104 47 163103.506 Sample ID:E200520MB Batch ID:E20VS077 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144457 SeqNo:3783313 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 1.0ND Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 101 47 163100.539 Sample ID:N040705-006AMS Batch ID:E20VS077 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144457 SeqNo:3783315 MSSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 44.1 43 1531.0 1.3803.586 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 73.6 47 16373.618 Sample ID:N040705-006AMSD Batch ID:E20VS077 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:5/20/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:144457 SeqNo:3783316 MSDSampType:TestCode:8015GAS_S GRO 5.000 35.0 43 153 20 S1.0 1.380 3.586 13.63.128 Surr: Chlorobenzene - d5 100.0 75.6 47 163 075.564 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 17 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781785 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 100 78 1275.0 040.110 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 107 75 1285.0 042.740 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 98.8 78 1265.0 039.510 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 96.7 80 1205.0 038.660 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 104 65 1365.0 041.790 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 98.8 66 1345.0 039.520 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 115 79 1285.0 045.940 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 119 80 1205.0 047.570 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 98.2 79 1235.0 039.300 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 117 74 1215.0 046.930 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 110 79 1285.0 043.920 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 114 65 13110045.460 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 106 79 1245.0 042.390 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 1205.0 041.930 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 107 80 1205.0 042.610 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 99.0 80 1205.0 039.610 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 117 76 1295.0 046.900 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 106 80 1205.0 042.430 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 102 80 1205.0 040.620 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 1205.0 041.950 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 134 66 1365.0 053.510 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 118 78 1245.0 047.370 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 118 79 1255.0 047.200 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 123 75 1305.0 049.080 Benzene 40.00 102 80 1205.0 040.980 Bromobenzene 40.00 104 80 1205.0 041.420 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 96.6 80 1275.0 038.640 Bromoform 40.00 98.5 67 1365.0 039.400 Bromomethane 40.00 93.9 45 1485.0 037.560 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 117 75 1375.0 046.650 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 18 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781785 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Chlorobenzene 40.00 101 80 1205.0 040.400 Chloroethane 40.00 98.8 64 1455.0 039.510 Chloroform 40.00 112 75 1205.0 044.640 Chloromethane 40.00 97.7 58 1395.0 039.090 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 107 76 1205.0 042.980 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 105 77 1285.0 041.840 Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 102 63 1385.0 040.630 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 101 79 1245.0 040.510 Dibromomethane 40.00 105 80 1205.0 042.150 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 105 64 1375.0 041.920 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 104 59 1375.0 041.790 Ethylbenzene 40.00 109 79 1205.0 043.710 Freon-113 40.00 99.3 58 1415.0 039.720 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 111 72 1265.0 044.320 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 108 62 1305.0 043.070 m,p-Xylene 80.00 116 80 12410093.160 Methylene chloride 40.00 94.0 65 1365.0 037.590 MTBE 40.00 101 65 1305.0 040.370 n-Butylbenzene 40.00 125 76 1335.0 049.980 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 118 76 1315.0 047.360 Naphthalene 40.00 103 58 1275.0 041.330 o-Xylene 40.00 102 75 1215.0 040.750 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 123 76 1335.0 049.370 Styrene 40.00 107 80 1205.0 042.920 Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 113 69 1285.0 045.110 Tert-Butanol 200.0 106 36 158250212.630 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 108 73 1305.0 043.380 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 99.3 77 1245.0 039.730 Toluene 40.00 108 79 1205.0 043.080 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 95.7 72 1295.0 038.270 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 19 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCS Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781785 LCSSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Trichloroethene 40.00 106 80 1205.0 042.210 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 108 66 1465.0 043.330 Vinyl chloride 40.00 106 68 1415.0 042.550 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 92.1 70 15646.060 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 107 73 12953.460 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 94.3 73 14647.130 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 103 80 12051.340 Sample ID:CA200519-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781786 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 103 78 127 205.0 0 40.11 2.4141.090 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 40.00 108 75 128 205.0 0 42.74 0.88543.120 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 40.00 94.6 78 126 205.0 0 39.51 4.3737.820 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 40.00 100 80 120 205.0 0 38.66 3.6640.100 1,1-Dichloroethane 40.00 103 65 136 205.0 0 41.79 1.3541.230 1,1-Dichloroethene 40.00 98.8 66 134 205.0 0 39.52 0.050639.500 1,1-Dichloropropene 40.00 116 79 128 205.0 0 45.94 1.2846.530 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 120 80 120 20 S5.0 0 47.57 1.1948.140 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 40.00 98.1 79 123 205.0 0 39.30 0.17839.230 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 40.00 120 74 121 205.0 0 46.93 2.0047.880 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 107 79 128 205.0 0 43.92 2.9342.650 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 40.00 114 65 131 2010045.46 0.24245.570 1,2-Dibromoethane 40.00 109 79 124 205.0 0 42.39 2.8143.600 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 103 80 120 205.0 0 41.93 1.4241.340 1,2-Dichloroethane 40.00 111 80 120 205.0 0 42.61 4.2344.450 1,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 103 80 120 205.0 0 39.61 3.9841.220 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 40.00 113 76 129 205.0 0 46.90 3.4045.330 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 120 205.0 0 42.43 1.0941.970 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 20 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781786 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,3-Dichloropropane 40.00 103 80 120 205.0 0 40.62 1.7341.330 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 40.00 100 80 120 205.0 0 41.95 4.6840.030 2,2-Dichloropropane 40.00 129 66 136 205.0 0 53.51 3.9851.420 2-Chlorotoluene 40.00 117 78 124 205.0 0 47.37 1.3246.750 4-Chlorotoluene 40.00 117 79 125 205.0 0 47.20 0.46746.980 4-Isopropyltoluene 40.00 117 75 130 205.0 0 49.08 4.5646.890 Benzene 40.00 102 80 120 205.0 0 40.98 0.83340.640 Bromobenzene 40.00 104 80 120 205.0 0 41.42 0.096541.460 Bromodichloromethane 40.00 99.0 80 127 205.0 0 38.64 2.5039.620 Bromoform 40.00 103 67 136 205.0 0 39.40 4.2241.100 Bromomethane 40.00 92.1 45 148 205.0 0 37.56 1.9136.850 Carbon tetrachloride 40.00 122 75 137 205.0 0 46.65 4.7348.910 Chlorobenzene 40.00 105 80 120 205.0 0 40.40 3.7941.960 Chloroethane 40.00 93.4 64 145 205.0 0 39.51 5.6237.350 Chloroform 40.00 117 75 120 205.0 0 44.64 4.3246.610 Chloromethane 40.00 92.6 58 139 205.0 0 39.09 5.3337.060 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 111 76 120 205.0 0 42.98 3.3244.430 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 40.00 107 77 128 205.0 0 41.84 2.2242.780 Di-isopropyl ether 40.00 103 63 138 205.0 0 40.63 1.6441.300 Dibromochloromethane 40.00 109 79 124 205.0 0 40.51 7.1943.530 Dibromomethane 40.00 103 80 120 205.0 0 42.15 2.4741.120 Dichlorodifluoromethane 40.00 102 64 137 205.0 0 41.92 2.3940.930 Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 40.00 111 59 137 205.0 0 41.79 5.8144.290 Ethylbenzene 40.00 114 79 120 205.0 0 43.71 3.8845.440 Freon-113 40.00 105 58 141 205.0 0 39.72 5.1341.810 Hexachlorobutadiene 40.00 111 72 126 205.0 0 44.32 0.090244.360 Isopropylbenzene 40.00 106 62 130 205.0 0 43.07 1.8042.300 m,p-Xylene 80.00 119 80 124 2010093.16 2.5195.530 Methylene chloride 40.00 94.3 65 136 205.0 0 37.59 0.29237.700 MTBE 40.00 106 65 130 205.0 0 40.37 5.2142.530 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 21 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-LCSD Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS02 RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781786 LCSDSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL n-Butylbenzene 40.00 122 76 133 205.0 0 49.98 2.7448.630 n-Propylbenzene 40.00 115 76 131 205.0 0 47.36 3.0245.950 Naphthalene 40.00 107 58 127 205.0 0 41.33 3.5942.840 o-Xylene 40.00 105 75 121 205.0 0 40.75 3.4242.170 sec-Butylbenzene 40.00 118 76 133 205.0 0 49.37 4.0747.400 Styrene 40.00 114 80 120 205.0 0 42.92 6.3445.730 Tert-amyl methyl ether 40.00 114 69 128 205.0 0 45.11 1.4745.780 Tert-Butanol 200.0 115 36 158 20250212.6 7.47229.140 tert-Butylbenzene 40.00 108 73 130 205.0 0 43.38 0.11543.330 Tetrachloroethene 40.00 107 77 124 205.0 0 39.73 7.4442.800 Toluene 40.00 107 79 120 205.0 0 43.08 0.67542.790 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 40.00 100 72 129 205.0 0 38.27 4.7940.150 Trichloroethene 40.00 106 80 120 205.0 0 42.21 0.094742.250 Trichlorofluoromethane 40.00 115 66 146 205.0 0 43.33 5.5645.810 Vinyl chloride 40.00 103 68 141 205.0 0 42.55 3.4941.090 Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 96.6 70 156 048.290 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 110 73 129 054.930 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 91.4 73 146 045.710 Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 103 80 120 051.300 Sample ID:CA200519-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781787 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5.0ND 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloroethane 5.0ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 5.0ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 22 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781787 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL 1,1-Dichloropropene 5.0ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 5.0ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.01.900 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 10ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 5.0ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 5.0ND 1,2-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.0ND 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 1,3-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 5.0ND 2,2-Dichloropropane 5.0ND 2-Chlorotoluene 5.0ND 4-Chlorotoluene 5.0ND 4-Isopropyltoluene 5.0ND Benzene 5.0ND Bromobenzene 5.0ND Bromodichloromethane 5.0ND Bromoform 5.0ND Bromomethane 5.0ND Carbon tetrachloride 5.0ND Chlorobenzene 5.0ND Chloroethane 5.0ND Chloroform 5.0ND Chloromethane 5.0ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.0ND cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 5.0ND Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 23 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781787 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Di-isopropyl ether 5.0ND Dibromochloromethane 5.0ND Dibromomethane 5.0ND Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.0ND Ethyl Tert-butyl ether 5.0ND Ethylbenzene 5.0ND Freon-113 5.0ND Hexachlorobutadiene 5.0ND Isopropylbenzene 5.0ND m,p-Xylene 10ND Methylene chloride 5.0ND MTBE 5.0ND n-Butylbenzene 5.0ND n-Propylbenzene 5.0ND Naphthalene 5.03.880 o-Xylene 5.0ND sec-Butylbenzene 5.0ND Styrene 5.0ND Tert-amyl methyl ether 5.0ND Tert-Butanol 25ND tert-Butylbenzene 5.0ND Tetrachloroethene 5.0ND Toluene 5.0ND trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 5.0ND Trichloroethene 5.0ND Trichlorofluoromethane 5.0ND Vinyl chloride 5.0ND Surr: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.00 104 70 15652.250 Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.00 109 73 12954.580 Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 50.00 89.4 73 14644.720 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 24 of 25 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N040705 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8260SOIL Sample ID:CA200519-MB1 Batch ID:CA20VS072 TestNo:EPA 8260B Analysis Date:5/19/2020 Prep Date: Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:µg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:144430 SeqNo:3781787 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8260SOIL Surr: Toluene-d8 50.00 98.4 80 12049.190 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 25 of 25 1 AssetLabs Sample Control From:Thad Malit <tmalit@assetlaboratories.com> Sent:Tuesday, May 19, 2020 6:08 PM To:Yoandra; AssetLabs Sample Control; Mary Claire Ignacio; diane@assetlaboratories.com; Anushka Wijesekera; 'Andrew Garaniel'; paul@assetlaboratories.com; Jannette Joy Soria Subject:FW: Matrix, 0014.013.002 (ASSET Labs No. N040607) FYI – see 24 HR TAT for sample Thad Malit General Manager ASSET Laboratories 11110 Artesia Blvd, Suite B Cerritos, CA. 90703 O: 562.219.7435 | M: 310.503.2359 | F: 562.219.7436 tmalit@assetlaboratories.com www.assetlaboratories.com o WBE/MBE/SBE/VSBE/DBE o Certified by the State of California’s Department of Public Health Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) o Certified by the State of Oregon’s Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ORELAP) - National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) o Certified by the State of Nevada’s Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Division of Environmental Protection From: Greg Dickinson Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 6:00 PM To: emilangelo@assetlaboratories.com Cc: puri@assetlaboratories.com; Thad Malit Subject: RE: Matrix, 0014.013.002 (ASSET Labs No. N040607) Please run HA8-0’ from the Subject project for TPH, VOCs and metals. Please provide results on 24-hour turnaround. Thanks, Greg Dickinson Principal Engineer Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 949-470-1937 (office) 949-230-6079 (cell) 1 AssetLabs Sample Control From:Thad Malit <tmalit@assetlaboratories.com> Sent:Tuesday, May 19, 2020 6:12 PM To:Yoandra; AssetLabs Sample Control; emilangelo@assetlaboratories.com Subject:FW: Matrix, 0014.013.002 (ASSET Labs No. N040607) FYI – please process Thad Malit General Manager ASSET Laboratories 11110 Artesia Blvd, Suite B Cerritos, CA. 90703 O: 562.219.7435 | M: 310.503.2359 | F: 562.219.7436 tmalit@assetlaboratories.com www.assetlaboratories.com o WBE/MBE/SBE/VSBE/DBE o Certified by the State of California’s Department of Public Health Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) o Certified by the State of Oregon’s Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ORELAP) - National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) o Certified by the State of Nevada’s Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Division of Environmental Protection From: Greg Dickinson Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 6:08 PM To: emilangelo@assetlaboratories.com Cc: puri@assetlaboratories.com; Thad Malit Subject: RE: Matrix, 0014.013.002 (ASSET Labs No. N040607) Please analyze the following on standard turnaround: HA3-3’ and 5’ for Arsenic HA4-3’ and 5’ for Arsenic HA7-3’ for Arsenic Thanks, Greg Dickinson Principal Engineer Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 ASSET Laboratories Change Order Checklist Please review the checklist below. Any NO and/or NA signifies non-compliance. Any non-compliance will be noted and must be understood as having an impact on the quality of the data. All tests will be performed as requested regardless of any compliance issues. If you have any questions or further instruction, please contact our Project Coordinator at (702) 307-2659. Client Name:PACED01 Work Order Number:N040705 Date / Time Created:5/20/2020 8:26:02 AM Created by:YR Checklist completed by: Signature Date Reviewed by: DateInitials 3. Change Order documents present?Yes No 1. All samples within holding time?Yes No 2. Refrigerator temperature in compliance?Yes No Comments: Page 1 of 1 Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 20-May-20 WorkOrder:N040705 Comments:Addendum WO for N040607 Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 5/20/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N040705-001A HA3-3'5/12/2020 10:19:00 AM 5/26/2020 Soil EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS WS 5/26/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP WS N040705-002A HA3-5'5/12/2020 10:23:00 AM 5/26/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS WS 5/26/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP WS N040705-003A HA4-3'5/12/2020 10:38:00 AM 5/26/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS WS 5/26/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP WS N040705-004A HA4-5'5/12/2020 10:41:00 AM 5/26/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS WS 5/26/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP WS N040705-005A HA7-3'5/12/2020 11:35:00 AM 5/26/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS WS 5/26/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP WS N040705-006A HA8-0'5/12/2020 12:03:00 PM 5/21/2020 EPA 3050B SOPREP TOTAL METALS VS 5/21/2020 EPA 6010B TOTAL METALS BY ICP VS 5/21/2020 MERCURY PREP VS 5/21/2020 EPA 7471A TOTAL MERCURY BY COLD VAPOR TECHNIQUE VS 5/21/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/21/2020 EPA 8015B GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID VS 5/21/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS VS N040705-006B 5/21/2020 EPA 8260B VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY GC/MS V-CA N040705-007A FOLDER 5/21/2020 5/21/2020 Folder Folder LAB 5/21/2020 Folder Folder LAB 1 of 1Page NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 November 19, 2020 Pacific Edge Engineering Greg Dickinson Attention: Greg Dickinson RE:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Workorder No.:N042994FAX:949 470 0943 TEL:949 470 1937 26431 Crown Valley Plant Ste 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Thank you for the opportunity to service the needs of your company. Please feel free to call me at (562) 219-7435 if I can be of further assistance to your company. Sincerely, Andrew Garaniel Laboratory Director Enclosed are the results for sample(s) received on November 11, 2020 by ASSET Laboratories. The sample(s) are tested for the parameters as indicated in the enclosed chain of custody in accordance with the applicable laboratory certifications. The cover letter is an integral part of this analytical report. This Laboratory Report cannot be reproduced in part or in its entirety without written permission from the client and ASSET Laboratories - California. 1 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-Nov-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 CASE NARRATIVE SAMPLE RECEIVING/GENERAL COMMENTS: All sample containers were received intact with proper chain of custody documentation. Information on sample receipt conditions including discrepancies can be found in attached Sample Receipt Checklist Form. Cooler temperature and sample preservation were verified upon receipt of samples if applicable. Samples were analyzed within method holding time. 2 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-Nov-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 Work Order Sample Summary Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection DateMatrix Date Received Contract No: Date Reported N042994-001AHA8-10'W-0'11/11/2020 10:10:00 AM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-002AHA8-10'W-2'11/11/2020 10:30:00 AM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-003AHA8-10'W-5'11/11/2020 10:35:00 AM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-004AHA8-2'W-0'11/11/2020 10:45:00 AM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-005AHA8-2'W-2'11/11/2020 11:00:00 AM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-006AHA8-2'W-5'11/11/2020 11:07:00 AM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-007AHA8-20'N-0'11/11/2020 12:00:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-008AHA8-20'N-2'11/11/2020 12:13:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-009AHA8-20'N-5'11/11/2020 12:20:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-010AHA8-10'N-0'11/11/2020 12:25:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-011AHA8-10'N-2'11/11/2020 12:40:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-012AHA8-10'N-5'11/11/2020 12:57:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-013AHA8-10'S-0'11/11/2020 1:05:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-014AHA8-10'S-2'11/11/2020 1:21:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-015AHA8-10'S-5'11/11/2020 1:50:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-016AHA8-20'S-0'11/11/2020 2:00:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-017AHA8-10'E-0'11/11/2020 2:15:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil N042994-018AHA8-10'E-2'11/11/2020 2:30:00 PM 11/11/2020 11/19/2020Soil 3 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'W-0' Collection Date:11/11/2020 10:10:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-001 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_201112C 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 01:29 PM10mg/Kg 1170 ORO 11/13/2020 01:29 PM10mg/Kg 1530 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 01:29 PM56-133 %REC 192.6 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 4 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'W-2' Collection Date:11/11/2020 10:30:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-002 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_201112B 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 08:00 AM9.9 mg/Kg 1ND ORO 11/13/2020 08:00 AM9.9 mg/Kg 115 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 08:00 AM56-133 %REC 1112 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 5 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'W-5' Collection Date:11/11/2020 10:35:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-003 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_201112B 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 08:31 AM10mg/Kg 112 ORO 11/13/2020 08:31 AM10mg/Kg 114 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 08:31 AM56-133 %REC 1115 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 6 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-2'W-0' Collection Date:11/11/2020 10:45:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-004 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_201112C 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 03:30 PM10mg/Kg 1220 ORO 11/13/2020 03:30 PM10mg/Kg 1700 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 03:30 PM56-133 %REC 189.4 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 7 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-2'W-2' Collection Date:11/11/2020 11:00:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-005 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_201112B 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 09:02 AM10mg/Kg 110 ORO 11/13/2020 09:02 AM10mg/Kg 116 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 09:02 AM56-133 %REC 1111 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 8 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-2'W-5' Collection Date:11/11/2020 11:07:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-006 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_201112B 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 09:33 AM10mg/Kg 1ND ORO 11/13/2020 09:33 AM10mg/Kg 112 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 09:33 AM56-133 %REC 1111 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 9 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'N-0' Collection Date:11/11/2020 12:25:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-010 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_201112C 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 11:59 AM9.9 mg/Kg 141 ORO 11/13/2020 11:59 AM9.9 mg/Kg 174 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 11:59 AM56-133 %REC 192.3 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 10 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'N-2' Collection Date:11/11/2020 12:40:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-011 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_201112B 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 10:04 AM9.9 mg/Kg 1ND ORO 11/13/2020 10:04 AM9.9 mg/Kg 112 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 10:04 AM56-133 %REC 1111 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 11 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'N-5' Collection Date:11/11/2020 12:57:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-012 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_201112B 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 10:35 AM10mg/Kg 1ND ORO 11/13/2020 10:35 AM10mg/Kg 1ND Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 10:35 AM56-133 %REC 1105 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 12 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'S-0' Collection Date:11/11/2020 1:05:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-013 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_201112C 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 03:00 PM9.9 mg/Kg 1240 ORO 11/13/2020 03:00 PM9.9 mg/Kg 1720 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 03:00 PM56-133 %REC 188.2 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 13 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'S-2' Collection Date:11/11/2020 1:21:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-014 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_201112C 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 12:29 PM10mg/Kg 133 ORO 11/13/2020 12:29 PM10mg/Kg 134 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 12:29 PM56-133 %REC 194.2 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 14 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'S-5' Collection Date:11/11/2020 1:50:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-015 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_201112C 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 12:59 PM10mg/Kg 121 ORO 11/13/2020 12:59 PM10mg/Kg 122 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 12:59 PM56-133 %REC 191.9 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 15 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'E-0' Collection Date:11/11/2020 2:15:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-017 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC1_201112C 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 04:00 PM10mg/Kg 1240 ORO 11/13/2020 04:00 PM10mg/Kg 1650 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 04:00 PM56-133 %REC 188.9 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 16 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'E-2' Collection Date:11/11/2020 2:30:00 PM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N042994 DF Lab ID:N042994-018 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_201112B 82994QC Batch:PrepDate:11/12/2020 DRO 11/13/2020 11:06 AM9.9 mg/Kg 1ND ORO 11/13/2020 11:06 AM9.9 mg/Kg 1ND Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/13/2020 11:06 AM56-133 %REC 192.2 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 17 of 18 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-Nov-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N042994 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8015_S_DM H Sample ID:MB-82994 Batch ID:82994 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:11/13/2020 Prep Date:11/12/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:148730 SeqNo:4004883 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 103.368 ORO 105.806 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 110 56 13387.788 Sample ID:LCS-82994 Batch ID:82994 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:11/13/2020 Prep Date:11/12/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:148730 SeqNo:4004884 LCSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1000 106 66 1211001055.311 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 111 56 13388.534 Sample ID:N042994-001A-MS Batch ID:82994 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:11/13/2020 Prep Date:11/12/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:148732 SeqNo:4005014 MSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 994.0 105 37 1419.9 167.51208.163 Surr: p-Terphenyl 79.52 94.9 56 13375.495 Sample ID:N042994-001A-MSD Batch ID:82994 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:11/13/2020 Prep Date:11/12/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:148732 SeqNo:4005015 MSDSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 997.0 102 37 141 2010167.5 1208 1.641188.474 Surr: p-Terphenyl 79.76 94.4 56 133 075.308 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 18 of 18 ASSET Laboratories Please review the checklist below. Any NO signifies non-compliance. Any non-compliance will be noted and must be understood as having an impact on the quality of the data. All tests will be performed as requested regardless of any compliance issues. If you have any questions or further instruction, please contact our Project Coordinator at (702) 307-2659. Carrier name:ASSET Cooler Received/Opened On:11/11/2020 Rep sample Temp (Deg C):3.2 IR Gun ID:1 Temp Blank:Yes No Last 4 digits of Tracking No.:NA Cooling process:Ice Ice Pack Dry Ice Other None Packing Material Used:None Workorder:N042994 Sample Receipt Checklist 4. Chain of custody present?Yes No 6. Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received?Yes No 7. Chain of custody agrees with sample labels?Yes No 8. Samples in proper container/bottle?Yes No 9. Sample containers intact?Yes No 10. Sufficient sample volume for indicated test?Yes No 11. All samples received within holding time?Yes No Yes No NA13. Water - VOA vials have zero headspace? 14. Water - pH acceptable upon receipt?Yes No NA Example: pH > 12 for (CN,S); pH<2 for Metals 1. Shipping container/cooler in good condition?Yes No Not Present 2. Custody seals intact, signed, dated on shippping container/cooler?Yes No Not Present 3. Custody seals intact on sample bottles?Yes No Not Present 5. Sampler's name present in COC?Yes No 12. Temperature of rep sample or Temp Blank within acceptable limit?Yes No NA Yes No NA15. Did the bottle labels indicate correct preservatives used? 16. Were there Non-Conformance issues at login?Yes No NA Was Client notified?Yes No NA Comments:Received at Las Vegas Lab on 11/12/20 at 1.7 oC, IR# 2, GSO# 2136. Checklist Completed By:TM Reviewed By: 11/13/2020 Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 12-Nov-20WorkOrder:N042994 Comments: Client ID:PACED01Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 11/11/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N042994-001A HA8-10'W-0'11/11/2020 10:10:00 AM 11/18/2020 Soil EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-002A HA8-10'W-2'11/11/2020 10:30:00 AM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-003A HA8-10'W-5'11/11/2020 10:35:00 AM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-004A HA8-2'W-0'11/11/2020 10:45:00 AM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-005A HA8-2'W-2'11/11/2020 11:00:00 AM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-006A HA8-2'W-5'11/11/2020 11:07:00 AM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-007A HA8-20'N-0'11/11/2020 12:00:00 PM WS N042994-008A HA8-20'N-2'11/11/2020 12:13:00 PM WS N042994-009A HA8-20'N-5'11/11/2020 12:20:00 PM WS N042994-010A HA8-10'N-0'11/11/2020 12:25:00 PM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-011A HA8-10'N-2'11/11/2020 12:40:00 PM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 1 of 2Page Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 12-Nov-20WorkOrder:N042994 Comments: Client ID:PACED01Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 11/11/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N042994-011A HA8-10'N-2'11/11/2020 12:40:00 PM 11/18/2020 Soil EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-012A HA8-10'N-5'11/11/2020 12:57:00 PM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-013A HA8-10'S-0'11/11/2020 1:05:00 PM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-014A HA8-10'S-2'11/11/2020 1:21:00 PM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-015A HA8-10'S-5'11/11/2020 1:50:00 PM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-016A HA8-20'S-0'11/11/2020 2:00:00 PM WS N042994-017A HA8-10'E-0'11/11/2020 2:15:00 PM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-018A HA8-10'E-2'11/11/2020 2:30:00 PM 11/18/2020 EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/18/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N042994-019A FOLDER 11/19/2020 11/18/2020 Folder Folder LAB 11/19/2020 Folder Folder LAB 2 of 2Page NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 November 19, 2020 Pacific Edge Engineering Greg Dickinson Attention: Greg Dickinson RE:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Workorder No.:N043025FAX:949 470 0943 TEL:949 470 1937 26431 Crown Valley Plant Ste 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Thank you for the opportunity to service the needs of your company. Please feel free to call me at (562) 219-7435 if I can be of further assistance to your company. Sincerely, Andrew Garaniel Laboratory Director Enclosed are the results for sample(s) received on November 13, 2020 by ASSET Laboratories. The sample(s) are tested for the parameters as indicated in the enclosed chain of custody in accordance with the applicable laboratory certifications. The cover letter is an integral part of this analytical report. This Laboratory Report cannot be reproduced in part or in its entirety without written permission from the client and ASSET Laboratories - California. 1 of 5 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-Nov-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N043025 CASE NARRATIVE SAMPLE RECEIVING/GENERAL COMMENTS: All sample containers were received intact with proper chain of custody documentation. Information on sample receipt conditions including discrepancies can be found in attached Sample Receipt Checklist Form. Cooler temperature and sample preservation were verified upon receipt of samples if applicable. Samples were analyzed within method holding time. 2 of 5 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-Nov-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N043025 Work Order Sample Summary Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Collection DateMatrix Date Received Contract No: Date Reported N043025-001AHA8-10'E-5'11/13/2020 10:30:00 AM 11/13/2020 11/19/2020Soil 3 of 5 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 Client Sample ID:HA8-10'E-5' Collection Date:11/13/2020 10:30:00 AM Matrix:SOIL Analyses Result QualUnits Date Analyzed CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Lab Order:N043025 DF Lab ID:N043025-001 ASSET Laboratories Print Date:19-Nov-20 PQL ANALYTICAL RESULTS DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID EPA 8015B Analyst:PL EPA 3550B RunID:NV00922-GC3_201116B 83039QC Batch:PrepDate:11/16/2020 DRO 11/17/2020 10:48 AM10mg/Kg 123 ORO 11/17/2020 10:48 AM10mg/Kg 130 Surr: p-Terphenyl 11/17/2020 10:48 AM56-133 %REC 1107 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference Results are wet unless otherwise specified DO Surrogate Diluted Out 4 of 5 NEVADA|P:702.307.2659 F:702.307.2691 3151 W. Post Rd., Las Vegas, NV 89118 ELAP Cert 2676 | NV Cert NV00922 ORELAP/NELAP Cert 4046 “Serving Clients with Passion and Professionalism” CALIFORNIA|P:562.219.7435 F:562.219.7436 11110 Artesia Blvd., Ste B, Cerritos, CA 90703 ELAP Cert 2921 EPA ID CA01638 19-Nov-20Date:ASSET Laboratories Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 CLIENT:Pacific Edge Engineering Work Order:N043025 ANALYTICAL QC SUMMARY REPORT TestCode:8015_S_DM H Sample ID:MB-83039 Batch ID:83039 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:11/17/2020 Prep Date:11/16/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:PBS RunNo:148791 SeqNo:4007075 MBLKSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 103.524 ORO 106.266 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 98.6 56 13378.856 Sample ID:LCS-83039 Batch ID:83039 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:11/17/2020 Prep Date:11/16/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:LCSS RunNo:148791 SeqNo:4007076 LCSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 1000 99.4 66 121100993.553 Surr: p-Terphenyl 80.00 99.1 56 13379.289 Sample ID:N042999-001A-MS Batch ID:83039 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:11/17/2020 Prep Date:11/16/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:148791 SeqNo:4007095 MSSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 998.0 95.1 37 14110116.61065.528 Surr: p-Terphenyl 79.84 80.6 56 13364.365 Sample ID:N042999-001A-MSD Batch ID:83039 TestNo:EPA 8015B Analysis Date:11/17/2020 Prep Date:11/16/2020 Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimitHighLimit RPDLimit Qual Units:mg/Kg PQL Client ID:ZZZZZZ RunNo:148791 SeqNo:4007096 MSDSampType:TestCode:8015_S_DM H EPA 3550B DRO 997.0 97.7 37 141 2010116.6 1066 2.341090.744 Surr: p-Terphenyl 79.76 87.8 56 133 070.003 Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank E Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit R RPD outside accepted recovery limits S Spike/Surrogate outside of limits due to matrix interference DO Surrogate Diluted Out Calculations are based on raw values 5 of 5 N043025-01 ASSET Laboratories Please review the checklist below. Any NO signifies non-compliance. Any non-compliance will be noted and must be understood as having an impact on the quality of the data. All tests will be performed as requested regardless of any compliance issues. If you have any questions or further instruction, please contact our Project Coordinator at (702) 307-2659. Carrier name:ASSET Cooler Received/Opened On:11/13/2020 Rep sample Temp (Deg C):4.8 IR Gun ID:1 Temp Blank:Yes No Last 4 digits of Tracking No.:NA Cooling process:Ice Ice Pack Dry Ice Other None Packing Material Used:None Workorder:N043025 Sample Receipt Checklist 4. Chain of custody present?Yes No 6. Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received?Yes No 7. Chain of custody agrees with sample labels?Yes No 8. Samples in proper container/bottle?Yes No 9. Sample containers intact?Yes No 10. Sufficient sample volume for indicated test?Yes No 11. All samples received within holding time?Yes No Yes No NA13. Water - VOA vials have zero headspace? 14. Water - pH acceptable upon receipt?Yes No NA Example: pH > 12 for (CN,S); pH<2 for Metals 1. Shipping container/cooler in good condition?Yes No Not Present 2. Custody seals intact, signed, dated on shippping container/cooler?Yes No Not Present 3. Custody seals intact on sample bottles?Yes No Not Present 5. Sampler's name present in COC?Yes No 12. Temperature of rep sample or Temp Blank within acceptable limit?Yes No NA Yes No NA15. Did the bottle labels indicate correct preservatives used? 16. Were there Non-Conformance issues at login?Yes No NA Was Client notified?Yes No NA Comments:Received at Las Vegas Lab on 11/14/20 at 3.9 oC, IR# 2, GSO# 3586. Checklist Completed By:TM Reviewed By: 11/16/2020 Sample ID Client Sample ID Date Collected Date Received: Date Due Matrix Test No WORK ORDER Summary 16-Nov-20 WorkOrder:N043025 Comments: Client ID:PACED01 Project:Matrix, 0014.013.002 QC Level:RTNE Hld MS Sub 11/13/2020 Test Name ASSET Laboratories Storage N043025-001A HA8-10'E-5'11/13/2020 10:30:00 AM 11/20/2020 Soil EPA 8015B DIESEL & MOTOR OIL RANGE ORGANICS BY GC/FID WS 11/20/2020 EPA 3550B SHAKE-OUT METHOD: EXTRACTABLE FUELS WS N043025-002A FOLDER 11/20/2020 11/20/2020 Folder Folder LAB 11/20/2020 Folder Folder LAB 1 of 1Page THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions E.3 - Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Date: May 20, 2021 To: Mr. Greg Dickinson Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 From: Heriberto Robles, Ph.D., D.A.B.T. Subject: Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation “Matrix” Property 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California At the request of Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. (Pacific Edge), Enviro-Tox Services Inc. (Enviro-Tox) conducted a Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation (VIRE) for the “Matrix” Property located at 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard in Anaheim, California (the Subject Property). The purpose of the VIRE was to assess whether the presence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) detected in soil gas under the property is likely to exceed levels considered acceptable to California health and environmental protection agencies. The risk evaluation was based on soil gas analytical data collected at the Subject Property by Pacific Edge in May 2020. A summary of soil gas analytical results is provided in Table 1. A copy of the analytical laboratory report is included in Attachment A. Environmental investigations conducted at the Subject Property revealed that traces of VOCs may be present in soil gas at the Subject Property (Pacific Edge, 2020). The potential for VOC vapor intrusion into future onsite residential building was evaluated in this VIRE. The cancer risk estimated to result from unmitigated vapor intrusion into onsite buildings is estimated to be less than seven in ten million (7E-07). This estimated cancer risk is lower than the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) benchmark value of 1E-06 and therefore considered acceptable. The non-cancer hazard was estimated to be 0.06. This estimated Hazard Index is within levels considered acceptable to California health and environmental protection agencies. Vapor Intrusion Risk Evaluation Methodology Risk characterization involves estimating the magnitude of the potential adverse health effects that could occur due to chronic, long-term exposure to chemicals identified in soil gas at the site. The risk characterization is based on the results of the dose-response (toxicity) and exposure assessment. It is known that chemicals may migrate through environmental media from their source to a point where human receptors may be exposed. Therefore, it was necessary to determine if the detected VOCs – given their residual concentrations, locations, soil physical characteristics, weather conditions, etc. – could potentially migrate up to the surface (where human receptors may be exposed). Screening-level models were used to predict indoor air concentrations that may result from the chemical vapors potentially released from soil gas under the Subject Property. The estimated vapor Technical Memorandum May 20, 2021 Page 2 of 7 flux and indoor air concentrations were then used to estimate potential health risks that may result from onsite exposures. For the purposes of this evaluation, it was assumed that the land use would be residential. The only exposure pathway that was considered complete was the volatilization of VOCs from soil gas and the subsequent emission to indoor air. In this evaluation, maximum detected chemical concentrations were considered representative of chemical concentrations present in soil gas under the Subject Property. Maximum detected concentrations are summarized in Table 1. DTSC guidance recommends that multiple lines of evidence be used when evaluating the potential risk and hazards posed by vapor intrusion. DTSC recommends that the indoor air chemical concentrations that can result from vapor intrusion be estimated using the following equation: 𝐴𝐹= 𝐶!"#$$% 𝐶&$!' )*& Where: AF = Attenuation factor (unitless) Cindoor = Indoor air concentration (micrograms per cubic meter [ug/m3]) Csoil gas = Soil gas concentration (ug/m3) Using the above equation, the indoor air chemical concentration can be estimated by multiplying the known soil gas concentration by the default attenuation factor (AF). In accordance with DTSC (2011) guidance, the default AF for residential sites (0.001) was used in this VIRE along with the maximum subsurface concentrations. The DTSC default AF reflects reasonably protective assumptions for conditions in California for the contamination of indoor air due to vapor intrusion (DTSC, 2011). However, DTSC (2019b) also recommends that risk assessments evaluate vapor intrusion using the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) default AF of 0.03 (USEPA, 2015). The AF of 0.03 was developed by the USEPA for the evaluation of sub-slab soil gas data (https://www.epa.gov/vaporintrusion/visl-users-guide). The AF of 0.03 assumes the source of contamination is located directly under the floor slab of the building. It is well known that soils have the capacity to reduce vapor flow in the subsurface. The vapor flow mitigating capacity of soils is directly proportional to the depth of the soil layer that separates the building from the source of VOCs. Specifically, the soil’s combined physical, chemical and/or lithological properties act to reduce or limit the migration of VOCs through the soil’s pore spaces (Little, Daisey and Nazaroff, 1992). The natural ability of soils to reduce vapor migration is not taken into consideration when the AF of 0.03 is assumed. The AF of 0.001 was developed by the DTSC (2011) based on empirical observations of DTSC case workers for hundreds of sites throughout California. The attenuation factors published in Table 2 of the VI Guidance (2011) are applicable to California sites having VOC sources located at depths of 5 feet or more. Based on this information, the default AF of 0.001 is deemed to be the most appropriate for the Subject Property. Since the potential cancer risk estimates that may be encountered by onsite receptors are best represented by estimates obtained from the AF developed by the DTSC for Technical Memorandum May 20, 2021 Page 3 of 7 California sites, the results obtained using the AF of 0.001 are presented and discussed in this VIRE. For completeness, the results of the evaluation using an AF of 0.03 are presented in Attachment B but are not discussed in this memorandum. The model assumes that the concentrations in indoor air are proportional to the flux throughout the soil column, and that a gas infiltrating into the building through the foundation floor is uniformly and instantaneously mixed within the air space above the lowest occupied floor of the building. Because this model ignores a number of possible mitigating factors, it is likely that it over-predicts the chemical flux to indoor air. However, because of its simplicity, this approach provides a simple method to estimate the likely maximum rate at which chemicals would be transported to the surface soils and into a building. The indoor air chemical concentrations estimated to result from the volatilization of VOCs could be considered to represent a “worst-case” estimate. In the calculations, it was assumed that single chemical compounds are volatilizing, traveling alone through the vadose zone and escaping to ambient air. In reality, all chemicals detected at the Subject Property are competing with each other for available soil-pore space. It is well known that chemical volatilization and migration is limited by the vapor saturation in the vadose zone. Indoor air VOC concentrations estimated using the AF of 0.001 are presented in Table 2. Toxicity Values The toxicity assessment characterizes the relationship between the magnitude of exposure to a chemical of potential concern (COPC) and the nature and magnitude of adverse health effects that may result from such exposure. For the purposes of calculating exposure criteria to be used in risk assessments, adverse health effects are classified into two broad categories – carcinogens and non- carcinogens. Toxicity values/exposure criteria are generally developed based on the threshold approach for non-carcinogenic effects and the non-threshold approach for carcinogenic effects. Toxicity values may be based on epidemiological studies, short-term human studies, and sub-chronic or chronic animal data. A reference concentration (RfC) is an exposure concentration in air that is not expected to cause adverse health effects over a lifetime of daily exposure in the most sensitive population. All RfCs used in this evaluation to estimate non-carcinogenic chronic health hazards are presented in Table 3. Health risks for exposures to carcinogens are defined in terms of probabilities. The probabilities quantify the likelihood of a carcinogenic response in an individual that receives a given dose of a particular compound. These probabilities are calculated based on the potential exposure concentration and the inhalation unit risk (IUR) for a chemical. The IUR, which is expressed in units of inverse micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3)-1, is the 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) of the probability of carcinogenic response per unit daily exposure to a given chemical concentration over a lifetime. The IUR multiplied by the lifetime exposure concentration of the chemical provides an estimate of the 95% UCL of the theoretical cancer risk for the specific chemical. The IURs used in this evaluation to estimate carcinogenic dose-assessment risks are presented in Table 3. Technical Memorandum May 20, 2021 Page 4 of 7 In this assessment, chronic toxicity criteria were selected in accordance with the DTSC Regulation “Toxicity Criteria for Human Health Risk Assessment” (effective September 2018) (https://dtsc.ca.gov/LawsRegsPolicies/Regs/Toxicity-Criteria-for-Human-Health-Risk-Assessment). Toxicity information was obtained from the DTSC Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note 10, Toxicity Criteria (DTSC, 2019a). Risk Characterization This section discusses the methods used to quantify the exposure concentration (EC) for potential receptors at the Subject Property. The estimated ECs for each VOC were used to estimate the potential for carcinogenic health risks and non-carcinogenic adverse health effects. The potential inhalation exposures were calculated using the following equation (USEPA, 2009): Where: EC = Exposure concentration, ug/m3 CA = Chemical concentration in air, ug/m3 ET = Exposure time, hours/day EF = Exposure frequency, days/year ED = Exposure duration, years AT = Averaging time, hours (used the equivalent of 70 years for carcinogens and same value as ED for non-carcinogens). Inhalation intake factors were combined with estimated indoor air chemical concentrations (CA) to obtain the exposure concentration for onsite residents. Exposure parameters used to characterize onsite residents are presented in Table 4. Non-Carcinogenic Health Hazard Evaluation The evaluation of non-carcinogenic health hazards began with a calculation of the hazard quotient or HQ for each chemical. The HQ is defined as the ratio of the exposure concentration (EC) to the reference concentration (RfC). The HQ can be expressed according to the following equation: Where: HQ = Hazard quotient, unitless EC = Exposure concentration, ug/m3 RfC = Reference concentration, ug/m3 The estimated HQs are compared to an acceptable hazard level. Implicit in the HQ is the assumption of a threshold level of exposure below which no adverse effects are expected to occur. For example, if the HQ exceeds unity (because site-specific exposure exceeds the RfC), then the potential for non- cancer adverse effects may exist. In general, the greater the value above 1.0, the greater the potential € EC = CA • ET • EF • ED AT € HQ = EC RfC Technical Memorandum May 20, 2021 Page 5 of 7 hazard. In contrast, HQs of less than 1.0 indicate that no adverse health effects are expected to occur from exposure to chemicals at the site. According to the USEPA (1989), if the HQ for a combination of chemicals is less than unity (1.0), there is no concern for potential chronic adverse health effects from the chemical exposures. The HQ estimated using an AF of 0.001 was 0.06 (Table 5). This estimated HQ value is below 1.0. Cancer Risk Estimates Cancer risks were estimated as the incremental probability of an individual developing cancer over a lifetime as a result of exposure to a potential carcinogen (i.e., incremental or excess individual lifetime cancer risk; USEPA, 1989). Cancer risks were calculated in accordance with DTSC (2015) and USEPA (1989) guidelines. Where: Risk = Upper bound incremental lifetime carcinogenic risk, unitless EC = Exposure concentration, ug/m3 IUR = Inhalation unit risk, (ug/m3)-1 The excess cancer risk was compared to the risk level considered acceptable by federal and state regulatory agencies. The target cancer risk level identified by the DTSC in the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) Guidance Manual is one in one million (1.0E-06). However, the USEPA has established acceptable incremental cancer risk levels to be within the risk range of one in 10,000 (1.0E-04) and 1.0E-06; risks greater than 1.0E-04 are generally considered unacceptable. The California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA) has defined a risk of one in 100,000 (1.0E-05) as the “no significant level” for carcinogens under California’s Safe Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Proposition 65). Further, most California air districts use the 1.0E-05 risk level as the notification trigger level under California’s AB2588 Toxic Hot Spots Program. Using the maximum detected VOC concentrations, the cancer risk estimated using an AF of 0.001 was 7E-07 (Table 6). This estimated cancer risk is lower than the DTSC (2015) benchmark value of 1E-06 and therefore considered acceptable. Conclusions and Recommendations Environmental investigations conducted at the Subject Property by Pacific Edge revealed that traces of VOCs may be present in soil gas under the Subject Property. The potential for VOC vapor intrusion into an onsite residential building was evaluated in this VIRE. Results of the VIRE indicate that the probability of developing cancer as a result of exposures to indoor air at the onsite buildings is below 7E-07. This estimated cancer risk is well below the known cancer risk for the United States population and is considered acceptable by California health and environmental protection agencies. Similarly, the estimated Hazard Index is well below the hazard quotient of 1.0, which is considered acceptable to California health and environmental protection agencies. I € Risk = EC • IUR Page 6 of 7 Technical Memorandum May 20, 2021 It should be noted that cancer risk and health hazard estimates using a default AF of 0.03 exceeded benchmark values established by the DTSC (Attachment B). There is a general consensus that a default AF of 0.03 is extremely unlikely to occur at new buildings. However, the possibility of unforeseen conditions that could create preferential vapor intrusion pathways under a new building cannot be ruled out. Therefore, it seems prudent to recommend that some form of engineered vapor mitigation measures (such as an impermeable membrane) be included in the design of any slab on grade residential buildings at the site. The recommended engineering controls could be considered as a precaution to prevent vapor intrusion. This VIRE was based on conservative (health-protective) assumptions, estimates, models, and parameters. Therefore, the results are not absolute estimates of health risks at the Subject Property but are health-protective estimates. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are professional opinions based solely upon the data described in this report. They are intended exclusively for the purpose outlined herein and the property’s location and project indicated. The scope of services performed in execution of this investigation may not be appropriate to satisfy the needs of users other than Pacific Edge. Any use or reuse of this document or the findings, conclusions, or recommendations presented herein is at the sole risk of said user. Given that the scope of services for this investigation was limited, and that conditions may vary between the points explored, it is possible that currently unrecognized subsurface contamination might be present at the Subject Property. Should site use or conditions change, the information and conclusions in this report may no longer apply. Opinions relating to environmental and public health conditions are based on limited data and actual conditions may vary from those encountered at the times and locations where data were obtained. No express or implied representation or warranty is included or intended in this report except that the work was performed within the limits prescribed by the Client with the customary thoroughness and competence of professionals working in the same area on similar projects. Attachments Table 1. Soil Gas Analytical Results Summary Table 2. Indoor Air Volatile Organic Compound Concentrations Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.001 and Maximum Detected Concentrations Table 3. Toxicity Criteria for Chemicals of Potential Concern Table 4. Exposure Parameters for Onsite Receptors Table 5. Health Hazards from Inhalation of Indoor Air Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.001 Table 6. Cancer Risks from Inhalation of Indoor Air Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.001 Technical Memorandum May 20, 2021 Page 7 of 7 Attachment A – Optimal Technology Soil Gas Analytical Reports Attachment B – Cancer Risk and Health Hazard Calculations Using an Attenuation Factor of 0.03 References DTSC. 2011. Interim Final, Guidance for the Evaluation and Mitigation of Subsurface Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air. February. DTSC. 2015. Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual. State of California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento, California. DTSC. 2019a. HERO HHRA Note Number: 10, Toxicity Criteria. February. DTSC. 2019b. HERO HHRA Note Number: 4, Guidance for Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessments. May 14. Little, J.C., Daisey, J.M., and Nazaroff, W.W. 1992. Transport of Subsurface Contaminants in Buildings, An Exposure Pathway for Volatile Organics. Environmental Science and Technology. Vol. 26, No. 11. Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 2020. Phase II Assessment, “Matrix” Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California. December 9. USEPA. 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume I - Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. Washington, D.C. USEPA. 2009. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part F, Supplemental Guidance for Inhalation Risk Assessment). EPA-540-R-070- 002. Final. January. USEPA. 2015. OSWER Technical Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating the Vapor Intrusion Pathway from Subsurface Vapor Sources to Indoor Air. June. This memorandum was prepared by: Enviro-Tox Services, Inc. ____________________________ Heriberto Robles, Ph. D., D.A.B.T. Principal Toxicologist TABLES Page 1 of 2 1, 2 , 4 - T r i m e t h y l b e n z e n e 1, 3 , 5 - T r i m e t h y l b e n z e n e 4- I s o p r o p y l t o l u e n e Be n z e n e Br o m o d i c h l o r o m e t h a n e Ch l o r o f o r m Dic h l o r o d i f l u o r o m e t h a n e Fr e o n 1 1 3 n- P r o p y l b e n z e n e se c - B u t y l b e n z e n e Te t r a c h l o r o e t h e n e To l u e n e Tr i c h l o r o e t h e n e Tr i c h l o r o f l u o r o m e t h a n e ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 ug/m3 M1-5'ND ND ND ND 13 11 ND 2140 ND ND 10 ND ND ND M1-5' REP ND ND ND ND 13 8 ND 2140 ND ND 11 ND ND ND M1-14'ND ND ND ND ND 9 ND 4070 ND ND ND ND ND ND M1-20'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6000 ND ND 14 ND ND ND M1-30'ND ND ND 8 ND ND ND 7420 ND ND ND ND ND ND M2-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1180 ND ND ND ND ND ND M2-15'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1410 ND ND ND ND ND ND M2-20'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1740 ND ND 10 ND ND ND M2-30'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2540 ND ND 14 ND 11 ND M3-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 932 ND ND ND 10 ND ND M3-5' REP ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 907 ND ND ND 10 ND ND M3-15'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1790 ND ND ND ND ND ND M3-20'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1490 ND ND ND ND ND ND M3-30'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4190 ND ND ND ND 32 ND M4-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1410 ND ND ND ND ND ND M4-13'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4070 ND ND ND ND ND ND M4-18'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4400 ND ND ND ND ND ND M4-30'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8010 ND ND ND ND ND ND M5-5'ND ND ND ND ND 9 ND 1570 ND ND 8 ND ND ND M5-15'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1770 ND ND ND ND ND ND M5-20'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2570 ND ND ND ND ND ND M5-30'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 3080 ND ND 9 22 ND ND M6-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6250 ND ND ND ND ND 17 M6-15'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6470 ND ND ND ND ND ND M6-20'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8760 ND ND ND ND ND 21 M6-27'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 9210 ND ND ND ND ND 20 M7-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4150 ND ND ND ND ND ND M7-15'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 5400 ND ND ND ND ND ND M7-19'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 5570 ND ND ND ND ND ND M7-30'ND ND 10 ND ND ND ND 15200 ND ND ND ND 8 22 Sample ID Table 1 Soil Gas Analytical Results Summary "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California Page 2 of 2 1, 2 , 4 - T r i m e t h y l b e n z e n e 1, 3 , 5 - T r i m e t h y l b e n z e n e 4- I s o p r o p y l t o l u e n e Be n z e n e Br o m o d i c h l o r o m e t h a n e Ch l o r o f o r m Dic h l o r o d i f l u o r o m e t h a n e Fr e o n 1 1 3 n- P r o p y l b e n z e n e se c - B u t y l b e n z e n e Te t r a c h l o r o e t h e n e To l u e n e Tr i c h l o r o e t h e n e Tr i c h l o r o f l u o r o m e t h a n e Sample ID Table 1 Soil Gas Analytical Results Summary "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California M7-30' REP ND ND 10 ND ND ND ND 14000 ND ND ND ND ND 18 M8-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6630 ND ND ND ND ND ND M8-15'ND ND ND 12 ND ND ND 7250 ND ND ND ND ND ND M8-20'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 11700 ND ND ND ND ND ND M8-30'ND ND ND ND ND ND 16 17600 ND ND ND ND ND 20 M9-5'ND ND ND ND ND 8 ND 1530 ND ND ND ND ND ND M9-15'ND ND ND ND ND 9 ND 1700 ND ND ND ND ND ND M9-20'ND ND ND ND ND 9 ND 3290 ND ND 9 ND ND ND M9-30'ND ND ND 10 ND ND ND 4630 ND ND 10 24 ND ND M10-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2700 ND ND ND ND ND ND M10-13'ND ND ND ND ND 9 ND 3860 ND ND 12 ND ND ND M10-18'ND ND ND ND ND 9 ND 3960 ND ND 20 ND ND ND M10-30'ND ND ND 13 ND 21 ND 6810 ND ND ND 19 ND ND M11-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 5010 ND ND ND ND ND ND M11-14'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 8490 ND ND ND ND ND ND M11-19'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 18300 ND ND 26 ND 103 ND M11-30'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 10600 ND ND 9 ND ND ND M12-5'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4950 ND ND ND ND ND ND M12-15'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 6720 ND ND ND ND ND ND M12-20'ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 17600 ND ND ND ND ND ND M12-30'ND ND ND ND ND ND 17 27300 ND ND 11 ND ND 27 M13-5'12 53 30 ND ND ND ND 1430 10 35 ND ND ND ND Maximum Concentration 12 53 30 13 13 21 17 27300 10 35 26 24 103 27 Notes: Only the detected volatile organic compounds are shown. ND = Not detected above the laboratory reporting limit ug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter Table 2 Indoor Air Volatile Organic Compound Concentrations Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.001 and Maximum Detected Concentrations "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95636 12 1.20E-02 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108678 53 5.30E-02 4-Isopropyltoluene 95476 30 3.00E-02 Benzene 71432 13 1.30E-02 Bromodichloromethane 75274 13 1.30E-02 Chloroform 67663 21 2.10E-02 Dichlorodifluoromethane 75718 17 1.70E-02 Freon 113 76131 27300 2.73E+01 n-Propylbenzene 103651 10 1.00E-02 sec-Butylbenzene 135988 35 3.50E-02 Tetrachloroethylene 127184 26 2.60E-02 Toluene 108883 24 2.40E-02 Trichloroethylene 79016 103 1.03E-01 Trichlorofluoromethane 75694 27 2.70E-02 Notes: Attenuation factor (unitless) =0.001 µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter NA = Not applicable or not available Chemical of Potential Concern (COPC) CAS Number Maximum Detected Soil Gas Concentration (ug/m3) Estimated Indoor Chemical Air Concentration (ug/m3) Table 3 Toxicity Criteria for Chemicals of Potential Concern "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California VOCs 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 6.0E+01 NA 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 6.0E+01 NA 4-Isopropyltoluene 1.0E+02 NA Benzene 3.0E+00 2.9E-05 Bromodichloromethane 8.0E+01 3.7E-05 Chloroform 9.8E+01 2.3E-05 Dichlorodifluoromethane 1.0E+02 NA Freon 113 5.0E+03 NA n-Propylbenzene 1.0E+03 NA sec-Butylbenzene 4.0E+02 NA Tetrachloroethylene 4.0E+01 6.1E-06 Toluene 3.0E+02 NA Trichloroethylene 2.0E+00 4.1E-06 Trichlorofluoromethane 1.2E+03 NA Notes: Source = Cal/EPA HHRA Note No. 10, 2019 Chemical Chronic Inhalation Reference Concentration (RfC) (ug/m3) Inhalation Unit Risk (ug/m3)-1 Exposure Parameters Adult Resident Child Resident Source Chemical Concentration in Air (CA)ug/m3 ----chemical-specific Exposure Frequency (EF)days/year 350 350 DTSC 2019 Exposure Duration (ED)years 20 6 DTSC 2019 Exposure Time (ET)hr/day 24 24 Default Averaging Time for Noncarcinogens (ATn)hours 175,200 52,560 USEPA 2009 Averaging Time for Carcinogens (ATc)hours 613,200 613,200 USEPA 2009 Exposure/Site Specific Parameters Units Table 4 Exposure Parameters for Onsite Receptors Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.001 "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California Table 5 Health Hazards from Inhalation of Indoor Air Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.001 "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California Residential Exposure Scenario Adult Resident Child Resident Child Resident VOCs 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1.2E-02 6.0E+01 1.2E-02 1.2E-02 2.E-04 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.3E-02 6.0E+01 5.1E-02 5.1E-02 8.E-04 4-Isopropyltoluene 3.0E-02 1.0E+02 2.9E-02 2.9E-02 3.E-04 Benzene 1.3E-02 3.0E+00 1.2E-02 1.2E-02 4.E-03 Bromodichloromethane 1.3E-02 8.0E+01 1.2E-02 1.2E-02 2.E-04 Chloroform 2.1E-02 9.8E+01 2.0E-02 2.0E-02 2.E-04 Dichlorodifluoromethane 1.7E-02 1.0E+02 1.6E-02 1.6E-02 2.E-04 Freon 113 2.7E+01 5.0E+03 2.6E+01 2.6E+01 5.E-03 n-Propylbenzene 1.0E-02 1.0E+03 9.6E-03 9.6E-03 1.E-05 sec-Butylbenzene 3.5E-02 4.0E+02 3.4E-02 3.4E-02 8.E-05 Tetrachloroethylene 2.6E-02 4.0E+01 2.5E-02 2.5E-02 6.E-04 Toluene 2.4E-02 3.0E+02 2.3E-02 2.3E-02 8.E-05 Trichloroethylene 1.0E-01 2.0E+00 9.9E-02 9.9E-02 5.E-02 Trichlorofluoromethane 2.7E-02 1.2E+03 2.6E-02 2.6E-02 2.E-05 Total Hazard Index 6.E-02 Notes: ug/m3 = Micrograms per cubic meter Hazard Quotient (Unitless)COPC Indoor Air Conc. (ug/m3) Inhalation Reference Dose (ug/m3) Average Exposure Conc_nc (ug/m3) Table 6 Cancer Risks from Inhalation of Indoor Air Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.001 "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California Adult Resident Child Resident Adult & Child VOCs 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1.2E-02 NA 3.3E-03 9.9E-04 NA 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5.3E-02 NA 1.5E-02 4.4E-03 NA 4-Isopropyltoluene 3.0E-02 NA 8.2E-03 2.5E-03 NA Benzene 1.3E-02 2.9E-05 3.6E-03 1.1E-03 1.E-07 Bromodichloromethane 1.3E-02 3.7E-05 3.6E-03 1.1E-03 2.E-07 Chloroform 2.1E-02 2.3E-05 5.8E-03 1.7E-03 2.E-07 Dichlorodifluoromethane 1.7E-02 NA 4.7E-03 1.4E-03 NA Freon 113 2.7E+01 NA 7.5E+00 2.2E+00 NA n-Propylbenzene 1.0E-02 NA 2.7E-03 8.2E-04 NA sec-Butylbenzene 3.5E-02 NA 9.6E-03 2.9E-03 NA Tetrachloroethylene 2.6E-02 6.1E-06 7.1E-03 2.1E-03 6.E-08 Toluene 2.4E-02 NA 6.6E-03 2.0E-03 NA Trichloroethylene 1.0E-01 4.1E-06 2.8E-02 8.5E-03 2.E-07 Trichlorofluoromethane 2.7E-02 NA 7.4E-03 2.2E-03 NA Total Cancer Risk 7.E-07 Notes: ug/m3 = Micrograms per cubic meter COPC Residential Exposure Scenario Indoor Air Chemical Conc. (ug/m3) Inhalation Slope Factor (ug/m3)-1 Lifetime Exposure Conc_c (ug/m3) Cancer Risk (Unitless) ATTACHMENT A Optimal Technology Soil Gas Analytical Reports Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS ANALYSES REQUESTED 1. EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 Greg Dickinson Sampling –Soil Gas samples were collected in glass gas-tight syringes equipped with Teflon plungers. A tracer gas mixture of n-pentane,n-hexane,and n-heptane was placed at the tubing-surface interface before sampling.These compounds were analyzed during the 8260B analytical run to determine if there were surface leaks into the subsurface due to improper installation of the probe.No tracer was detected in any of the samples reported herein. The sampling rate was approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record,using a glass gas-tight syringe.Purging was completed using a pump set at approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record.A default of 3 purge volumes was used as recommended by July 2015 DTSC/RWQCB guidance documents. Prior to purging and sampling of soil gas at each point,a shut-in test was conducted to check for leaks in the above ground fittings.The shut-in test was performed on the above ground apparatus by evacuating the line to a vacuum of 100 inches of water, sealing the entire system and watching the vacuum for at least one minute.A vacuum gauge attached in parallel to the apparatus measured the vacuum.If there was any observable loss of vacuum,the fittings were adjusted as needed until the vacuum did not change noticeably.The soil gas sample was then taken. No flow conditions occur when a sampling rate greater than 10 mL/min cannot be maintained without applying a vacuum greater than 100 inches of water to the sampling train.The sampling train is left at a vacuum for no less than three minutes.If the vacuum does not subside appreciably after three minutes,the sample location is determined to be a no flow sample. Analytical –Soil Gas samples were analyzed using EPA Method 8260 that includes extra compounds required by DTSC/RWQCB (such as Freon 113).Instrument Continuing Calibration Verification,QC Reference Standards,Instrument Blanks and Sampling Blanks were analyzed every 12 hours as prescribed by the method.In addition,a Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)were analyzed with each batch of Soil Gas samples.A duplicate/replicate sample was analyzed each day of the sampling activity.All samples were injected into the GC/MS system within 30 minutes of collection. Page 1 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M11-5 M11-14 M11-19 M11-30 M4-5 Jones ID:D-1825-01 D-1825-02 D-1825-03 D-1825-04 D-1825-05 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Anaheim, CA 92805 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Greg Dickinson Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Mission Viejo, California 92691 Matrix Site Reporting Limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Page 2 of 12 Sample ID:M11-5 M11-14 M11-19 M11-30 M4-5 Jones ID:D-1825-01 D-1825-02 D-1825-03 D-1825-04 D-1825-05 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 5010 8490 18300*10600*1410 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 26 9 ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 103 ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 12.5 12.5 1/12.5*1/12.5*12.5 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 99%102%103%101%103% Toluene-d₈97%97%96%97%94% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 93%94%96%94%91% Batch ID:D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS QC Limits Page 3 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M3-5 M3-5 REP M3-15 M3-20 M3-30 Jones ID:D-1825-06 D-1825-07 D-1825-08 D-1825-09 D-1825-10 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 Greg Dickinson Page 4 of 12 Sample ID:M3-5 M3-5 REP M3-15 M3-20 M3-30 Jones ID:D-1825-06 D-1825-07 D-1825-08 D-1825-09 D-1825-10 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 932 907 1790 1490 4190*16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene 10 10 ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND 32 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 12.5 12.5 1/12.5* Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 101%102%104%105%103% Toluene-d₈95%96%95%95%94% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 94%94%96%93%95% Batch ID:D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits Page 5 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M13-5 M10-5 Jones ID:D-1825-11 D-1825-12 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene 35 ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 Greg Dickinson Page 6 of 12 Sample ID:M13-5 M10-5 Jones ID:D-1825-11 D-1825-12 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 1430E 2700*16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene 30 ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene 10 ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 12 ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 53 ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1/12.5* Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 101%105% Toluene-d₈93%95% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 92%95% Batch ID:D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01/D1-051820- 01* ND = Value below reporting limit E = Estimated. Value exceeds calibration range. 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits Page 7 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:D-1825 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:051620- D1MB1 051620- D1SB1 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND 10 μg/m3 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site Reporting Limit JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Mission Viejo, California 92691 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units Page 8 of 12 Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:051620- D1MB1 051620- D1SB1 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 ND ND 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 104%102% Toluene-d₈94%98% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 96%94% Batch ID:D1-051620- 01 D1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION 60 - 140 60 - 140 QC Limits Page 9 of 12 Client: 5/21/2020 Client Address:D-1825 Attn:5/16/2020 5/16/2020 Project:5/16/2020 Project Address:Soil Gas Batch ID: Jones ID:051620-D1CCV1 Parameter RPD Acceptability Range (%)CCV Acceptability Range (%) Vinyl chloride 16.7%60 - 140 114%80 - 120 1,1-Dichloroethene 6.9%60 - 140 65%80 - 120 Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 6.6%70 - 130 117%80 - 120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.4%70 - 130 114%80 - 120 Benzene 3.1%70 - 130 114%80 - 120 Trichloroethene 0.2%70 - 130 113%80 - 120 Toluene 2.6%70 - 130 116%80 - 120 Tetrachloroethene 0.8%70 - 130 118%80 - 120 Chlorobenzene 2.1%70 - 130 110%80 - 120 Ethylbenzene 1.4%70 - 130 115%80 - 120 1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene 0.4%70 - 130 115%80 - 120 Surrogate Recovery: Dibromofluoromethane 60 - 140 92%60 - 140 Toluene-d₈60 - 140 96%60 - 140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 60 - 140 98%60 - 140 105% 117% Matrix Site Date Analyzed: 1445 S Anaheim Blvd, 109% 114% 124% 105% 110% 114%113% 63% 55% 107%105% 113% LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate RPD = Relative Percent Difference; Acceptability range for RPD is ≤ 20% LCS = Laboratory Control Sample 101%105% 94% 94%94% EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates 051620-D1LCS1 051620-D1LCSD1 110% Date Sampled: Anaheim, CA 92805 Date Received: 94% Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc.Report date: 59764 Crown Valley Parkway, Ste 270 Greg Dickinson JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Jones Ref. No.: Mission Viejo, California 92691 Physical State: LCS Recovery (%) LCSD Recovery (%) 115% D1-051620-01 CCV = Continuing Calibration Verification 74% 59% 117% 112%115% 117% Page 10 of 12 Page 11 of 12 Page 12 of 12 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS ANALYSES REQUESTED 1. EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 Greg Dickinson Sampling –Soil Gas samples were collected in glass gas-tight syringes equipped with Teflon plungers. A tracer gas mixture of n-pentane,n-hexane,and n-heptane was placed at the tubing-surface interface before sampling.These compounds were analyzed during the 8260B analytical run to determine if there were surface leaks into the subsurface due to improper installation of the probe.No tracer was detected in any of the samples reported herein. The sampling rate was approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record,using a glass gas-tight syringe.Purging was completed using a pump set at approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record.A default of 3 purge volumes was used as recommended by July 2015 DTSC/RWQCB guidance documents. Prior to purging and sampling of soil gas at each point,a shut-in test was conducted to check for leaks in the above ground fittings.The shut-in test was performed on the above ground apparatus by evacuating the line to a vacuum of 100 inches of water, sealing the entire system and watching the vacuum for at least one minute.A vacuum gauge attached in parallel to the apparatus measured the vacuum.If there was any observable loss of vacuum,the fittings were adjusted as needed until the vacuum did not change noticeably.The soil gas sample was then taken. No flow conditions occur when a sampling rate greater than 10 mL/min cannot be maintained without applying a vacuum greater than 100 inches of water to the sampling train.The sampling train is left at a vacuum for no less than three minutes.If the vacuum does not subside appreciably after three minutes,the sample location is determined to be a no flow sample. Analytical –Soil Gas samples were analyzed using EPA Method 8260 that includes extra compounds required by DTSC/RWQCB (such as Freon 113).Instrument Continuing Calibration Verification,QC Reference Standards,Instrument Blanks and Sampling Blanks were analyzed every 12 hours as prescribed by the method.In addition,a Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)were analyzed with each batch of Soil Gas samples.A duplicate/replicate sample was analyzed each day of the sampling activity.All samples were injected into the GC/MS system within 30 minutes of collection. Page 1 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M7-5'M7-15'M7-19'M7-30'M7-30' REP Jones ID:F-0426-01 F-0426-02 F-0426-03 F-0426-04 F-0426-05 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Anaheim, CA 92805 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Greg Dickinson Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. Mission Viejo, CA92691 Matrix Site Reporting Limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Page 2 of 14 Sample ID:M7-5'M7-15'M7-19'M7-30'M7-30' REP Jones ID:F-0426-01 F-0426-02 F-0426-03 F-0426-04 F-0426-05 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 4150 5400 5570 15200 14000 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND 10 10 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND 8 ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND 22 18 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 117%115%115%116%115% Toluene-d₈92%90%93%93%91% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 90%90%88%88%87% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS QC Limits Page 3 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M6-5'M6-15'M6-20'M6-27'M8-5' Jones ID:F-0426-06 F-0426-07 F-0426-08 F-0426-09 F-0426-10 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 Greg Dickinson Page 4 of 14 Sample ID:M6-5'M6-15'M6-20'M6-27'M8-5' Jones ID:F-0426-06 F-0426-07 F-0426-08 F-0426-09 F-0426-10 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 6250 6470 8760 9210 6630 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane 17 ND 21 20 ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 116%116%115%115%116% Toluene-d₈91%92%92%91%92% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 92%90%90%91%87% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits Page 5 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M8-15'M8-20'M8-30'M4-13'M4-18' Jones ID:F-0426-11 F-0426-12 F-0426-13 F-0426-14 F-0426-15 Analytes: Benzene 12 ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 16 ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 Greg Dickinson Page 6 of 14 Sample ID:M8-15'M8-20'M8-30'M4-13'M4-18' Jones ID:F-0426-11 F-0426-12 F-0426-13 F-0426-14 F-0426-15 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 7250 11700 17600 4070 4440 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 20 ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 114%117%117%115%116% Toluene-d₈90%90%90%92%92% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 88%90%89%89%91% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits Page 7 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M4-30'M12-5'M12-15'M12-20'M12-30' Jones ID:F-0426-16 F-0426-17 F-0426-18 F-0426-19 F-0426-20 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND 17 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Reporting Limit Units Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 Page 8 of 14 Sample ID:M4-30'M12-5'M12-15'M12-20'M12-30' Jones ID:F-0426-16 F-0426-17 F-0426-18 F-0426-19 F-0426-20 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 8010 4950 6720 17600 27300 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND ND ND 11 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND 27 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 114%116%114%117%115% Toluene-d₈92%92%91%93%91% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 90%87%90%86%88% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 60 - 140 ND = Value below reporting limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Page 9 of 14 Client: Report date:5/21/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:F-0426 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:051620- F1MB1 051620- F1SB1 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND 10 μg/m3 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site Reporting Limit JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc. 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA92691 1445 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, CA 92805 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units Page 10 of 14 Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:051620- F1MB1 051620- F1SB1 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 ND ND 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 115%115% Toluene-d₈93%92% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 94%91% Batch ID:F1-051620- 01 F1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION 60 - 140 60 - 140 QC Limits Page 11 of 14 Client: 5/21/2020 Client Address:F-0426 Attn:5/16/2020 5/16/2020 Project:5/16/2020 Project Address:Soil Gas Batch ID: Jones ID:051620-F1CCV1 Parameter RPD Acceptability Range (%)CCV Acceptability Range (%) Vinyl chloride 6.6%60 - 140 89%80 - 120 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.5%60 - 140 99%80 - 120 Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.5%70 - 130 9290%80 - 120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1.7%70 - 130 103%80 - 120 Benzene 1.0%70 - 130 84%80 - 120 Trichloroethene 0.4%70 - 130 93%80 - 120 Toluene 17.1%70 - 130 85%80 - 120 Tetrachloroethene 4.5%70 - 130 112%80 - 120 Chlorobenzene 4.3%70 - 130 89%80 - 120 Ethylbenzene 4.4%70 - 130 88%80 - 120 1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene 6.7%70 - 130 91%80 - 120 Surrogate Recovery: Dibromofluoromethane 60 - 140 112%60 - 140 Toluene-d₈60 - 140 92%60 - 140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 60 - 140 97%60 - 140 95% 88% Matrix Site Date Analyzed: 1445 S Anaheim Blvd 103% 91% 88% 97% 108% 83%80% 107% 88% 86%82% 82% LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate RPD = Relative Percent Difference; Acceptability range for RPD is ≤ 20% LCS = Laboratory Control Sample 112%113% 92% 95%96% EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates 051620-F1LCS1 051620-F1LCSD1 83% Date Sampled: Anaheim, CA 92805 Date Received: 91% Pacific Edge Engineering, Inc.Report date: 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Greg Dickinson JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Jones Ref. No.: Mission Viejo, CA92691 Physical State: LCS Recovery (%) LCSD Recovery (%) 90% F1-051620-01 CCV = Continuing Calibration Verification 100% 88% 86% 91%77% 81% Page 12 of 14 Page 13 of 14 Page 14 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas ANALYSES REQUESTED 1. EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Sampling –Soil Gas samples were collected in glass gas-tight syringes equipped with Teflon plungers. A tracer gas mixture of n-pentane,n-hexane,and n-heptane was placed at the tubing-surface interface before sampling.These compounds were analyzed during the 8260B analytical run to determine if there were surface leaks into the subsurface due to improper installation of the probe.No tracer was detected in any of the samples reported herein. The sampling rate was approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record,using a glass gas-tight syringe.Purging was completed using a pump set at approximately 200 cc/min,except when noted differently on the chain of custody record.A default of 3 purge volumes was used as recommended by July 2015 DTSC/RWQCB guidance documents. Prior to purging and sampling of soil gas at each point,a shut-in test was conducted to check for leaks in the above ground fittings.The shut-in test was performed on the above ground apparatus by evacuating the line to a vacuum of 100 inches of water, sealing the entire system and watching the vacuum for at least one minute.A vacuum gauge attached in parallel to the apparatus measured the vacuum.If there was any observable loss of vacuum,the fittings were adjusted as needed until the vacuum did not change noticeably.The soil gas sample was then taken. No flow conditions occur when a sampling rate greater than 10 mL/min cannot be maintained without applying a vacuum greater than 100 inches of water to the sampling train.The sampling train is left at a vacuum for no less than three minutes.If the vacuum does not subside appreciably after three minutes,the sample location is determined to be a no flow sample. Analytical –Soil Gas samples were analyzed using EPA Method 8260 that includes extra compounds required by DTSC/RWQCB (such as Freon 113).Instrument Continuing Calibration Verification,QC Reference Standards,Instrument Blanks and Sampling Blanks were analyzed every 12 hours as prescribed by the method.In addition,a Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)and Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)were analyzed with each batch of Soil Gas samples.A duplicate/replicate sample was analyzed each day of the sampling activity.All samples were injected into the GC/MS system within 30 minutes of collection. Page 1 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M9-5'M9-15'M9-20'M9-30'M5-5' Jones ID:G-0138-01 G-0138-02 G-0138-03 G-0138-04 G-0138-05 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND 10 ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform 8 9 9 ND 9 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 Matrix Site Reporting Limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Units 1441 S Anaheim Blvd JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Greg Dickinson Pacific Edge Engineering Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Anaheim, California Page 2 of 14 Sample ID:M9-5'M9-15'M9-20'M9-30'M5-5' Jones ID:G-0138-01 G-0138-02 G-0138-03 G-0138-04 G-0138-05 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 1530 1700 3290E 4630 1570 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 9 10 8 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND 24 ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 110%119%113%114%115% Toluene-d₈96%94%96%93%95% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 98%101%100%103%100% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 QC Limits ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 Reporting Limit Units 60 - 140 EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Page 3 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M5-15'M5-20'M5-30'M1-5'M1-5' REP Jones ID:G-0138-06 G-0138-07 G-0138-08 G-0138-09 G-0138-10 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND 13 13 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND ND 11 8 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 4 of 14 Sample ID:M5-15'M5-20'M5-30'M1-5'M1-5' REP Jones ID:G-0138-06 G-0138-07 G-0138-08 G-0138-09 G-0138-10 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 1770 2570 3080 2140 2410 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 9 10 11 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 22 ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 116%117%114%112%113% Toluene-d₈94%95%93%97%97% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 105%100%100%97%100% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit QC Limits 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 5 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M1-14'M1-20'M1-30'M2-5'M2-15' Jones ID:G-0138-11 G-0138-12 G-0138-13 G-0138-14 G-0138-15 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform 9 ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 6 of 14 Sample ID:M1-14'M1-20'M1-30'M2-5'M2-15' Jones ID:G-0138-11 G-0138-12 G-0138-13 G-0138-14 G-0138-15 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 4070E 6000*7420E 1180 1410 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND 14 ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1/125*1 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 113%115%105%114%114% Toluene-d₈97%95%97%96%94% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 101%104%101%99%104% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01/D1-051820- 01* G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 QC Limits ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 60 - 140 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 7 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:M2-20'M2-30'M10-13'M10-18'M10-30' Jones ID:G-0138-16 G-0138-17 G-0138-18 G-0138-19 G-0138-20 Analytes: Benzene ND ND ND ND 13 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 9 9 21 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND ND ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 10 μg/m3 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Reporting Limit Units Greg Dickinson Matrix Site 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Page 8 of 14 Sample ID:M2-20'M2-30'M10-13'M10-18'M10-30' Jones ID:G-0138-16 G-0138-17 G-0138-18 G-0138-19 G-0138-20 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 1740 2540 3860 3960*6810E 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND ND ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene 10 14 12 20 ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND ND ND 19 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND 11 ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND ND ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND ND ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND ND ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND ND ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 1 1/12.5*1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 113%109%110%98%110% Toluene-d₈96%96%94%95%96% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 103%101%98%100%104% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01/D1-051820- 01* G1-051620- 01 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 60 - 140 ND = Value below reporting limit EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units QC Limits 60 - 140 60 - 140 Page 9 of 14 Client: Report date:5/20/2020 Client Address:Jones Ref. No.:G-0138 Attn:Date Sampled:5/16/2020 Date Received:5/16/2020 Project:Date Analyzed:5/16/2020 Project Address:Physical State:Soil Gas Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:052620- G1MB1 052620- G1SB1 Analytes: Benzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromodichloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Bromoform ND ND 8 μg/m3 n-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 sec-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 tert-Butylbenzene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Carbon tetrachloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chlorobenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Chloroform ND ND 8 μg/m3 2-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 4-Chlorotoluene ND ND 12 μg/m3 Dibromochloromethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ND ND 8 μg/m3 Dibromomethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2- Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 Dichlorodifluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3-Dichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 2,2-Dichloropropane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1-Dichloropropene ND ND 10 μg/m3 Units JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION Pacific Edge Engineering 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 1441 S Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Greg Dickinson Matrix Site Reporting Limit Page 10 of 14 Sample ID:METHOD BLANK SAMPLING BLANK Jones ID:052620- G1MB1 052620- G1SB1 Analytes: cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Ethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Freon 113 ND ND 16 μg/m3 Hexachlorobutadiene ND ND 24 μg/m3 Isopropylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 4-Isopropyltoluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Methylene chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 Naphthalene ND ND 40 μg/m3 n-Propylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Styrene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 Tetrachloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Toluene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichloroethene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Trichlorofluoromethane ND ND 16 μg/m3 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND ND 8 μg/m3 Vinyl chloride ND ND 8 μg/m3 m,p-Xylene ND ND 16 μg/m3 o-Xylene ND ND 8 μg/m3 MTBE ND ND 40 μg/m3 Ethyl-tert-butylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 Di-isopropylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-amylmethylether ND ND 40 μg/m3 tert-Butylalcohol ND ND 400 μg/m3 Tracer: n-Pentane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Hexane ND ND 80 μg/m3 n-Heptane ND ND 80 μg/m3 Dilution Factor 1 1 Surrogate Recoveries: Dibromofluoromethane 117%116% Toluene-d₈101%99% 4-Bromofluorobenzene 105%102% Batch ID:G1-051620- 01 G1-051620- 01 ND = Value below reporting limit 60 - 140 JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION 60 - 140 60 - 140 QC Limits EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates Reporting Limit Units Page 11 of 14 Client: 5/20/2020 Client Address:G-0138 Attn:5/16/2020 5/16/2020 Project:5/16/2020 Project Address:Soil Gas Batch ID: Jones ID: Parameter RPD Acceptability Range (%)CCV Acceptability Range (%) Vinyl chloride 1.1%60 - 140 76%80 - 120 1,1-Dichloroethene 13.2%60 - 140 100%80 - 120 Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 7.1%70 - 130 94%80 - 120 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 12.0%70 - 130 100%80 - 120 Benzene 6.0%70 - 130 94%80 - 120 Trichloroethene 10.8%70 - 130 92%80 - 120 Toluene 8.6%70 - 130 93%80 - 120 Tetrachloroethene 14.0%70 - 130 90%80 - 120 Chlorobenzene 10.6%70 - 130 91%80 - 120 Ethylbenzene 16.9%70 - 130 96%80 - 120 1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene 15.1%70 - 130 103%80 - 120 Surrogate Recovery: Dibromofluoromethane 60 - 140 110%60 - 140 Toluene-d₈60 - 140 98%60 - 140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 60 - 140 104%60 - 140 85% 79% G1-051620-01 CCV = Continuing Calibration Verification 77% 101% 99% 83%90% Jones Ref. No.: Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Physical State: LCS Recovery (%) LCSD Recovery (%) Date Received: 94% Pacific Edge Engineering Report date: 26431 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 270 Greg Dickinson JONES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION 94% 102%104% EPA 8260B – Volatile Organics by GC/MS + Oxygenates 051620-G1LCS1 051620-G1LCSD1 93% Date Sampled: 88%80% 98% LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate RPD = Relative Percent Difference; Acceptability range for RPD is ≤ 20% LCS = Laboratory Control Sample 113%112% 92% 88% 100% 102% 80% 101%85% 051620-G1CCV1 90% 93% Matrix Site Date Analyzed: 1441 S Anaheim Blvd 78% 88% Anaheim, California Page 12 of 14 Page 13 of 14 Page 14 of 14 ATTACHMENT B Cancer Risk and Health Hazard Calculations Using an Attenuation Factor of 0.03 Table B-1 Indoor Air Exposure Point Concentrations Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.03 "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95636 12 3.60E-01 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108678 53 1.59E+00 4-Isopropyltoluene 95476 30 9.00E-01 Benzene 71432 13 3.90E-01 Bromodichloromethane 75274 13 3.90E-01 Chloroform 67663 21 6.30E-01 Dichlorodifluoromethane 75718 17 5.10E-01 Freon 113 76131 27300 8.19E+02 n-Propylbenzene 103651 10 3.00E-01 sec-Butylbenzene 135988 35 1.05E+00 Tetrachloroethylene 127184 26 7.80E-01 Toluene 108883 24 7.20E-01 Trichloroethylene 79016 103 3.09E+00 Trichlorofluoromethane 75694 27 8.10E-01 Notes: Attenuation factor (unitless) =0.03 µg/L = micrograms per liter NA = Not applicable or not available Chemical of Potential Concern (COPC) CAS Number Maximum Detected Soil Gas Concentration (µg/m3) Estimated Indoor Chemical Air Concentration (ug/m3) Table B-2 Health Hazards from Inhalation of Indoor Air Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.03 "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California Indoor Inhalation Residential Exposure Scenario Air Reference Average Exposure Conc_nc Hazard Quotient Conc.Dosea (ug/m3)(Unitless) (ug/m3)(ug/m3)Adult Res.Child Res.Child Res. VOCs 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 3.6E-01 6.0E+01 3.5E-01 3.5E-01 5.8E-03 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 1.6E+00 6.0E+01 1.5E+00 1.5E+00 2.5E-02 4-Isopropyltoluene 9.0E-01 1.0E+02 8.6E-01 8.6E-01 8.6E-03 Benzene 3.9E-01 3.0E+00 3.7E-01 3.7E-01 1.2E-01 Bromodichloromethane 3.9E-01 8.0E+01 3.7E-01 3.7E-01 4.7E-03 Chloroform 6.3E-01 9.8E+01 6.0E-01 6.0E-01 6.2E-03 Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.1E-01 1.0E+02 4.9E-01 4.9E-01 4.9E-03 Freon 113 8.2E+02 5.0E+03 7.9E+02 7.9E+02 1.6E-01 n-Propylbenzene 3.0E-01 1.0E+03 2.9E-01 2.9E-01 2.9E-04 sec-Butylbenzene 1.1E+00 4.0E+02 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 2.5E-03 Tetrachloroethylene 7.8E-01 4.0E+01 7.5E-01 7.5E-01 1.9E-02 Toluene 7.2E-01 3.0E+02 6.9E-01 6.9E-01 2.3E-03 Trichloroethylene 3.1E+00 2.0E+00 3.0E+00 3.0E+00 1.5E+00 Trichlorofluoromethane 8.1E-01 1.2E+03 7.8E-01 7.8E-01 6.5E-04 Total Hazard Index 1.8E+00 Notes: ug/m3 = Micrograms per cubic meter COPC Table B-3 Cancer Risks from Inhalation of Indoor Air Estimated Using a Default Attenuation Factor of 0.03 "Matrix" Property: 1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California Indoor Air Inhalation Chemical Slope Lifetime Expossure Conc_c Cancer Risk Conc.Factor (ug/m3)(unitless) (ug/m3)(ug/m3)-1 Adult Resident Child Resident Adult & Child VOCs 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 3.6E-01 NA 9.9E-02 3.0E-02 NA 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 1.6E+00 NA 4.4E-01 1.3E-01 NA 4-Isopropyltoluene 9.0E-01 NA 2.5E-01 7.4E-02 NA Benzene 3.9E-01 2.9E-05 1.1E-01 3.2E-02 4.E-06 Bromodichloromethane 3.9E-01 3.7E-05 1.1E-01 3.2E-02 5.E-06 Chloroform 6.3E-01 2.3E-05 1.7E-01 5.2E-02 5.E-06 Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.1E-01 NA 1.4E-01 4.2E-02 NA Freon 113 8.2E+02 NA 2.2E+02 6.7E+01 NA n-Propylbenzene 3.0E-01 NA 8.2E-02 2.5E-02 NA sec-Butylbenzene 1.1E+00 NA 2.9E-01 8.6E-02 NA Tetrachloroethylene 7.8E-01 6.1E-06 2.1E-01 6.4E-02 2.E-06 Toluene 7.2E-01 NA 2.0E-01 5.9E-02 NA Trichloroethylene 3.1E+00 4.1E-06 8.5E-01 2.5E-01 5.E-06 Trichlorofluoromethane 8.1E-01 NA 2.2E-01 6.7E-02 NA Total Cancer Risk 2.E-05 Notes: ug/m3 = Micrograms per cubic meter COPC Residential Exposure Scenario City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix F: Hydrology and Water Quality Supporting Information THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions F.1 - Hydrology Study THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY STUDY 110 W. Midway Drive ANAHEIM, CA OTH2021-01359 Project Address: 110 W. Midway Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Prepared For: National Community Renaissance 9421 Haven Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Alexa Washburn Sr. Vice President – Planning & Acquisitions Prepared By: C&V Consulting Inc. 9830 Irvine Center Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Ryan Bittner, P.E. (949) 916-3800 April 2021 Revised May 2021 6/1/2021, 4:40:48 PM ANAH-OTH2021-01359 Esperanza Rios TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 3.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY 2 4.0 PROPOSED CONDITIONS 2 5.0 METHODOLOGY 3 6.0 RESULTS 4 7.0 CONCLUSION 5 8.0 DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS 5 9.0 REFERENCES 5 APPENDIX A: Hydrology Maps Existing Conditions Preliminary Hydrology Map Proposed Conditions Preliminary Hydrology Map APPENDIX B: Hydrology Calculations Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (10-year Storm Event) Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (25-year Storm Event) Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (100-year Storm Event) APPENDIX C: USDA Soil Map APPENDIX D: Portions of the City of Anaheim, Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area APPENDIX E: Orange County Drainage Facilities Maps APPENDIX F: Hydraulic Calculations Catch Basin Sizing Pipe Sizing Parkway Culvert Sizing 100-Year Water Surface Elevation APPENDIX G: Small Area Unit Hydrograph Preliminary Hydrology Study for 110 W. Midway Dr Anaheim, CA 92805 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND SIGNATURE PAGE This Preliminary Hydrology Study was prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. under the supervision of Ryan Bittner, P.E. ___________________________________ ____________ Ryan Bittner, R.C.E. 68167 Date Principal, C&V Consulting, Inc. 5/5/215/25/21 Midway Affordable Housing National Community Renaissance 1 1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The proposed development comprises 2.28 gross acres* and is located at the southwest corner of W. Midway Drive and S. Anaheim Boulevard in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange. The site is bounded by W. Midway Drive to the north, an existing mobile home park to the south, Zeyn Street to the west, and S. Anaheim Boulevard to the east. The existing site is currently used as a city storage yard, car dealership vehicle storage, and a building on the northwest corner of the site is used as a leasing office for the nearby RV Park. Towards the easterly property line there is a drive aisle that provides access to the mobile home park to the south. Along Anaheim Boulevard there is a driveway that provides access to the mobile home park as well. Existing perimeter controls include a chain link fence along most of the property line on all sides of the site. The proposed development will include (86) residential units. The proposed site will be accessible via (2) proposed driveway entrances/exits along W. Midway Drive and S. Anaheim Blvd. The development will include private drive aisles, guest and resident parking areas, a community Clubroom, a public flex space, open space areas consisting of a pool and playground, and landscaping throughout the site. *The gross area utilized for proposed hydrology calculations includes a portion of Zeyn Street which will be private in the proposed condition and drain towards onsite stormwater conveyance facilities. 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS Based on site topography, the existing project site contains approximately 18% impervious coverage. The site consists of primarily a dirt lot utilized for vehicular and City Maintenance Yard Storage areas. The portions of the site that area currently impervious consist of one (1) existing structure and a paved alley. Currently, the project site is generally sloped in the westerly direction, ranging in elevation between 146.8 and 149.2 feet above mean sea level. Onsite drainage is directed as sheet flow in the westerly direction towards Zeyn Street and through the neighboring RV Park to the west. Runoff continues west on the neighboring site until it discharges at the west corner of the intersection of Willow Street and W. Midway Drive. Runoff continues west in W. Midway Drive to an existing City of Anaheim catch basin located on the west side of S. Palm Street approximately 1280 feet northwest of the project site. This existing catch basin captures and conveys stormwater to an existing City of Anaheim 48” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) which drains in the westerly direction and crosses under Interstate-5. Stormwater is conveyed to Anaheim-Barber City Channel via the existing City storm drain system. Anaheim-Barber City Channel drains through Bolsa Chica Channel and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean at Anaheim Bay. The existing alley on the eastern part of the site conveys runoff from north to south in a concrete valley gutter. Per the City of Anaheim, Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area, the site is located within Drainage Basin 22. Drainage Basin 22 has a tributary drainage area of approximately 940 acres. Refer to Appendix D for portions of the City of Anaheim, Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area. Midway Affordable Housing National Community Renaissance 2 The Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) Drainage Facilities Maps were utilized to verify the drainage pattern of site runoff. The topographic survey was utilized to identify existing onsite high points and overall site conveyance of storm water runoff. The entire site runoff was quantified based on the longest hydraulic path from the most remote high point to drop inlet low point. Refer to Appendix E for the applicable OCFCD Drainage Facilities Maps. Refer to “Existing Conditions Preliminary Hydrology Map” within Appendix A for additional information. 3.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY The preliminary hydrology study will determine the amount of stormwater runoff generated from the project site in the existing and proposed conditions. This study will determine whether detention or other peak flow mitigation methods will be required by comparing the proposed and existing condition peak flow rates for the 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm events. 4.0 PROPOSED CONDITIONS The proposed development will consist of 2.28 acres and provide a total of 86 residential units. Associated resident and guest parking areas, bike parking, a private drive aisle, recreational areas, sidewalks, and landscaped areas are also proposed within the development. Based on the proposed land use of the residential lot, the imperviousness was assumed to be 80% per the Orange County Hydrology Manual, Figure C-4. Actual imperviousness will be calculated during final engineering, and hydrology calculations will be revised. The residential site will be graded to convey stormwater as surface flow to three (3) proposed curb- inlet catch basins within localized sumps throughout the site. The catch basins will capture and convey site surface runoff to (2) two proposed, private underground storm drain infiltration systems that are sized to statically detain and infiltrate increased peak flow rates of the proposed condition. At the driveway on Anaheim Boulevard, proposed grading will convey runoff through proposed curb cuts into adjacent landscaped areas. The landscape will serve as pre-treatment before excess runoff is conveyed through area drains into the underground infiltration system. Two areas along the southerly property line were graded to slope south to provide a positive overflow path to W. Midway Drive. The runoff from these areas will be conveyed through curb cuts and into the adjacent landscaped areas. Area drains (designed during final engineering) will collect and convey excess runoff from the landscaped areas into the underground infiltration system. During large storm events that produce flow rates that exceed pre-development peak flow rates and when the underground infiltration systems are at capacity, runoff from Subareas P2 and P3 will overflow into a series of junction structures and a proposed storm drain pipe located in Zeyn Street that will convey the overflow onto W. Midway Avenue through two proposed parkway culverts. The overflow pipe in Zeyn Street will be sized to convey the 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm events. Runoff from Subarea P4 will overflow within the catch basin located at the northwest corner of the site and be conveyed into W. Midway Drive through the parkway culverts. The flow line of the proposed parkway culverts will be at least 1’ below any onsite drainage structure lid or grate. Midway Affordable Housing National Community Renaissance 3 Runoff from the proposed development that enters the public right-of-way on W. Midway Drive will be conveyed in a manner to follow the historic drainage patterns. If the storm drain system becomes clogged, Emergency (secondary) overflow will pond within the localized sumps and overflow within Zeyn Street to W. Midway Drive via the proposed entrance/exit. The site to the west of this development, referred to as the Legacy TTM 19122, is currently processing entitlements and will be in construction prior to the improvements of this site. Developers of both sites are in coordination with one another regarding the design and grading of the shared private drive aisle (Zeyn Street) to prevent any cross-lot drainage from occurring. A proposed cross gutter will be constructed at the intersection of Zeyn Street and W. Midway Drive to allow for continuous street runoff in the westerly direction within W. Midway Drive. Both sites propose for the construction of new curb and gutter along the property frontages on W. Midway Drive as well as half street improvements to convey street and on-site flows properly to the west. The proposed catch basins will convey low flows to proposed biofiltration systems to treat the required water quality design flow rate. Runoff will then be conveyed into private underground storm drain infiltration systems. The infiltration systems are designed to statically detain the Design Capture Volume for water quality treatment and infiltrate the entire volume within 48 hours. This development is a City-led affordable housing project, and a Tentative Parcel Map is currently in process by the City of Anaheim to merge existing lot lines, dedicate right-of-way along W. Midway Drive and S. Anaheim Boulevard and vacate existing roadway easements and right-of-way onsite. Refer to “Proposed Conditions Preliminary Hydrology Map” within Appendix A for additional information. Refer the separately prepared Preliminary WQMP for more information on the proposed infiltration system. 5.0 METHODOLOGY The project site was analyzed using the Orange County Hydrology Manual 1986 and Advanced Engineering Software (AES) 2014 hydrology software. The initial subareas were analyzed for acreage, land-use, soil type, peak flow rate and time of concentration according to the Rational Method described in the manual. Midway Affordable Housing National Community Renaissance 4 6.0 RESULTS Drainage Area Area (ac) Q10 (cfs) Q25 (cfs) Q100 (cfs) Tc (min) Existing Conditions X1 0.11 0.27 0.33 0.43 8.23 X2 1.54 3.12 3.84 5.06 10.90 X3 0.13 0.41 0.49 0.64 9.60 X4 0.37 1.01 1.23 1.61 7.14 Total 2.15 4.71 5.76 7.58 8.23 Proposed Conditions P1 0.17 0.58 0.69 0.89 5.50 P2 1.20 3.57 4.28 5.53 6.79 P3 0.25 0.9 1.07 1.38 5.0 P4 0.66 1.92 2.29 2.94 7.22 Total 2.28* 6.75 8.07 10.41 Refer to Appendix B for hydrology calculations. Note: All time of concentrations indicated above refer to the 100-year storm event. *The increase in acreage in the proposed condition is because the proposed site will be taking on flows from the half width of Zeyn Street which will be private in the proposed condition. Surface flows from the proposed site will not cross over the Zeyn Street Centerline and no onsite flows from the west are anticipated. Catch Basin Sizing Catch basin sizing will be based on the 100-year storm event peak flow rates. Parkway Culverts Two (2) proposed parkway culverts will convey the primary overflow of larger storm events to W. Midway Drive. The proposed parkway culverts have been sized for the 100-year storm event. Refer to Appendix F of this report for culvert sizing. 100-Year Water Surface Elevations Water surface elevations for the 100-year storm event peak flow rates will verify that the proposed finish floor elevations are set at least 1 foot above the water surface elevation. The flowline elevations of the parkway culverts onsite is 148.4 and the finished floor elevation is 150.18. The Ponding Exhibit in Appendix F shows the water surface elevation during the 100 year storm event if the storm drain system becomes clogged. If the 100 year storm event is exceeded and the storm drain system is clogged, runoff will pond at the shown locations until they exceed the high point grades shown on the exhibit. The finished floor elevations are more than 1’ above these high points. Refer to the Ponding Exhibit and calculations within Appendix F for additional information. Detention Volume Due to the slight increased peak flow rate because of the change in land use and increased impervious coverage of the proposed development, a small amount of stormwater will need to be detained and mitigated onsite. The small unit area hydrograph was analyzed to determine the amount of increased volume runoff that will need to be mitigated. Approximately 189 cf (cubic feet) will need to be detained onsite and mitigated based on the existing 100-year storm event. The water quality Midway Affordable Housing National Community Renaissance 5 infiltration system will be designed to mitigate both water quality and increased 100-year peak flow rates. The system is sized to statically detain the required design capture volume of 6,332 cf to promote onsite infiltration and retention. Refer to Appendix G for the small unit area hydrograph calculations. Storm Drain Pipe Sizing Onsite underground storm drain pipe will be analyzed for the 100-year storm even peak flow rate utilizing WSPG software and will be provided during final engineering. 7.0 CONCLUSION The results from this preliminary hydrology study demonstrate that the proposed condition of the project site will generate a slightly higher peak runoff flowrate than the existing condition of the site. The increase in peak flow can be accounted for in the increase in site area with the addition of the half width of Zeyn Street as well as an increase in impervious area. The proposed water quality infiltration facilities will be designed to statically detain the increased peak flow volume shown by the difference between the existing and proposed conditions produced by the small area unit hydrograph in Appendix G. Downstream facilities will not be hydrologically or hydraulically impacted by the proposed condition of the project site. Refer to Appendix B for Peak Runoff Calculations. Refer to the separately prepared Preliminary WQMP for more information on the proposed infiltration/retention system. 8.0 DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS 1. The property is located in the City of Anaheim, Orange County rainfall region. 2. 100-year storm event flood level protection analysis required for habitable structures per the requirements of the Orange County Flood Control District Design Manual. 3. Site located within Hydrologic Soil Types “A” and “B” per the USDA Web Soil Survey Data, (See Appendix C of this report for reference). 4. The site has approximately 20% impervious coverage. A majority of the site is covered by decomposed granite. In AES, the natural cover type “barren” was used as it is described as graded land in the Hydrology Manual. 5. Proposed conditions use the AES land use of “Apartments” corresponding to 80% impervious cover. Proposed impervious cover will be verified during final engineering. 6. Peak flow rates and time of concentrations were calculated based on the Rational Method using AES 2014. 9.0 REFERENCES 1. Orange County Hydrology Manual 1986 2. Orange County Flood Control District Design Manual 2000 Midway Affordable Housing National Community Renaissance 6 3. NRCS Web Soil Survey 4. City of Anaheim, Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area 2009 5. Orange County Drainage Facilities Map No. 21 6. Advanced Engineering Software (AES) 2014 APPENDIX A HYDROLOGY MAPS Existing Conditions Hydrology Map Proposed Conditions Hydrology Map APPENDIX B HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (10-year Storm Event) Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (25-year Storm Event) Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (100-year Storm Event) APPENDIX C USDA Soil Map and Orange County TGD Figure XVI-2a APPENDIX D Portions of the City of Anaheim, Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area APPENDIX E Orange County Drainage Facilities Maps APPENDIX F Hydraulic Calculations Catch Basin Sizing Pipe Sizing To be provided during final engineering. Parkway Culvert Sizing 100-Year Water Surface Elevation Trench Drain Sizing Storm Drain Inlet Sizing APPENDIX G Small Area Unit Hydrograph APPENDIX A HYDROLOGY MAPS Existing Conditions Hydrology Map 0 SCALE: 1" = 20' 10 20 40 Proposed Conditions Hydrology Map ELE C / P H O N E CAT V FIR E RIS E R E L E C / P H O N E C A T V F I R E R I S E R ELE C / P H O N E CAT V FIR E RISE R ELE C / P H O N E CAT V FIR E RISE R 0 SCALE: 1" = 20' 10 20 40 APPENDIX B HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (10-year Storm Event) ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE (Reference: 1986 ORANGE COUNTY HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING * * NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE * * EXISTING Q10 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: NCR1X10.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 10:50 05/04/2021 ============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*-- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 10.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *DATA BANK RAINFALL USED* *ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) II ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* *USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 80.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 149.24 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 148.70 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 8.233 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.051 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.11 0.30 1.000 86 8.23 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.30 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 1.000 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.27 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.27 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 148.70 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 147.60 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 248.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 5.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.010 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 2.562 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN COMMERCIAL B 0.15 0.30 0.100 56 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.84 0.30 1.000 86 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.55 0.40 1.000 78 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.34 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.912 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.74 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.41 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.16 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 15.40 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.94 Tc(MIN.) = 11.17 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.54 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.12 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.65 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.31 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.34 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.92 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.35 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.21 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 20.04 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.63 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.34 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 328.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 301.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 82.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 149.41 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.14 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.558 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.821 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) COMMERCIAL A 0.02 0.40 0.100 32 5.56 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.07 0.40 1.000 78 9.60 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.04 0.30 1.000 86 9.60 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.36 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.862 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.41 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.13 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.41 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 301.00 TO NODE 302.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.14 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 148.16 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 149.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 5.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.010 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.263 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN COMMERCIAL A 0.18 0.40 0.100 32 COMMERCIAL B 0.01 0.30 0.100 56 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.18 0.40 1.000 78 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.40 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.538 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 0.91 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.41 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.12 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 10.93 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.76 Tc(MIN.) = 7.32 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.01 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.39 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.62 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.36 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.14 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 12.82 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.56 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.22 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 302.00 = 231.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.32 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.39 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.622 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.36 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE (Reference: 1986 ORANGE COUNTY HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING * * NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE * * PROPOSED Q10 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: NCR1P10.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:44 05/04/2021 ============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*-- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 10.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *DATA BANK RAINFALL USED* *ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) II ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* *USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 112.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 150.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.40 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.496 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.845 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS B 0.17 0.30 0.200 56 5.50 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.30 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.58 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.17 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.58 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.40 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 147.94 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 168.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 3.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.030 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.379 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN APARTMENTS A 0.72 0.40 0.200 32 APARTMENTS B 0.48 0.30 0.200 56 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.36 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 2.33 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.01 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.19 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 14.40 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.39 Tc(MIN.) = 6.89 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.57 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.37 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.07 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.08 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.24 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 18.50 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.23 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.52 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 280.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.94 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 119.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 18.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 8.2 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.20 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4.08 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.38 Tc(MIN.) = 7.27 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< ============================================================================ **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 301.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 70.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 148.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 147.32 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.000 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.060 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.13 0.40 0.200 32 5.00 APARTMENTS B 0.12 0.30 0.200 56 5.00 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.90 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.25 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.90 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 301.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.32 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 59.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 18.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 3.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.16 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 0.90 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.31 Tc(MIN.) = 5.31 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 129.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 11 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>CONFLUENCE MEMORY BANK # 1 WITH THE MAIN-STREAM MEMORY<<<<< ============================================================================ ** MAIN STREAM CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 0.90 5.31 3.922 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 0.2 300.00 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 129.00 FEET. ** MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 4.08 7.27 3.276 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.4 100.00 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 4.48 5.31 3.922 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.3 300.00 2 4.83 7.27 3.276 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.6 100.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.83 Tc(MIN.) = 7.270 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.62 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.07 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 400.00 TO NODE 401.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 182.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 148.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 146.75 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 7.034 * 10 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.338 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.15 0.40 0.200 32 7.03 APARTMENTS B 0.51 0.30 0.200 56 7.03 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.94 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.66 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.94 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TC(MIN.) = 7.03 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.66 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.06 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.32 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.200 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.94 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (25-year Storm Event) ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE (Reference: 1986 ORANGE COUNTY HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING * * NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE * * EXISTING Q25 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: NCR1X25.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 10:57 05/04/2021 ============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*-- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 25.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *DATA BANK RAINFALL USED* *ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) II ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* *USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 80.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 149.24 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 148.70 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 8.233 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.638 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.11 0.30 1.000 86 8.23 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.30 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 1.000 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.33 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.33 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 148.70 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 147.60 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 248.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 5.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.010 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.079 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN COMMERCIAL B 0.15 0.30 0.100 56 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.84 0.30 1.000 86 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.55 0.40 1.000 78 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.34 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.912 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 2.13 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.47 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.18 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 16.77 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.82 Tc(MIN.) = 11.05 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.54 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 3.84 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.65 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.31 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.34 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.92 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.11 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.23 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 21.93 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.68 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 328.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 301.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 82.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 149.41 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.14 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.558 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.544 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) COMMERCIAL A 0.02 0.40 0.100 32 5.56 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.07 0.40 1.000 78 9.60 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.04 0.30 1.000 86 9.60 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.36 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.862 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.49 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.13 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.49 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 301.00 TO NODE 302.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.14 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 148.16 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 149.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 5.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.010 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.913 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN COMMERCIAL A 0.18 0.40 0.100 32 COMMERCIAL B 0.01 0.30 0.100 56 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.18 0.40 1.000 78 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.40 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.538 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.10 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.48 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.13 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.79 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.68 Tc(MIN.) = 7.24 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.23 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.39 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.62 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.65 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.15 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 14.02 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.60 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.24 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 302.00 = 231.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.24 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.39 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.622 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.65 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE (Reference: 1986 ORANGE COUNTY HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING * * NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE * * PROPOSED Q25 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: NCR1P25.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:45 05/04/2021 ============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*-- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 25.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *DATA BANK RAINFALL USED* *ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) II ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* *USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 112.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 150.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.40 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.496 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.572 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS B 0.17 0.30 0.200 56 5.50 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.30 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.69 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.17 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.69 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.40 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 147.94 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 168.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 3.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.030 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.035 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN APARTMENTS A 0.72 0.40 0.200 32 APARTMENTS B 0.48 0.30 0.200 56 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.36 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 2.79 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.06 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.21 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 15.71 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.36 Tc(MIN.) = 6.86 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 4.28 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.37 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.07 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 4.89 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.25 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 19.98 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.31 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.58 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 280.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.94 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 119.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 18.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 9.1 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.45 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 4.89 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.36 Tc(MIN.) = 7.22 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< ============================================================================ **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 301.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 70.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 148.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 147.32 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.000 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.824 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.13 0.40 0.200 32 5.00 APARTMENTS B 0.12 0.30 0.200 56 5.00 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.25 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.07 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 301.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.32 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 59.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 18.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.3 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.34 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.07 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.29 Tc(MIN.) = 5.29 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 129.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 11 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>CONFLUENCE MEMORY BANK # 1 WITH THE MAIN-STREAM MEMORY<<<<< ============================================================================ ** MAIN STREAM CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 1.07 5.29 4.670 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 0.2 300.00 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 129.00 FEET. ** MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 4.89 7.22 3.918 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.4 100.00 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 5.35 5.29 4.670 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.3 300.00 2 5.78 7.22 3.918 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.6 100.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.78 Tc(MIN.) = 7.220 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.62 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.07 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 400.00 TO NODE 401.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 182.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 148.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 146.75 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 7.034 * 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.976 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC II): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.15 0.40 0.200 32 7.03 APARTMENTS B 0.51 0.30 0.200 56 7.03 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.32 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.66 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.32 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TC(MIN.) = 7.03 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.66 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.06 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.32 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.200 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.32 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS Existing & Proposed Conditions Hydrology Calculations (100-year Storm Event) ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE (Reference: 1986 ORANGE COUNTY HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING * * NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE * * EXISTING Q100 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: NCR1X100.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 11:06 05/04/2021 ============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*-- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *DATA BANK RAINFALL USED* *ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) III ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* *USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 80.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 149.24 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 148.70 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 8.233 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 4.650 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.11 0.30 1.000 97 8.23 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.30 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 1.000 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.43 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.11 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.43 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 148.70 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 147.60 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 248.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 5.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.010 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 3.958 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN COMMERCIAL B 0.15 0.30 0.100 76 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.84 0.30 1.000 97 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.55 0.40 1.000 93 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.34 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.912 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 2.82 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.55 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.20 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 18.84 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.67 Tc(MIN.) = 10.90 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.54 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.06 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.65 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.31 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.34 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.92 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 5.42 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.25 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 24.34 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.80 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.46 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 328.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 301.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 82.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 149.41 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.14 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.558 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.824 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) COMMERCIAL A 0.02 0.40 0.100 52 5.56 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.07 0.40 1.000 93 9.60 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" B 0.04 0.30 1.000 97 9.60 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.36 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.862 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.64 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.13 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.64 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 301.00 TO NODE 302.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.14 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 148.16 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 149.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 5.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.010 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.046 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN COMMERCIAL A 0.18 0.40 0.100 52 COMMERCIAL B 0.01 0.30 0.100 76 NATURAL POOR COVER "BARREN" A 0.18 0.40 1.000 93 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.40 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.538 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.44 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.57 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.14 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 13.16 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.58 Tc(MIN.) = 7.14 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.37 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.61 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.39 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.62 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.16 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.17 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 15.57 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.71 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.28 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 302.00 = 231.00 FEET. ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.5 TC(MIN.) = 7.14 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.50 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.24 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.39 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.622 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.16 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE (Reference: 1986 ORANGE COUNTY HYDROLOGY CRITERION) (c) Copyright 1983-2014 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 21.0 Release Date: 06/01/2014 License ID 1580 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING * * NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE * * PROPOSED Q100 * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: NCR1P100.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 16:46 05/04/2021 ============================================================================ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ============================================================================ --*TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION MODEL*-- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 18.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.95 *DATA BANK RAINFALL USED* *ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION (AMC) III ASSUMED FOR RATIONAL METHOD* *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0312 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* *USER-SPECIFIED MINIMUM TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE ADJUSTMENT NOT SELECTED **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 112.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 150.40 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 149.40 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.496 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.861 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS B 0.17 0.30 0.200 76 5.50 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.30 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.89 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.17 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.89 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE = 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< ============================================================================ UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 149.40 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 147.94 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 168.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 3.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.050 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.030 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION) = 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.194 SUBAREA LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN APARTMENTS A 0.72 0.40 0.200 52 APARTMENTS B 0.48 0.30 0.200 76 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.36 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 3.59 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.17 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.23 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 17.52 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.29 Tc(MIN.) = 6.79 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 1.20 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 5.53 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.37 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.07 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.4 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 6.32 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.27 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 22.28 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 2.43 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.66 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 280.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.94 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 119.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 10.7 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 5.79 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 6.32 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.34 Tc(MIN.) = 7.13 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>MAIN-STREAM MEMORY COPIED ONTO MEMORY BANK # 1 <<<<< ============================================================================ **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 301.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 70.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 148.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 147.32 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 5.000 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 6.187 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.13 0.40 0.200 52 5.00 APARTMENTS B 0.12 0.30 0.200 76 5.00 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.38 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.25 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.38 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 301.00 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>COMPUTE PIPE-FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA<<<<< >>>>>USING COMPUTER-ESTIMATED PIPESIZE (NON-PRESSURE FLOW)<<<<< ============================================================================ ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 144.32 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 143.90 FLOW LENGTH(FEET) = 59.00 MANNING'S N = 0.013 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) INCREASED TO 18.000 DEPTH OF FLOW IN 18.0 INCH PIPE IS 4.9 INCHES PIPE-FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 3.58 ESTIMATED PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 NUMBER OF PIPES = 1 PIPE-FLOW(CFS) = 1.38 PIPE TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.27 Tc(MIN.) = 5.27 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 129.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.10 TO NODE 1.10 IS CODE = 11 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>CONFLUENCE MEMORY BANK # 1 WITH THE MAIN-STREAM MEMORY<<<<< ============================================================================ ** MAIN STREAM CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 1.38 5.27 6.000 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 0.2 300.00 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 129.00 FEET. ** MEMORY BANK # 1 CONFLUENCE DATA ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 6.32 7.13 5.049 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.4 100.00 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. ** PEAK FLOW RATE TABLE ** STREAM Q Tc Intensity Fp(Fm) Ap Ae HEADWATER NUMBER (CFS) (MIN.) (INCH/HR) (INCH/HR) (ACRES) NODE 1 6.94 5.27 6.000 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.3 300.00 2 7.47 7.13 5.049 0.35( 0.07) 0.20 1.6 100.00 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 COMPUTED CONFLUENCE ESTIMATES ARE AS FOLLOWS: PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 7.47 Tc(MIN.) = 7.129 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 1.62 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR) = 0.07 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.35 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.20 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 1.6 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 1.10 = 399.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 400.00 TO NODE 401.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< >>USE TIME-OF-CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH FOR INITIAL SUBAREA<< ============================================================================ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 182.00 ELEVATION DATA: UPSTREAM(FEET) = 148.00 DOWNSTREAM(FEET) = 146.75 Tc = K*[(LENGTH** 3.00)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**0.20 SUBAREA ANALYSIS USED MINIMUM Tc(MIN.) = 7.034 * 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HR) = 5.088 SUBAREA Tc AND LOSS RATE DATA(AMC III): DEVELOPMENT TYPE/ SCS SOIL AREA Fp Ap SCS Tc LAND USE GROUP (ACRES) (INCH/HR) (DECIMAL) CN (MIN.) APARTMENTS A 0.15 0.40 0.200 52 7.03 APARTMENTS B 0.51 0.30 0.200 76 7.03 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS LOSS RATE, Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.32 SUBAREA AVERAGE PERVIOUS AREA FRACTION, Ap = 0.200 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.98 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.66 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.98 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TC(MIN.) = 7.03 EFFECTIVE AREA(ACRES) = 0.66 AREA-AVERAGED Fm(INCH/HR)= 0.06 AREA-AVERAGED Fp(INCH/HR) = 0.32 AREA-AVERAGED Ap = 0.200 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.98 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS APPENDIX C USDA Soil Map and Orange County TGD Figure XVI-2a O R A N G E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y S A N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y S A N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTY LOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTY OR A N G E C O U N T Y OR A N G E C O U N T Y LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y P: \ 9 5 2 6 E \ 6 - G I S \ M x d s \ R e p o r t s \ I n f i l t r a t i o n F e a s a b i l i t y _2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 \ 9 5 2 6 E _ F i g u r e X V I - 2 a _ H y d r o S o i l s _ 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 . m x d FIGURE XVI-2a JO B TI T L E SC A L E 1" = 1 . 8 m i l e s DE S I G N E D DR A W I N G CH E C K E D BM P 02 / 0 9 / 1 1 DA T E JO B N O . 95 2 6 - E THTH OR A N G E C O U N T Y IN F I L T R A T I O N S T U D Y OR A N G E C O . CA NR C S H Y D R O L O G I C SO I L S G R O U P S SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVISION Source: Soils: Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey - soil_ca678, Orange County & Western Riverside Date of publication: 2006-02-08 !I 03.67.21.8 Miles 05102.5 Kilometers LEGEND City Boundaries Hydrologic Soil Groups A Soils B Soils C Soils D Soils http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm PROJECT SITE Soil Map—Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Natural ResourcesConservation Service Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey 3/25/2021Page 1 of 3 37 4 1 6 4 0 37 4 1 6 5 0 37 4 1 6 6 0 37 4 1 6 7 0 37 4 1 6 8 0 37 4 1 6 9 0 37 4 1 7 0 0 37 4 1 7 1 0 37 4 1 7 2 0 37 4 1 7 3 0 37 4 1 7 4 0 37 4 1 6 4 0 37 4 1 6 5 0 37 4 1 6 6 0 37 4 1 6 7 0 37 4 1 6 8 0 37 4 1 6 9 0 37 4 1 7 0 0 37 4 1 7 1 0 37 4 1 7 2 0 37 4 1 7 3 0 37 4 1 7 4 0 415970 415980 415990 416000 416010 416020 416030 416040 416050 416060 416070 416080 416090 416100 416110 416120 416130 415970 415980 415990 416000 416010 416020 416030 416040 416050 416060 416070 416080 416090 416100 416110 416120 416130 33° 48' 45'' N 11 7 ° 5 4 ' 2 8 ' ' W 33° 48' 45'' N 11 7 ° 5 4 ' 2 2 ' ' W 33° 48' 41'' N 11 7 ° 5 4 ' 2 8 ' ' W 33° 48' 41'' N 11 7 ° 5 4 ' 2 2 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS840 35 70 140 210 Feet0 10 20 40 60 MetersMap Scale: 1:785 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation ServiceWeb Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Orange County and Part of Riverside County, CaliforniaSurvey Area Data: Version 14, May 27, 2020 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 13, 2018—Jan 25, 2019 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Natural ResourcesConservation Service Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey 3/25/2021Page 2 of 3 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 163 Metz loamy sand 1.2 51.0% 196 San Emigdio fine sandy loam, moderately fine substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes 1.2 49.0% Totals for Area of Interest 2.4 100.0% Soil Map—Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Natural ResourcesConservation Service Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey 3/25/2021Page 3 of 3 Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California 163—Metz loamy sand Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: hcn8 Elevation: 30 to 2,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 57 to 61 degrees F Frost-free period: 200 to 340 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Metz and similar soils:80 percent Minor components:20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Metz Setting Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (two-dimensional):Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Convex Parent material:Alluvium derived from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 17 inches: loamy sand H2 - 17 to 63 inches: stratified sand to fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Somewhat excessively drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity:Low (about 5.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Map Unit Description: Metz loamy sand---Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Natural ResourcesConservation Service Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey 3/25/2021Page 1 of 2 Ecological site: R019XD035CA Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components San emigdio, fine sandy loam Percent of map unit:4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Hueneme, fine sandy loam Percent of map unit:4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Riverwash Percent of map unit:4 percent Landform:Fans Hydric soil rating: Yes Corralitos, loamy sand Percent of map unit:4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Metz, mod fine substratum Percent of map unit:4 percent Hydric soil rating: No Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Survey Area Data: Version 14, May 27, 2020 Map Unit Description: Metz loamy sand---Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Natural ResourcesConservation Service Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey 3/25/2021Page 2 of 2 Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California 196—San Emigdio fine sandy loam, moderately fine substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: hcpb Elevation: 10 to 700 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 81 inches Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F Frost-free period: 270 to 350 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition San emigdio and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of San Emigdio Setting Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (two-dimensional):Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Riser, flat Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium derived from sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam H2 - 7 to 40 inches: stratified gravelly loamy coarse sand to very fine sandy loam H3 - 40 to 44 inches: silty clay loam H4 - 44 to 61 inches: stratified gravelly loamy coarse sand to very fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Map Unit Description: San Emigdio fine sandy loam, moderately fine substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes---Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Natural ResourcesConservation Service Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey 3/25/2021Page 1 of 2 Available water capacity:Moderate (about 8.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R019XD029CA Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Metz, loamy sand Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Sorrento, sandy loam Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Hueneme, fine sandy loam Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Survey Area Data: Version 14, May 27, 2020 Map Unit Description: San Emigdio fine sandy loam, moderately fine substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes---Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California Natural ResourcesConservation Service Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey 3/25/2021Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX D Portions of the City of Anaheim, Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area ( * $ ! 2 ! . .! 3 % $ + $- $-2 ? # 4$ $ $- 9 & 3 * $ $- $2 5 $ + $- $-2 8 $- 4$ $ > $ 4$ $ $- # $ !2 # $ & # + $- $- - & * $ $ # $ $ $- . : ( : 3% $ * 5 $ + + " ! ! % % ,- -! ! # & * & # $- $- $ $ %- $ . & ( % ,- -! ! * & . & ( ,- & # $ . - # $- & # $ $ $- $ $ & $- & A2 A2 A! $ * + $ Table 13 – Drainage Area 22 Summary of Hydrology Node Location Drainage Area (ac) 10-Year Flow (cfs) 25-Year Flow (cfs) 100-Year Flow (cfs) 2294 Katella Ave (at Ninth St) 940 883 1107 1404 % % !. % $ ! % $ !2 $- * / $ * ! $ * $ & H 3% $ $ 4$ % $ + # $ $ - * + 2 #- $- $ * $ $- H 3% $ 5 $ + ,- $ $ $ + $ % $ & $- $ & $- ,- $ # $ $- $- ! & 5 $ + $ - . #- H 3% H 3% & # $- $- * $ * $- ! & 5 $ ,- * . * :( : 3% $ $ $- # $ $- # !2 H 3% A $ + $ * & $- & # & * $- $- ! $ $- $- ! & 5 $ 0$ . . - $ !12 $# $ & * ! 0 H 3% H 3% 1 / $- * $- ! 2 $- $# 0 H 3% H 3% 1 $ $ $ $- / $ . & & # $- $- * $- ! $ ! + ,- * $ $ ! + $ $- # $ :( : 3% $ $ / $ $ & > $ 4$ #- $ & # $- $- $- ! 5 $ $ * ,- % $!: & # $- $ $ $ & 4$ & * % $ + $ ( * $ ! 2 & $ $ *2 3 % 2 ? 2 > $ 3 2 * 4$ 2 - * + $ $- )A 2 6 - $ + . $# . )A 2 5 $ + . $# . 8 $-2 > $ 4$ ,- ( $ $ $ & # -! $ & . & # !$!% " $ ! % 4 $ 2 + $ $ $ * $ $- % $!: # . & # $- @ * $ ,- $ ** $ $ & # $ * * + * $ $ + ! $- & & # & $- ! $ * $- & # $ $ * $ = • ) $ "$ & H 3% 4$ & * % $ + $ $- $- • ) $ ", & H 3% 4$ & * $- & $- H 3% $ $- $- • ) $ "$ & H 3% % & * 3 $ $- $-# $ • ) $ "$ & H 3% 3 & * - * + $ % • ) $ "$ & H 3% * 4$ & * $- ( $ H 3% $ > $ 3 • ) $ "$ & H 3% > $ 3 & * * 4$ $ % * $ 4$ • ) $ "$ & H 3% ? & * * 4$ $ $- $ ,- * $ & $- ** $ * $ ! $- & $ ! & # ,- * $ $ * $ $- $ $ * $ $- & # $- @ * $ $ ! - + $ * . $ $ - + && $ & # $! - # ( 2 $ * $ $- & # $- $ 2 $ # . ! $ * + $- $ * $! % $ + 2 5 $ + 2 - * + 2 6 - $ + 2 > $ 4$ 2 8 $- 4$ $ $ + . # + $- ( * $ E & $ $ * $ $- - ( $ $ * $!2 $ + ! $ $ + *. $ & $ $ + #- $- * E $ * + $- $ $ $ * $ # $- # $ % '( , ,- $ $ + & = • 3 $- ( $ H $ H 3% % $ + # $- H 3% & * - * $ • 3 $- ( $ H 3% 6 - $ + # $- H 3% & * . $ ) $ $ $ " # ! • 3 $- ( $ A : ( : 3% - * + # $- A :( : 3% & * ! > ! $ - * > ! • 3 $- ( $ H 3% - * # $- : ( : 3% & * 5 $ $ ! > ! • 3 $- ( $ H 3% > $ 4$ # $- H 3% & * 5 $ $ 5 *. ! • 3 $- ( $ H D H 3% $- $- ! & 5 $ # $- : ( : 3% . $# - * . • 3 $- :( : 3% $- $- ! & 5 $ # $- A :J : 3% & * . $ - &# ! . $# . ! • 3 $- ( $ :( : ,3% / $ $ * & > $ 5 $ # $- :( : $ 0 1 3% @ - . ( • 3 $- ( $ : ( : 3% $- $- ! & 5 $ # $- A K ( : 3% - &# ! . $# . ! $ > $ • 3 $- ( $ A : ( : 3% 5 $ # $- A :J 3% . $# > $ 8 $- $- H 3% $ $ $- % %- # $- :( : ,3% • 3 $- ( $ H 3% # $- H 3% 8 $- 4$ & * 5 $ $ $ , ,- $ $ + & = • % $ $ H 3% $ $- ( $ H 3% % $ + & * - * $ • % $ $ H 3% $ $- ( $ H 3% 6 - $ + & * . $ ) $ $ $ " # ! • % $ $ :( : 3% $ $- ( $ A : ( : 3% - * + & * ! > ! $ - * > ! • % $ $ H 3% - * $ $- ( $ H 3% & * 5 $ $ ! > ! • % $ $ H 3% $ $- ( $ H 3% > $ 4$ & * 5 $ $ 5 *. ! • % $ $ H 3% $ $- ( $ H H 3% $ + ! $- $- ! & 5 $ . $# - * . • % $ $ :J : 3% $ $- ( $ :( : 3% $- $- ! & 5 $ & * . $ - &# ! . $# . ! • % $ $ :J : 3% $ $- ( $ : ( : 3% $- $- ! & 5 $ - &# ! . $# . ! $ > $ • % $ $ :( : 3% @ - . ( $ $- ( $ :( : ,3% / $ $ * & > $ 5 $ • % $ $ :J : 3% $ $- ( $ A :( : 3% 5 $ & * ! $ > $ • 3 $- ( $ H 3% # $- :( : ,3% 2 $ . $- $- ( $ :( : 3% $- :( :3% $ $- 2 $ $- *. & # $ $- % %- • % $ $ H 3% $ $- ( $ H 3% 8 $- 4$ & * 5 $ $ $ )* + , ,- $ $ + & = • 3 $- ( $ H $ H 3% % $ + # $- H 3% & * - * $ • 3 $- ( $ H 3% 6 - $ + # $- H 3% & * . $ ) $ $ $ " # ! • % $ $ :( : 3% $ $- ( $ A : ( : 3% - * + & * ! > ! $ - * > ! • 3 $- ( $ H 3% - * # $- # : ( : 3% & * 5 $ $ ! > ! • 3 $- ( $ H 3% > $ 4$ # $- H 3% & * 5 $ $ 5 *. ! • 3 $- ( $ H D H 3% $- $- ! & 5 $ # $- : ( : 3% . $# - * . • % $ $ :J : 3% $ $- ( $ :( : 3% $- $- ! & 5 $ & * . $ - &# ! . $# . ! • % $ $ :J : 3% $ $- ( $ : ( : 3% $- $- ! & 5 $ - &# ! . $# . ! $ > $ • % $ $ :( : 3% @ - . ( $ $- ( $ :( : ,3% / $ $ * & > $ 5 $ • % $ $ :J : 3% $ $- ( $ A :( : 3% 5 $ & * 8 $- $ > $ • 3 $- ( $ H 3% # $- :( : ,3% 2 $ . $- $- ( $ :( : 3% $- :( :3% $ $- 2 $ $- *. & # $ $- % %- • 3 $- ( $ H 3% # $- H 3% 8 $- 4$ & * 5 $ $ $ 7 5 $ + $ 8 $- 4$2 $- ( $ + $ - $- $ $- H # $- $ # @ * $ ! $- & ) $ * * E $- E & $- $ * * + * $ 5 $ + 2 $- $ ** $- % $! $ $ $ . # $- . $- & $- & # $ = ,- $- $ & $- $ $- $- & 5 $ + . $# 4 . + 4 $ 4$ ,- ( $ ** $ $ $- $- $ & $- $ $ & ' $ 5 $ + 4 $- $ 4$ 3 & $ 4 $ & * & * $ *!% % % 4 ** E , . $- $ $ $ $ * $ .! / $ $ & ,- $ $ * $ # 4 $ ,- $ $ $ * $ & . & ( ' Table 14 – Drainage Area 22 Cost Estimate (2008 Dollars) Drainage Area Street Type of Facility Size Estimated Cost Allec St (from Cerritos to 1425’ N/O Cerritos) New 51” RCP $835,000 22 (from 1425’ N/O Cerritos to 2015’ N/O Cerritos) New 39” RCP 22 Palais Rd (from Anaheim to Claudina) New 45” RCP $316,000 22 Claudina St (from 925’ N/O Palais to Palais) New 42” RCP $384,000 22 Guinida Ln (between Palm & Iris) New 39” RCP $371,000 22 Palm St (from Winston to 250’ N/O Winston) New 39” RCP $145,000 22 Winston Rd (from Palm to Claremont) New 39” RCP $265,000 22 Cerritos Ave (from Anaheim to Allec) Replacement per Alternative 3 60” RCP $1,052,000 Anaheim Blvd (Disney Way to Anaheim Way) New per Alternative 3 3’X5’ RCB $1,208,000 22 (Katella to Disney Way) New per Alternative 3 8’X5’ RCB 22 Manchester Ave (from Harbor to 5-Fwy) Replacement per Alternative 3 42” RCP $343,000 22 Walnut St (from Katella to Kimberly) Replacement per Alternative 3 48” RCP $460,000 22 Ninth St (between Katella and Holgate) Replacement per Alternative 3 30” RCP $143,000 Katella Ave (from ABC to Bayless) Replacement per Alternative 3 9.5’X8’ TRCB (from Bayless to Walnut) New per Alternative 3 10’X8.5’ RCB (Squash box upstream of Walnut) New per Alternative 3 11’X4’ DRCB (North side from Walnut to Midway between Disneyland Dr and Harbor) New per Alternative 3 8’X7’ RCB (North side from midway between Disneyland Dr and Harbor to Harbor) New per Alternative 3 5’X7’ RCB 22 (North side from Anaheim to Harbor) Replacement per Alternative 3 10’X5’ RCB $7,859,000 TOTAL $13,381,000 PROJECT SITE APPENDIX E Orange County Drainage Facilities Maps PROJECT SITE APPENDIX F Hydraulic Calculations Catch Basin Sizing Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, May 4 2021 CB #1 Sizing Q100 Combination Inlet Location = Sag Curb Length (ft) = 7.00 Throat Height (in) = 6.00 Grate Area (sqft) = 7.53 Grate Width (ft) = 3.00 Grate Length (ft) = 7.00 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.010 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = 2.00 Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = -0- Gutter n-value = -0- Calculations Compute by: Known Q Q (cfs) = 6.28 Highlighted Q Total (cfs) = 6.28 Q Capt (cfs) = 6.28 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 4.64 Efficiency (%) = 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 11.76 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = -0- Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, May 4 2021 CB #2 Sizing Q100 Curb Inlet Location = Sag Curb Length (ft) = 3.50 Throat Height (in) = 6.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = -0- Grate Length (ft) = -0- Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.010 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = 2.00 Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = -0- Gutter n-value = -0- Calculations Compute by: Known Q Q (cfs) = 1.38 Highlighted Q Total (cfs) = 1.38 Q Capt (cfs) = 1.38 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 4.53 Efficiency (%) = 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 11.28 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = -0- Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, May 4 2021 CB #3 Sizing Q100 Curb Inlet Location = Sag Curb Length (ft) = 7.00 Throat Height (in) = 6.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = -0- Grate Length (ft) = -0- Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.010 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = 2.00 Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = -0- Gutter n-value = -0- Calculations Compute by: Known Q Q (cfs) = 2.94 Highlighted Q Total (cfs) = 2.94 Q Capt (cfs) = 2.94 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 5.11 Efficiency (%) = 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 13.69 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = -0- Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Pipe Sizing To be provided during final engineering. Parkway Culvert Sizing Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, May 4 2021 Q100 Parkway Drain Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 2.50 Total Depth (ft) = 0.33 Invert Elev (ft) = 148.42 Slope (%) = 2.00 N-Value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by: Known Depth Known Depth (ft) = 0.33 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.33 Q (cfs) = 5.445 Area (sqft) = 0.83 Velocity (ft/s) = 6.60 Wetted Perim (ft) = 3.16 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.33 Top Width (ft) = 2.50 EGL (ft) = 1.01 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 148.00 -0.42 148.25 -0.17 148.50 0.08 148.75 0.33 149.00 0.58 Reach (ft) Q100=10.36 CFS 2-2.5FT WIDE PARKWAY DRAINS ARE REQUIRED 100-Year Water Surface Elevation Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, May 4 2021 CB #1 Depth of Flow Q100 User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 147.94 Slope (%) = 0.80 N-Value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 6.28 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 148.60)-(0.10, 147.94, 0.013)-(2.66, 148.11, 0.013)-(41.90, 148.90, 0.013)-(42.00, 149.40, 0.013)-(48.21, 149.52, 0.013) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.41 Q (cfs) = 6.280 Area (sqft) = 2.28 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.75 Wetted Perim (ft) = 14.98 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.44 Top Width (ft) = 14.62 EGL (ft) = 0.53 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 147.00 -0.94 147.50 -0.44 148.00 0.06 148.50 0.56 149.00 1.06 149.50 1.56 150.00 2.06 Sta (ft) PONDING ELEVATION CB #1 FL (INV ABOVE)=147.94 DEPTH= 0.41 PONDING ELEVATION =147.94+0.41'=148.35 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, May 4 2021 CB #2 Depth of Flow Q100 User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 147.32 Slope (%) = 0.80 N-Value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 1.38 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 147.64)-(11.50, 147.41, 0.013)-(12.90, 147.32, 0.013)-(13.00, 147.98, 0.013)-(13.48, 147.99, 0.013)-(17.17, 148.06, 0.013) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.23 Q (cfs) = 1.380 Area (sqft) = 0.75 Velocity (ft/s) = 1.83 Wetted Perim (ft) = 8.64 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.24 Top Width (ft) = 8.43 EGL (ft) = 0.28 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 146.50 -0.82 147.00 -0.32 147.50 0.18 148.00 0.68 148.50 1.18 149.00 1.68 Sta (ft) PONDING ELEVATION CB #2 FL (INV ABOVE)=147.32 DEPTH= 0.23 PONDING ELEVATION =147.32+0.23'=147.55 Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, May 4 2021 CB #3 Depth of Flow Q100 User-defined Invert Elev (ft) = 146.75 Slope (%) = 0.80 N-Value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 2.94 (Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)... ( 0.00, 147.07)-(11.50, 146.84, 0.013)-(12.90, 146.75, 0.013)-(13.00, 147.41, 0.013)-(13.48, 147.42, 0.013)-(17.17, 147.49, 0.013) Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.29 Q (cfs) = 2.940 Area (sqft) = 1.33 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.21 Wetted Perim (ft) = 11.68 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.31 Top Width (ft) = 11.42 EGL (ft) = 0.37 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 146.00 -0.75 146.50 -0.25 147.00 0.25 147.50 0.75 148.00 1.25 Sta (ft) PONDING ELEVATION CB #3 FL (INV ABOVE)=146.75 DEPTH= 0.29 PONDING ELEVATION =146.75+0.29'=147.01 ELE C / P H O N E CAT V FIR E RIS E R E L E C / P H O N E C A T V F I R E RI S E R ELE C / P H O N E CA T V FIR E RIS E R ELE C / P H O N E CAT V FIR E RIS E R 0 SCALE: 1" = 20' 10 20 40 APPENDIX G Small Area Unit Hydrograph City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions F.2 - Water Quality Management Plan THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 27+  &LW\RI$QDKHLP &RXQW\RI2UDQJH6DQWD$QD5HJLRQ 3ULRULW\3URMHFW 3UHOLPLQDU\:DWHU4XDOLW\0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ :403   3URMHFW1DPH 0LGZD\$IIRUGDEOH+RXVLQJ :0,':$<'5,9( $1$+(,0&$ $316 3UHSDUHGIRU 1DWLRQDO&RPPXQLW\5HQDLVVDQFH +DYHQ$YHQXH 5DQFKR&XFDPRQJD&$ $OH[D:DVKEXUQ6HQLRU9LFH3UHVLGHQWRI3ODQQLQJ $FTXLVLWLRQ    3UHSDUHGE\ & 9&RQVXOWLQJ,QF5\DQ%LWWQHU3( ,UYLQH&HQWHU'ULYH,UYLQH&$  UELWWQHU#FYFLQFQHW  $SULO 5HYLVHG0D\ 6/1/2021, 4:24:47 PM ANAH-OTH2021-01361 Esperanza Rios Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Owner’s Certification NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page i This Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for National Community Renaissance by C&V Consulting, Inc. The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the City of Anaheim and County of Orange NPDES Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of the plan. The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan , including the ongoing operation and maintenance of all best management practices (BMPs), and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with the current Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the intent of the non-point source NPDES Permit for Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District and the incorporated Cities of Orange County within the Santa Ana Region. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors-in-interest shall bear the aforementioned responsibility to implement and amend the WQMP. An appropriate number of approved and signed copies of this document shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity. Owner: Alexa Washburn Title Senior Vice President of Planning & Acquisition Company National Community Renaissance Address 9421 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Email awashburn@nationalcore.org Telephone # (909) 483-2444 I understand my responsibility to implement the provisions of this WQMP including the ongoing operation and maintenance of the best management practices (BMPs) described herein. Owner Signature Date Project Owner’s Certification Planning Application No. (If applicable) MIS2021-00767, SUBPM2021-1232, DEV2021-00059 Grading Permit No. TBD RCP No. TBD Tract/Parcel Map and Lot(s) No. TPM 2021-123 Building Permit No. TBD Address of Project Site and APN (If no address, specify Tract/Parcel Map and Lot Numbers) 110 W. Midway Drive, Anaheim, CA 92805 APNs: 082-185-53, 082-185-48, 082- 185-47, 082-185-41 3UHOLPLQDU\:DWHU4XDOLW\0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ :403 D/tz&&KZ&>,Kh^/E'͕E,/D   EĂƚŝŽŶĂůŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJZĞŶĂŝƐƐĂŶĐĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌ͛ƐĞƌƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ EZͲϬϬϭWƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJtYDW WĂŐĞŝŝ   Preparer (Engineer): Ryan Bittner, P.E. Title CEO PE Registration # 68167 Company C&V Consulting, Inc. Address 9830 Irvine Center Drive, Irvine, CA 92618 Email rbittner@cvc‐inc.net     Telephone # (949) 916-3800 I hereby certify that this Water Quality Management Plan is in compliance with, and meets the requirements set forth in, Order No. R8-2009-0030/NPDES No. CAS618030, of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Preparer Signature       Date       Place Stamp Here 5-24-21 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Table of Contents NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page iii Contents Page No. Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance ........... 1 Section II Project Description .................................................................................. 2 Section III Site Description ....................................................................................... 9 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) ...................................................... 14 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs ................................. 31 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) .......................................................................... 35 Section VII Educational Materials ............................................................................ 36 Attachments Attachment A ........................................................................... Preliminary WQMP Exhibit Attachment B .......................................................................... TGD Worksheets & Figures Attachment C ..................................................................................................... Site BMPs Attachment D ................................................................... Operations & Maintenance Plan Attachment E ................... Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation & GeoTracker Exhibit Attachment F ............................................................. Notice of Transfer of Responsibility Attachment G ................................................................................... Educational Materials Attachment H ......................................................................... Conditions for Final WQMP Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section I NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 1 Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance Project Infomation Permit/Application No. (If applicable) MIS2021-00767, SUBPM2021-1232, DEV2021-00059 Grading Permit No. & RCP No. TBD Address of Project Site (or Tract Map and Lot Number if no address) and APN 110 W. Midway Drive, Anaheim CA 92805 APNs: 082-185-53, 082-185-48, 082-185-47, 082-185-41 Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance applied to this project. (Please list verbatim.) Conditions of Approval have not been issued at this time. Water Quality Conditions of Approval will be provided in the Final WQMP. Conceptual WQMP Was a Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan previously approved for this project? This is a Conceptual WQMP to support entitlement processing. Watershed-Based Plan Conditions Provide applicable conditions from watershed - based plans including WIHMPs and TMDLS. There are no applicable WIHMPs or TMDL for the Anaheim Bay- Huntington Harbor watershed. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section II NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 2 Section II Project Description II.1 Project Description Description of Proposed Project Development Category (From Model WQMP, Table 7.11-2; or -3): All significant redevelopment projects, where significant redevelopment is defined as the addition or replacement of 5,000 or more square feet of impervious surface on an already developed site. Redevelopment does not include routine maintenance activities that are conducted to maintain original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, original purpose of the facility, or emergency redevelopment activity required to protect public health and safety. If the redevelopment results in the addition or replacement of less than 50 percent of the impervious area on-site and the existing development was not subject to WQMP requirement, the numeric sizing criteria discussed in Section 7.II-2.0 only applies to the addition or replacement area. If the addition or replacement accounts for 50 percent or more of the impervious area, the Project WQMP requirements apply to the entire development. Project Area (ft2): 99,452* Number of Dwelling Units: 86 SIC Code: n/a Project Area Pervious Impervious Area (square feet) Percentage Area (square feet) Percentage Pre-Project Conditions 19,890 20% 79,561 80% Post-Project Conditions** 0 0% 99,452 100% Drainage Patterns/Connections Currently, the project site is generally sloped in the south westerly direction, ranging in elevation between 146.8 and 149.2 feet above mean sea level. In the existing condition of the project site, onsite drainage is directed as sheet flow in the westerly direction towards Zeyn Street. The drive aisle on the eastern part of the site conveys runoff from north to south in a valley gutter. Runoff is conveyed within W. Midway Drive in the northwesterly direction towards an existing City of Anaheim catch basin located approximately 1280 feet northwest of the project site. This existing catch basin captures and conveys stormwater to an existing City of Anaheim 48” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) which drains in the westerly direction and crosses under Interstate-5. Stormwater is conveyed to Anaheim-Barber City Channel via the existing City storm drain system. Anaheim-Barber City Channel drains through Bolsa Chica Channel and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean at Anaheim Bay. The proposed site will generally drain in the westerly direction with primary overflow to W. Midway Drive via a two (2) proposed parkway culverts, thus Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section II NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 3 matching the historic drainage pattern. At the intersection of Zeyn Street and Midway Avenue, there is a cross gutter proposed to be constructed to convey runoff from the parkway culverts, west in Midway Avenue. There is proposed curb and gutter along the south side of Midway Avenue that will convey runoff to the catch basin that is approximately 1280 feet northwest of the site. In the proposed condition, three (3) proposed catch basins within localized sumps will capture and convey site surface runoff to (2) two proposed, private underground infiltration storm drain systems. At the driveway on Anaheim Boulevard, proposed grading diverts runoff through a curb cut and into adjacent landscape. During final engineering, the landscaped areas will be designed with area drains that will convey runoff directly into the underground storm drain system. Two areas along the southerly property line were graded to slope south in order to provide a positive overflow path to Midway Drive. The runoff from these areas will be conveyed through curb cuts into the adjacent landscaped areas where areas drains will collect excess runoff and convey flows directly into the underground storm drain system. The two (2) proposed infiltration systems will capture, detain, and infiltrate the site’s Design Capture Volume (DCV) for water quality treatment with 48 hours. During larger storm events and when the proposed infiltrations systems are at capacity, excess stormwater in DMAs 1a and 1b will be conveyed through a proposed pipe in Zeyn Street into a junction structure at the northwest corner of the site. Stormwater will pond within the proposed junction structure and primary overflow will be conveyed to W. Midway Drive via two (2) proposed parkway culverts along the site’s northerly right-of-way. During larger storm events DMA 2 will overflow in the catch basin at the northwest corner of the site and primary overflow will be conveyed to W. Midway Drive via the same two (2) proposed parkway culverts mentioned above. In the event the storm drain system becomes clogged, the catch basins will pond within the localized sumps and overflow to W. Midway Drive via the proposed driveway entrances/exits. Upon entering the public right-of-way, site runoff will follow the historic drainage pattern. As part of the proposed development, all (3) proposed onsite catch basins will be equipped with a connector pipe screen (CPS) Device for full capture trash requirements. The CPS device has full capture certification and will be sized for the 1 year 1 hour storm event for the onsite drainage areas. The CPS devices comply with certified full capture system requirements. Refer to the Preliminary WQMP Exhibit within Attachment A of this report for the location of existing and proposed stormwater conveyance systems and BMPs. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section II NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 4 Narrative Project Description: The proposed development comprises 2.28 gross acres* and is located at the southwest corner of 110 W. Midway Drive in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange. The site is bounded by W. Midway Drive to the north, an existing mobile home park to the south, Zeyn Street to the west, and S. Anaheim Boulevard to the east. The existing site is currently used as a city storage yard, car dealership vehicle storage, and a building on the northwest corner of the site is used as a leasing office for the nearby RV Park. Towards the easterly property line there is a drive aisle that provides access to the mobile home park to the south. Along S. Anaheim Boulevard a proposed driveway that provides access to the mobile home park. Existing perimeter controls include a chain link fence along most of the property line on all sides of the site. The proposed development will include (86) residential units. The proposed site will be accessible via a shared private drive (formerly Zeyn Street) along W. Midway Drive and (1) proposed driveway on S. Anaheim Blvd. The development will include private drive aisles, guest and resident parking areas, a community Clubroom, a public flex space, open space areas consisting of a pool and playground, and landscaping throughout the site. For purposes of this Preliminary WQMP and to be conservative, proposed landscaping is assumed to provide approximately 0% pervious cover in the proposed condition. *The gross area utilized for proposed water quality calculations includes a portion of Zeyn Street which will be a private shared access drive aisle in the proposed condition and has been designed to drain towards onsite stormwater conveyance facilities. DMA 3, approximately 0.15 acres, consists of proposed public improvements within the right-of-way. This includes the proposed 2’ right-of-way dedication on W. Midway Drive, the proposed 7’ right-of-way dedication along S. Anaheim Boulevard, ADA curb ramp reconstruction, sidewalk replacement, new curb/gutter with 2’ wide sawcut/ asphalt replacement, a proposed driveway entrances and proposed parkway. Proposed water quality treatment and site design BMPs will be selected for DMA 3 during final engineering. Best Management Practice (BMP) selection for treatment of stormwater has been described in Section IV of this report. Implementation of BMPs will address the pollutants of concern associated with multi-family residential development. No car washing, trash enclosures, outdoor storage or food processing areas will be incorporated on this project. Long-term maintenance is planned to be handled by a Property Management Company (PMC) appointed by the owner. The project will be serviced by onsite private water system and onsite private sanitary sewer system. The proposed private water system will be looped with (2) points of connection to the existing City domestic water line within W. Midway Drive & S. Anaheim Boulevard. The proposed private sewer system will be gravity feed to (3) points of connection to existing sewer mains flowing within W. Midway Drive & S. Anaheim Boulevard. The private water and Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section II NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 5 sewer systems will be maintained by the PMC. Refer to Attachment A of this report for the Preliminary WQMP Exhibit. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section II NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 6 II.2 Potential Stormwater Pollutants Pollutants of Concern Pollutant Check One for each: E=Expected to be of concern N=Not Expected to be of concern Additional Information and Comments Suspended-Solid/ Sediment E N Expected by proposed landscaped areas. Nutrients E N Expected by proposed landscaped areas. Heavy Metals E N Tributary by uncovered parking areas. Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus) E N Expected by future residents and pets. Pesticides E N Expected by proposed landscaped areas. Oil and Grease E N Expected by uncovered parking areas. Toxic Organic Compounds E N Expected by uncovered parking areas. Trash and Debris E N Expected by future residents. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section II NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 7 II.3 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern No – Show map Yes – Describe applicable hydrologic conditions of concern below. Per the TGD Figure 2, Susceptibility Analysis of Anaheim Bay – Huntington Harbor dated February 2013, the project site is not indicated as a potential area of erosion, habitat, and physical structure susceptibility. The project site drains only through engineered/stabilized channels prior to discharging to the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, HCOCs do not apply to this project. Refer to Attachment B for a the TGD Figure 2. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section II NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 8 II.4 Post Development Drainage Characteristics Post–development drainage will be consistent with a proposed attached Multi-Family Residential project. The tributary areas and direction of run-off flows for the proposed site are delineated on the attached WQMP Exhibit based on the grading and drainage design. Refer to the Preliminary WQMP Exhibit in Attachment A of this report. In the existing condition, site runoff drains overland in the westerly direction towards Zeyn Street and is conveyed to an existing City of Anaheim catch basin located approximately 1280 feet northwest of the project site. Site runoff is captured and conveyed to an existing City of Anaheim 48” RCP which drains in the westerly direction under the I-5 freeway. The City storm drain ultimately discharges to Anaheim-Barber City Channel which drains through Bolsa Chica Channel and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean at Anaheim Bay. Proposed drainage will be conveyed as surface flow and through a series of catch basins within localized sumps that will capture and convey site surface runoff to (2) two proposed, underground storm drain systems. During larger storm events and when the proposed infiltration system is at capacity, stormwater will overflow out of the proposed infiltration systems into a catch basin or junction structure nearest to the northwest corner of the site. Primary overflow will be conveyed to W. Midway Drive via two (2) proposed parkways culverts along the site’s northerly right-of-way. In the event the storm drain system becomes clogged, the catch basins will pond within the localized sumps and overflow to W. Midway Drive via the proposed driveway entrances/exits. Upon entering the public right-of-way, site runoff will follow the historic drainage pattern. As part of the proposed development, all (3) proposed onsite catch basins will be equipped with a connector pipe screen (CPS) Device for full capture trash requirements. The CPS device has full capture certification and will be sized for the 1 uyear 1 hour storm event for the onsite drainage areas. The CPS devices comply with certified full capture system requirements. Runoff from this area historically flows in the westerly direction and ultimately discharges to Anaheim-Barber City Channel which drains through Bolsa Chica Channel and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean at Anaheim Bay. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section II NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 9 II.5 Property Ownership/Management The property is currently owned by National Community Renaissance. The Owner will be responsible for the long-term maintenance of the project’s storm water facilities and conformance to the Final WQMP after construction is complete. A Notice of Transfer of Responsibility is located in Attachment F of this report and should be executed as part of any ownership transfer after construction is complete. National Community Renaissance may appoint a Property Management Company to provide long term BMP maintenance for the proposed development. Refer to Section V of this report for additional information. Note, the maintenance for proposed BMPs for the public right-of-way improvements will be determined during final engineering. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section III NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 10 Section III Site Description III.1 Physical Setting Name of Planned Community/Planning Area (if applicable) Midway Affordable Housing Location/Address 110 W. Midway Drive Anaheim, CA 92805 General Plan Land Use Designation Medium Density Existing Zoning Transitional, T Proposed Zoning Residential Opportunity Overlay Zone, RO Acreage of Project Site 2.28 acres (gross) Predominant Soil Type Per TGD, Figure XVI-2a, NRCS Hydrologic Soils Groups the site is located within Soil Types A and B. Refer to Attachment B of this report for a copy of the map. For site specific soil information, refer to Section III.2 and Attachment E of this report. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section III NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 11 III.2 Site Characteristics Site Characteristics Precipitation Zone The site falls under the 0.85” per the TGD, Figure XVI-1, Rainfall Zones map. Refer to Attachment B of this report for a copy of the map. Topography Site topography generally slopes in the south westerly direction. The site ranges in elevations from approximately 146.9 to 149.2 feet above mean sea level. Drainage Patterns/Connections Site runoff is conveyed in Midway Avenue in the northwesterly direction towards an existing City of Anaheim catch basin located approximately 1280 feet northwest of the project site. This existing catch basin captures and conveys stormwater to an existing City of Anaheim 48” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) which drains in the westerly direction and crosses under Interstate-5. Stormwater is conveyed to Anaheim-Barber City Channel via the existing City storm drain system. Anaheim-Barber City Channel drains through Bolsa Chica Channel and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean at Anaheim Bay. The proposed development will match the historic drainage pattern by draining in the westerly directly and ultimately discharging to W. Midway Drive. At the intersection of Zeyn and Midway, there is a proposed valley gutter that will convey runoff from the proposed parkway culverts west on Midway Avenue. There is proposed curb and gutter along the south side of Midway Avenue that will convey runoff to the catch basin that is approximately 1280 feet northwest of the site. Low flows will be captured by proposed catch basins within localized sumps and will be conveyed through site surface runoff to the proposed, private underground storm drain systems. Primary overflow of high flows will be conveyed to W. Midway Drive via two (2) proposed parkway culverts. Upon entering the public right-or-way, site runoff will follow the historic drainage pattern. Soil Type, Geology, and Infiltration Properties Per the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation for Proposed Multi- Family Residential Project prepared by EEI, dated April 15, 2021, geotechnical properties encountered at the project site are as follows: “Up to five (5) foot thick layer of trash laden artificial fill soils were encountered within our excavations. Fill soils generally consisted of light to dark brown silty sandy soils with abundant past construction debris such as concrete, clay and metal pipe, and decomposed wood fragments.” “Alluvial deposits were encountered in our borings and test excavations below the fill layers and consisted of tan to light gray and yellowish Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section III NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 12 brown, medium dens, fine to coarse grained sands and silty sands to approximately 25 feet below grade, underlain by approximately 10 foot thick layer of brown, medium stiff sandy silt layer. Below 35 feet the alluvial deposits generally consisted of medium dense to dense layers of sands and silty sands to the maximum depth of exploration of 51.5 feet.” Refer to Attachment E of this report for a copy of the geotechnical report. Hydrogeologic (Groundwater) Conditions Per the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation for Proposed Multi- Family Residential Project prepared by EEI, dated April 15, 2021, the site’s groundwater conditions are described as the following: “Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory excavations during our site investigation. Our research of the existing data indicated that the historic groundwater is greater than 50 feet below the ground surface (CDMG, 1998).” Refer to Attachment E of this report for a copy of the geotechnical report. Geotechnical Conditions (relevant to infiltration) Per the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation for Proposed Multi- Family Residential Project prepared by EEI, dated April 15, 2021, the site’s geotechnical infiltration properties are described as follows: “Percolation tests were performed in borings B-4/P-1 and B-5/P-2. The approximate locations of the percolation wells are identified on Boring Location Map (Figure 3). Percolation test wells were constructed by inserting 3-inch-diameter perforated PVC pipe in the borings and backfilling the annular space with ⅜-inch gravel to prevent caving during the percolation test. Following construction of the percolation test wells, they were filled with water and pre-saturated. Percolation testing was then performed and consisted of refilling the test wells with water to approximate referenced elevation and taking a reading of drop in water level every ten minutes for a period of approximately one hour. Table 4 presents the measured percolation and corresponding infiltration rates calculated for the test holes. " Summary of Percolation Testing Location Depth (ft.) Pre-Adjusted Percolation Rate (in/hr.) Infiltration Rate (in/hr.) B-4/P-1 11.3 480 90 B-5/P-2 19.15 122.4 7.95 “The percolation test results are presented in Appendix C. It must be realized that the infiltration rates presented above are as tested Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section III NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 13 infiltration rates and do not include a factor of safety used for design rates. The project civil engineer should determine the appropriate factor of safety for the proposed disposal system. We note that only conceptual plans were available at the time of this evaluation, and the design and location of a storm water dissipation/retention system has not yet been determined. Therefore, our percolation test was performed in soils that are generally representative of the overall property.” Refer to Attachment E of this report for a copy of the referenced geotechnical recommendations. Per additional research on the GeoTracker website, it was determined that there are no known sources of contamination within 250 feet of the project site with the potential to contaminate infiltrated water. A copy of the GeoTracker map with the project site identified is included in Attachment E as well. Off-Site Drainage No off-site drainage enters the property. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORFABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section III NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 14 III.3 Watershed Description Receiving Waters Site runoff is tributary to Anaheim-Barber City Channel, Bolsa Chica Channel, and Anaheim Bay. The site is located within the Anaheim Bay-Huntington Harbor watershed. 303(d) Listed Impairments Anaheim-Barber City Channel: n/a Bolsa Chica Channel: Ammonia; Indicator Bacteria; pH Anaheim Bay: PCBs (tissue) Applicable TMDLs Anaheim-Barber City Channel: n/a Bolsa Chica Channel: n/a Anaheim Bay: n/a Pollutants of Concern for the Project Anticipated and Potential Pollutants of Concern for Attached Residential Development is Suspended Solid/Sediments, Nutrients, Heavy Metals, Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus), Pesticides, Oil & Grease, Toxic Organic Compounds and Trash & Debris. Environmentally Sensitive and Special Biological Significant Areas The project is not located within any known Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) or Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS). Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 15 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) IV. 1 Project Performance Criteria (NOC Permit Area only) Is there an approved WIHMP or equivalent for the project area that includes more stringent LID feasibility criteria or if there are opportunities identified for implementing LID on regional or sub-regional basis? YES NO If yes, describe WIHMP feasibility criteria or regional/sub-regional LID opportunities. There are currently no approved WIHMPs for the Santa Ana Region. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 16 Project Performance Criteria If HCOC exists, list applicable hydromodification control performance criteria (Section 7.II- 2.4.2.2 in MWQMP) Per 7.II-2.4.2.2 of the MWQMP, HCOCs exist when the proposed condition of the site generates a decrease in the time of concentration beyond 5% and an increase in runoff volume beyond 5% for the 2-year storm event, thus potentially increasing downstream erosion. Since the proposed project will infiltrate a significant amount of water, erosion of downstream drainage facilities is not a concern. In addition, the project site only drains through engineered/stabilized channels prior to entering the Pacific Ocean. List applicable LID performance criteria (Section 7.II- 2.4.3 from MWQMP) According to Section 7.II-2.4.3 of the MWQMP Priority Projects must infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspiration, or biotreat/biofilter the 85th percentile, 24-hour storm event (Design Capture Volume). A properly designed biotreatment system may only be considered if infiltration, harvest and use, and evapotranspiration (ET) cannot be feasibly implemented for the full design capture volume. In this case, infiltration, harvest and use, and ET practices must be implemented to the greatest extent feasible and biotreatment be provided for the remaining design capture. This project proposes to infiltrate the DCV. Biotreatment will also be utilized as a form of pre-treatment prior to entering the proposed infiltration systems. List applicable treatment control BMP performance criteria (Section 7.II- 3.2.2 from MWQMP) If it is not feasible to meet LID performance criteria through retention and/or biotreatment provided on-site or at a sub-regional/regional scale, then treatment control BMPs shall be provided on-site or off-site prior to discharge to waters of the US. Since the project proposes to satisfy LID performance criteria, treatment control performance criteria is also fully satisfied. This project proposes to utilize a combination of an infiltration BMP and biotreatment BMPs to treat the required stormwater runoff. Refer to Attachment C for manufacturer’s specifications for the proposed infiltration and biotreatment BMPs. Refer to Section IV.3.2, Infiltration BMPs and Section IV.3.4, Biotreatment BMPs for additional information regarding BMP selection. Calculate LID design storm capture volume for Project. The proposed project residential site will generate a total DCV of 6,331 cf. The DCV was calculated as follows: DMA 1a and 1b: Vdesign = 0.9*0.85*1.62 acres*43,560 (sf/acre)*(1 foot/12 inches) = 4,499 cf DMA 2: Vdesign = 0.9*0.85* 0.66 acres*43,560 (sf/acre)*(1 foot/12 inches) = 1,833 cf See Attachment B of this report for DCV calculations. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 17 IV.2. Site Design and Drainage The proposed site has been designed as (3) Drainage Management Areas (DMA) which will utilize an infiltration and biofiltration BMP for treatment and retention of the DCV. DMA 1A AND 1B, approximately 1.62 acres, and DMA 2, approximately 0.66 acres, consists of the development site and will utilize an infiltration/ retention BMP. Proposed biotreatment BMPs upstream of the infiltration system will provide pretreatment of the DCV prior to infiltration. Surface runoff will be conveyed as sheet flow, within proposed curb and gutter, and through a series of area drains towards (2) proposed catch basins in DMA 1A and 1B and (1) catch basin in DMA 2, within localized sumps throughout the site. The proposed catch basins will capture and convey site runoff to one of the two proposed ADS StormTech Chambers infiltration system located within DMAs 1A and 1B or DMA 2. Each catch basin will be equipped with a Dvert system which will divert low flows to proposed Modular Wetland System (MWS) biofiltration vaults for pretreatment prior to being conveyed to the proposed infiltration system. Pre-treated low flows will fill the proposed ADS StormTech Chambers infiltration system and infiltrate within a maximum drawdown time of 48 hours. During larger storm events and then the infiltration system is full, high flows in DMA 1A and 1B will overflow out of the infiltration system and into a proposed junction structure. Stormwater will be conveyed out of the junction structure into the public right-of-way via two proposed parkway culvert. High flows in DMA 2 will overflow out of the proposed catch basin nearest to the northwest corner of the site and be conveyed to the right-of-way via the same proposed parkway culverts. In the event the proposed storm drain system becomes clogged, site runoff will pond slightly within the localized sumps and eventually cascade towards W. Midway Drive. The Modular Wetland System (MWS) biofiltration vaults proposed for pretreatment are designed to provide a 3-phase treatment train. Initially, when the stormwater enters the system, a trash rack, filter media and settling chamber will capture large trash/ debris and sediment in the stormwater before stormwater enters the planting media. This system is designed to treat stormwater flow horizontally. Before the stormwater enters the planting or “wetland” chamber, the runoff flows through the 2nd phase, a pre-filter cartridge which captures fines TSS, metals, nutrients and bacteria. The pre-filter chamber eliminates additional maintenance of the planting area. The wetland chamber is the 3rd phase of the system which provides final treatment through a combination of physical, chemical and biological processes. Refer to Section IV.3.4 of this report for sizing information of the Biofiltration Vaults. The ADS StormTech Chambers infiltration system is an underground infiltration gallery consisting of a series of open-bottom domes underlain by a bed of gravel which promotes subsurface infiltration. The system will be designed to provide enough static volume within the domes and gravel bed to retain the entire DCV. The amount of surface area provided will be designed to ensure infiltration of the entire DCV within 48 hours. Refer to Section IV.3.2 of this report for sizing information for the infiltration system. DMA 3, approximately 0.15 acres, consists of the public improvements, including the 2’ right-of-way dedication within W. Midway Drive. & proposed 7” right-of-way along S. Anaheim boulevard. The DCV volume for this area has been calculated and provided within this report, however BMP selection will be determined during final engineering, in order to verify the extent of the overall public improvements. It is anticipated a biofiltration BMP, such as bioretention or bio-swale can be utilized within the parkway area with curb cuts due to the infiltration capabilities of the subsurface soils and the available space for these types of BMPs. All (3) proposed onsite catch basins will be equipped with a connector pipe screen (CPS) Device for full Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 18 capture trash requirements. The CPS device has full capture certification and will be sized for the 1 uyear 1 hour storm event for the onsite drainage areas. Refer the Preliminary WQMP Exhibit in Attachment A for the location of the proposed BMPs. Refer to Attachment C for manufacturer’s specifications of the selected BMPs. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 19 IV.3 LID BMP Selection and Project Conformance Analysis IV.3.1 Hydrologic Source Controls (HSCs) The full Design Capture Volume (DCV) is being treated with LID BMPs, therefore HSCs are not proposed. Name Included? Localized on-lot infiltration Impervious area dispersion (e.g. roof top disconnection) Street trees (canopy interception) Residential rain barrels (not actively managed) Green roofs/Brown roofs Blue roofs Impervious area reduction (e.g. permeable pavers, site design) Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: * The entire DCV will be treated with an LID BMP. In addition, the project is not subject to HCOCs. Therefore, HSC BMPs are not required. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 20 IV.3.2 Infiltration BMPs Name Included? Bioretention without underdrains Rain gardens Porous landscaping Infiltration planters Retention swales Infiltration trenches Infiltration basins Drywells Subsurface infiltration galleries French drains Permeable asphalt Permeable concrete Permeable concrete pavers Other: Based on site infiltration properties and Table 2.7, Infiltration BMP Feasibility, infiltration is feasible for the entire DCV for the proposed residential development. DMA 1a and 1b and DMA 2 will utilize (2) ADS StormTech Chambers infiltration systems to retain and infiltrate the entire DCV. The ADS StormTech Chambers system is an underground infiltration gallery with several rows of open-bottom domes which are underlain by a gravel bed for infiltration. The infiltration system is equipped with one (1) isolator row for filtration of suspended solids prior to infiltration. In addition, Modular Wetland System Biofiltration vaults will be utilized to provide pre-treatment of street runoff prior to entering the infiltration system. The system will be designed to provide enough static volume to retain 100% of the DCV, and the gravel bed surface area will provide sufficient surface area infiltrate this entire volume within 48 hours. Infiltration Calculations Per the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation for Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development prepared by EEI, dated April 15, 2021, infiltration rates encountered on the project site ranged between 90.0 and 7.95 inches per hour. Infiltration Rate P-1 90.0 was utilized for infiltration calculations based on the testing location and depth similar to the proposed BMP facility design. TGD Worksheet H was completed purposed a Factor of Safety of 10 has been utilized to support the design infiltration rate, Kdesign , of 9.00 in/hr. Refer to Attachment E for the geotechnical report. Refer to Attachment B for factor of safety calculations. Infiltration capacity of the proposed infiltration system over 48 hours was calculated using the following equation: Vinfiltration = (1/12)(Surface Area, sf)(Kdesign, in/hr)(Drawdown Time, hrs) Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 21 DMA 1a and 1b – MC-3500 ADS StormTech Chambers DCV = 4,499 cf Installed System effective depth = 3.75’ Installed System total depth (9” gravel) = 4.5’ Installed System Volume = 4,972 cf > 4,499 cf  Installed System Surface Area = 1,524 sf Vinfiltration, 48 hr = (1 ft/12 in)(1,524 sf)(9.00 in/hr)(48 hrs) = 54,756 cf > 4,499 cf  Drawdown time = (4,499cf) /[(1 ft/12 in)(1,524 sf)(9.00 in/hr]=3.94 hours DMA 2 – MC-3500 ADS StormTech Chambers DCV = 1,833 cf Installed System effective depth = 3.75’ Installed System total depth (9” gravel) = 4.5’ Installed System Volume = 1,856 cf > 1,833 cf  Installed System Surface Area = 588 sf Vinfiltration, 48 hr = (1 ft/12 in)(588 sf)(9.00 in/hr)(48 hrs) = 21,168 cf > 1,833 cf  Drawdown time = (1,833 cf) /[(1 ft/12 in)(588 sf)(9.00 in/hr]=4.16 hours Refer to Table 2.7 Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet located within Attachment B. Refer to Attachment C of this report for more information on the ADS StormTech Chambers infiltration system. Note, BMP selection and supporting calculations for DMA 2, right-of-way public improvements, will be provided during final engineering. Conclusion: The proposed ADS StormTech Chambers will provide more than enough static storage and infiltration volume for the entire DCV. GIS Coordinates of ADS StormTech System: DMA 1A AND 1B 6058297.2330E, 2243000.2578N DMA 2 6058177.092E, 2243209.2587N DMA3, Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 22 IV.3.3 Evapotranspiration, Rainwater Harvesting BMPs Name Included? All HSCs; See Section IV.3.1 Surface-based infiltration BMPs Biotreatment BMPs Above-ground cisterns and basins Underground detention Other: Other: Other: Evapotranspiration, Rainwater Harvesting BMPs will not be utilized because the entire DCV is being retained onsite through a proposed infiltration BMP. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 23 IV.3.4 Biotreatment BMPs Name Included? Bioretention with underdrains Stormwater planter boxes with underdrains Rain gardens with underdrains Constructed wetlands Vegetated swales Vegetated filter strips Proprietary vegetated biotreatment systems Wet extended detention basin Dry extended detention basins Other: Modular Wetland System (MWS) biofiltration vaults will be utilized at each catch basin to pre-treat low flows prior to entering the proposed infiltration systems for DMA 1a and 1b. The MWS Biofiltration vaults utilize a 3-phase treatment train by collecting the stormwater runoff in a Pre-Treatment Chamber, Planting or “Wetland” Chamber and Discharge Chamber. Pre-treated stormwater is then conveyed to a proposed ADS StormTech Chambers infiltration system which will infiltrate the entire DCV within a maximum drawdown time of 48 hours. The MWS Biofiltration vaults were sized using the area tributary to the catch basin and the treatment flow rate method per the Orange County Technical Guidance Document worksheets. Note that the tributary treatment area used for the MWS sizing calculation refers only to street runoff which is captured by the proposed catch basins. Landscape areas (including roof runoff) captured by area drains have been excluded from MWS sizing calculations since landscaping provides adequate pre-treatment of pollutants of concern in these areas. Runoff collected by the area drains will flow directly into the underground infiltration systems. Landscape areas have been indicated on the Preliminary WQMP exhibit. Refer to Worksheet D in Attachment A for calculations. Refer to the Preliminary WQMP Exhibit in Attachment B for areas that were excluded from MWS sizing calculations. The MWS Biofiltration vaults were sized separately per area tributary to each catch basin using the treatment flow rate method per the Orange County Technical Guidance Document Worksheet D. A 50% reduction factor was applied to the total peak flow rate per Design Standard #2 for Pre-Treatment for Focused Infiltration indicated within the City of Anaheim BMP Design Guidelines dated December 2020. Refer to Worksheet D in Attachment B for calculations. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 24 CB/ MWS # Tributary Area (ac) Required Treatment Flowrate, Q (cfs)* 50% Reduction MWS Model** Treatment Capacity, Q (cfs) 1 0.87 0.20 0.10 MWS-L-4-8-V 0.115 2 0.19 0.044 0.022 MWS-L-4-4-V 0.052 3 0.14 0.034 0.017 MWS-L-4-4-V 0.052 Total 1.20 0.279 0.139 - 0.219 *Required treatment is based on an assumed 100% pervious cover and will be refined during final engineering. **Project-specific details will be provided during final engineering. Refer to Attachment C for additional manufacturer information. ***Area drain design will be provided during final engineering Conclusion: The utilization of a MWS Biofiltration vault at each proposed catch basin will provide more than the required pre- treatment flow rate for each tributary drainage area. GIS Coordination of MWS Systems . 33.81193°, -117.90738° 33.81189°, -117.90758° 33.81253°, -117.90756° Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 25 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 26 IV.3.5 Hydromodification Control BMPs Hydromodification Control BMPs BMP Name BMP Description n/a n/a IV.3.6 Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs Not Applicable for this project. IV.3.7 Treatment Control BMPs Treatment Control BMPs BMP Name BMP Description Connector Pipe Screen (CPS) Device The proposed onsite catch basins in DMAs 1a, 1b, and 2 will be equipped with a Connector Pipe Screen (CPS) device sized for the 1-year 1-hour storm event during final engineering. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 27 IV.3.8 Non-structural Source Control BMPs Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable N1 Education for Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants N2 Activity Restrictions N3 Common Area Landscape Management N4 BMP Maintenance N5 Title 22 CCR Compliance (How development will comply) No hazardous materials are proposed to be stored onsite. N6 Local Industrial Permit Compliance Proposed residential project. N7 Spill Contingency Plan Proposed residential project. N8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance Proposed residential project. N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance No hazardous materials are proposed to be stored onsite. N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation No hazardous materials are proposed to be stored onsite. N11 Common Area Litter Control N12 Employee Training N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks Proposed residential project. N14 Common Area Catch Basin Inspection N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots N16 Retail Gasoline Outlets Proposed residential project. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 28 N1: Education for Property Owners, Tenants & Occupants Project conditions of approval will require that the Homeowner’s Association (PMC) periodically provide environmental awarness education materials, made available by the municipalities, to all of its members. Among other things, these materials will be descrive the use of chemcials (including household type) that should be limited to the property, with no discharge of wastes via hosing or other direct discharge to gutters, catch basins and storm drains. Educational materials available from the County of Orange can be downloaded here: http://www.ocwatersheds.com/PublicEd/resources/default.aspx N2: Activity Restrictions Conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs) must be prepared by the developer for the appointed PMC for the purpose of surface water quality protection. The CC&Rs shall incorporate the restrictions based on the Project WQMP. N3: Common Area Landscape Management All common landscaping and/ or open space areas shall have on-going landscape maintenance by an appointed professional landscaping maintenance company as selected by the PMC. Maintenance shall incorporate all current County Water Conservation Resolution usage and follow the Management Guidelines for Use of Fertilizers per the DAMP Section 5.5. Refer to Section 5 of this report for additional landscape maintenance requirements. N4: BMP Maintenance Refer to Section 5 and Attachment E of this report for additional non-structural BMP maintenance requirements, responsibility and frequency. N11: Common Area Litter Control PMC to implement trash management and litter control procedures in the common areas aimed at reducing pollution of drainage water. PMC to contract with landscape maintenance company to provide this service during regularly scheduled maintenance, which will consist of litter patrol, emptying of trash receptacles in common areas, and noting trash disposals violations by homeowners, tenants or occupants and reporting the violations to the PMC for investigation. N12: Employee Training PMC to provide Educational Materials and Property Management manuals to all employees upon initial hiring. Any updated information shall be provided to employees within a timely manner along with information on implementation. N14: Common Area Catch Basin Inspections PMC to inspect, clean and repair common area catch basins within the development to verify that the private drainage system is working properly. All trash/ debris and sediment build up is removed and any repairs/ replacements are conducted. Cleaning should take place in late summer/ early fall prior to the start of the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 29 raining season. Drainage facilities include catch basins (storm drain inlets), detention basins, retention basins, sediment basins, open drainage channels, area drains, and lift stations. Records shall be kept onsite to document the annual maintenance. N15: Street Sweeping of Private Streets & Parking Lots PMC to schedule at a minimum street sweeping of private streets and parking areas prior to the start of the rainy seasons, in late summer or early fall. Additional sweeping may be required to remove landscaping foliage and/ or pollution. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 30 IV.3.9 Structural Source Control BMPs Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable S1 Provide storm drain system stenciling and signage S2 Design and construct outdoor material storage areas to reduce pollution introduction No proposed outdoor storage areas. S3 Design and construct trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollution introduction No proposed trash enclosure areas. S4 Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control S5 Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation No proposed slopes or channels. Incorporate requirements applicable to individual priority project categories (from SDRWQCB NPDES Permit) Not Applicable. S6 Dock areas No proposed dock areas. S7 Maintenance bays No proposed maintenance bay areas. S8 Vehicle wash areas No proposed vehicle wash areas. S9 Outdoor processing areas No proposed outdoor processing areas. S10 Equipment wash areas No proposed equipment wash areas. S11 Fueling areas No proposed fueling areas. S12 Hillside landscaping No proposed hillside landscaping areas. S13 Wash water control for food preparation areas No wash water control for food preparation areas. S14 Community car wash racks No proposed community car washing racks. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 31 S1 (CASQA Fact Sheet SD-13): Storm Drain Stenciling & Signage PMC to inspect, repair and/ or replace storm drain stenciling and signage immediately. Inspection of stenciling and signage shall occur at least once per month and prior to the start of the raining season. Storm Drain stenciling and signage with a reference that indicates “Drains to Ocean” per CASQA BMP SD-13 Fact Sheet is required. S4 (CASQA Fact Sheet SD-12): Use Efficient Irrigation Systems & Landscape Design PMC shall implement the timing and application methods of irrigation water to minimize the runoff of excess irrigation water into the storm drain systems. PMC to implement the following methods to reduce excessive irrigation water runoff, where applicable: • Employ rain shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after precipitation • Utilizing landscape specific irrigation water requirements • Utilize flow reducers or shutoff valves triggered by pressure drop to control water loss due to broken sprinkler heads • Implement landscaping practices per the County Water Conservation Resolution or City agency equivalent • Group plants or landscaping with similar water consumption in order to promote surface infiltration Refer to CASQA BMP Fact Sheet SD-12 for additional information. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 32 IV.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (Not Applicable) IV.4.1 Water Quality Credits Description of Proposed Project Project Types that Qualify for Water Quality Credits (Select all that apply): Redevelopment projects that reduce the overall impervious footprint of the project site. Brownfield redevelopment, meaning redevelopment, expansion, or reuse of real property which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants, and which have the potential to contribute to adverse ground or surface WQ if not redeveloped. Higher density development projects which include two distinct categories (credits can only be taken for one category): those with more than seven units per acre of development (lower credit allowance); vertical density developments, for example, those with a Floor to Area Ratio (FAR) of 2 or those having more than 18 units per acre (greater credit allowance). Mixed use development, such as a combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses which incorporate design principles that can demonstrate environmental benefits that would not be realized through single use projects (e.g. reduced vehicle trip traffic with the potential to reduce sources of water or air pollution). Transit-oriented developments, such as a mixed use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transportation; similar to above criterion, but where the development center is within one half mile of a mass transit center (e.g. bus, rail, light rail or commuter train station). Such projects would not be able to take credit for both categories, but may have greater credit assigned Redevelopment projects in an established historic district, historic preservation area, or similar significant city area including core City Center areas (to be defined through mapping). Developments with dedication of undeveloped portions to parks, preservation areas and other pervious uses. Developments in a city center area. Developments in historic districts or historic preservation areas. Live-work developments, a variety of developments designed to support residential and vocational needs together – similar to criteria to mixed use development; would not be able to take credit for both categories. In-fill projects, the conversion of empty lots and other underused spaces into more beneficially used spaces, such as residential or commercial areas. Calculation of Water Quality Credits (if applicable) Water Quality credits will not be utilized on this project. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section IV NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 33 IV.4.2 Alternative Compliance Plan Information Not applicable for this project. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section VI NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 34 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs The property is currently owned by National Community Renaissance. The Owner will be responsible for the long-term maintenance of the project’s storm water facilities and conformance to the Final WQMP after construction is complete. Proposed offsite BMPs are to be maintained by the City of Anaheim after the completion of construction. A Notice of Transfer of Responsibility is located in Attachment F of this report and should be executed as part of any ownership transfer after construction is complete. The owner may appoint a Property Management Company (PMC) to provide long term BMP maintenance for the proposed development upon completion of construction. Owner/ Developer: National Community Renaissance 9421 Haven Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Alexa Washburn (909) 483-2444 Property Management Company To be determined The owner is aware of the maintenance responsibilities of the proposed BMPs. A funding mechanism is in place to maintain the BMPs at the frequency stated in the WQMP. The following BMP Inspection/ Maintenance table will be completed as part of the final engineering. This table will include BMP description, responsible party(ies), required inspection/ maintenance routine and frequency. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section VI NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 35 BMP Inspection/Maintenance BMP Reponsible Party(s) Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency of Activities Education for Property Owners, Tenants, Occupants & Employees Property Management Company (PMC) PMC to provide education material, a copy of the approved WQMP and Operation & Maintenance Plan (O&M) to new property owners, tenants, occupants & employees. At time of hiring, leasing and/ or home purchase. Activity Restrictions PMC PMC employees notified of activities that are prohibited by homeowners. Restrictions identified in Employee Manual and reviewed yearly by employees. Common Area Landscape Management PMC PMC to hire professional landscape company to conduct maintenance of landscaping to meet current water efficiency and keep plants healthy and bio areas maintained with proper soil amendments. Regular maintenance once a week and monthly inspection to determine deficiencies. BMP Maintenance PMC PMC to hire professional BMP maintenance company to conduct regular inspections, repairs and cleanings per manufacturer’s specifications. A minimum 2 inspections/ cleanings per year per manufacturer’s specifications prior to October 1st (before rainy season) Common Area Litter Control PMC PMC to provide litter removal of site parking lot and landscape areas and to empty common area trash bins. Once per week. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section VI NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 36 Employee Training PMC The distribution of these materials will be the reasonability of the PMC at the initial hiring of the employee. At time of hiring. Private Street & Parking Lot Sweeping PMC PMC to provide maintenance of Parking Lot and provide Street Sweeping services. Maintenance as needed and street sweeping on a weekly basis. Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control PMC PMC to provide maintenance of landscaping to meet current water efficiency standards and keep plants healthy. Regular maintenance once a week and monthly inspection to determine any water deficiencies. Common Area Catch Basin Inspections PMC PMC shall inspect common areas where catch basins are located within the surrounding area and remove any trash/ debris. Inspections/ Cleaning shall occur at least twice per month. Storm Drain System Stencilling & Signage PMC PMC to inspect and repair as needed all onsite storm drain stencilling & signage. Inspection should occur at minimum twice per year. Right-of-Way Public Improvements BMP TBD TBD TBD Modular Wetlands System (MWS) Biofiltration Vaults PMC PMC will be required to hire a professional maintenance company to provide regular inspections, repairs and cleaning per manufacturer’s specifications. Inspections/ Cleanings should occur at least two times per year and before the start of the rainy season (October 1st). Refer to Attachment C for additional information and manufacturer’s specifications. Modular Trough Diversion System PMC PMC to inspect system and schedule maintenance Inspections should occur at least two Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section VI NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 37 when deficiencies are noted. Area near system to be kept free of debris and cleanings shall be scheduled to remove silt from trough as needed times per year and before the start of the rainy season (October 1st). ADS StormTech Chambers Infiltration System PMC PMC will be required to hire a professional maintenance company to provide regular inspection, repairs and cleaning per manufacturer’s specifications. All trash/ debris and loose sediment/ silt shall be removed per manufacturer’s specifications. Inspections/ cleanings should occur at least two times per year and before the start of the rainy season (October 1st). Refer to Attachment C for additional information and manufacturer’s specifications. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section VI NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 38 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) VI.1 BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) Refer to Attachment A of this report for the Preliminary WQMP Exhibit which provides the location of all proposed BMPs and a site plan of the project. VI.2 Submittal and Recordation of Water Quality Management Plan Following approval of the Final Project-Specific WQMP, three copies of the approved WQMP (including BMP Exhibit, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, and Appendices) will be submitted. Each approved WQMP (including BMP Exhibit, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, and Appendices) will be recorded in the Orange County Clerk-Recorder’s Office, prior to close-out of grading and/or building permit. Educational Materials are not required to be included. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ANAHEIM National Community Renaissance Section VII NCRC-001 Preliminary WQMP Page 39 Section VII Educational Materials Refer to the Orange County Stormwater Program (www.ocwatersheds.com) for a library of materials available. Education Materials Residential Material (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Check If Applicable Business Material (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Check If Applicable The Ocean Begins at Your Front Door Tips for the Automotive Industry Tips for Car Wash Fund-raisers Tips for Using Concrete and Mortar Tips for the Home Mechanic Tips for the Food Service Industry Homeowners Guide for Sustainable Water Use Proper Maintenance Practices for Your Business Household Tips Other Material Check If Attached Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (North County) Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (Central County) Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (South County) Tips for Maintaining a Septic Tank System Responsible Pest Control Sewer Spill Tips for the Home Improvement Projects Tips for Horse Care Tips for Landscaping and Gardening Tips for Pet Care Tips for Pool Maintenance Tips for Residential Pool, Landscape and Hardscape Drains Tips for Projects Using Paint Attachment A Preliminary WQMP Exhibit ELEC / P H O N E CATV FIRE RISE R EL E C / P H O N E CA T V FI R E RI S E R ELEC / P H O N E CATV FIRE RISE R ELEC / P H O N E CATV FIRE RISER 0.50 AC 0.04 AC 0.52 AC TEL 0.02 AC 0 SCALE: 1" = 30' 15 30 60 X.X AC Attachment B TGD Worksheets & Figures Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet Infeasibility Criteria Yes No 1 Would Infiltration BMPs pose significant risk for groundwater related concerns? Refer to Appendix VII (Worksheet I) for guidance on groundwater-related infiltration feasibility criteria. X Provide basis: Per the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation for Proposed Multi-Family Residential Project prepared by GeoTek, Inc., dated February 28, 2019, historic high groundwater is greater than 50 feet below grade. 2 Would Infiltration BMPs pose significant risk of increasing risk of geotechnical hazards that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? (Yes if the answer to any of the following questions is yes, as established by a geotechnical expert):  The BMP can only be located less than 50 feet away from slopes steeper than 15 percent  The BMP can only be located less than eight feet from building foundations or an alternative setback.  A study prepared by a geotechnical professional or an available watershed study substantiates that stormwater infiltration would potentially result in significantly increased risks of geotechnical hazards that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level. X Provide basis: 3 Would infiltration of the DCV from drainage area violate downstream water rights? X Provide basis: Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet (continued) Partial Infeasibility Criteria Yes No 4 Is proposed infiltration facility located on HSG D soils or the site geotechnical investigation identifies presence of soil characteristics which support categorization as D soils? X Provide basis: Per the TGD Fire XVI-2a, NRCS Hydrologic Soils Groups, the project site is located within HSGs A and B. 5 Is measured infiltration rate below proposed facility less than 0.3 inches per hour? This calculation shall be based on the methods described in Appendix VII. X Provide basis: Per the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation for Proposed Multi-Family Residential Project prepared by GeoTek, Inc., dated February 28, 2019, infiltration rates encountered onsite range between 26.6 and 25.0 inches per hour. 6 Would reduction of over predeveloped conditions cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses, such as change of seasonality of ephemeral washes or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? X Provide citation to applicable study and summarize findings relative to the amount of infiltration that is permissible: 7 Would an increase in infiltration over predeveloped conditions cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses, such as change of seasonality of ephemeral washes or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? X Provide citation to applicable study and summarize findings relative to the amount of infiltration that is permissible: Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet (continued) Infiltration Screening Results (check box corresponding to result): 8 Is there substantial evidence that infiltration from the project would result in a significant increase in I&I to the sanitary sewer that cannot be sufficiently mitigated? (See Appendix XVII) Provide narrative discussion and supporting evidence: No 9 If any answer from row 1-3 is yes: infiltration of any volume is not feasible within the DMA or equivalent. Provide basis: No 10 If any answer from row 4-7 is yes, infiltration is permissible but is not presumed to be feasible for the entire DCV. Criteria for designing biotreatment BMPs to achieve the maximum feasible infiltration and ET shall apply. Provide basis: No 11 If all answers to rows 1 through 11 are no, infiltration of the full DCV is potentially feasible, BMPs must be designed to infiltrate the full DCV to the maximum extent practicable. Infiltration is Feasible Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA 1 and 2 Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure III.1, d (inches) d= 0.85 inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC= 0 inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dremainder (inches) (Line 1 – Line 2) dremainder= 0.85 inches Step 2: Calculate the DCV 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.62 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 1 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.9 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vdesign= (C x dremainder x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesign= 4,499 cu-ft Step 3: Design BMPs to ensure full retention of the DCV Step 3a: Determine design infiltration rate 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, Kmeasured (in/hr) (Appendix VII) Kmeasured= 90 In/hr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sfinal (unitless) Sfinal= 10 3 Calculate design infiltration rate, Kdesign = Kmeasured / Sfinal Kdesign= 9 In/hr Step 3b: Determine minimum BMP footprint 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= 48 Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmax = Kdesign x T x (1/12) Dmax= 36 feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Amin = Vdesign/ dmax Amin= 124.97 sq-ft Aprovided = 1,524.52 sf > 124 sf  Vprovided = 4,972 sf > 4,499 cf  Dmax = 36ft > 5.5 ft  DMA 1A AND 1B Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA 3 Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure III.1, d (inches) d= 0.85 inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC= 0 inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dremainder (inches) (Line 1 – Line 2) dremainder= 0.85 inches Step 2: Calculate the DCV 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 0.66 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 1 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.9 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vdesign= (C x dremainder x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesign= 1,833 cu-ft Step 3: Design BMPs to ensure full retention of the DCV Step 3a: Determine design infiltration rate 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, Kmeasured (in/hr) (Appendix VII) Kmeasured= 90 In/hr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sfinal (unitless) Sfinal= 10 3 Calculate design infiltration rate, Kdesign = Kmeasured / Sfinal Kdesign= 9 In/hr Step 3b: Determine minimum BMP footprint 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= 48 Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmax = Kdesign x T x (1/12) Dmax= 36 feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Amin = Vdesign/ dmax Amin= 51 sq-ft Aprovided = 588 sf > 51 sf  Vprovided = 1,856 sf > 1,833 cf  Dmax = 36ft > 5.5ft  DMA 2 CB #1 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc= 5 min 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= 0.26 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC= 0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2= 0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2= 0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= 0.26 Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 0.87 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 1.00 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.9 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= 0.20 cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Surface runoff will be conveyed proposed curb inlet catch basins equipped with a Dvert System that diverts low flows to proposed Biofiltration Vault for pretreatment of the DCV before entering a proposed infiltration system. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration was assumed to be 5 minutes for conservative purposes Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx CB #2 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc= 5 min 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= 0.26 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC= 0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2= 0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2= 0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= 0.26 Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 0.19 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 1.00 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.9 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= 0.044 cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Surface runoff will be conveyed proposed curb inlet catch basins equipped with a Dvert System that diverts low flows to proposed Biofiltration Vault for pretreatment of the DCV before entering a proposed infiltration system. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration was assumed to be 5 minutes for conservative purposes Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx CB #3 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc= 5 min 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= 0.26 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC= 0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2= 0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2= 0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= 0.26 Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 0.14 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 1.00 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.9 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= 0.034 cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Surface runoff will be conveyed proposed curb inlet catch basins equipped with a Dvert System that diverts low flows to proposed Biofiltration Vault for pretreatment of the DCV before entering a proposed infiltration system. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration was assumed to be 5 minutes for conservative purposes Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Graphical Operations 3URYLGHVXSSRUWLQJJUDSKLFDORSHUDWLRQV6HH([DPSOH,,, I2 = 0.00 I1 = 0.26 Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate Worksheet Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 1 0.25 Predominant soil texture 0.25 3 0.75 Site soil variability 0.25 1 0.25 Depth to groundwater / impervious layer 0.25 1 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = p 1.5 B Design Tributary area size 0.25 2 0.5 Level of pretreatment/ expected sediment loads 0.25 1 0.25 Redundancy 0.25 1 0.25 Compaction during construction 0.25 1 0.25 Design Safety Factor, SB = p 1.25 Combined Safety Factor, STOT= SA x SB 1.875 → use 10 Measured Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, KM (corrected for test-specific bias) 90 Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, KDESIGN = STOT / KM 9 Supporting Data Briefly describe infiltration test and provide reference to test forms: Percolation test was conducted by EEI, as follows: “Percolation tests were performed in borings B-4/P-1 and B-5/P-2. The approximate locations of the percolation wells are identified on Boring Location Map (Figure 3). Percolation test wells were constructed by inserting 3-inch-diameter perforated PVC pipe in the borings and backfilling the annular space with ⅜-inch gravel to prevent caving during the percolation test. Following construction of the percolation test wells, they were filled with water and pre-saturated. Percolation testing was then performed and consisted of refilling the test wells with water to approximate referenced elevation and taking a reading of drop in water level every ten minutes for a period of approximately one hour. Table 4 presents the measured percolation and corresponding infiltration rates calculated for the test holes. " Summary of Percolation Testing Location Depth (ft.) Pre-Adjusted Percolation Rate Infiltration Rate (in/hr.) Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate Worksheet Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v (in/hr.) B-4/P-1 11.3 480 90 B-5/P-2 19.15 122.4 7.95 “The percolation test results are presented in Appendix C. It must be realized that the infiltration rates presented above are as tested infiltration rates and do not include a factor of safety used for design rates. The project civil engineer should determine the appropriate factor of safety for the proposed disposal system. We note that only conceptual plans were available at the time of this evaluation, and the design and location of a storm water dissipation/retention system has not yet been determined. Therefore our percolation test was performed in soils that are generally representative of the overall property.” Although the calculated Factor of Safety is 1.875, to be conservative and based on geotechnical recommendations, a higher factor of safety of 10 will be utilized for a design infiltration rate of 9.00 in/hr. Note: The minimum combined adjustment factor shall not be less than 2.0 and the maximum combined adjustment factor shall not exceed 9.0. Worksheet I: Summary of Groundwater-related Feasibility Criteria DMA 1a and 1b 1 Is project large or small? (as defined by Table VIII.2) circle one Large Small 2 What is the tributary area to the BMP? A 1.62 acres 3 What type of BMP is proposed? Underground infiltration 4 What is the infiltrating surface area of the proposed BMP? ABMP 1524 sq-ft 5 What land use activities are present in the tributary area (list all) Multi-Family Residential 6 What land use-based risk category is applicable? L M H 7 If M or H, what pretreatment and source isolation BMPs have been considered and are proposed (describe all): Proposed MWS System Biofiltration Vaults will provide treatment for the required design flow rate. 8 What minimum separation to mounded seasonally high groundwater applies to the proposed BMP? See Section VIII.2 (circle one) 5 ft 10 ft 9 Provide rationale for selection of applicable minimum separation to seasonally high mounded groundwater: Per the TGD Section VIII.2, the following applies to a subsurface infiltration gallery: “Separation to mounded seasonally high groundwater shall be at least 10 feet for infiltration devices that inject water below the subsurface and surface infiltration BMPs with tributary area and land use activities that are considered to pose a more significant risk to groundwater quality.” 10 What is separation from the infiltrating surface to seasonally high groundwater? SHGWT 10 ft 11 What is separation from the infiltrating surface to mounded seasonally high groundwater? Mounded SHGWT n/a ft 12 Describe assumptions and methods used for mounding analysis: Groundwater was not encountered during exploratory excavations. Historic groundwater is greater than 50’ below ground surface 13 Is the site within a plume protection boundary (See Figure Y N N/A Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Note: if a single criterion or group of criteria would render infiltration infeasible, it is not necessary to evaluate every question in this worksheet. VIII.2)? 14 Is the site within a selenium source area or other natural plume area (See Figure VIII.2)? Y N N/A 15 Is the site within 250 feet of a contaminated site? Y N N/A 16 If site-specific study has been prepared, provide citation and briefly summarize relevant findings: n/a 17 Is the site within 100 feet of a water supply well, spring, septic system? Y N N/A 18 Is infiltration feasible on the site relative to groundwater- related criteria? Y N Provide rationale for feasibility determination: Infiltration is feasible Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet I: Summary of Groundwater-related Feasibility Criteria DMA 2 1 Is project large or small? (as defined by Table VIII.2) circle one Large Small 2 What is the tributary area to the BMP? A 0.66 acres 3 What type of BMP is proposed? Underground infiltration 4 What is the infiltrating surface area of the proposed BMP? ABMP 588 sq-ft 5 What land use activities are present in the tributary area (list all) Multi-Family Residential 6 What land use-based risk category is applicable? L M H 7 If M or H, what pretreatment and source isolation BMPs have been considered and are proposed (describe all): Proposed MWS System Biofiltration Vaults will provide treatment for the required design flow rate. 8 What minimum separation to mounded seasonally high groundwater applies to the proposed BMP? See Section VIII.2 (circle one) 5 ft 10 ft 9 Provide rationale for selection of applicable minimum separation to seasonally high mounded groundwater: Per the TGD Section VIII.2, the following applies to a subsurface infiltration gallery: “Separation to mounded seasonally high groundwater shall be at least 10 feet for infiltration devices that inject water below the subsurface and surface infiltration BMPs with tributary area and land use activities that are considered to pose a more significant risk to groundwater quality.” 10 What is separation from the infiltrating surface to seasonally high groundwater? SHGWT 10 ft 11 What is separation from the infiltrating surface to mounded seasonally high groundwater? Mounded SHGWT n/a ft 12 Describe assumptions and methods used for mounding analysis: Groundwater was not encountered during exploratory excavations. Historic groundwater is greater than 50’ below ground surface Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet I: Summary of Groundwater-related Feasibility Criteria DMA 2 13 Is the site within a plume protection boundary (See Figure VIII.2)? Y N N/A 14 Is the site within a selenium source area or other natural plume area (See Figure VIII.2)? Y N N/A 15 Is the site within 250 feet of a contaminated site? Y N N/A 16 If site-specific study has been prepared, provide citation and briefly summarize relevant findings: n/a 17 Is the site within 100 feet of a water supply well, spring, septic system? Y N N/A 18 Is infiltration feasible on the site relative to groundwater- related criteria? Y N Provide rationale for feasibility determination: Infiltration is feasible Note: if a single criterion or group of criteria would render infiltration infeasible, it is not necessary to evaluate every question in this worksheet. O R A N G E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y S A N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y S A N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTY LOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTY OR A N G E C O U N T Y OR A N G E C O U N T Y LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y 1.05 0.7 1 0 . 9 5 0 . 9 0 . 8 5 0 . 8 0 . 7 5 0 . 7 0 . 6 5 0. 9 5 0.7 0. 9 0.9 0 . 7 5 P: \ 9 5 2 6 E \ 6 - G I S \ M x d s \ R e p o r t s \ I n f i l t r a t i o n F e a s a b i l i t y _2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 \ 9 5 2 6 E _ F i g u r e X V I - 1 _ R a i n f a l l Z o n e s _ 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 . mx d FIGURE JO B TI T L E SC A L E 1" = 1 . 8 m i l e s DE S I G N E D DR A W I N G CH E C K E D BM P 04 / 2 2 / 1 0 DA T E JO B N O . 95 2 6 - E THTH OR A N G E C O U N T Y TE C H N I C A L G U I D A N C E DO C U M E N T OR A N G E C O . CA RA I N F A L L Z O N E S SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVISION 0 3.6 7.21.8 Miles 0 6 123 Kilometers LEGEND Orange County Precipitation Stations 24 Hour, 85th Percentile Rainfall (Inches) 24 Hour, 85th Percentile Rainfall (Inches) - Extrapolated City Boundaries Rainfall Zones Design Capture Storm Depth (inches) 0.65" 0.7 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.10" Note: Events defined as 24-hour periods (calendar days) with greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall. For areas outside of available data coverage, professional judgment shall be applied. XVI-1 PROJECT SITE O R A N G E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y S A N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y S A N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTY LOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTY OR A N G E C O U N T Y OR A N G E C O U N T Y LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y P: \ 9 5 2 6 E \ 6 - G I S \ M x d s \ R e p o r t s \ I n f i l t r a t i o n F e a s a b i l i t y _2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 \ 9 5 2 6 E _ F i g u r e X V I - 2 a _ H y d r o S o i l s _ 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 . m x d ),*85( ;9,D -2 % 7, 7 / ( 6& $ / ( 1" = 1 . 8 m i l e s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x d s \ R e p o r t s \ I n f i l t r a t i o n F e a s a b i l i t y _2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 \ 9 5 2 6 E _ F i g u r e X V I - 2 d _ D e p t h T o G r o u n d w a t e r O v e r vi e w _ 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 . m x d ),*85( ;9,G -2 % 7, 7 / ( 6& $ / ( 1" = 1 . 2 5 m i l e s '( 6 , * 1 ( ' '5 $ : , 1 * &+ ( & . ( ' BM P 02 / 0 9 / 1 1 '$ 7 ( -2 %  1 2  95 2 6 - E THTH OR A N G E C O U N T Y IN F I L T R A T I O N S T U D Y 25 $ 1 * (  & 2  &$ NO R T H O R A N G E C O U N T Y MA P P E D D E P T H T O F I R S T GR O U N D W A T E R SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVISION 1RWH'DWDDUHQRWDYDLODEOHIRU6RXWK2UDQJH&RXQW\DWWKLVWLPH 6RXUFH 6SURWWH)XOOHUDQG*UHHQZRRG &DOLIRUQLD'LYLVLRQRI0LQHVDQG*HRORJ\ &DOLIRUQLD*HRORJLFDO6XUYH\ !I  0LOHV  .LORPHWHUV /(*(1' 'HSWK7R)LUVW*URXQGZDWHU&RQWRXUV &LW\%RXQGDULHV 2&:'*URXQGZDWHU%DVLQ3URWHFWLRQ%RXQGDU\ PROJECT SITE O R A N G E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y O R A N G E C O U N T Y S A N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y S A N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTY LOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTY OR A N G E C O U N T Y OR A N G E C O U N T Y LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y LO S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y P: \ 9 5 2 6 E \ 6 - G I S \ M x d s \ R e p o r t s \ I n f i l t r a t i o n F e a s a b i l i t y _2 0 1 1 0 2 1 5 \ 9 5 2 6 E _ F i g u r e X V I - 2 f _ N o r t h O C G r o u n d w a t e r P r o t e c t i o n A r e a s S t r e e t M a p _ 2 0 1 1 02 1 5 . m x d FIGURE XVI-2f JO B TI T L E SC A L E 1" = 1 . 2 5 m i l e s DE S I G N E D DR A W I N G CH E C K E D BM P 04 / 2 2 / 1 0 DA T E JO B N O . 95 2 6 - E THTH OR A N G E C O U N T Y IN F I L T R A T I O N S T U D Y OR A N G E C O . CA NO R T H O R A N G E C O U N T Y GR O U N D W A T E R P R O T E C T I O N AR E A S SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVISION Note: Individual contamination sites are not plotted. See State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker database (http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov), Department of Toxic Substance Control Envirostor database (http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov) and other applicable sources for current listing of active contaminated sites. Groundwater basin and plume protection boundaries for South Orange County are not shown on this exhibit at this time !I 02.551.25 Miles 0482 Kilometers LEGEND City Boundaries OCWD Groundwater Basin Protection Boundary Plume Protection Boundaries North Basin Groundwater Protection Project South Basin Groundwater Protection Project El Toro Marine Base Tustin Marine Air Base Approximate Selenium Contamination Area Project Site P:\ 9 5 2 6 E \ 6 - G I S \ M x d s \ W o r k s p a c e \ S u s c e p t i b l e A n a l y s i s _ 2 01 0 0 4 2 2 \ 9 5 2 6 E _ A n a h e i m B a y _ 2 0 1 0 0 3 3 1 . m x d Los Alamitos Naval Air Station Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station John Wayne Airport Seal BeachNationalWildlife Refuge Newport Bay SanGabriel-CoyoteCreek SantaAna River Newland Retarding Basin Lake Huntington West Street Retarding Basin Haster Retarding Basin FIGURE 2 JO B TIT L E SC A L E 1" = 6 5 0 0 ' DE S I G N E D DR A W I N G CH E C K E D BM P 04 / 2 2 / 1 0 DA T E JO B N O . 95 2 6 - E THTH OR A N G E C O U N T Y WA T E R S H E D MA S T E R P L A N N I N G OR A N G E C O . CA SU S C E P T I B I L I T Y A N A L Y I S AN A H E I M B A Y - HU N T I N G T O N H A R B O R !I 0 6,500 13,000 Feet Susceptibility Potential Areas of Erosion, Habitat, &Physical Structure Susceptibility Channel Type Earth (Unstable) Earth (Stabilized) Stabilized Tidel Influence <= Mean High Water Line (4.28') Water Body Basin Lake Federal & Other Lands Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge Airports/Military 686&(37,%,/,7<0$383$7( )(% Project Site Attachment C Site BMPs User Inputs Chamber Model: MC-3500 Outlet Control Structure: Yes Project Name: NCRC001.1 Engineer: Sarah Pfeifer Project Location: California Measurement Type: Imperial Required Storage Volume: 4800 cubic ft. Stone Porosity: 40% Stone Foundation Depth: 9 in. Stone Above Chambers: 12 in. Average Cover Over Chambers: 18 in. Design Constraint Dimensions:(16 ft. x 96 ft.) Results System Volume and Bed Size Installed Storage Volume: 4972.27 cubic ft. Storage Volume Per Chamber: 109.90 cubic ft. Number Of Chambers Required: 24 Number Of End Caps Required: 4 Chamber Rows: 2 Maximum Length:95.68 ft. Maximum Width: 15.93 ft. Approx. Bed Size Required: 1524.52 square ft. System Components Amount Of Stone Required: 210.65 cubic yards Volume Of Excavation (Not Including Fill): 310.55 cubic yards Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. FOR STORMTECHINSTRUCTIONS,DOWNLOAD THE INSTALLATION APP SiteASSIST MC-3500 STORMTECH CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS 1. CHAMBERS SHALL BE STORMTECH MC-3500. 2. CHAMBERS SHALL BE ARCH-SHAPED AND SHALL BE MANUFACTURED FROM VIRGIN, IMPACT-MODIFIED POLYPROPYLENE COPOLYMERS. 3. CHAMBERS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418-16a, "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP)CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS" CHAMBER CLASSIFICATION 45x76 DESIGNATION SS. 4. CHAMBER ROWS SHALL PROVIDE CONTINUOUS, UNOBSTRUCTED INTERNAL SPACE WITH NO INTERNAL SUPPORTS THAT WOULDIMPEDE FLOW OR LIMIT ACCESS FOR INSPECTION. 5. THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THE CHAMBERS, THE STRUCTURAL BACKFILL, AND THE INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS SHALL ENSURETHAT THE LOAD FACTORS SPECIFIED IN THE AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS, SECTION 12.12, ARE MET FOR: 1)LONG-DURATION DEAD LOADS AND 2) SHORT-DURATION LIVE LOADS, BASED ON THE AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK WITH CONSIDERATIONFOR IMPACT AND MULTIPLE VEHICLE PRESENCES. 6. CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED, TESTED AND ALLOWABLE LOAD CONFIGURATIONS DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787, "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS". LOAD CONFIGURATIONS SHALL INCLUDE: 1) INSTANTANEOUS (<1 MIN) AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK LIVE LOAD ON MINIMUM COVER 2) MAXIMUM PERMANENT (75-YR) COVER LOAD AND 3) ALLOWABLE COVER WITH PARKED (1-WEEK) AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK. 7. REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING AND INSTALLATION:·TO MAINTAIN THE WIDTH OF CHAMBERS DURING SHIPPING AND HANDLING, CHAMBERS SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL, INTERLOCKINGSTACKING LUGS.·TO ENSURE A SECURE JOINT DURING INSTALLATION AND BACKFILL, THE HEIGHT OF THE CHAMBER JOINT SHALL NOT BE LESSTHAN 3”.·TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF THE ARCH SHAPE DURING INSTALLATION, a) THE ARCH STIFFNESS CONSTANT AS DEFINED INSECTION 6.2.8 OF ASTM F2418 SHALL BE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 500 LBS/IN/IN. AND b) TO RESIST CHAMBER DEFORMATIONDURING INSTALLATION AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES (ABOVE 73° F / 23° C), CHAMBERS SHALL BE PRODUCED FROM REFLECTIVE GOLD OR YELLOW COLORS. 8. ONLY CHAMBERS THAT ARE APPROVED BY THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER WILL BE ALLOWED. UPON REQUEST BY THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OWNER, THE CHAMBER MANUFACTURER SHALL SUBMIT A STRUCTURAL EVALUATION FOR APPROVAL BEFOREDELIVERING CHAMBERS TO THE PROJECT SITE AS FOLLOWS:·THE STRUCTURAL EVALUATION SHALL BE SEALED BY A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.·THE STRUCTURAL EVALUATION SHALL DEMONSTRATE THAT THE SAFETY FACTORS ARE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 1.95 FORDEAD LOAD AND 1.75 FOR LIVE LOAD, THE MINIMUM REQUIRED BY ASTM F2787 AND BY SECTIONS 3 AND 12.12 OF THE AASHTOLRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS FOR THERMOPLASTIC PIPE.·THE TEST DERIVED CREEP MODULUS AS SPECIFIED IN ASTM F2418 SHALL BE USED FOR PERMANENT DEAD LOAD DESIGNEXCEPT THAT IT SHALL BE THE 75-YEAR MODULUS USED FOR DESIGN. 9. CHAMBERS AND END CAPS SHALL BE PRODUCED AT AN ISO 9001 CERTIFIED MANUFACTURING FACILITY. IMPORTANT - NOTES FOR THE BIDDING AND INSTALLATION OF MC-3500 CHAMBER SYSTEM 1. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED UNTIL THE MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE HAS COMPLETED APRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH THE INSTALLERS. 2. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE". 3. CHAMBERS ARE NOT TO BE BACKFILLED WITH A DOZER OR AN EXCAVATOR SITUATED OVER THE CHAMBERS.STORMTECH RECOMMENDS 3 BACKFILL METHODS:·STONESHOOTER LOCATED OFF THE CHAMBER BED.·BACKFILL AS ROWS ARE BUILT USING AN EXCAVATOR ON THE FOUNDATION STONE OR SUBGRADE.·BACKFILL FROM OUTSIDE THE EXCAVATION USING A LONG BOOM HOE OR EXCAVATOR. 4. THE FOUNDATION STONE SHALL BE LEVELED AND COMPACTED PRIOR TO PLACING CHAMBERS. 5. JOINTS BETWEEN CHAMBERS SHALL BE PROPERLY SEATED PRIOR TO PLACING STONE. 6. MAINTAIN MINIMUM - 6" (150 mm) SPACING BETWEEN THE CHAMBER ROWS. 7. INLET AND OUTLET MANIFOLDS MUST BE INSERTED A MINIMUM OF 12" (300 mm) INTO CHAMBER END CAPS. 8. EMBEDMENT STONE SURROUNDING CHAMBERS MUST BE A CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE MEETING THE AASHTO M43 DESIGNATION OF #3OR #4. 9. STONE MUST BE PLACED ON THE TOP CENTER OF THE CHAMBER TO ANCHOR THE CHAMBERS IN PLACE AND PRESERVE ROW SPACING. 10. THE CONTRACTOR MUST REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES WITH CHAMBER FOUNDATION MATERIALS BEARING CAPACITIES TO THE SITE DESIGNENGINEER. 11. ADS RECOMMENDS THE USE OF "FLEXSTORM CATCH IT" INSERTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR ALL INLETS TO PROTECT THE SUBSURFACESTORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FROM CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF. NOTES FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT 1. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE". 2. THE USE OF EQUIPMENT OVER MC-3500 CHAMBERS IS LIMITED:·NO EQUIPMENT IS ALLOWED ON BARE CHAMBERS.·NO RUBBER TIRED LOADER, DUMP TRUCK, OR EXCAVATORS ARE ALLOWED UNTIL PROPER FILL DEPTHS ARE REACHED IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE".·WEIGHT LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CAN BE FOUND IN THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE". 3. FULL 36" (900 mm) OF STABILIZED COVER MATERIALS OVER THE CHAMBERS IS REQUIRED FOR DUMP TRUCK TRAVEL OR DUMPING. USE OF A DOZER TO PUSH EMBEDMENT STONE BETWEEN THE ROWS OF CHAMBERS MAY CAUSE DAMAGE TO CHAMBERS AND IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLEBACKFILL METHOD. ANY CHAMBERS DAMAGED BY USING THE "DUMP AND PUSH" METHOD ARE NOT COVERED UNDER THE STORMTECH STANDARDWARRANTY. CONTACT STORMTECH AT 1-888-892-2694 WITH ANY QUESTIONS ON INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS OR WEIGHT LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT. ©2013 ADS, INC. PROJECT INFORMATION ADS SALES REP PROJECT NO. ENGINEERED PRODUCTMANAGER NCRC001.1 ANAHEIM, CA St o r m T e c h 88 8 - 8 9 2 - 2 6 9 4 | WW W . S T O R M T E C H . C O M ® Ch a m b e r S y s t e m 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 1 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF2 6 NOTES• MANIFOLD SIZE TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER. SEE TECH NOTE #6.32 FOR MANIFOLD SIZING GUIDANCE.• DUE TO THE ADAPTATION OF THIS CHAMBER SYSTEM TO SPECIFIC SITE AND DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO CUT AND COUPLE ADDITIONAL PIPE TO STANDARD MANIFOLDCOMPONENTS IN THE FIELD.• THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER MUST REVIEW ELEVATIONS AND IF NECESSARY ADJUST GRADING TO ENSURE THE CHAMBER COVER REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.• THIS CHAMBER SYSTEM WAS DESIGNED WITHOUT SITE-SPECIFIC INFORMATION ON SOIL CONDITIONS OR BEARING CAPACITY. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FORDETERMININGTHE SUITABILITY OF THE SOIL AND PROVIDING THE BEARING CAPACITY OF THE INSITU SOILS. THE BASE STONE DEPTH MAY BE INCREASED OR DECREASED ONCE THIS INFORMATION ISPROVIDED.•NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION: THIS LAYOUT IS FOR DIMENSIONAL PURPOSES ONLY TO PROVE CONCEPT & THE REQUIRED STORAGE VOLUME CAN BE ACHIEVED ON SITE. CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (TOP OF PAVEMENT/UNPAVED):12.50MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (UNPAVED WITH TRAFFIC):6.50MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (UNPAVED NO TRAFFIC):6.00MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (TOP OF RIGID CONCRETE PAVEMENT):6.00MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (BASE OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT):6.00TOP OF STONE:5.50TOP OF MC-3500 CHAMBER:4.5012" x 12" TOP MANIFOLD INVERT:3.1724" ISOLATOR ROW PLUS INVERT:0.92BOTTOM OF MC-3500 CHAMBER:0.75BOTTOM OF STONE:0.00 PROPOSED LAYOUT 24 STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS4 STORMTECH MC-3500 END CAPS12STONE ABOVE (in)9 STONE BELOW (in) 40 STONE VOID 4847 INSTALLED SYSTEM VOLUME (CF)(PERIMETER STONE INCLUDED)(COVER STONE INCLUDED)(BASE STONE INCLUDED)1467 SYSTEM AREA (SF)222.0 SYSTEM PERIMETER (ft) *INVERT ABOVE BASE OF CHAMBER MAX FLOWINVERT*DESCRIPTIONITEM ONLAYOUTPART TYPE 2.06"24" BOTTOM CORED END CAP, PART#: MC3500IEPP24BC / TYP OF ALL 24" BOTTOMCONNECTIONS AND ISOLATOR PLUS ROWSAPREFABRICATED END CAP 29.08"12" TOP CORED END CAP, PART#: MC3500IEPP12T / TYP OF ALL 12" TOP CONNECTIONSBPREFABRICATED END CAP INSTALL FLAMP ON 24" ACCESS PIPE / PART#: MC350024RAMPCFLAMP 29.04"12" x 12" TOP MANIFOLD, ADS N-12DMANIFOLD 2.5 CFS IN30" DIAMETER (24.00" SUMP MIN)ENYLOPLAST (INLET W/ ISOPLUS ROW) ISOLATOR ROW PLUS (SEE DETAIL) PLACE MINIMUM 17.50' OF ADSPLUS175 WOVEN GEOTEXTILE OVER BEDDINGSTONE AND UNDERNEATH CHAMBER FEET FOR SCOUR PROTECTION AT ALLCHAMBER INLET ROWS BED LIMITS 95.68' 15 . 3 3 ' 89.75' 13 . 3 3 ' 20 ' 10 ' 0 B C D A E St o r m T e c h 88 8 - 8 9 2 - 2 6 9 4 | WW W . S T O R M T E C H . C O M ® Ch a m b e r S y s t e m ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS: STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBER SYSTEMS PLEASE NOTE:1. THE LISTED AASHTO DESIGNATIONS ARE FOR GRADATIONS ONLY. THE STONE MUST ALSO BE CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR. FOR EXAMPLE, A SPECIFICATION FOR #4 STONE WOULD STATE: "CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR NO. 4 (AASHTO M43) STONE".2. STORMTECH COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS ARE MET FOR 'A' LOCATION MATERIALS WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED IN 9" (230 mm) (MAX) LIFTS USING TWO FULL COVERAGES WITH A VIBRATORY COMPACTOR.3. WHERE INFILTRATION SURFACES MAY BE COMPROMISED BY COMPACTION, FOR STANDARD DESIGN LOAD CONDITIONS, A FLAT SURFACE MAY BE ACHIEVED BY RAKING OR DRAGGING WITHOUT COMPACTION EQUIPMENT. FOR SPECIAL LOAD DESIGNS, CONTACT STORMTECH FORCOMPACTION REQUIREMENTS. 4. ONCE LAYER 'C' IS PLACED, ANY SOIL/MATERIAL CAN BE PLACED IN LAYER 'D' UP TO THE FINISHED GRADE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE SOILS CAN BE USED TO REPLACE THE MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS OF LAYER 'C' OR 'D' AT THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S DISCRETION. NOTES: 1. CHAMBERS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418-16a, "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS" CHAMBER CLASSIFICATION 45x76 DESIGNATION SS. 2. MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS". 3. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE BEARING RESISTANCE (ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY) OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS AND THE DEPTH OF FOUNDATION STONE WITH CONSIDERATION FOR THE RANGE OF EXPECTED SOIL MOISTURE CONDITIONS. 4. PERIMETER STONE MUST BE EXTENDED HORIZONTALLY TO THE EXCAVATION WALL FOR BOTH VERTICAL AND SLOPED EXCAVATION WALLS. 5. REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING AND INSTALLATION: ·TO MAINTAIN THE WIDTH OF CHAMBERS DURING SHIPPING AND HANDLING, CHAMBERS SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL, INTERLOCKING STACKING LUGS. ·TO ENSURE A SECURE JOINT DURING INSTALLATION AND BACKFILL, THE HEIGHT OF THE CHAMBER JOINT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 3”. ·TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF THE ARCH SHAPE DURING INSTALLATION, a) THE ARCH STIFFNESS CONSTANT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 6.2.8 OF ASTM F2418 SHALL BE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 500 LBS/IN/IN. AND b) TO RESIST CHAMBER DEFORMATION DURING INSTALLATION AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES (ABOVE 73° F / 23° C), CHAMBERS SHALL BE PRODUCED FROM REFLECTIVE GOLD OR YELLOW COLORS. MATERIAL LOCATION DESCRIPTION AASHTO MATERIAL CLASSIFICATIONS COMPACTION / DENSITY REQUIREMENT D FINAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'D' STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE 'C'LAYER TO THE BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT OR UNPAVED FINISHEDGRADE ABOVE. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASE MAY BE PART OF THE 'D'LAYER ANY SOIL/ROCK MATERIALS, NATIVE SOILS, OR PER ENGINEER'S PLANS.CHECK PLANS FOR PAVEMENT SUBGRADE REQUIREMENTS.N/A PREPARE PER SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S PLANS. PAVED INSTALLATIONS MAY HAVE STRINGENT MATERIAL AND PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS. C INITIAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'C' STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE EMBEDMENT STONE ('B' LAYER) TO 24" (600 mm) ABOVE THE TOP OF THE CHAMBER. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASE MAY BE A PART OF THE 'C' LAYER. GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, <35% FINES ORPROCESSED AGGREGATE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE MATERIALS CAN BE USED IN LIEU OF THISLAYER. AASHTO M145¹A-1, A-2-4, A-3 OR AASHTO M43¹3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57, 6, 67, 68, 7, 78, 8, 89, 9, 10 BEGIN COMPACTIONS AFTER 24" (600 mm) OF MATERIAL OVERTHE CHAMBERS IS REACHED. COMPACT ADDITIONAL LAYERS IN12" (300 mm) MAX LIFTS TO A MIN. 95% PROCTOR DENSITY FORWELL GRADED MATERIAL AND 95% RELATIVE DENSITY FORPROCESSED AGGREGATE MATERIALS. B EMBEDMENT STONE: FILL SURROUNDING THE CHAMBERS FROM THEFOUNDATION STONE ('A' LAYER) TO THE 'C' LAYER ABOVE.CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE AASHTO M43¹3, 4 A FOUNDATION STONE: FILL BELOW CHAMBERS FROM THE SUBGRADE UP TO THE FOOT (BOTTOM) OF THE CHAMBER.CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE AASHTO M43¹3, 4 PLATE COMPACT OR ROLL TO ACHIEVE A FLAT SURFACE.2,3 45" (1140 mm) 18" (450 mm) MIN* 8' (2.4 m) MAX 12" (300 mm) MIN77" (1950 mm) 12" (300 mm) MIN 6" (150 mm) MIN DEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER 9" (230 mm) MIN D C B A *TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVEDINSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR,INCREASE COVER TO 24" (600 mm). 6" (150 mm) MIN PERIMETER STONE(SEE NOTE 4) EXCAVATION WALL(CAN BE SLOPED OR VERTICAL) MC-3500 END CAP SUBGRADE SOILS(SEE NOTE 3) PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNEDBY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER) NO COMPACTION REQUIRED. ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE ALL AROUND CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE IN A & B LAYERS 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 1 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF3 6 St o r m T e c h 88 8 - 8 9 2 - 2 6 9 4 | WW W . S T O R M T E C H . C O M ® Ch a m b e r S y s t e m INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE STEP 1) INSPECT ISOLATOR ROW PLUS FOR SEDIMENTA. INSPECTION PORTS (IF PRESENT)A.1. REMOVE/OPEN LID ON NYLOPLAST INLINE DRAINA.2. REMOVE AND CLEAN FLEXSTORM FILTER IF INSTALLED A.3. USING A FLASHLIGHT AND STADIA ROD, MEASURE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT AND RECORD ON MAINTENANCE LOG A.4. LOWER A CAMERA INTO ISOLATOR ROW PLUS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION OF SEDIMENT LEVELS (OPTIONAL) A.5. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.B. ALL ISOLATOR PLUS ROWSB.1. REMOVE COVER FROM STRUCTURE AT UPSTREAM END OF ISOLATOR ROW PLUSB.2. USING A FLASHLIGHT, INSPECT DOWN THE ISOLATOR ROW PLUS THROUGH OUTLET PIPEi) MIRRORS ON POLES OR CAMERAS MAY BE USED TO AVOID A CONFINED SPACE ENTRYii) FOLLOW OSHA REGULATIONS FOR CONFINED SPACE ENTRY IF ENTERING MANHOLEB.3. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3. STEP 2) CLEAN OUT ISOLATOR ROW PLUS USING THE JETVAC PROCESS A. A FIXED CULVERT CLEANING NOZZLE WITH REAR FACING SPREAD OF 45" (1.1 m) OR MORE IS PREFERRED B. APPLY MULTIPLE PASSES OF JETVAC UNTIL BACKFLUSH WATER IS CLEAN C. VACUUM STRUCTURE SUMP AS REQUIRED STEP 3) REPLACE ALL COVERS, GRATES, FILTERS, AND LIDS; RECORD OBSERVATIONS AND ACTIONS. STEP 4) INSPECT AND CLEAN BASINS AND MANHOLES UPSTREAM OF THE STORMTECH SYSTEM. NOTES 1. INSPECT EVERY 6 MONTHS DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION. ADJUST THE INSPECTION INTERVAL BASED ON PREVIOUSOBSERVATIONS OF SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION AND HIGH WATER ELEVATIONS. 2. CONDUCT JETTING AND VACTORING ANNUALLY OR WHEN INSPECTION SHOWS THAT MAINTENANCE IS NECESSARY. CATCH BASIN OR MANHOLE MC-3500 ISOLATOR ROW PLUS DETAIL NTS 24" (600 mm) HDPE ACCESS PIPE REQUIRED USEFACTORY PRE-CORED END CAPPART #: MC3500IEPP24BC OR MC3500IEPP24BW STORMTECH HIGHLY RECOMMENDSFLEXSTORM INSERTS IN ANY UPSTREAMSTRUCTURES WITH OPEN GRATES COVER PIPE CONNECTION TO END CAP WITH ADSGEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE MC-3500 CHAMBER OPTIONAL INSPECTION PORT MC-3500 END CAP ONE LAYER OF ADSPLUS175 WOVEN GEOTEXTILE BETWEENFOUNDATION STONE AND CHAMBERS8.25' (2.51 m) MIN WIDE CONTINUOUS FABRIC WITHOUT SEAMS SUMP DEPTH TBD BYSITE DESIGN ENGINEER(24" [600 mm] MIN RECOMMENDED) INSTALL FLAMP ON 24" (600 mm) ACCESS PIPEPART #: MC350024RAMP 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 1 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF4 6 St o r m T e c h 88 8 - 8 9 2 - 2 6 9 4 | WW W . S T O R M T E C H . C O M ® Ch a m b e r S y s t e m MC-SERIES END CAP INSERTION DETAIL NTS NOTE: MANIFOLD STUB MUST BE LAID HORIZONTAL FOR A PROPER FIT IN END CAP OPENING. MANIFOLD HEADER MANIFOLD STUB STORMTECH END CAP MANIFOLD HEADER MANIFOLD STUB 12" (300 mm) MIN SEPARATION 12" (300 mm) MIN INSERTION 12" (300 mm) MIN SEPARATION 12" (300 mm)MIN INSERTION PART # STUB B C MC3500IEPP06T 6" (150 mm)33.21" (844 mm)--- MC3500IEPP06B ---0.66" (17 mm) MC3500IEPP08T 8" (200 mm)31.16" (791 mm)--- MC3500IEPP08B ---0.81" (21 mm) MC3500IEPP10T 10" (250 mm)29.04" (738 mm)--- MC3500IEPP10B ---0.93" (24 mm) MC3500IEPP12T 12" (300 mm)26.36" (670 mm)--- MC3500IEPP12B ---1.35" (34 mm) MC3500IEPP15T 15" (375 mm)23.39" (594 mm)--- MC3500IEPP15B ---1.50" (38 mm) MC3500IEPP18TC 18" (450 mm) 20.03" (509 mm)---MC3500IEPP18TW MC3500IEPP18BC ---1.77" (45 mm)MC3500IEPP18BW MC3500IEPP24TC 24" (600 mm) 14.48" (368 mm)---MC3500IEPP24TW MC3500IEPP24BC ---2.06" (52 mm)MC3500IEPP24BW MC3500IEPP30BC 30" (750 mm)---2.75" (70 mm) NOMINAL CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS SIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 77.0" X 45.0" X 86.0" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 2184 mm) CHAMBER STORAGE 109.9 CUBIC FEET (3.11 m³) MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 175.0 CUBIC FEET (4.96 m³)WEIGHT 134 lbs. (60.8 kg) NOMINAL END CAP SPECIFICATIONSSIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 75.0" X 45.0" X 22.2" (1905 mm X 1143 mm X 564 mm)END CAP STORAGE 14.9 CUBIC FEET (0.42 m³)MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 45.1 CUBIC FEET (1.28 m³)WEIGHT 49 lbs. (22.2 kg) *ASSUMES 12" (305 mm) STONE ABOVE, 9" (229 mm) STONE FOUNDATION, 6" SPACING BETWEENCHAMBERS, 6" (152 mm) STONE PERIMETER IN FRONT OF END CAPS AND 40% STONE POROSITY MC-3500 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION NTS 90.0" (2286 mm)ACTUAL LENGTH 86.0" (2184 mm)INSTALLED BUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTION NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINAL LOWER JOINTCORRUGATION WEB CREST CRESTSTIFFENING RIB VALLEYSTIFFENING RIB B C 75.0" (1905 mm) 45.0" (1143 mm) 25.7"(653 mm) FOOT 77.0"(1956 mm) 45.0"(1143 mm) STUBS AT BOTTOM OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "B" STUBS AT TOP OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "T"END CAPS WITH A WELDED CROWN PLATE END WITH "C"END CAPS WITH A PREFABRICATED WELDED STUB END WITH "W" UPPER JOINT CORRUGATION 22.2"(564 mm)INSTALLED CUSTOM PRECORED INVERTS AREAVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.INVENTORIED MANIFOLDS INCLUDE12-24" (300-600 mm) SIZE ON SIZEAND 15-48" (375-1200 mm) ECCENTRIC MANIFOLDS. CUSTOM INVERT LOCATIONS ON THE MC-3500END CAP CUT IN THE FIELD ARE NOTRECOMMENDED FOR PIPE SIZESGREATER THAN 10" (250 mm). THEINVERT LOCATION IN COLUMN 'B'ARE THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE FORTHE PIPE SIZE. PART # STUB B C MC3500IEPP06T 6" (150 mm)33.21" (844 mm)--- MC3500IEPP06B ---0.66" (17 mm) MC3500IEPP08T 8" (200 mm)31.16" (791 mm)--- MC3500IEPP08B ---0.81" (21 mm) MC3500IEPP10T 10" (250 mm)29.04" (738 mm)--- MC3500IEPP10B ---0.93" (24 mm) MC3500IEPP12T 12" (300 mm)26.36" (670 mm)--- MC3500IEPP12B ---1.35" (34 mm) MC3500IEPP15T 15" (375 mm)23.39" (594 mm)--- MC3500IEPP15B ---1.50" (38 mm) MC3500IEPP18TC 18" (450 mm) 20.03" (509 mm)---MC3500IEPP18TW MC3500IEPP18BC ---1.77" (45 mm)MC3500IEPP18BW MC3500IEPP24TC 24" (600 mm) 14.48" (368 mm)---MC3500IEPP24TW MC3500IEPP24BC ---2.06" (52 mm)MC3500IEPP24BW MC3500IEPP30BC 30" (750 mm)---2.75" (70 mm) NOMINAL CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS SIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 77.0" X 45.0" X 86.0" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 2184 mm) CHAMBER STORAGE 109.9 CUBIC FEET (3.11 m³) MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 175.0 CUBIC FEET (4.96 m³)WEIGHT 134 lbs. (60.8 kg) NOMINAL END CAP SPECIFICATIONSSIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 75.0" X 45.0" X 22.2" (1905 mm X 1143 mm X 564 mm)END CAP STORAGE 14.9 CUBIC FEET (0.42 m³)MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 45.1 CUBIC FEET (1.28 m³)WEIGHT 49 lbs. (22.2 kg) *ASSUMES 12" (305 mm) STONE ABOVE, 9" (229 mm) STONE FOUNDATION, 6" SPACING BETWEENCHAMBERS, 6" (152 mm) STONE PERIMETER IN FRONT OF END CAPS AND 40% STONE POROSITY MC-3500 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION NTS 90.0" (2286 mm)ACTUAL LENGTH 86.0" (2184 mm)INSTALLED BUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTION NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINAL LOWER JOINTCORRUGATION WEB CREST CRESTSTIFFENING RIB VALLEYSTIFFENING RIB B C 75.0" (1905 mm) 45.0" (1143 mm) 25.7"(653 mm) FOOT 77.0"(1956 mm) 45.0"(1143 mm) STUBS AT BOTTOM OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "B" STUBS AT TOP OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "T"END CAPS WITH A WELDED CROWN PLATE END WITH "C"END CAPS WITH A PREFABRICATED WELDED STUB END WITH "W" UPPER JOINT CORRUGATION 22.2"(564 mm)INSTALLED CUSTOM PRECORED INVERTS AREAVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.INVENTORIED MANIFOLDS INCLUDE12-24" (300-600 mm) SIZE ON SIZEAND 15-48" (375-1200 mm) ECCENTRIC MANIFOLDS. CUSTOM INVERT LOCATIONS ON THE MC-3500END CAP CUT IN THE FIELD ARE NOTRECOMMENDED FOR PIPE SIZESGREATER THAN 10" (250 mm). THEINVERT LOCATION IN COLUMN 'B'ARE THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE FORTHE PIPE SIZE. 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 1 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF5 6 NYLOPLAST DRAIN BASIN NTS NOTES 1. 8-30" (200-750 mm) GRATES/SOLID COVERS SHALL BE DUCTILE IRON PER ASTM A536GRADE 70-50-052. 12-30" (300-750 mm) FRAMES SHALL BE DUCTILE IRON PER ASTM A536 GRADE 70-50-05 3. DRAIN BASIN TO BE CUSTOM MANUFACTURED ACCORDING TO PLAN DETAILS 4. DRAINAGE CONNECTION STUB JOINT TIGHTNESS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM D3212 FOR CORRUGATED HDPE (ADS & HANCOR DUAL WALL) & SDR 35 PVC5. FOR COMPLETE DESIGN AND PRODUCT INFORMATION: WWW.NYLOPLAST-US.COM6. TO ORDER CALL: 800-821-6710 A PART # GRATE/SOLID COVER OPTIONS 8" (200 mm)2808AG PEDESTRIAN LIGHTDUTY STANDARD LIGHTDUTY SOLID LIGHT DUTY 10"(250 mm)2810AG PEDESTRIAN LIGHTDUTY STANDARD LIGHTDUTY SOLID LIGHT DUTY 12" (300 mm)2812AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-10 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 15"(375 mm)2815AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-10 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 18" (450 mm)2818AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-10 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 24"(600 mm)2824AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-10 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 30" (750 mm)2830AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-20 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 INTEGRATED DUCTILE IRONFRAME & GRATE/SOLID TOMATCH BASIN O.D. VARIOUS TYPES OF INLET ANDOUTLET ADAPTERS AVAILABLE:4-30" (100-750 mm) FORCORRUGATED HDPE WATERTIGHT JOINT(CORRUGATED HDPE SHOWN) BACKFILL MATERIAL BELOW AND TO SIDESOF STRUCTURE SHALL BE ASTM D2321CLASS I OR II CRUSHED STONE OR GRAVELAND BE PLACED UNIFORMLY IN 12" (305 mm)LIFTS AND COMPACTED TO MIN OF 90% TRAFFIC LOADS: CONCRETE DIMENSIONS ARE FOR GUIDELINE PUPOSES ONLY.ACTUAL CONCRETE SLAB MUST BEDESIGNED GIVING CONSIDERATION FORLOCAL SOIL CONDITIONS, TRAFFIC LOADING& OTHER APPLICABLE DESIGN FACTORS ADAPTER ANGLES VARIABLE 0°- 360°ACCORDING TO PLANS 18" (457 mm)MIN WIDTH A AASHTO H-20 CONCRETE SLAB8" (203 mm) MIN THICKNESS VARIABLE SUMP DEPTH ACCORDING TO PLANS [6" (152 mm) MIN ON 8-24" (200-600 mm),10" (254 mm) MIN ON 30" (750 mm)] 4" (102 mm) MIN ON 8-24" (200-600 mm) 6" (152 mm) MIN ON 30" (750 mm) 12" (610 mm) MIN(FOR AASHTO H-20) INVERT ACCORDING TO PLANS/TAKE OFF Ny l o p l a s t 77 0 - 9 3 2 - 2 4 4 3 | WW W . N Y L O P L A S T - U S . C O M ® 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 1 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF6 6 User Inputs Chamber Model: MC-3500 Outlet Control Structure: No Project Name: NCRC001.2 Engineer: Sarah Pfeifer Project Location: California Measurement Type: Imperial Required Storage Volume: 1833 cubic ft. Stone Porosity: 40% Stone Foundation Depth: 9 in. Stone Above Chambers: 12 in. Average Cover Over Chambers: 18 in. Design Constraint Dimensions:(16 ft. x 50 ft.) Results System Volume and Bed Size Installed Storage Volume: 1856.88 cubic ft. Storage Volume Per Chamber: 109.90 cubic ft. Number Of Chambers Required: 8 Number Of End Caps Required: 4 Chamber Rows: 2 Maximum Length:38.35 ft. Maximum Width: 15.33 ft. Approx. Bed Size Required: 588.00 square ft. System Components Amount Of Stone Required: 85.01 cubic yards Volume Of Excavation (Not Including Fill): 119.78 cubic yards Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. FOR STORMTECHINSTRUCTIONS,DOWNLOAD THE INSTALLATION APP SiteASSIST MC-3500 STORMTECH CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS 1. CHAMBERS SHALL BE STORMTECH MC-3500. 2. CHAMBERS SHALL BE ARCH-SHAPED AND SHALL BE MANUFACTURED FROM VIRGIN, IMPACT-MODIFIED POLYPROPYLENE COPOLYMERS. 3. CHAMBERS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418-16a, "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP)CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS" CHAMBER CLASSIFICATION 45x76 DESIGNATION SS. 4. CHAMBER ROWS SHALL PROVIDE CONTINUOUS, UNOBSTRUCTED INTERNAL SPACE WITH NO INTERNAL SUPPORTS THAT WOULDIMPEDE FLOW OR LIMIT ACCESS FOR INSPECTION. 5. THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THE CHAMBERS, THE STRUCTURAL BACKFILL, AND THE INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS SHALL ENSURETHAT THE LOAD FACTORS SPECIFIED IN THE AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS, SECTION 12.12, ARE MET FOR: 1)LONG-DURATION DEAD LOADS AND 2) SHORT-DURATION LIVE LOADS, BASED ON THE AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK WITH CONSIDERATIONFOR IMPACT AND MULTIPLE VEHICLE PRESENCES. 6. CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED, TESTED AND ALLOWABLE LOAD CONFIGURATIONS DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787, "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS". LOAD CONFIGURATIONS SHALL INCLUDE: 1) INSTANTANEOUS (<1 MIN) AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK LIVE LOAD ON MINIMUM COVER 2) MAXIMUM PERMANENT (75-YR) COVER LOAD AND 3) ALLOWABLE COVER WITH PARKED (1-WEEK) AASHTO DESIGN TRUCK. 7. REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING AND INSTALLATION:·TO MAINTAIN THE WIDTH OF CHAMBERS DURING SHIPPING AND HANDLING, CHAMBERS SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL, INTERLOCKINGSTACKING LUGS.·TO ENSURE A SECURE JOINT DURING INSTALLATION AND BACKFILL, THE HEIGHT OF THE CHAMBER JOINT SHALL NOT BE LESSTHAN 3”.·TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF THE ARCH SHAPE DURING INSTALLATION, a) THE ARCH STIFFNESS CONSTANT AS DEFINED INSECTION 6.2.8 OF ASTM F2418 SHALL BE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 500 LBS/IN/IN. AND b) TO RESIST CHAMBER DEFORMATIONDURING INSTALLATION AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES (ABOVE 73° F / 23° C), CHAMBERS SHALL BE PRODUCED FROM REFLECTIVE GOLD OR YELLOW COLORS. 8. ONLY CHAMBERS THAT ARE APPROVED BY THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER WILL BE ALLOWED. UPON REQUEST BY THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER OR OWNER, THE CHAMBER MANUFACTURER SHALL SUBMIT A STRUCTURAL EVALUATION FOR APPROVAL BEFOREDELIVERING CHAMBERS TO THE PROJECT SITE AS FOLLOWS:·THE STRUCTURAL EVALUATION SHALL BE SEALED BY A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.·THE STRUCTURAL EVALUATION SHALL DEMONSTRATE THAT THE SAFETY FACTORS ARE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 1.95 FORDEAD LOAD AND 1.75 FOR LIVE LOAD, THE MINIMUM REQUIRED BY ASTM F2787 AND BY SECTIONS 3 AND 12.12 OF THE AASHTOLRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS FOR THERMOPLASTIC PIPE.·THE TEST DERIVED CREEP MODULUS AS SPECIFIED IN ASTM F2418 SHALL BE USED FOR PERMANENT DEAD LOAD DESIGNEXCEPT THAT IT SHALL BE THE 75-YEAR MODULUS USED FOR DESIGN. 9. CHAMBERS AND END CAPS SHALL BE PRODUCED AT AN ISO 9001 CERTIFIED MANUFACTURING FACILITY. IMPORTANT - NOTES FOR THE BIDDING AND INSTALLATION OF MC-3500 CHAMBER SYSTEM 1. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED UNTIL THE MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVE HAS COMPLETED APRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH THE INSTALLERS. 2. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE". 3. CHAMBERS ARE NOT TO BE BACKFILLED WITH A DOZER OR AN EXCAVATOR SITUATED OVER THE CHAMBERS.STORMTECH RECOMMENDS 3 BACKFILL METHODS:·STONESHOOTER LOCATED OFF THE CHAMBER BED.·BACKFILL AS ROWS ARE BUILT USING AN EXCAVATOR ON THE FOUNDATION STONE OR SUBGRADE.·BACKFILL FROM OUTSIDE THE EXCAVATION USING A LONG BOOM HOE OR EXCAVATOR. 4. THE FOUNDATION STONE SHALL BE LEVELED AND COMPACTED PRIOR TO PLACING CHAMBERS. 5. JOINTS BETWEEN CHAMBERS SHALL BE PROPERLY SEATED PRIOR TO PLACING STONE. 6. MAINTAIN MINIMUM - 6" (150 mm) SPACING BETWEEN THE CHAMBER ROWS. 7. INLET AND OUTLET MANIFOLDS MUST BE INSERTED A MINIMUM OF 12" (300 mm) INTO CHAMBER END CAPS. 8. EMBEDMENT STONE SURROUNDING CHAMBERS MUST BE A CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE MEETING THE AASHTO M43 DESIGNATION OF #3OR #4. 9. STONE MUST BE PLACED ON THE TOP CENTER OF THE CHAMBER TO ANCHOR THE CHAMBERS IN PLACE AND PRESERVE ROW SPACING. 10. THE CONTRACTOR MUST REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES WITH CHAMBER FOUNDATION MATERIALS BEARING CAPACITIES TO THE SITE DESIGNENGINEER. 11. ADS RECOMMENDS THE USE OF "FLEXSTORM CATCH IT" INSERTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR ALL INLETS TO PROTECT THE SUBSURFACESTORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FROM CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF. NOTES FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT 1. STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE". 2. THE USE OF EQUIPMENT OVER MC-3500 CHAMBERS IS LIMITED:·NO EQUIPMENT IS ALLOWED ON BARE CHAMBERS.·NO RUBBER TIRED LOADER, DUMP TRUCK, OR EXCAVATORS ARE ALLOWED UNTIL PROPER FILL DEPTHS ARE REACHED IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE".·WEIGHT LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CAN BE FOUND IN THE "STORMTECH MC-3500/MC-4500 CONSTRUCTION GUIDE". 3. FULL 36" (900 mm) OF STABILIZED COVER MATERIALS OVER THE CHAMBERS IS REQUIRED FOR DUMP TRUCK TRAVEL OR DUMPING. USE OF A DOZER TO PUSH EMBEDMENT STONE BETWEEN THE ROWS OF CHAMBERS MAY CAUSE DAMAGE TO CHAMBERS AND IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLEBACKFILL METHOD. ANY CHAMBERS DAMAGED BY USING THE "DUMP AND PUSH" METHOD ARE NOT COVERED UNDER THE STORMTECH STANDARDWARRANTY. CONTACT STORMTECH AT 1-888-892-2694 WITH ANY QUESTIONS ON INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS OR WEIGHT LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT. ©2013 ADS, INC. PROJECT INFORMATION ADS SALES REP PROJECT NO. ENGINEERED PRODUCTMANAGER NCRC001.2 ANAHEIM, CA St o r m T e c h 88 8 - 8 9 2 - 2 6 9 4 | WW W . S T O R M T E C H . C O M ® Ch a m b e r S y s t e m 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 2 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF2 6 NOTES• MANIFOLD SIZE TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER. SEE TECH NOTE #6.32 FOR MANIFOLD SIZING GUIDANCE.• DUE TO THE ADAPTATION OF THIS CHAMBER SYSTEM TO SPECIFIC SITE AND DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO CUT AND COUPLE ADDITIONAL PIPE TO STANDARD MANIFOLDCOMPONENTS IN THE FIELD.• THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER MUST REVIEW ELEVATIONS AND IF NECESSARY ADJUST GRADING TO ENSURE THE CHAMBER COVER REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.• THIS CHAMBER SYSTEM WAS DESIGNED WITHOUT SITE-SPECIFIC INFORMATION ON SOIL CONDITIONS OR BEARING CAPACITY. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FORDETERMININGTHE SUITABILITY OF THE SOIL AND PROVIDING THE BEARING CAPACITY OF THE INSITU SOILS. THE BASE STONE DEPTH MAY BE INCREASED OR DECREASED ONCE THIS INFORMATION ISPROVIDED.•NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION: THIS LAYOUT IS FOR DIMENSIONAL PURPOSES ONLY TO PROVE CONCEPT & THE REQUIRED STORAGE VOLUME CAN BE ACHIEVED ON SITE. CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (TOP OF PAVEMENT/UNPAVED):12.50MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (UNPAVED WITH TRAFFIC):6.50MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (UNPAVED NO TRAFFIC):6.00MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (TOP OF RIGID CONCRETE PAVEMENT):6.00MINIMUM ALLOWABLE GRADE (BASE OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT):6.00TOP OF STONE:5.50TOP OF MC-3500 CHAMBER:4.5012" x 12" TOP MANIFOLD INVERT:3.1724" ISOLATOR ROW PLUS INVERT:0.92BOTTOM OF MC-3500 CHAMBER:0.75BOTTOM OF STONE:0.00 PROPOSED LAYOUT 8 STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBERS4 STORMTECH MC-3500 END CAPS12STONE ABOVE (in)9 STONE BELOW (in) 40 STONE VOID 1857 INSTALLED SYSTEM VOLUME (CF)(PERIMETER STONE INCLUDED)(COVER STONE INCLUDED)(BASE STONE INCLUDED)588 SYSTEM AREA (SF)107.4 SYSTEM PERIMETER (ft) *INVERT ABOVE BASE OF CHAMBER MAX FLOWINVERT*DESCRIPTIONITEM ONLAYOUTPART TYPE 2.06"24" BOTTOM CORED END CAP, PART#: MC3500IEPP24BC / TYP OF ALL 24" BOTTOMCONNECTIONS AND ISOLATOR PLUS ROWSAPREFABRICATED END CAP 29.08"12" TOP CORED END CAP, PART#: MC3500IEPP12T / TYP OF ALL 12" TOP CONNECTIONSBPREFABRICATED END CAP INSTALL FLAMP ON 24" ACCESS PIPE / PART#: MC350024RAMPCFLAMP 29.04"12" x 12" TOP MANIFOLD, ADS N-12DMANIFOLD 2.5 CFS IN30" DIAMETER (24.00" SUMP MIN)ENYLOPLAST (INLET W/ ISOPLUS ROW) ISOLATOR ROW PLUS (SEE DETAIL) PLACE MINIMUM 17.50' OF ADSPLUS175 WOVEN GEOTEXTILE OVER BEDDINGSTONE AND UNDERNEATH CHAMBER FEET FOR SCOUR PROTECTION AT ALLCHAMBER INLET ROWS BED LIMITS 38.35' 15 . 3 3 ' 32.42' 13 . 3 3 ' 10 ' 5' 0 B C D A E St o r m T e c h 88 8 - 8 9 2 - 2 6 9 4 | WW W . S T O R M T E C H . C O M ® Ch a m b e r S y s t e m ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS: STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBER SYSTEMS PLEASE NOTE:1. THE LISTED AASHTO DESIGNATIONS ARE FOR GRADATIONS ONLY. THE STONE MUST ALSO BE CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR. FOR EXAMPLE, A SPECIFICATION FOR #4 STONE WOULD STATE: "CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR NO. 4 (AASHTO M43) STONE".2. STORMTECH COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS ARE MET FOR 'A' LOCATION MATERIALS WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED IN 9" (230 mm) (MAX) LIFTS USING TWO FULL COVERAGES WITH A VIBRATORY COMPACTOR.3. WHERE INFILTRATION SURFACES MAY BE COMPROMISED BY COMPACTION, FOR STANDARD DESIGN LOAD CONDITIONS, A FLAT SURFACE MAY BE ACHIEVED BY RAKING OR DRAGGING WITHOUT COMPACTION EQUIPMENT. FOR SPECIAL LOAD DESIGNS, CONTACT STORMTECH FORCOMPACTION REQUIREMENTS. 4. ONCE LAYER 'C' IS PLACED, ANY SOIL/MATERIAL CAN BE PLACED IN LAYER 'D' UP TO THE FINISHED GRADE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE SOILS CAN BE USED TO REPLACE THE MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS OF LAYER 'C' OR 'D' AT THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S DISCRETION. NOTES: 1. CHAMBERS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418-16a, "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS" CHAMBER CLASSIFICATION 45x76 DESIGNATION SS. 2. MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS". 3. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE BEARING RESISTANCE (ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY) OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS AND THE DEPTH OF FOUNDATION STONE WITH CONSIDERATION FOR THE RANGE OF EXPECTED SOIL MOISTURE CONDITIONS. 4. PERIMETER STONE MUST BE EXTENDED HORIZONTALLY TO THE EXCAVATION WALL FOR BOTH VERTICAL AND SLOPED EXCAVATION WALLS. 5. REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING AND INSTALLATION: ·TO MAINTAIN THE WIDTH OF CHAMBERS DURING SHIPPING AND HANDLING, CHAMBERS SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL, INTERLOCKING STACKING LUGS. ·TO ENSURE A SECURE JOINT DURING INSTALLATION AND BACKFILL, THE HEIGHT OF THE CHAMBER JOINT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 3”. ·TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF THE ARCH SHAPE DURING INSTALLATION, a) THE ARCH STIFFNESS CONSTANT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 6.2.8 OF ASTM F2418 SHALL BE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 500 LBS/IN/IN. AND b) TO RESIST CHAMBER DEFORMATION DURING INSTALLATION AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES (ABOVE 73° F / 23° C), CHAMBERS SHALL BE PRODUCED FROM REFLECTIVE GOLD OR YELLOW COLORS. MATERIAL LOCATION DESCRIPTION AASHTO MATERIAL CLASSIFICATIONS COMPACTION / DENSITY REQUIREMENT D FINAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'D' STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE 'C'LAYER TO THE BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT OR UNPAVED FINISHEDGRADE ABOVE. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASE MAY BE PART OF THE 'D'LAYER ANY SOIL/ROCK MATERIALS, NATIVE SOILS, OR PER ENGINEER'S PLANS.CHECK PLANS FOR PAVEMENT SUBGRADE REQUIREMENTS.N/A PREPARE PER SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S PLANS. PAVED INSTALLATIONS MAY HAVE STRINGENT MATERIAL AND PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS. C INITIAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'C' STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE EMBEDMENT STONE ('B' LAYER) TO 24" (600 mm) ABOVE THE TOP OF THE CHAMBER. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASE MAY BE A PART OF THE 'C' LAYER. GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, <35% FINES ORPROCESSED AGGREGATE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE MATERIALS CAN BE USED IN LIEU OF THISLAYER. AASHTO M145¹A-1, A-2-4, A-3 OR AASHTO M43¹3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57, 6, 67, 68, 7, 78, 8, 89, 9, 10 BEGIN COMPACTIONS AFTER 24" (600 mm) OF MATERIAL OVERTHE CHAMBERS IS REACHED. COMPACT ADDITIONAL LAYERS IN12" (300 mm) MAX LIFTS TO A MIN. 95% PROCTOR DENSITY FORWELL GRADED MATERIAL AND 95% RELATIVE DENSITY FORPROCESSED AGGREGATE MATERIALS. B EMBEDMENT STONE: FILL SURROUNDING THE CHAMBERS FROM THEFOUNDATION STONE ('A' LAYER) TO THE 'C' LAYER ABOVE.CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE AASHTO M43¹3, 4 A FOUNDATION STONE: FILL BELOW CHAMBERS FROM THE SUBGRADE UP TO THE FOOT (BOTTOM) OF THE CHAMBER.CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE AASHTO M43¹3, 4 PLATE COMPACT OR ROLL TO ACHIEVE A FLAT SURFACE.2,3 45" (1140 mm) 18" (450 mm) MIN* 8' (2.4 m) MAX 12" (300 mm) MIN77" (1950 mm) 12" (300 mm) MIN 6" (150 mm) MIN DEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER 9" (230 mm) MIN D C B A *TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVEDINSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR,INCREASE COVER TO 24" (600 mm). 6" (150 mm) MIN PERIMETER STONE(SEE NOTE 4) EXCAVATION WALL(CAN BE SLOPED OR VERTICAL) MC-3500 END CAP SUBGRADE SOILS(SEE NOTE 3) PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNEDBY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER) NO COMPACTION REQUIRED. ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE ALL AROUND CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE IN A & B LAYERS 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 2 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF3 6 St o r m T e c h 88 8 - 8 9 2 - 2 6 9 4 | WW W . S T O R M T E C H . C O M ® Ch a m b e r S y s t e m INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE STEP 1) INSPECT ISOLATOR ROW PLUS FOR SEDIMENTA. INSPECTION PORTS (IF PRESENT)A.1. REMOVE/OPEN LID ON NYLOPLAST INLINE DRAINA.2. REMOVE AND CLEAN FLEXSTORM FILTER IF INSTALLED A.3. USING A FLASHLIGHT AND STADIA ROD, MEASURE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT AND RECORD ON MAINTENANCE LOG A.4. LOWER A CAMERA INTO ISOLATOR ROW PLUS FOR VISUAL INSPECTION OF SEDIMENT LEVELS (OPTIONAL) A.5. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.B. ALL ISOLATOR PLUS ROWSB.1. REMOVE COVER FROM STRUCTURE AT UPSTREAM END OF ISOLATOR ROW PLUSB.2. USING A FLASHLIGHT, INSPECT DOWN THE ISOLATOR ROW PLUS THROUGH OUTLET PIPEi) MIRRORS ON POLES OR CAMERAS MAY BE USED TO AVOID A CONFINED SPACE ENTRYii) FOLLOW OSHA REGULATIONS FOR CONFINED SPACE ENTRY IF ENTERING MANHOLEB.3. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3. STEP 2) CLEAN OUT ISOLATOR ROW PLUS USING THE JETVAC PROCESS A. A FIXED CULVERT CLEANING NOZZLE WITH REAR FACING SPREAD OF 45" (1.1 m) OR MORE IS PREFERRED B. APPLY MULTIPLE PASSES OF JETVAC UNTIL BACKFLUSH WATER IS CLEAN C. VACUUM STRUCTURE SUMP AS REQUIRED STEP 3) REPLACE ALL COVERS, GRATES, FILTERS, AND LIDS; RECORD OBSERVATIONS AND ACTIONS. STEP 4) INSPECT AND CLEAN BASINS AND MANHOLES UPSTREAM OF THE STORMTECH SYSTEM. NOTES 1. INSPECT EVERY 6 MONTHS DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION. ADJUST THE INSPECTION INTERVAL BASED ON PREVIOUSOBSERVATIONS OF SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION AND HIGH WATER ELEVATIONS. 2. CONDUCT JETTING AND VACTORING ANNUALLY OR WHEN INSPECTION SHOWS THAT MAINTENANCE IS NECESSARY. CATCH BASIN OR MANHOLE MC-3500 ISOLATOR ROW PLUS DETAIL NTS 24" (600 mm) HDPE ACCESS PIPE REQUIRED USEFACTORY PRE-CORED END CAPPART #: MC3500IEPP24BC OR MC3500IEPP24BW STORMTECH HIGHLY RECOMMENDSFLEXSTORM INSERTS IN ANY UPSTREAMSTRUCTURES WITH OPEN GRATES COVER PIPE CONNECTION TO END CAP WITH ADSGEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE MC-3500 CHAMBER OPTIONAL INSPECTION PORT MC-3500 END CAP ONE LAYER OF ADSPLUS175 WOVEN GEOTEXTILE BETWEENFOUNDATION STONE AND CHAMBERS8.25' (2.51 m) MIN WIDE CONTINUOUS FABRIC WITHOUT SEAMS SUMP DEPTH TBD BYSITE DESIGN ENGINEER(24" [600 mm] MIN RECOMMENDED) INSTALL FLAMP ON 24" (600 mm) ACCESS PIPEPART #: MC350024RAMP 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 2 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF4 6 St o r m T e c h 88 8 - 8 9 2 - 2 6 9 4 | WW W . S T O R M T E C H . C O M ® Ch a m b e r S y s t e m MC-SERIES END CAP INSERTION DETAIL NTS NOTE: MANIFOLD STUB MUST BE LAID HORIZONTAL FOR A PROPER FIT IN END CAP OPENING. MANIFOLD HEADER MANIFOLD STUB STORMTECH END CAP MANIFOLD HEADER MANIFOLD STUB 12" (300 mm) MIN SEPARATION 12" (300 mm) MIN INSERTION 12" (300 mm) MIN SEPARATION 12" (300 mm)MIN INSERTION PART # STUB B C MC3500IEPP06T 6" (150 mm)33.21" (844 mm)--- MC3500IEPP06B ---0.66" (17 mm) MC3500IEPP08T 8" (200 mm)31.16" (791 mm)--- MC3500IEPP08B ---0.81" (21 mm) MC3500IEPP10T 10" (250 mm)29.04" (738 mm)--- MC3500IEPP10B ---0.93" (24 mm) MC3500IEPP12T 12" (300 mm)26.36" (670 mm)--- MC3500IEPP12B ---1.35" (34 mm) MC3500IEPP15T 15" (375 mm)23.39" (594 mm)--- MC3500IEPP15B ---1.50" (38 mm) MC3500IEPP18TC 18" (450 mm) 20.03" (509 mm)---MC3500IEPP18TW MC3500IEPP18BC ---1.77" (45 mm)MC3500IEPP18BW MC3500IEPP24TC 24" (600 mm) 14.48" (368 mm)---MC3500IEPP24TW MC3500IEPP24BC ---2.06" (52 mm)MC3500IEPP24BW MC3500IEPP30BC 30" (750 mm)---2.75" (70 mm) NOMINAL CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS SIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 77.0" X 45.0" X 86.0" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 2184 mm) CHAMBER STORAGE 109.9 CUBIC FEET (3.11 m³) MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 175.0 CUBIC FEET (4.96 m³)WEIGHT 134 lbs. (60.8 kg) NOMINAL END CAP SPECIFICATIONSSIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 75.0" X 45.0" X 22.2" (1905 mm X 1143 mm X 564 mm)END CAP STORAGE 14.9 CUBIC FEET (0.42 m³)MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 45.1 CUBIC FEET (1.28 m³)WEIGHT 49 lbs. (22.2 kg) *ASSUMES 12" (305 mm) STONE ABOVE, 9" (229 mm) STONE FOUNDATION, 6" SPACING BETWEENCHAMBERS, 6" (152 mm) STONE PERIMETER IN FRONT OF END CAPS AND 40% STONE POROSITY MC-3500 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION NTS 90.0" (2286 mm)ACTUAL LENGTH 86.0" (2184 mm)INSTALLED BUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTION NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINAL LOWER JOINTCORRUGATION WEB CREST CRESTSTIFFENING RIB VALLEYSTIFFENING RIB B C 75.0" (1905 mm) 45.0" (1143 mm) 25.7"(653 mm) FOOT 77.0"(1956 mm) 45.0"(1143 mm) STUBS AT BOTTOM OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "B" STUBS AT TOP OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "T"END CAPS WITH A WELDED CROWN PLATE END WITH "C"END CAPS WITH A PREFABRICATED WELDED STUB END WITH "W" UPPER JOINT CORRUGATION 22.2"(564 mm)INSTALLED CUSTOM PRECORED INVERTS AREAVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.INVENTORIED MANIFOLDS INCLUDE12-24" (300-600 mm) SIZE ON SIZEAND 15-48" (375-1200 mm) ECCENTRIC MANIFOLDS. CUSTOM INVERT LOCATIONS ON THE MC-3500END CAP CUT IN THE FIELD ARE NOTRECOMMENDED FOR PIPE SIZESGREATER THAN 10" (250 mm). THEINVERT LOCATION IN COLUMN 'B'ARE THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE FORTHE PIPE SIZE. PART # STUB B C MC3500IEPP06T 6" (150 mm)33.21" (844 mm)--- MC3500IEPP06B ---0.66" (17 mm) MC3500IEPP08T 8" (200 mm)31.16" (791 mm)--- MC3500IEPP08B ---0.81" (21 mm) MC3500IEPP10T 10" (250 mm)29.04" (738 mm)--- MC3500IEPP10B ---0.93" (24 mm) MC3500IEPP12T 12" (300 mm)26.36" (670 mm)--- MC3500IEPP12B ---1.35" (34 mm) MC3500IEPP15T 15" (375 mm)23.39" (594 mm)--- MC3500IEPP15B ---1.50" (38 mm) MC3500IEPP18TC 18" (450 mm) 20.03" (509 mm)---MC3500IEPP18TW MC3500IEPP18BC ---1.77" (45 mm)MC3500IEPP18BW MC3500IEPP24TC 24" (600 mm) 14.48" (368 mm)---MC3500IEPP24TW MC3500IEPP24BC ---2.06" (52 mm)MC3500IEPP24BW MC3500IEPP30BC 30" (750 mm)---2.75" (70 mm) NOMINAL CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS SIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 77.0" X 45.0" X 86.0" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 2184 mm) CHAMBER STORAGE 109.9 CUBIC FEET (3.11 m³) MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 175.0 CUBIC FEET (4.96 m³)WEIGHT 134 lbs. (60.8 kg) NOMINAL END CAP SPECIFICATIONSSIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH) 75.0" X 45.0" X 22.2" (1905 mm X 1143 mm X 564 mm)END CAP STORAGE 14.9 CUBIC FEET (0.42 m³)MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE* 45.1 CUBIC FEET (1.28 m³)WEIGHT 49 lbs. (22.2 kg) *ASSUMES 12" (305 mm) STONE ABOVE, 9" (229 mm) STONE FOUNDATION, 6" SPACING BETWEENCHAMBERS, 6" (152 mm) STONE PERIMETER IN FRONT OF END CAPS AND 40% STONE POROSITY MC-3500 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION NTS 90.0" (2286 mm)ACTUAL LENGTH 86.0" (2184 mm)INSTALLED BUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTION NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINAL LOWER JOINTCORRUGATION WEB CREST CRESTSTIFFENING RIB VALLEYSTIFFENING RIB B C 75.0" (1905 mm) 45.0" (1143 mm) 25.7"(653 mm) FOOT 77.0"(1956 mm) 45.0"(1143 mm) STUBS AT BOTTOM OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "B" STUBS AT TOP OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "T"END CAPS WITH A WELDED CROWN PLATE END WITH "C"END CAPS WITH A PREFABRICATED WELDED STUB END WITH "W" UPPER JOINT CORRUGATION 22.2"(564 mm)INSTALLED CUSTOM PRECORED INVERTS AREAVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.INVENTORIED MANIFOLDS INCLUDE12-24" (300-600 mm) SIZE ON SIZEAND 15-48" (375-1200 mm) ECCENTRIC MANIFOLDS. CUSTOM INVERT LOCATIONS ON THE MC-3500END CAP CUT IN THE FIELD ARE NOTRECOMMENDED FOR PIPE SIZESGREATER THAN 10" (250 mm). THEINVERT LOCATION IN COLUMN 'B'ARE THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE FORTHE PIPE SIZE. 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 2 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF5 6 NYLOPLAST DRAIN BASIN NTS NOTES 1. 8-30" (200-750 mm) GRATES/SOLID COVERS SHALL BE DUCTILE IRON PER ASTM A536GRADE 70-50-052. 12-30" (300-750 mm) FRAMES SHALL BE DUCTILE IRON PER ASTM A536 GRADE 70-50-05 3. DRAIN BASIN TO BE CUSTOM MANUFACTURED ACCORDING TO PLAN DETAILS 4. DRAINAGE CONNECTION STUB JOINT TIGHTNESS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM D3212 FOR CORRUGATED HDPE (ADS & HANCOR DUAL WALL) & SDR 35 PVC5. FOR COMPLETE DESIGN AND PRODUCT INFORMATION: WWW.NYLOPLAST-US.COM6. TO ORDER CALL: 800-821-6710 A PART # GRATE/SOLID COVER OPTIONS 8" (200 mm)2808AG PEDESTRIAN LIGHTDUTY STANDARD LIGHTDUTY SOLID LIGHT DUTY 10"(250 mm)2810AG PEDESTRIAN LIGHTDUTY STANDARD LIGHTDUTY SOLID LIGHT DUTY 12" (300 mm)2812AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-10 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 15"(375 mm)2815AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-10 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 18" (450 mm)2818AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-10 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 24"(600 mm)2824AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-10 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 30" (750 mm)2830AG PEDESTRIANAASHTO H-20 STANDARD AASHTOH-20 SOLIDAASHTO H-20 INTEGRATED DUCTILE IRONFRAME & GRATE/SOLID TOMATCH BASIN O.D. VARIOUS TYPES OF INLET ANDOUTLET ADAPTERS AVAILABLE:4-30" (100-750 mm) FORCORRUGATED HDPE WATERTIGHT JOINT(CORRUGATED HDPE SHOWN) BACKFILL MATERIAL BELOW AND TO SIDESOF STRUCTURE SHALL BE ASTM D2321CLASS I OR II CRUSHED STONE OR GRAVELAND BE PLACED UNIFORMLY IN 12" (305 mm)LIFTS AND COMPACTED TO MIN OF 90% TRAFFIC LOADS: CONCRETE DIMENSIONS ARE FOR GUIDELINE PUPOSES ONLY.ACTUAL CONCRETE SLAB MUST BEDESIGNED GIVING CONSIDERATION FORLOCAL SOIL CONDITIONS, TRAFFIC LOADING& OTHER APPLICABLE DESIGN FACTORS ADAPTER ANGLES VARIABLE 0°- 360°ACCORDING TO PLANS 18" (457 mm)MIN WIDTH A AASHTO H-20 CONCRETE SLAB8" (203 mm) MIN THICKNESS VARIABLE SUMP DEPTH ACCORDING TO PLANS [6" (152 mm) MIN ON 8-24" (200-600 mm),10" (254 mm) MIN ON 30" (750 mm)] 4" (102 mm) MIN ON 8-24" (200-600 mm) 6" (152 mm) MIN ON 30" (750 mm) 12" (610 mm) MIN(FOR AASHTO H-20) INVERT ACCORDING TO PLANS/TAKE OFF Ny l o p l a s t 77 0 - 9 3 2 - 2 4 4 3 | WW W . N Y L O P L A S T - U S . C O M ® 46 4 0 T R U E M A N B L V D HI L L I A R D , O H 4 3 0 2 6 1- 8 0 0 - 7 3 3 - 7 4 7 3 DA T E : D R A W N : S P PR O J E C T # : C H E C K E D : N / A TH I S D R A W I N G H A S B E E N P R E P A R E D B A S E D O N I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D T O A D S U N D E R T H E D I R E C T I O N O F T H E S I T E DE S I G N E N G I N E E R O R O T H E R P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E . T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R S H A L L R E V I E W T H I S D R A W I N G PR I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . I T I S T H E U L T I M A T E RE S P O N S I B I L I T Y O F T H E S I T E D E S I G N E N G I N E E R T O E N S U R E T H A T T H E P R O D U C T ( S ) D E P I C T E D A N D A L L A S S O C I A T E D D E T A I L S M E E T A L L A P P L I C A B L E L A W S , R E G U L A T I O N S , A N D P R O J E C T R E Q U I R E M E N T S . RE V D R W C H K D E S C R I P T I O N NC R C 0 0 1 . 2 AN A H E I M , C A SHEET OF6 6 MWS Linear Advanced Stormwater Biofiltration Contents 1 Introduction 2 Applications 3 Configurations 4 Advantages 5 Operation 6 Orientations | Bypass 7 Performance | Approvals 8 Sizing 9 Installation | Maintenance | Plants www.ModularWetlands.com The Urban Impact For hundreds of years natural wetlands surrounding our shores have played an integral role as nature’s stormwater treatment system. But as our cities grow and develop, these natural wet- lands have perished under countless roads, rooftops, and parking lots. Plant A Wetland Without natural wetlands our cities are deprived of water purification, flood control, and land stability. Modular Wetlands and the MWS Linear re-establish nature’s presence and rejuvenate water ways in urban areas. MWS Linear The Modular Wetland System Linear represents a pioneering breakthrough in stormwater tech- nology as the only biofiltration system to utilize patented horizontal flow, allowing for a smaller footprint and higher treatment capacity. While most biofilters use little or no pre-treatment, the MWS Linear incorporates an advanced pre-treatment chamber that includes separation and pre- filter cartridges. In this chamber sediment and hydrocarbons are removed from runoff before it enters the biofiltration chamber, in turn reducing maintenance costs and improving performance. Parking Lots Parking lots are designed to maximize space and the MWS Linear’s 4 ft. standard planter width al- lows for easy integration into parking lot islands and other landscape medians. Mixed Use The MWS Linear can be installed as a raised plant- er to treat runoff from rooftops or patios, making it perfect for sustainable “live-work” spaces. Industrial Many states enforce strict regulations for dis- charges from industrial sites. The MWS Linear has helped various sites meet difficult EPA mandated effluent limits for dissolved metals and other pol- lutants. Residential Low to high density developments can benefit from the versatile design of the MWS Linear. The system can be used in both decentralized LID de- sign and cost-effective end-of-the-line configura- tions. Streets Street applications can be challenging due to limited space. The MWS Linear is very adaptable, and offers the smallest footprint to work around the constraints of existing utilities on retrofit pro- jects. Commercial Compared to bioretention systems, the MWS Lin- ear can treat far more area in less space - meeting treatment and volume control requirements. Applications The MWS Linear has been successfully used on numerous new construction and retrofit projects. The system’s superior versatility makes it beneficial for a wide range of stormwater and waste water applications - treating rooftops, streetscapes, parking lots, and industrial sites. More applications are available on our website: www.ModularWetlands.com/Applications • Agriculture • Reuse • Low Impact Development • Waste Water www.ModularWetlands.com Configurations The MWS Linear is the preferred biofiltration system of Civil Engineers across the country due to its versatile design. This highly versatile system has available “pipe-in” options on most models, along with built-in curb or grated inlets for simple integration into your stormdrain design. Curb Type The Curb Type configuration accepts sheet flow through a curb opening and is commonly used along road ways and parking lots. It can be used in sump or flow by conditions. Length of curb opening varies based on model and size. Grate Type The Grate Type configuration offers the same features and benefits as the Curb Type but with a grated/drop inlet above the systems pre-treatment chamber. It has the added benefit of allowing for pedestrian access over the inlet. ADA compliant grates are available to assure easy and safe access. The Grate Type can also be used in scenarios where runoff needs to be intercepted on both sides of landscape islands. Downspout Type The Downspout Type is a variation of the Vault Type and is designed to accept a vertical downspout pipe from roof top and podium areas. Some models have the option of utilizing an internal bypass, simplifying the overall design. The system can be installed as a raised planter and the exterior can be stuccoed or covered with other finishes to match the look of adjacent buildings. Vault Type The system’s patented horizontal flow biofilter is able to accept inflow pipes directly into the pre-treatment chamber, meaning the MWS Linear can be used in end-of-the-line installations. This greatly improves feasibility over typical decentralized designs that are required with other biofiltration/bioretention systems. Another benefit of the “pipe in” design is the ability to install the system downstream of underground detention systems to meet water quality volume requirements. Page 3 Cartridge Housing Pre-filter Cartridge Curb Inlet Individual Media Filters Advantages & Operation The MWS Linear is the most efficient and versatile biofiltration system on the market, and the only system with horizontal flow which improves performance, reduces footprint, and minimizes maintenance. Figure-1 and Figure-2 illustrate the invaluable benefits of horizontal flow and the multiple treatment stages. • Horizontal Flow Biofiltration • Greater Filter Surface Area • Pre-Treatment Chamber • Patented Perimeter Void Area • Flow Control • No Depressed Planter Area Separation • Trash, sediment, and debris are separated before entering the pre-filter cartridges • Designed for easy maintenance access Pre-Filter Cartridges • Over 25 ft2 of surface area per cartridge • Utilizes BioMediaGREEN filter material • Removes over 80% of TSS & 90% of hydrocarbons • Prevents pollutants that cause clogging from migrating to the biofiltration chamber Pre-Treatment1 1 2 Drain- 1 2Vertical Underdrain Manifold Featured Advantages www.ModularWetlands.com Fig. 1 Horizontal Flow • Less clogging than downward flow biofilters • Water flow is subsurface • Improves biological filtration Patented Perimeter Void Area • Vertically extends void area between the walls and the WetlandMEDIA on all four sides. • Maximizes surface area of the media for higher treatment capacity WetlandMEDIA • Contains no organics and removes phosphorus • Greater surface area and 48% void space • Maximum evapotranspiration • High ion exchange capacity and light weight Flow Control • Orifice plate controls flow of water through WetlandMEDIA to a level lower than the media’s capacity. • Extends the life of the media and improves performance Drain-Down Filter • The Drain-Down is an optional feature that completely drains the pre-treatment chamber • Water that drains from the pre-treatment chamber between storm events will be treated 2x to 3x More Surface Area Than Traditional Downward Flow Bioretention Systems.Fig. 2 - Top View Biofiltration2 Discharge3 Perimeter V o i d A r e a 3 4 3 Flow Control Riser -Down Line Outlet Pipe Page 5 Orientations Bypass Internal Bypass Weir (Side-by-Side Only) The Side-By-Side orientation places the pre-treat- ment and discharge chambers adjacent to one an- other allowing for integration of internal bypass. The wall between these chambers can act as a by- pass weir when flows exceed the system’s treatment capacity, thus allowing bypass from the pre-treat- ment chamber directly to the discharge chamber. External Diversion Weir Structure This traditional offline diversion method can be used with the MWS Linear in scenarios where run- off is being piped to the system. These simple and effective structures are generally configured with two outflow pipes. The first is a smaller pipe on the upstream side of the diversion weir - to divert low flows over to the MWS Linear for treatment. The second is the main pipe that receives water once the system has exceeded treatment capacity and water flows over the weir. Flow By Design This method is one in which the system is placed just upstream of a standard curb or grate inlet to intercept the first flush. Higher flows simply pass by the MWS Linear and into the standard inlet down- stream. End-To-End The End-To-End orientation places the pre-treat- ment and discharge chambers on opposite ends of the biofiltration chamber therefore minimizing the width of the system to 5 ft (outside dimension). This orientation is perfect for linear projects and street retrofits where existing utilities and sidewalks limit the amount of space available for installation. One limitation of this orientation is bypass must be ex- ternal. Side-By-Side The Side-By-Side orientation places the pre-treat- ment and discharge chamber adjacent to one an- other with the biofiltration chamber running paral- lel on either side. This minimizes the system length, providing a highly compact footprint. It has been proven useful in situations such as streets with di- rectly adjacent sidewalks, as half of the system can be placed under that sidewalk. This orientation also offers internal bypass options as discussed below. This simple yet innovative diversion trough can be installed in existing or new curb and grate inlets to divert the first flush to the MWS Linear via pipe. It works similar to a rain gutter and is installed just below the opening into the inlet. It captures the low flows and channels them over to a connecting pipe exiting out the wall of the inlet and leading to the MWS Linear. The DVERT is perfect for retrofit and green street applications that allows the MWS Lin- ear to be installed anywhere space is available. DVERT Low Flow Diversion DVERT Trough www.ModularWetlands.com Rhode Island DEM Approved Approved as an authorized BMP and noted to achieve the following minimum removal efficiencies: 85% TSS, 60% Pathogens, 30% Total Phosphorus for discharges to freshwater systems, and 30% Total Nitrogen for discharges to saltwater or tidal systems. MASTEP Evaluation The University of Massachusetts at Amherst – Water Resources Research Center, issued a technical evaluation report noting removal rates up to 84% TSS, 70% Total Phosphorus, 68.5% Total Zinc, and more. Washington State DOE Approved The MWS Linear is approved for General Use Level Designation (GULD) for Basic, En- hanced, and Phosphorus treatment at 1 gpm/ft2 loading rate. The highest performing BMP on the market for all main pollutant categories. Approvals The MWS Linear has successfully met years of challenging technical reviews and testing from some of the most prestigious and demanding agencies in the nation, and perhaps the world. DEQ Assignment The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality assigned the MWS Linear, the highest phosphorus removal rating for manufactured treatment devices to meet the new Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Technical Criteria. VA TSS Total Phosphorus Ortho Phosphorus Nitrogen Dissolved Zinc Dissolved Copper Total Zinc Total Copper Motor Oil 85% 64% 67% 45% 66% 38% 69% 50% 95% Performance The MWS Linear continues to outperform other treatment methods with superior pollutant removal for TSS, heavy metals, nutrients, hydrocarbons and bacteria. Since 2007 the MWS Linear has been field tested on nu- merous sites across the country. With it’s advanced pre-treatment chamber and innovative horizontal flow biofilter, the system is able to effectively remove pollutants through a combination of physical, chemical, and biological filtration processes. With the same biological processes found in natural wetlands, the MWS Linear harnesses natures ability to process, transform, and remove even the most harmful pollutants. Page 7 Treatment Flow Sizing Table Model # Dimensions WetlandMedia Surface Area Treatment Flow Rate (cfs) MWS-L-4-4 4’ x 4’ 23 ft 2 0.052 MWS-L-4-6 4’ x 6’ 32 ft 2 0.073 MWS-L-4-8 4’ x 8’ 50 ft 2 0.115 MWS-L-4-13 4’ x 13’ 63 ft 2 0.144 MWS-L-4-15 4’ x 15’ 76 ft 2 0.175 MWS-L-4-17 4’ x 17’ 90 ft 2 0.206 MWS-L-4-19 4’ x 19’ 103 ft 2 0.237 MWS-L-4-21 4’ x 21’ 117 ft 2 0.268 MWS-L-8-8 8’ x 8’ 100 ft 2 0.230 MWS-L-8-12 8’ x 12’ 151 ft 2 0.346 MWS-L-8-16 8’ x 16’ 201 ft 2 0.462 Flow Based Sizing The MWS Linear can be used in stand alone applica- tions to meet treatment flow requirements. Since the MWS Linear is the only biofiltration system that can ac- cept inflow pipes several feet below the surface it can be used not only in decentralized design applications but also as a large central end-of-the-line application for maximum feasibility. Volume Based Sizing Many states require treatment of a water quality volume and do not offer the option of flow based design. The MWS Linear and its unique horizontal flow makes it the only biofilter that can be used in volume based design installed downstream of ponds, detention basins, and underground storage systems. Treatment Volume Sizing Table Model #Treatment Capacity (cu. ft.) @ 24-Hour Drain Down Treatment Capacity (cu. ft.) @ 48-Hour Drain Down MWS-L-4-4 1140 2280 MWS-L-4-6 1600 3200 MWS-L-4-8 2518 5036 MWS-L-4-13 3131 6261 MWS-L-4-15 3811 7623 MWS-L-4-17 4492 8984 MWS-L-4-19 5172 10345 MWS-L-4-21 5853 11706 MWS-L-8-8 5036 10072 MWS-L-8-12 7554 15109 MWS-L-8-16 10073 20145 www.ModularWetlands.com Installation The MWS Linear is simple, easy to install, and has a space efficient design that offers lower excavation and in- stallation costs compared to traditional tree-box type systems. The structure of the system resembles pre-cast catch basin or utility vaults and is installed in a similar fashion. The system is delivered fully assembled for quick in- stallation. Generally, the structure can be unloaded and set in place in 15 minutes. Our experienced team of field technicians are available to supervise installations and provide technical support. Plant Selection Abundant plants, trees, and grasses bring value and an aesthetic benefit to any urban setting, but those in the MWS Linear do even more - they increase pollutant removal. What’s not seen, but very important, is that below grade the stormwater runoff/flow is being subjected to nature’s secret weapon: a dynamic physical, chemi- cal, and biological process working to break down and remove non-point source pollutants. The flow rate is controlled in the MWS Linear, giving the plants more “contact time” so that pollutants are more successfully decomposed, volatilized and incorporated into the biomass of The MWS Linear’s micro/macro flora and fauna. A wide range of plants are suitable for use in the MWS Linear, but selec- tions vary by location and climate. View suitable plants by selecting the list relative to your project location’s hardy zone. Please visit www.ModularWetlands.com/Plants for more information and various plant lists. Maintenance Reduce your maintenance costs, man hours, and materials with the MWS Linear. Unlike other biofiltration systems that provide no pre-treatment, the MWS Linear is a self-contained treatment train which incorporates simple and effective pre-treatment. Maintenance requirements for the biofilter itself are almost completely eliminated, as the pre-treatment chamber removes and isolates trash, sediments, and hydrocarbons. What’s left is the simple maintenance of an easily accessible pre-treatment chamber that can be cleaned by hand or with a standard vac truck. Only periodic replacement of low- cost media in the pre-filter cartridges is required for long term opera- tion and there is absolutely no need to replace expensive biofiltration media. Page 9 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-43 December 20, 2013 INF-7: Underground Infiltration Underground infiltration is a vault or chamber with an open bottom that used to store runoff and percolate into the subsurface. A number of vendors offer proprietary infiltration products that allow for similar or enhanced rates of infiltration and subsurface storage while offering durable prefrabricated structures. There are many varieties of proprietary infiltration BMPs that can be used for roads and parking lots, parks and open spaces, single and multi-family residential, or mixed-use and commercial uses. Feasibility Screening Considerations x Infiltration bains shall pass infeasible screening criteria to be considered for use. x Underground infiltration galleries pose a potential risk of groundwater contamination; pretreatment should be used. Opportunity Criteria x Soils are adequate for infiltration or can be amended to provide an adequate infiltration rate. x Appropriate for sites with limited surface space. x Can be placed beneath roads, parking lots, parks, and athletic fields. x Potential for groundwater contamination can be mitigated through isolation of pollutant sources, pretreatment of inflow, and/or demonstration of adequate treatment capacity of underlying soils. x Infiltration is into native soil, or depth of engineered fill is ≤ 5 feet from the bottom of the facility to native material and infiltration into fill is approved by a geotechnical professional. x Tributary area land uses include mixed-use and commercial, sngle-family and multi-family, roads and parking lots, and parks and open spaces. High pollutant land uses should not be tributary to infiltration BMPs. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Placement of BMPs should observe geotechnical recommendations with respect to geological hazards (e.g. landslides, liquefaction zones, erosion, etc.) and set-backs (e.g., foundations, utilities, roadways, etc.) □ Minimum separation to mounded seasonally high groundwater of 10 feet shall be observed. □ Minimum pretreatment should be provided upstream of the infiltration facility, and water bypassing pretreatment should not be directed to the facility. □ Underground infiltration should not be used for drainage areas with high sediment production potential unless preceded by full treatment control with a BMP effective for sediment removal. □ Design infiltration rate should be determined as described in Appendix VII. □ Inspection ports or similar design features shall be provided to verify continued system performance and identify need for major maintenance. Also known as: ¾Infiltration vault ¾Recharge vault Underground Infiltration Source: http://www.contech-cpi.com TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-44 December 20, 2013 □ For infiltration facilities beneath roads and parking areas, structural requirements should meet H-20 load requirements. Computing Underground Infiltration Device Size Underground infiltration devices vary by design and by proprietary designs. The sizing method selected for use must be based on the BMP type it most strongly resembles. x For underground infiltration devices with open pore volume (e.g., vaults, crates, pipe sections, etc), sizing will be most similar to infiltration basins. x For underground infiltration devices with pore space (e.g., aggregate reservoirs), sizing will be most similar to permeable pavement. Additional References for Design Guidance x Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Stormwater Technical Manual, Chapter 5: http://www.laschools.org/employee/design/fs-studies-and- reports/download/white_paper_report_material/Storm_Water_Technical_Manual_2009-opt- red.pdf?version_id=76975850 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-69 December 20, 2013 BIO-7: Proprietary Biotreatment Proprietary biotreatment devices are devices that are manufactured to mimic natural systems such as bioretention areas by incorporating plants, soil, and microbes engineered to provide treatment at higher flow rates or volumes and with smaller footprints than their natural counterparts. Incoming flows are typically filtered through a planting media (mulch, compost, soil, plants, microbes, etc.) and either infiltrated or collected by an underdrain and delivered to the storm water conveyance system. Tree box filters are an increasingly common type of proprietary biotreatment device that are installed at curb level and filled with a bioretention type soil. For low to moderate flows they operate similarly to bioretention systems and are bypassed during high flows. Tree box filters are highly adaptable solutions that can be used in all types of development and in all types of soils but are especially applicable to dense urban parking lots, street, and roadways. Feasibility Screening Considerations x Proprietary biotreatment devices that are unlined may cause incidental infiltration. Therefore, an evaluation of site conditions should be conducted to evaluate whether the BMP should include an impermeable liner to avoid infiltration into the subsurface. Opportunity Criteria x Drainage areas of 0.25 to 1.0 acres. x Land use may include commercial, residential, mixed use, institutional, and subdivisions. Proprietary biotreatment facilities may also be applied in parking lot islands, traffic circles, road shoulders, and road medians. x Must not adversely affect the level of flood protection provided by the drainage system. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Frequent maintenance and the use of screens and grates to keep trash out may decrease the likelihood of clogging and prevent obstruction and bypass of incoming flows. □ Consult proprietors for specific criteria concerning the design and performance. □ Proprietary biotreatment may include specific media to address pollutants of concern. However, for proprietary device to be considered a biotreatment device the media must be capable of supporting rigorous growth of vegetation. □ Proprietary systems must be acceptable to the reviewing agency. Reviewing agencies shall have the discretion to request performance information. Reviewing agencies shall have the discretion to deny the use of a proprietary BMP on the grounds of performance, maintenance considerations, or other relevant factors. Also known as: ¾Catch basin planter box ¾Bioretention vault ¾Tree box filter Proprietary biotreatment Source: http://www.americastusa.com /index.php/filterra/ TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-70 December 20, 2013 □ In right of way areas, plant selection should not impair traffic lines of site. Local jurisdictions may also limit plant selection in keeping with landscaping themes. Computing Sizing Criteria for Proprietary Biotreatment Device x Proprietary biotreatment devices can be volume based or flow-based BMPs. x Volume-based proprietary devices should be sized using the Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method described in Appendix III.3.1 or the Capture Efficiency Method for Volume-Based, Constant Drawdown BMPs described in Appendix III.3.2. x The required design flowrate for flow-based proprietary devices should be computed using the Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-based BMPs described in Appendix III.3.3). In South Orange County, the provided ponding plus pore volume must be checked to demonstrate that it is greater than 0.75 of the remaining DCV that this BMP is designed to address. Many propretary biotreatment BMPs will not be able to meet the definition of “biofiltration” that applies in South Orange County. See Section III.7 and Worksheet SOC-1. Additional References for Design Guidance x Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Stormwater Technical Manual, Chapter 4: http://www.laschools.org/employee/design/fs-studies-and- reports/download/white_paper_report_material/Storm_Water_Technical_Manual_2009-opt- red.pdf?version_id=76975850 x Los Angeles County Stormwater BMP Design and Maintenance Manual, Chapter 9: http://dpw.lacounty.gov/DES/design_manuals/StormwaterBMPDesignandMaintenance.pdf x Santa Barbara BMP Guidance Manual, Chapter 6: http://www.santabarbaraca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/91D1FA75-C185-491E-A882- 49EE17789DF8/0/Manual_071008_Final.pdf Attachment D Operations & Maintenance Plan To be provided during final engineering. Attachment E Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation & GeoTracker Exhibit 1938 Kellogg Avenue, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92008 * Ph: 760-431-3747 www.eeitiger.com GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development SWC W. Midway Drive and South Anaheim Boulvard Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 April 15, 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope of Services ........................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Subject Property Description ..................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Topography…............ .................................................................................................................. 2 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION, SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING ................................... 2 3.1 Field Exploration ......................................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Laboratory Testing ...................................................................................................................... 3 4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 3 4.1 Geologic Setting .......................................................................................................................... 3 4.2 Site Geology ................................................................................................................................ 4 4.2.1 Alluvium (Qaf)............................................................................................................. 4 4.2.2 Alluvium (Qal) ............................................................................................................. 4 4.3 Groundwater .............................................................................................................................. 4 5.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ............................................................................................................................... 5 5.1 Seismic Design Values ................................................................................................................ 5 Table 1 – ASCE 7-10 Seismic Design Values ..................................................................................... 5 5.2 Faulting and Surface Rupture ..................................................................................................... 5 Table 2 – Nearby Active Faults ......................................................................................................... 6 5.3 Landslides and Slope Stability .................................................................................................... 6 5.4 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement ....................................................................................... 6 5.5 Flooding…………. .......................................................................................................................... 6 5.6 Expansive Soil and Subsidence ................................................................................................... 7 6.0 CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 7 7.0 GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................ 8 7.1 General ....................................................................................................................................... 8 7.2 Site Preparation and Grading ..................................................................................................... 8 7.3 Remedial Earthwork ................................................................................................................... 9 7.4 Yielding Subgrade Conditions ................................................................................................... 10 7.5 Shrinkage and Bulking .............................................................................................................. 11 7.6 Temporary Site Excavations ..................................................................................................... 11 7.7 Slopes ....................................................................................................................................... 11 8.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 11 8.1 General ..................................................................................................................................... 11 8.2 Shallow Conventional Foundations .......................................................................................... 12 8.3 Footing Setbacks ....................................................................................................................... 12 8.4 Interior Slabs-on-Grade ............................................................................................................ 12 8.5 Exterior Slabs-on-Grade ........................................................................................................... 13 8.6 Pool Design ............................................................................................................................... 14 8.7 Conventional Retaining Walls................................................................................................... 14 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 8.7.1 Foundations ............................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Lateral Earth Pressure ................................................................................................... 14 8.8 Corrosivity ................................................................................................................................ 15 9.0 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 15 Table 3 – Preliminary Pavement Design Recommendations ......................................................... 16 10.0 DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 16 10.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting ................................................................................... 16 10.2 Site Drainage .......................................................................................................................... 17 10.3 Site Runoff Considertatins – Stormwater Disposal System .................................................... 17 Table 4 – Summary of Percolation Testing..................................................................................... 17 10.4 Structure Setback from Retention Devices ............................................................................ 18 10.5 Additional Site Improvements ................................................................................................ 18 10.6 Utility Trench Backfill .............................................................................................................. 18 11.0 PLAN REVIEW ..................................................................................................................................... 19 12.0 LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 19 FIGURES Figure 1 – Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 – Aerial Site Map Figure 3 – Geotechnical Map APPENDICES Appendix A – Soil Classification Chart and Boring Logs Appendix B - Laboratory Test Data Appendix C- Field Percolation Data Appendix D – Earthwork and Grading Guidelines Distribution: (1) Addressee via an electronic copy Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this Geotechnical Evaluation Report is to provide geotechnical information to National Community Renaissance (“Client”) regarding the subject property in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, California. The information gathered in this Geotechnical Evaluation is intended to provide the Client with an understanding of the physical conditions of site-specific subsurface soils, groundwater, and the regional geologic setting which could affect the cost or design of the proposed development at the property (Site Vicinity Map-Figure 1, Aerial Site Map-Figure 2). This Geotechnical Evaluation has been conducted in general accordance with accepted geotechnical engineering principles as well as in general conformance with the approved proposal and cost estimate for the project by EEI, dated February 20, 2021. EEI conducted an onsite field exploration which consisted of the drilling, sampling and logging of six (6) hollow stem auger exploratory borings and six (6) backhoe test excavation trenches on March 23, 2021 and March 24, 2021, respectively. This Geotechnical Evaluation report has been prepared for the sole use of National Community Renaissance. Other parties, without the express written consent of EEI and Cadance Acquisition should not rely upon this Geotechnical Evaluation Report. 1.2 Project Description Based on our review of the conceptual development plans prepared by ktgy Architectue + Planning (January 29, 2020), it is our understanding that the proposed development of the subject property will involve construction of up to four story , 86 units of multi-family residential structures with associated parking and carport areas, flatworks, utilities, and landscape areas. Construction of a pool and some ancillary buildings are also planned. No other information regarding the proposed site development is known at this time. No detailed grading plans were provided to EEI at the time of our preparation of this report. However, grading of the subject property is anticipated to include cuts and fills on the order of one to two feet (exclusive of remedial grading) to provide for site drainage. No foundation plans were provided to EEI at the time of preparation of this report. However, foundation loads assumed by EEI for the engineering analysis are up to 4000 pounds per lineal foot and 200 kips for wall and column loads respectively. 1.3 Scope of Services The scope of our services included: • A review of the readily available data pertinent to the subject property and immediate vicinity, including published and unpublished geologic reports/maps and soils data for the area. • Conducting a geotechnical reconnaissance of the subject property and nearby vicinity. • Coordination with Underground Service Alert North (USA) to identify the presence of underground utilities for clearance of the proposed exploratory boring locations. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 2 • Drilling and logging of six (6) hollow stem auger (HSA) (8” diameter) exploratory borings (B-1 through B-6) and six (6) backhoe test trenches. Borings were advanced to depths ranging from approximately 11.5 to 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface on March 23, 2021 by use of an Ingersoll-Rand A300 truck-mounted drilling rig. Backhoe test trenches were excavated to the approximate depths of 4 to 5 feet below the existing grade on March 24, 2021. A John Deere 35 D track mounted mini excavator was utilized for this purpose. Subsurface materials encountered in our exploratory borings consisted of approximately 5 feet thick of trash laden fill soils underlain by Quaternary age alluvial deposits to the maximum depths explored. Excavation refusal was not encountered in any of our exploratory borings and test trenches. (Geotechnical Map, Figure 3). • Performing two (2) Percolation testing (B4/P1 and B5/P2) to provide preliminary information to evaluate the feasibility of the installation of an onsite storm water disposal system. • Completion of laboratory testing of representative earth materials encountered onsite to determine their pertinent soils engineering properties, including corrosion potential (Appendix B). • The preparation of this report which presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the proposed development. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 Subject Property Description The site is located at the southwest corner of W. Midway Drive and South Anaheim Boulvard in the City of Anaheim, Califirnia (Site Vicinity Map, Figure 1; Aerial Site Map, Figure 2). The property includes a single parcel, totaling roughly 2.26-acres. The subject property is currently developed primarily as an industrial storage yard, with a single commercial structure located at its northwest corner. It is our understanding that the existing improvements at the site will be demolished prior to construction of the proposed improvements. The Latitude and Longitude of the site are approximately 33.8121° N and 117.9072° W, respectively. 2.2 Topography The subject property is located on the United States Geological Survey (USGS), 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Map, Anaheim, California Quadrangle. The property elevation is approximately 140 feet above mean sea level (amsl). 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION, SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING 3.1 Field Exploration Field work for our Geotechnical Evaluation was conducted on March 23 and 24, 2020. Our field investigation consisted of drilling six (6) exploratory borings ans excavating six (6) backhoe test trenches. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 3 Six (6) hollow stem (8” diameter) exploratory borings (designated B-1 through B-6) were advanced at the subject property to depths of 11.5 to 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface in readily accessible areas on March 23, 2021. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 3. A truck mounted Mobile B-57 hollow stem auger (HSA) drill rig was used to advance all five exploratory borings. Blow count values were determined utilizing a 140-pound hammer, falling 30-inches onto a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) split-spoon sampler and a Modified California split-tube sampler. The blows per 6-inch increment required to advance the 18-inch long SPT and 18-inch long Modified California split-tube samplers were measured at various depth intervals are recorded on the boring logs, and are presented in Appendix A (Soil Classification Chart and Boring Logs). Relatively “undisturbed “samples were collected in a 2.42-inch (inside diameter) California Modified split-tube sampler for visual examination and laboratory testing. Representative bulk samples were collected from the exploratory borings for appropriate laboratory testing. The soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487). Six (6) backhoe test trenches were excavated to the approximate depths of 4 to 5 feet below the existing grade on March 24, 2021. A John Deere 35 D track mounted mini excavator was utilized for this purpose. Additionally, two (2) percolation testing in borings B4/P-1 and B5/P-2 were performed on March 24, 2021. Percolation testing were performed provide preliminary information to evaluate the feasibility of the installation of an onsite storm water disposal system. 3.2 Laboratory Testing Selected samples obtained from our borings were tested to evaluate pertinent soil classification and engineering properties and enable development of geotechnical conclusions and recommendations. The laboratory tests consisted of: • Moisture Content and Dry Density • Grain Size Distribution • Direct Shear • Corrosivity The results of the laboratory tests, and brief explanations of test procedures, are presented in Appendix B. It should be understood that the results provided in Appendix B are based upon pre- development conditions. Verification testing is recommended at the conclusion of grading on samples collected at or near finish grade. 4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4.1 Geologic Setting The Latitude and Longitude of the site area are approximately 33.8121° N and -117.9072° W, respectively. The project area is relatively flat with approximate elevation of 140 feet above mean sea level. The site is depicted on the Anaheim; CA 7.5-Minute Topographic Quad Map dated 2018. The subject property lies within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of southern California. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 4 This province consists of a series of ranges separated by northwest trending valleys; sub parallel to branches of the San Andreas Fault (CGS, 2002). The Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province, one of the largest geomorphic units in western North America, extends from the Transverse Ranges Geomorphic Province and the Los Angeles Basin, south to Baja California. It is bound on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the south by the Gulf of California and on the east by the Colorado Desert Province. The Peninsular Ranges are essentially a series of northwest-southeast oriented fault blocks (CGS, 2002). Major fault zones and subordinate fault zones found in the Peninsular Ranges Province typically trend in a northwest-southeast direction. More regionally speaking, the subject property is located in the southern part of the Los Angeles Basin: a broad sedimentary basin that is bordered by the Pacific Ocean to the west and south; the Santa Ana Mountains to the east; and the Santa Monica Mountains and Whittier Hills to the north. Ephemeral streams and rivers traverse the basin from north to south – one of them being the San Gabriel River, which is located approximately one mile to the west of the subject property. Regional geologic maps indicate the subject property overlies Quaternary-age Young Alluvial Deposits consisting of poorly consolidated mixtures of sand, silty sand, silt, and clay. 4.2 Site Geology Information obtained from our subsurface investigation indicated that the site is underlain by approximately 5 feet thich of trash laden fill soils and Quaternary age alluvial deposits to the maximum depths explored. 4.2.1 Artificial Fill (Qaf) Up to five (5) foot thick layer of trash laden artificial fill soils were encounterd within our excavations. Fill soils generally consisted of light to dark brown silty sandy soils with abundant past construction debris such as concrete, caly and metal pipe, and decomposed wood fragments. 4.2.2 Alluvium (Qal) Alluvial deposits were encountered in our borings and test excavations below the fill layers and consisted of tan to light gray and yellowish brown, medium dens, fine to coarse grained sands and silty sands to approximately 25 feet below grade, underlain by approximately 10 foot thick layer of brown, medium stiff sandy silt layer. Below 35 feet the alluvial deposits generally consisted of medium dense to dense layers of sands and silty sands to the maximum depth of exploration of 51.5 feet. 4.3 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory excavations during our site investigation. Our research of the existing data indicated that the historic groundwater is greater than 50 feet below the ground surface (CDMG, 1998). Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 5 5.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5.1 Seismic Design Values EEI utilized seismic design criteria provided in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC, 2019) and ASCE 7-16. Final selection of the appropriate seismic design coefficients should be made by the structural consultant based on the local laws and ordinances, expected building response, and desired level of conservatism. The site coefficients and adjusted maximum considered earthquake spectral response accelerations in accordance with ASCE 7-16 are presented in Table 1. 5.2 Faulting and Surface Rupture A risk common to all areas of southern California that should not be overlooked is the potential for damage resulting from seismic events (earthquakes). The site is located within a seismically active area, as is all of southern California. Although we are not aware of any active or potentially active faults on or within the immediate vicinity of the site, earthquakes generated on large regional faults could affect this site. The closest known active fault to the site is the Puente Hills (Coyote Hills) Fault and is located approximately 4.2 miles (6.7 km) west of the site. This fault is thought to be capable of a maximum 6.9 moment magnitude earthquake. . The major faults that are likely to affect the site are listed below in Table 2. Table 1 ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Values Parameter Value Site Coordinates Latitude 33.8121° Longitude -117.9072° Mapped Spectral Acceleration Value at Short Period: Ss 1.433g. Mapped Spectral Acceleration Value at 1-Second Period: S1 0.507g. Site Soil Classification D Short Period Site Coefficient: Fa 1.000 1-Second Period Site Coefficient: Fv 1.793 Adjusted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Period: SMS 1.433g. Adjusted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period: SM1 0.909g. Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods: SDS 0.955g. Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period: SD1 0.606g. Peak Ground Acceleration Adjusted For Site Class Effects: PGAM 0.667g. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 6 The subject property is not located within a currently designated State of California Earthquake Fault Zone. Based on a review of the existing geologic information, no major surface fault crosses through or extends toward the site. The potential for surface rupture resulting from the movement of nearby major faults is not known with certainty but is considered low. TABLE 2 Nearby Active Faults Fault Distance in Miles (Kilometers)1 Maximum Magnitude1 Puente Hills (Coyote Hills) 4.18 (6.72) 6.90 San Joaquin Hills 8.15 (13.12) 7.10 Elsinore;W+GI+T 8.68 (13.96) 7.48 Elsinore;W+GI 8.68 (13.96) 7.27 Elsinore;W+GI+T+J+CM 8.68 (13.96) 7.85 1. USGS Online Fault Search (2008) 5.3 Landslides and Slope Stability Seismically induced landslides and other slope failures are common occurrences during or soon after earthquakes. However, due to the presence of the very low on-site gradient, the potential for seismically induced landsliding to occur is very low. Additionally; according to the Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, the site is also not mapped within a zone of potential seismically induced landsliding. 5.4 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement Liquefaction is a sudden loss of strength of saturated, cohesionless soil caused by cyclic loading (e.g., earthquake shaking). Generally, liquefaction occurs in predominantly poorly consolidated granular soil where the groundwater depth is less than 50 feet. It is our opinion that due to the absence of shallow ground water, the potential for liquefaction to occur is considered negligible, and liquefaction is not a significant geotechnical concern at the subject property. Additionally, according to the Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle, the site is not mapped within a zone of potential liquefaction. The potential for liquefaction induced lateral spreading and seismic induced settlement to occur at the subject property is considered negligible. 5.5 Flooding The subject property is not located within a Tsunami Evacuation Area; therefore, damage due to tsunami is considered low. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 7 EEI reviewed the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Hazard Map online database (FEMA, 2019) to determine if the subject property was located within an area designated as a Flood Hazard Zone. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Map No. 06059C0128J, effective December 3, 2009, the subject property is located within an area of minimal flood hazard, identified as Flood Zone X. Additionally; the potential for earthquake-induced flooding at the site, caused by the failure of dams or other water-retaining structures as a result of earthquakes is considered very low. The risk of seiches affecting the site during a nearby seismic event is also considered low. 5.6 Expansive Soil and Subsidence The near-surface onsite soils encountered in our borings are sands and silty sands. The expansion potential of these materials is not considered to pose a hazard for the proposed site development. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on our field exploration, laboratory testing and engineering and geologic analysis, it is our opinion that the subject property is suitable for the proposed residential development project from geotechnical engineering and geologic viewpoint provided the recommendations presented in our geotechnical report are incorporated into the design and construction phase of the project. However, there are existing geotechnical conditions associated with the property that will warrant mitigation and/or consideration during planning stages. If site plans and/or the proposed building location are revised, additional field studies may be warranted to address proposed site-specific conditions. The main geotechnical conclusions for the project are presented in the following text. • Six (6) hollow stem (8” diameter) exploratory borings (designated B-1 through B-6) were advanced at the subject property to depths of 11.5 to 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface in readily accessible areas on March 23, 2021. Additionally, six (6) backhoe test trenches were also excavated to the approximate depths of 4 to 5 feet below the existing grade on March 24, 2021. Subsurface materials encountered in our exploratory borings consisted of approximately 5 feet thich of trash laden fill soils underlain by Quaternary age alluvial deposits to the maximum depths explored. Excavation refusal was not encountered in any of our exploratory borings and test trenches. • Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory excavations during our site investigation. Our research of the existing data indicated that the historic groundwater is greater than 50 feet below the ground surface (CDMG, 1998). • The subject property is located within an area of southern California recognized as having a number of active and potentially-active faults located nearby. Our literature and database review indicate that there are no known active faults mapped as crossing the subject property and the potential for surface rupture is low, however, several nearby and regional faults are capable of causing strong ground shaking at the property. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 8 • Earth materials underlying the site for the proposed residential development are not considered susceptible to liquefaction or significant amounts of seismic settlement. Liquefaction induced lateral spreading also does not appear to be a concern at the subject property. • The expansion potential of the near surface soils is not considered to pose a hazard for the proposed site development. • The alluvial deposits appear to be suitable for use as a structural fill provided that they are moisture conditioned (as needed) and meet EEI’s recommendations for size (Section 7.3) and are properly compacted. • The existing alluvial deposits are excavatable with conventional construction equipment. However, localized areas that contain dense and hard caliche-cemented zones that may require heavy ripping should be anticipated. • A conventional shallow foundation system in conjunction with a concrete slab-on-grade floor appears to be suitable for support of the proposed commercial building. 7.0 GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS Earthwork Considerations 7.1 General The proposed site development should be constructed in general conformance with the guidelines presented herein, as well as the California Building Code (CBC 2019) and the requirements of local jurisdictions. Additionally, general Earthwork and Grading Guidelines are provided herein as Appendix D. During earthwork operations, removals and reprocessing of fill soils and unsuitable materials, as well as general grading procedures of the contractor should be observed, and the fill placed should be tested by representatives of EEI. If any unusual or unexpected conditions are exposed in the field, they should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer and if warranted, modified and/or additional recommendations will be offered. Specific guidelines and comments pertinent to the planned development are provided herein. The recommendations presented herein are based on the preliminary information provided to us regarding site development. EEI should be provided with grading and foundation plans once they are available so that we can determine if the recommendations provided in this report remain applicable. 7.2 Site Preparation and Grading Debris and other deleterious material, such as organic soils, tree root balls and/or environmentally impacted earth materials (if any) should be removed from the subject property prior to the start of grading. All of the existing fill materials and loose and disturbed alluvial deposits should be removed to the contact with the firm underlying alluvial materials and recompacted. Alluvial removals should extend Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 9 to minimum 2 feet below the bottom elevation of the proposed foundation system. A minimum of 5 foot of removal and recompaction should be anticipated. Areas to receive fill should be properly scarified and/or benched in accordance with current industry standards of practice and guidelines specified in the CBC (2019) and the requirements of the local jurisdiction. Abandoned trenches should be properly backfilled and tested. If unanticipated subsurface improvements (utility lines, septic systems, wells, utilities, etc.) are encountered during earthwork construction, the Geotechnical Engineer should be informed and appropriate remedial recommendations would then be provided. The on-site alluvial soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill and backfill. Site alluvial soils are generally free of organic materials (less than 2% by weight) and do not appear to contain oversized particles (greater than 6-inches in largest dimension). Additionally, site alluvial soils do not possess expansive characteristics. The import fill and select backfill material should be free of perishable material and should meet the following criteria: a. Maximum particle size 1 inch b. Maximum Liquid Limit (LL) 20% c. Maximum Plasticity Index (PI) 10% d. Maximum percentage passing No. 200 sieve 30% e. Minimum sand equivalent 30 f. Maximum Expansive Index (EI), (ASTM D-4829) 20 g. Maximum Soluble Sulfate Concentration ≤1,000 ppm 7.3 Remedial Earthwork Areas to be graded should be cleared of all the existing vegetation and fill soils, remnants of past construction, loose soils within the trench excavations, and other unsuitable materials. The existing soils should be excavated to the contact with the firm underlying alluvial deposits. These removals should extend to a minimum depth of 5 feet below the existing ground surface or 2-feet below the bottom elevations of the proposed foundation systems, whichever is deeper. The area of site preparation should extend at least five feet beyond any proposed improvements. Following removal, the bottom of the resulting excavation(s) should be observed by a representative of EEI to check that unsuitable materials have been sufficiently removed. It should be understood that based on the observations of the field representative, localized deeper removals may be recommended. This remedial earthwork should extend at least five feet beyond the area to receive fill or equal to the vertical depth of fill measured horizontally (whichever is greater). Note that vertical sides exceeding five feet in depth may be prone to sloughing and may require laying back to an inclination of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical). Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 10 After removal of the unsuitable soils and observation of the excavation bottoms, the upper 6 to 8 inches of surface exposed by the excavation should be scarified and moisture-conditioned to 2 to 4 percent over optimum moisture content, and compacted to minimum 95 percent relative compaction1. Subsequent fill placement required during the grading phase should be placed in layers less than 8 inches in loose thickness and moisture conditioned to at least 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted by mechanical methods to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by (ASTM D1557). Fill material should be free of organic matter (less than 2 percent organics by weight) and other deleterious material. Fill material should not contain rocks greater than 6-inches in maximum dimension. If localized areas of relatively loose soil prevent proper compaction, over-excavation and re-scarified compaction will be necessary. Subgrade materials should not be allowed to desiccate between the grading and the construction phases of the concrete slabs, foundations, and pavements. The subgrade should be thoroughly and uniformly moistened prior to placing concrete. The grading operations should be performed under the observation and testing of an EEI representative. If import soils are needed, the earthwork contractor should ensure that all proposed fill materials are approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to use. Representative soil samples should be made available for testing at least ten (10) working days prior to import to the property to allow for laboratory testing. 7.4 Yielding Subgrade Conditions The soils encountered at the subject property can exhibit “pumping” or yielding if they become saturated. This can often occur in response to periods of significant precipitation, such as during the winter rainy season. If this occurs and in order to help stabilize the yielding subgrade soils within the bottom of the removal areas, the contractor can consider the placement of stabilization fabric or geo- grid over the yielding areas, depending on the relative severity. Mirafi 600X (or approved equivalent) stabilization fabric may be used for areas with low to moderate yielding conditions. Geo-grid such as Tensar TX-5 (or approved equivalent) may be used for areas with moderate to severe yielding conditions. Uniform sized, ¾- to 2-inch crushed rock, should be placed over the stabilization fabric or geo-grid. A 12-inch thick section of crushed rock will typically be necessary to stabilize yielding ground. A filter fabric should be placed over the crushed rock/gravel to prevent migration of fines into the gravel and subsequent settlement of the overlying fill. Fill soils, which should be placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations presented herein, should then be placed over the filter fabric until design finish grades are reached. The crushed rock/gravel and stabilization fabric or geo-grid should extend at least 5 feet laterally beyond the limits of the yielding areas. These operations should be performed under the observation and testing of a representative of EEI in order to evaluate the effectiveness of these measures and to provide additional recommendations for mitigation, as necessary. 1 Relative compaction refers to the in-place dry density of soil expressed as a percentage of the maximum dry density of the same material, as determined by the ASTM (D1557) test method. Optimum moisture content corresponding to the maximum dry density, as determined by the ASTM (D557) test method. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 11 After preparation of the subgrade by removal and replacement with compacted fill, we do not anticipate that any significant subgrade yielding will occur except for normal settlement due to the applied loads. 7.5 Shrinkage and Bulking Several factors will impact earthwork balancing on the subject property, including shrinkage, bulking, subsidence, trench spoils from utilities and footing excavations, and final pavement section thickness as well as the accuracy of topography. Shrinkage, bulking and subsidence are primarily dependent upon the degree of compactive effort achieved during construction. Shrinkage, bulking and subsidence should be considered by the project civil engineer relative to final site balancing. It is recommended that the site development be planned to include an area that could be raised or lowered to accommodate final site balancing. 7.6 Temporary Site Excavations It is anticipated that excavations in the onsite materials can be achieved with conventional earthwork equipment in good working order. Temporary excavations within the alluvial materials (considered to be a Type B soil per OSHA guidelines) should be stable at 1. 5H: 1V inclinations for short durations during construction, and where cuts do not exceed 10 feet in height. Some sloughing of surface soils should be anticipated. Temporary excavations 4 feet deep or less can be made vertically. The faces of temporary slopes should be inspected daily by the contractor’s Competent Person before personnel are allowed to enter the excavation. Any zones of potential instability, sloughing or raveling should be brought to the attention of the Engineer and corrective action implemented before personnel begin working in the excavation. Excavated soils should not be stockpiled behind temporary excavations within a distance equal to the depth of the excavation. EEI should be notified if other surcharge loads are anticipated so that lateral load criteria can be developed for the specific situation. If temporary slopes are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are recommended along the tops of slopes to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and eroding the slope faces. 7.7 Slopes Permanent slopes should be constructed at an inclination of 2:1 H: V or flatter. Faces of fill slopes should be compacted either by rolling with a sheep-foot roller or other suitable equipment, or by overfilling and cutting back to design grade. All slopes are susceptible to surficial slope failure and erosion. Water should not be allowed to flow over the top of slopes. Additionally, slopes should be planted with vegetation that will reduce the potential for erosion. 8.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1 General The foundation recommendations provided herein are based on the proposed development information provided by the Client. EEI should be provided with the final grading and foundation plans once they are available so that we can determine if the recommendations provided in this report remain applicable. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 12 Recommendations by the project's design-structural engineer or architect may exceed the following minimum recommendations. However; if analyses by the structural engineer result in less critical details than are provided herein as minimums, the minimums presented herein should be adopted. Based on our subsurface investigation and laboratory test data as well as our engineering analysis we judge that a conventional shallow foundation system in conjunction with a concrete slab-on-grade floor appears to be suitable for support of the proposed residential buildings. 8.2 Shallow Conventional Foundations Foundation support for the proposed development could be derived by utilizing a conventional, shallow foundation system embedded within the properly compacted fill soils in accordance with the following criteria: • Minimum depth measured from lowest adjacent grade ......................................................... 2 feet • Minimum footing width ........................................................................................................ 1.5 feet • Allowable bearing capacity (pounds per square foot), (FS > 3) a. Sustained loads ................................................................................................ 2,000 psf b. Total loads (1/3 allowable increase for wind and seismic) ............................. 2,650 psf • Resistance to lateral loads a. Passive soils resistance (pounds per cubic foot) ................................................ 200 psf b. Coefficient of sliding friction ................................................................................... 0.40 Footings can be designed to resist lateral loads by using a combination of sliding friction and passive resistance. The coefficient of friction should be applied to dead load forces only; and passive resistance should be reduced by one third. For foundations with no sliding friction at the base (foundations resisting uplift loads), 100% of passive resistance could be utilizes. The upper one foot of passive resistance should be neglected where the soil is not confined by the slabs or pavement. For the properly constructed foundations in accordance with the foregoing criteria, total static post- construction settlement from the anticipated structural loads is estimated to be on the order of 1 inch. Differential settlement on the order of ½ of total settlement should be anticipated over a distance of 40 feet. 8.3 Footing Setbacks Footings adjacent to unlined drainage swales or underground utilities (if any) should be deepened to a minimum of 6-inches below the invert of the adjacent unlined swale or utilities. This distance is measured from the footing face at the bearing elevation. Footings for structures adjacent to retaining walls should be deepened so as to extend below a 1:1 projection from the heel of the wall. Alternatively, walls may be designed to accommodate structural loads from buildings or appurtenances. 8.4 Interior Slabs-on-Grade The project structural engineer should design the interior concrete slab-on-grade floor. However; as a minimum, it is recommended that a minimum of 5-inch thick slab, reinforced with No. 4 bars located at 18 inches on center, both ways, be constructed. A layer of free draining, clean (washed) ¾ -inch crushed rock, at least 6 inches thick layer should be placed below the slab. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 13 Subgrade materials should not be allowed to desiccate between grading and the construction of the concrete slabs. The floor slab subgrade should be thoroughly and uniformly moistened prior to placing concrete. A moisture vapor retarder/barrier should be placed beneath slabs where moisture sensitive floor coverings will be installed. The vapor barrier should comply with the requirements of ASTM E1745 (Class “A”), and should be installed in accordance with ASTM E1643. The vapor barrier should be at least 15-mil thick and should be sealed at all splices, around the plumbing, and at the perimeter of slab areas, Every effort should be made to provide a continuous barrier and care should be taken not to puncture the membrane. Current construction practice typically includes placement of a 2-inch thick sand cushion between the bottom of the concrete slab and the moisture vapor retarder/barrier. This cushion can provide some protection to the vapor retarder/barrier during construction and may assist in reducing the potential for edge curling in the slab during curing. However, the sand layer also provides a source of moisture vapor to the underside of the slab that can increase the time required to reduce moisture vapor emissions to limits acceptable for the type of floor covering placed on top of the slab. The slab can be placed directly on the vapor retarder/barrier. The floor covering manufacturer should be contacted to determine the volume of moisture vapor allowable and any treatment needed to reduce moisture vapor emissions to acceptable limits for the particular type of floor covering installed. The project architect should determine the appropriate treatment for the specific application. 8.5 Exterior Slabs-on-Grade It is recommended that a minimum 4-inch slab reinforced with No. 3 bars located at 12 inches on center, both ways, be constructed. At the exterior edges of the flatwork, a thickened edge is recommended. A layer of free-draining, clean (washed) crushed rock, at least 4 inches thick beneath the slab is also recommended. Subgrade materials should not be allowed to desiccate between grading and the construction of the concrete slabs. The floor slab subgrade should be thoroughly and uniformly moistened prior to placing concrete. Slabs should be provided with weakened plane joints. Joints should be placed in accordance with the American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. Proper control joints should be provided to reduce the potential for damage resulting from shrinkage movement of the slabs adjacent to the structures, and can be mitigated by doweling slabs to the perimeter footings. As an option to doweling, an architectural separation could be provided between the main structure and the abutting appurtenant improvements. All dedicated exterior flatwork should conform to standards provided by the governing agency including section composition, supporting material thickness and any requirements for reinforcing steel. Concrete mix proportions and construction techniques, including the addition of water and improper curing, can adversely affect the finished quality of the concrete and result in cracking and spalling of the slab. We recommend that all placement and curing be performed in accordance with procedures outlined by the American Concrete Institute and/or Portland Cement Association. Special consideration should be given to concrete placed and cured during hot or cold weather conditions. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 14 8.6 Pool Design The new pool and pool deck should be designed according to the following criteria: • Design shell as free standing. • Utilize 65 pcf equivalent fluid pressures for static active lateral soil loading plus a 60 pcf expansive soil surcharge in the upper six feet. • Decking commonly becomes separated from the pool shell, tilts, and/or heaves above the coping in response to expansive soil action. It is recommended that pool decking be designed in accordance with “Exterior Slabs- on- Grade” criteria presented in this report. • Provide for hydrostatic pressure relief. • In the case of a spa being planned structurally continuous with the pool shell, the spa should either be designed to be entirely supported by the pool shell (i.e., cantilevered) or the spa support should be derived at a depth comparable to that of the pool. 8.7 Conventional Retaining Walls 8.7.1 Foundations The recommendations provided in the foundation sections of this report are also applicable to conventional retaining walls. 8.7.2 Lateral Earth Pressure The following parameters are based on the use of low-expansion potential backfill materials within a 1:1 (H: V) line projected from the heel of the retaining wall. The active earth pressure for the design of unrestrained earth retaining structures with level backfills can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 40 pcf. The at-rest earth pressure for the design of restrained earth retaining structures with level backfills can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 60 pcf. An additional 20 pcf should be added to these values for walls with a 2:1(H: V) sloping backfill. The above values assume a granular and drained backfill condition. Higher lateral earth pressures would apply if walls retain expansive clay soils. An increase in earth pressure equivalent to an additional 2 feet of retained soil can be used to account for surcharge loads from light traffic. Surcharge due to other loading within an approximate 1½:1 (H: V) projection from the back of the wall will increase the lateral pressures provided above and should be incorporated into the wall design. Where required, seismic earth pressures can be taken as equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 25 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). The resultant force will be acting at 1/3 H feet from top of the wall. This value is for level backfill conditions and do not include a factor of safety. The seismic pressure is in addition to the static lateral earth pressures. Retaining walls should be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures or be provided with a back-drain to reduce the accumulation of hydrostatic pressures. Back-drains may consist of a two-foot wide zone of ¾-inch crushed rock. The back-drain should be separated from the adjacent soils using a non-woven filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent. A perforated pipe (Schedule 40 PVC) should be installed Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 15 at the base of the back-drain and sloped to discharge to a suitable storm drain facility. As an alternative, a geo-composite drainage system such as Miradrain 6000 or equivalent placed behind the wall and connected to a suitable storm drain facility can be used. The project architect should provide waterproofing specifications and details. 8.8 Corrosivity One sample of the onsite soils was tested to provide a preliminary indication of the corrosion potential of the onsite soils. The test results are presented in Appendix B. A brief discussion of the corrosion test results is provided in the following section. • The sample tested had a soluble sulfate concentration of 30 parts per million (ppm), which indicates the sample has a negligible sulfate corrosion potential relative to concrete. It should be noted that soluble sulfate in the irrigation water supply, and/or the use of fertilizer may cause the sulfate content in the surficial soils to increase with time. This may result in a higher sulfate exposure than that indicated by the test results reported herein. Studies have shown that the use of improved cements in the concrete, and a low water-cement ratio will improve the resistance of the concrete to sulfate exposure. Therefore; as a minimum we recommend that the concrete should utilize typeII cement with maximum 0.50 water/cement ratio. Concrete mix design, materials, placement, curing, and finishing should be in conformance with the California Building Code (2019), and American Concrete Institute (ACI) specifications. • The sample tested had a chloride concentration of 20 ppm, which indicates the sample has a moderate chloride corrosion potential relative to metal. • The sample tested had a minimum resistivity of 6300 ohm-cm, which indicates the sample is non corrosive to ferrous metals. • The sample tested had a pH of 7.8, which indicates the sample is generally neutral. Additional testing should be performed after grading to evaluate the as-graded corrosion potential of the onsite soils. We are not corrosion engineers. A corrosion consultant should be retained to provide corrosion control recommendations if deemed necessary. 9.0 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Deleterious material, excessively wet or dry pockets, concentrated zones of oversized rock fragments, and any other unsuitable yielding materials encountered during grading should be removed. Once compacted fill and/or native soils are brought to the proposed pavement subgrade elevations, the subgrade should be proof-rolled in order to check for a uniform firm and unyielding surface. Representatives of the project geotechnical engineer should observe all grading and fill placement. The upper 24-inches of pavement subgrade soils should be scarified; moisture conditioned to at least 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the laboratory standard (ASTM D1557). If loose or yielding materials are encountered during subgrade preparation, evaluation should be performed by EEI. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 16 Aggregate base materials should be properly prepared (i.e., processed and moisture conditioned) and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. All pavement section changes should be properly transitioned. Although not anticipated, if adverse conditions are encountered during the preparation of subgrade materials, special construction methods may need to be employed. A representative of the project geotechnical engineer should be present for the preparation of subgrade and aggregate base. For preliminary design purposes, we have assumed an R-Value of 15 for the materials likely to be exposed at subgrade. For design purposes we have assumed a Traffic Index (TI) of 5.0 for the parking stalls and a Traffic Index (TI) of 6.0 for drive areas. This assumed TI should be verified as necessary by the Civil Engineer or Traffic Engineer. TABLE 3 Preliminary Pavement Design Recommendations Traffic Index (TI) / Intended Use Pavement Surface Aggregate Base Material (1) 5 3.0-inches Asphalt Concrete 8.0-inches 6 3.0-inches Asphalt Concrete 11.0-inches Concrete Pavement Section 6.0-inches Portland Cement Concrete 6.0-inches (1) R-Value of 78 for Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base The recommended pavement sections provided in Table 3 are intended as a minimum guideline. If thinner or highly variable pavement sections are constructed, increased maintenance and repair could be expected. If the actual traffic index (TI) increases beyond our assumed values, increased maintenance and repair could be required for the pavement section. Final pavement design should be verified by testing of soils exposed at subgrade after grading has been completed. Thicker pavement sections could result if R-Value testing indicates lower values. 10.0 DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 10.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting Water is known to decrease the physical strength of earth materials, significantly reducing stability by high moisture conditions. Surface drainage away from foundations and graded slopes should be maintained. Only the volume and frequency of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be applied. Consideration should be given to selecting lightweight, deep rooted types of landscape vegetation which require low irrigation that are capable of surviving the local climate. From a soils engineering viewpoint, “leaching” of the onsite soils is not recommended for establishing landscaping. If landscape soils are processed for the addition of amendments, the processed soils should be re-compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557). Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 17 10.2 Site Drainage Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled over slopes. Runoff should be channeled away from slopes and structures and not allowed to pond and/or seep uncontrolled into the ground. Pad drainage should be directed toward an acceptable outlet. Consideration should be given to eliminating open bottom planters directly adjacent to proposed structures for a minimum distance of 10 feet. As an alternative, closed-bottom type planters could be utilized, with a properly designed drain outlet placed in the bottom of the planter. Final surface grades around structures should be designed to collect and direct surface water away from structures and toward appropriate drainage facilities. The ground around the structure should be graded so that surface water flows rapidly away from the structure without ponding. In general, we recommend that the ground adjacent to the structure slope away at a gradient of at least 2 percent. Densely vegetated areas where runoff can be impaired should have a minimum gradient of at least 5 percent within the first 5 feet from the structure. Roof gutters with downspouts that discharge directly into a closed drainage system are recommended on structures. Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the proposed structures. 10.3 Site Runoff Considerations - Stormwater Disposal Systems To comply with the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requirements it is our understanding that an onsite water retention system for the proposed development is contemplated. For this reason we performed percolation testing at the site in order to provide a preliminary indication of the infiltration characteristics of the onsite materials. Percolation tests were performed in borings B-4/P-1 and B-5/P-2. The approximate locations of the percolation wells are identified on Boring Location Map (Figure 3). Percolation test wells were constructed by inserting 3-inch-diameter perforated PVC pipe in the borings and backfilling the annular space with ⅜-inch gravel to prevent caving during the percolation test. Following construction of the percolation test wells, they were filled with water and pre-saturated. Percolation testing was then performed, and consisted of refilling the test wells with water to approximate referenced elevation and taking a reading of drop in water level every ten minutes for a period of approximately one hour. Table 4 presents the measured percolation and corresponding infiltration rates calculated for the test holes. TABLE 4 Summary of Percolation Testing Location Depth (ft.) Pre-Adjusted Percolation Rate (in/hr.) Infiltration Rate (in/hr.) B-4/P-1 11.3 480 90 B-5/P-2 19.15 122.4 7.95 Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 18 The percolation test results are presented in Appendix C. It must be realized that the infiltration rates presented above are as tested infiltration rates and do not include a factor of safety used for design rates. The project civil engineer should determine the appropriate factor of safety for the proposed disposal system. We note that only conceptual plans were available at the time of this evaluation, and the design and location of a storm water dissipation/retention system has not yet been determined. Therefore our percolation test was performed in soils that are generally representative of the overall property. 10.4 Structure Setback from Retention Devices We recommend that retention/disposal devices be situated at least three times their depth, or a minimum of 15 feet (whichever is greater), from the outside bottom edge of structural foundations. Structural foundations include (but are not limited to) buildings, loading docks, retaining walls, and screen walls. All stormwater disposal systems should be checked and maintained on regular intervals. Stormwater devices including bioswales that are located closer than 10 feet from any foundations/footings should be lined with an impermeable membrane to reduce the potential for saturation of foundation soils. Foundations may also need to be deepened. 10.5 Additional Site Improvements Recommendations for additional grading can be provided upon request. If in the future, additional property improvements are planned for the subject property, recommendations concerning the design and construction of improvements would be provided upon request. 10.6 Utility Trench Backfill Fill around the pipe should be placed in accordance with details shown on the drawings, and should be placed in layers not to exceed 8-inches loose (unless otherwise approved by the geotechnical engineer) and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor). The geotechnical engineer should approve all backfill material. Select material should be used when called for on the drawings, or when recommended by the geotechnical engineer. Care should be taken during backfill and compaction operations to maintain alignment and prevent damage to the joints. The backfill should be kept free from oversized material, chunks of highly plastic clay, or other unsuitable or deleterious material. Backfill soils should be non- expansive, non-corrosive, and compatible with native earth materials. Backfill materials and testing should be in accordance with the IBC (2012), and the requirements of the local governing jurisdiction. Pipe backfill areas should be graded and maintained in such a condition that erosion or saturation will not damage the pipe bedding or backfill. Flooding trench backfill is not recommended. Heavy equipment should not be operated over any pipe until it has been properly backfilled with a minimum of 2 to 3 feet of cover. The utility trench should be systematically backfilled to allow maximum time for natural settlement. Backfill should not occur over porous, wet, or spongy subgrade surfaces. Should these conditions exist, the areas should be removed, replaced and recompacted. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 19 11.0 PLAN REVIEW Once detailed grading and foundation plans are available, they should be submitted to EEI for review and comment, to reduce the potential for discrepancies between plans and recommendations presented herein. If conditions are found to differ substantially from those stated, appropriate recommendations will be provided. Additional field studies may be warranted. 12.0 LIMITATIONS This Geotechnical Evaluation has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. Findings provided herein have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. This report has been prepared for the sole use of National Community Renaissance (Client), within a reasonable time from its authorization. Subject property conditions, land use (both onsite and offsite), or other factors may change as a result of manmade influences, and additional work may be required with the passage of time. This Geotechnical Evaluation should not be relied upon by other parties without the express written consent of EEI and the Client; therefore, any use or reliance upon this Geotechnical Evaluation by a party other than the Client should be solely at the risk of such third party and without legal recourse against EEI, its employees, officers, or directors, regardless of whether the action in which recovery of damages is brought or based upon contract, tort, statue, or otherwise. The Client has the responsibility to see that all parties to the project, including the designer, contractor, subcontractor, and building official, etc. are aware of this report in its complete form. This report contains information that may be used in the preparation of contract specifications; however, the report is not designed as a specification document, and may not contain sufficient information for use without additional assessment. EEI assumes no responsibility or liability for work or testing performed by others. In addition, this report may be subject to review by the controlling authorities. Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 FIGURES FIGURE 1 SITE VICINITY MAP National Community Renaissance Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim Ave Anaheim, Orange County, CA EEI Project NCO-73182.4 Scale: 1" = 4,900 feet Note: All Locations Are Approximate 4,900 ft USGS US Topo 7.5-minute map for Anaheim, CA 2018 LEGEND 9,800 ft2,450 ft0 SITE VICINITY FIGURE 2 AERIAL SITE MAP National Community Renaissance Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim Ave Anaheim, Orange County, CA EEI Project NCO-73182.4 Source: Google Earth, 2021 Scale: 1" = 64' Note: All Locations Are Approximate 64 ft 128 ft32 ft0 SUBJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARY FIGURE 3 GEOTECHNICAL MAP National Community Renaissance Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim Ave Anaheim, Orange County, CA EEI Project NCO-73182.4 Source: Google Earth, 2021 SUBJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARY Approximate locations of exploratory boringsB-1 Approximate location of percolation tests B-4/P-1 B-1 B-3 B-2 B-6 B-4/P-1 B-5/P-2 TP-6 TP-4 TP-1 TP-2 TP-3 TP-5 TP-4 Scale: 1" = 64' Note: All Locations Are Approximate 64 ft 128 ft32 ft0 Scale: 1" = 64' Note: All Locations Are Approximate 64 ft 128 ft32 ft0 Approximate location of test pits Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 APPENDIX A SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART AND BORING LOGS S o u t h M e l r o s e D r i v e SYMBOLS GRAPH LETTER TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONSMAJOR DIVISIONS GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH COARSE GRAINED SOILS GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOILS CLEAN GRAVELS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) GRAVELS WITH FINES (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO. 4 SEIVE WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND- CLAY MIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINESCLEAN SANDS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) SANDS WITH FINES SAND AND SANDY SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION REATINED ON NO. 4 SEIVE MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS LARGER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY-SANDS, SAND – SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND – CLAY MIXTURES FINE GRAINED SOILS SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS SAMPLER TYPES SPT Modified California (2.5" I.D.) Bulk Shelby Tube Rock Core OTHER TESTS COR – Corrosivity) CD – Consolidated Drained Triaxial CON – Consolidation DS – Direct Shear RV – R-Value SA – Sieve Analysis ATT – Atterberg Limit (Plasticity Index) TV – Torvane Shear UU – Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial PLASTICITY CHART P la s t ic it y I n d e x (%) 0 0 Liquid Limit (%) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 CL-ML CL “A ” L I N E CH OH & MH Water Level PENETRATION RESISTANCE (Recorded As Blows/Foot) SAND & GRAVEL SILT & CLAY Relative Density Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense Blows/Foot* N 0-4 4-10 10-30 30-50 Over 50 Consistency Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Very Stiff Blows/Foot* N 0 - 2 2 - 4 4 - 8 Over 30 8 - 15 Hard 15 - 30 Strength**(KSF) 0 – 0.5 0.5 – 1.0 1.0 – 2.0 Over 8.0 2.0 – 4.0 4.0 – 8.0 * Number of blows of 140LB hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D. (1-3/8 inch I.D.) split barrel sampler the last 12 inches of an 18-inch drive (ASTM-1586 Standard Penetration Test) 60 60 ** Undrained shear strength in kips/sq. ft. As determined by laboratory testing or approximated by the standard penetration test, pocket penetrometer, torvane, or visual observation UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION (ASTM D-2487-98) Geotechnical & Environmental Solutions LEGEND TO SOIL DESCRIPTIONS APPENDIX A EI – Expansion Index MAX – Maximum Density -#200 - Percent Passing #200 Sieve Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) dark brown, slighly moist to moist, medium dense, fine to coarsegrained with gravel and fragments of asphalt. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SP-SM) tan to light gray, slightly moist to moist, medium dense, fine tovery coarse grained. Silty SAND (SP-SM) tan to light gray, moist, dense, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) brown, moist, medium dense, very fine to medium grained, lowtomoderate plasticity. 16 1 1 2 4 6 15 SM SP-SM SP-SM SM 96 141614 1089 71014 91218 111726 91317 81619 MC MC SPT MC MC MC MC MC 116 90 113 89 101 103 114 B-1 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 2 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Silty SAND (SP-SM) tan to light gray, moist, dense, fine to coarse grained. Sandy SILT (ML) yellowish brown to greenish brown, moist, medium dense, fine tocoarse grained. Silty SAND (SP-SM) tan to light gray, moist, dense, fine to coarse grained. Total Depth: 51.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredBackfilled with native soil 9 24 4 2 SP-SM ML SP-SM 172843 71020 3550-5" 234650-5" MC MC MC MC 106 100 109 106 B-1 3/23/20213/23/2021 2 of 2 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) brown to greenish brown, slighly moist, medium dense, fine tocoarse grained with gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to very coarse. Silty SAND (SM) brown to greenish brown, moist, medium dense, very fine tomedium grained, low to moderate plasticity. Total Depth: 26.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredBackfilled with native soils 5 12 SM SM SM SM 121316 333 565 675 888 5811 71114 MC SPT SPT SPT SPT SPT MC 107 117 B-2 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SP-SM) dark brown, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained withgravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)SAND (SP) tan to dark gray, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained. SAND (SP) tan to dark gray, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to very coarse grained. Sandy SILT (ML) brown, moist, medium dense, very fine to medium grained, low tomoderate plasticity. Total Depth: 26.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredBackfilled with native soils 5 2 2 3 19 SP-SM SP SP SM ML 3711 856 91114 101216 91011 91112 7912 MC MC MC MC SPT SPT MC 113 104 101 101 109 B-3 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) light gray, slighly moist, medium dense, very fine to very coarsegrained with gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SM) greenish yellow to tan, slightly moist, medium dense, fine to verycoarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) yellowish brown to light gray, moist, loose, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) yellowish brown to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to verycoarse grained. Total Depth: 11.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredPercolation test performedBackfilled with native soils 6 SM SM SM SM 81010 544 766 788 MC SPT SPT SPT 102 B-4/P-1 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) dark brown, slighly moist to moist, medium dense, fine to coarsegrained with gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SM) brown to tan, moist, medium dense, fine to coarse grained. Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to very coarse grained. Total Depth: 21.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredPercolation test performedBackfilled with native soils 3 SM SM SM 7912 549 567 666 778 91314 MC SPT SPT SPT SPT SPT 133 B-5/P-2 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Artificial Fill (Af)Silty SAND (SM) brown to greenish brown, moist, medium dense,very fine to coarsegrained with gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qal)Silty SAND (SM) brown to greenish brown, moist, medium dense, very fine to coarsegrained. Silty SAND (SM) tan to light gray, moist, medium dense, fine to very coarsegrained. Sandy SILT (ML) greenish brown to dark brown, moist, medium dense, very fine tomedium grained, low to moderate plasticity. Total Depth: 26.5' bgsNo groundwater encounteredBackfilled with native soils 8 21 SP-SM SM SM ML 477 555 345 444 787 6711 5711 MC SPT SPT SPT SPT SPT MC 108 104 B-6 3/23/20213/23/2021 1 of 1 8"Ingersoll-Rand A300 / 8" Hollow Stem Auger 140 lbs Manual Hammer Bulk BS National Community Renaissance Project No.: NCO-73182.4 Proposed "Midway Affordable" Housing Development Geologic Description SAMPLE LOG Moisture(%)GraphicLog BOREHOLE LOG Borehole Diameter:Drill Rig/Sampling Method BOREHOLE LOG USCSSymbol (SoilType, Color, Grain, Minor Soil Component, Moisture, Density, Odor, Etc.) EEI Rep: Client: Location: Date Started:SWC W. Midway Dr and S. Anaheim AveDate Finished: Number: Sheet: BlowsPer 6" DepthInFeet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SampleType Dry UnitWt. (pcf) BO R E H O L E L O G N C O - 7 3 1 8 2 . 4 . G P J E E I . G D T 4 / 1 0 / 2 1 Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST DATA Laboratory tests were performed to provide geotechnical parameters for engineering analyses. The following tests were performed: • CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. • MOISTURE CONTENT and DRY DENSITY: The in-situ moisture content and dry density of soils was determined for soil samples obtained from the exploratory borings and were determined in general accordance with ASTM D2216 and ASTM 2937, respectively. • EXPANSION INDEX: The expansion index was determined on a select near-surface sample in accordance with ASTM D4829. • DIRECT SHEAR: Direct shear testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM D3080 on a single sample with normal load increments of approximately 1,000, 1,700 and 2,500 psf. • CORROSIVITY: Corrosion testing of representative soil samples included sulfate potential by California Test 417, chloride potential by California Test 422, and soil minimum resistivity and pH by California Test 643. The sample was tested at Clarkson Laboratory and Supply, Inc. located in Chula Vista, California. Moisture-Density Determination Client:Samp Received.: W.O.:Test By: Date:Samples By: Classification Description Color Moisture Moist Dry Dry Dry Dry Moist Moist Moist Consistancy Misc. WET DENSITY Boring/Pit No. B-1 Depth (ft) Elev (ft)2.5 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 Length of Sample (L)6 5 5 6 6 5 6 6 Total Wet Weight (T)1210.3 860.3 888.4 900.1 997.5 964.1 1189.7 1072.5 Total Ring Wt. (R)252 330 210 252 252 330 252 252 Total Soil (S) [T-R]958.3 530.3 678.4 648.1 745.5 634.1 937.7 820.5 Average Wt. (A) [S/L] 159.71667 106.06 135.68 108.01667 124.25 126.82 156.28333 136.75 GMS to LBS [A/453.6]0.3521091 0.2338183 0.2991182 0.238132 0.2739198 0.2795855 0.34454 0.3014771 LBS to CF3 (.00256 cf)134.39277 91.33529 114.16724 90.890069 104.54952 109.2131 131.50381 115.06758 Wet Density (pcf)134.4 91.3 114.2 90.9 104.5 109.2 131.5 115.1 MOISTURE CONTENT Tare No. Wet Weight (g)144.3 148.3 157.2 128.3 123.6 132.8 148.1 145.2 Dry Weight (g)124.5 146.7 155.7 126 119.3 125 128.7 133.3 Tare (g) Water 19.8 1.6 1.5 2.3 4.3 7.8 19.4 11.9 Percent Moisture 15.9% 1.1% 1.0% 1.8% 3.6% 6.2% 15% 9% DRY DENSITY Dry Density 116.0 90.3 113.1 89.3 100.9 102.8 114.3 105.6 Maximum Density Percent Compaction Percent Saturation**98.9% 3.5% 5.5% 5.7% 15.0% 27.2% 89.4% 41.8% *Av. Ring Weight (gms)42 **Specific Gravity 2.65 Rev 8/1/2014 66 EEI 5932-E-SC 4/5/2021 3/26/2021 TR Client SM SP-SM SP SP-SM SP-SM SM SM SP-SM Dark Olive Brown Gray Gray Gray Gray Olive Brown Olive Brown Olive Brown Dense Medium DenseDense Medium Dense Dense Medium Dense Medium Dense Medium Dense Geosoils, Inc. 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad CA 92010 (760) 438-3155 PageX:\clint\EXTERNAL R-VALUE FOLDER\5932 EEI\2021\04 April\5932_NCO-73182.4_M&DMoist.-Dens. (2) Moisture-Density Determination Client:Samp Received.: W.O.:Test By: Date:Samples By: Classification Description Color Moisture Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Consistancy Misc. WET DENSITY Boring/Pit No. B-1 B-2 B-3 Depth (ft) Elev (ft)40.0 45.0 50.0 2.5 25.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Length of Sample (L)6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Total Wet Weight (T)1137.7 1057.4 1021.7 1048.4 1188.2 1098.1 1003.8 987.6 Total Ring Wt. (R)252 252 252 252 252 252 252 252 Total Soil (S) [T-R]885.7 805.4 769.7 796.4 936.2 846.1 751.8 735.6 Average Wt. (A) [S/L] 147.61667 134.23333 128.28333 132.73333 156.03333 141.01667 125.3 122.6 GMS to LBS [A/453.6]0.3254336 0.2959289 0.2828116 0.292622 0.3439888 0.3108833 0.2762346 0.2702822 LBS to CF3 (.00256 cf)124.21129 112.94995 107.94335 111.68778 131.29345 118.65775 105.43304 103.16114 Wet Density (pcf)124.2 112.9 107.9 111.7 131.3 118.7 105.4 103.2 MOISTURE CONTENT Tare No. Wet Weight (g)149.2 120.6 142.4 118.6 146.5 119.2 135.5 125 Dry Weight (g)120 116.5 139.8 113.4 130.4 113.5 133.3 122.7 Tare (g) Water 29.2 4.1 2.6 5.2 16.1 5.7 2.2 2.3 Percent Moisture 24.3% 3.5% 1.9% 4.6% 12.3% 5.0% 2% 2% DRY DENSITY Dry Density 99.9 109.1 106.0 106.8 116.9 113.0 103.7 101.3 Maximum Density Percent Compaction Percent Saturation**98.4% 18.1% 8.8% 22.2% 78.8% 28.7% 7.4% 7.8% *Av. Ring Weight (gms)42 **Specific Gravity 2.65 Rev 8/1/2014 EEI 3/26/2021 5932-E-SC TR 4/5/2021 Client ML SP-SM SP SM SM SP-SM SP SP Olive Brown Gray Gray Olive Brown Olive Brown Gray Gray Gray Dense Medium Dense Medium Dense Dense Dense Dense Dense Dense Geosoils, Inc. 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad CA 92010 (760) 438-3155 PageX:\clint\EXTERNAL R-VALUE FOLDER\5932 EEI\2021\04 April\5932_NCO-73182.4_M&DMoist.-Dens. (3) Moisture-Density Determination Client:Samp Received.: W.O.:Test By: Date:Samples By: Classification Description Color Moisture Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Moist Consistancy Misc. WET DENSITY Boring/Pit No. B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 Depth (ft) Elev (ft)10.0 25.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 25.0 Length of Sample (L)6 6 6 6 6 6 Total Wet Weight (T)991.7 1176.1 1024.2 1231.3 1085.3 1152.9 Total Ring Wt. (R)252 252 252 252 252 252 Total Soil (S) [T-R]739.7 924.1 772.2 979.3 833.3 900.9 Average Wt. (A) [S/L] 123.28333 154.01667 128.7 163.21667 138.88333 150.15 GMS to LBS [A/453.6]0.2717887 0.3395429 0.2837302 0.3598251 0.3061802 0.3310185 LBS to CF3 (.00256 cf)103.73613 129.59653 108.29395 137.33783 116.86267 126.34295 Wet Density (pcf)103.7 129.6 108.3 137.3 116.9 126.3 MOISTURE CONTENT Tare No. Wet Weight (g)126.5 157.9 135.8 123.1 120.7 151.2 Dry Weight (g)123.2 132.8 128.4 119.3 111.6 124.5 Tare (g) Water 3.3 25.1 7.4 3.8 9.1 26.7 Percent Moisture 2.7% 18.9% 5.8% 3.2% 8.2% 21.4% DRY DENSITY Dry Density 101.0 109.0 102.4 133.1 108.1 104.0 Maximum Density Percent Compaction Percent Saturation**11.1% 96.9% 24.8% 34.8% 40.7% 96.4% *Av. Ring Weight (gms)42 **Specific Gravity 2.65 Rev 8/1/2014 EEI 3/26/2021 5932-E-SC TR 4/5/2021 Client SP ML SM SM SP-SM ML Gray Olive Brown Gray Gray Gray Olive Brown Medium Dense Dense Medium Dense Dense Dense Dense Geosoils, Inc. 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad CA 92010 (760) 438-3155 PageX:\clint\EXTERNAL R-VALUE FOLDER\5932 EEI\2021\04 April\5932_NCO-73182.4_M&DMoist.-Dens. (4) Tested By: TR Checked By: TR Client: EEI Project: EEI Source of Sample: SHEAR Depth: 5.0 Sample Number: B-3 Proj. No.: 5932-E-SC Date Sampled: Sample Type: Undisturbed Description: Gray Sand Specific Gravity= 2.65 Remarks: Plate Sample No. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf Saturation, % Void Ratio Diameter, in. Height, in. Water Content, % Dry Density, pcf Saturation, % Void Ratio Diameter, in. Height, in. Normal Stress, psf Fail. Stress, psf Strain, % Ult. Stress, psf Strain, % Strain rate, in./min. In i t i a l At T e s t Sh e a r S t r e s s , p s f 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Strain, % 0 5 10 15 20 1 2 3 Ul t . S t r e s s , p s f Fa i l . S t r e s s , p s f 0 2000 4000 6000 Normal Stress, psf 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 C, psf f, deg Tan(f) Fail. Ult. 135 41.3 0.88 83 33.5 0.66 1 2.0 103.4 8.8 0.5992 2.40 1.00 18.1 103.9 81.1 0.5928 2.40 1.00 1100 1093 3.2 818 7.5 0.005 2 2.0 103.5 8.9 0.5979 2.40 1.00 18.6 104.5 84.6 0.5836 2.40 0.99 2200 2083 3.9 1531 7.8 0.005 3 2.0 105.0 9.2 0.5753 2.40 1.00 17.6 106.1 83.2 0.5596 2.40 0.99 3300 3025 3.7 2276 10.1 0.004 Tested By: TR Checked By: TR 4-5-21 (no specification provided) PL= LL= PI= D90= D85= D60= D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= USCS= AASHTO= * Gray Sand .375 #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100.0 98.8 94.7 73.7 41.3 15.2 4.9 2.0 1.5002 1.2115 0.6153 0.5016 0.3450 0.2489 0.2096 2.94 0.92 SP NCO-73182.4 EEI EEI 5932-E-SC Soil Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Source of Sample: Sieve Depth: 10.0 Sample Number: B-1 Date: Client: Project: Project No:Plate SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS? SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) PE R C E N T F I N E R 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 GRAIN SIZE - mm. 0.0010.010.1110100 % +3"Coarse % Gravel Fine Coarse Medium % Sand Fine Silt % Fines Clay 0.0 0.0 1.2 4.1 53.4 39.3 2.0 6 i n . 3 i n . 2 i n . 1½ i n . 1 i n . ¾ i n . ½ i n . 3/ 8 i n . #4 #1 0 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #6 0 #1 0 0 #1 4 0 #2 0 0 Particle Size Distribution Report Tested By: TR Checked By: TR 4-5-21 (no specification provided) PL= LL= PI= D90= D85= D60= D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= USCS= AASHTO= * Gray Sand w/Silt .375 #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100.0 99.8 99.1 93.0 74.9 49.1 24.9 13.4 0.7136 0.5764 0.3077 0.2541 0.1709 0.0908 SP-SM NCO-73182.4 EEI EEI 5932-E-SC Soil Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Source of Sample: Sieve Depth: 45.0 Sample Number: B-1 Date: Client: Project: Project No:Plate SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS? SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) PE R C E N T F I N E R 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 GRAIN SIZE - mm. 0.0010.010.1110100 % +3"Coarse % Gravel Fine Coarse Medium % Sand Fine Silt % Fines Clay 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.7 24.2 61.5 13.4 6 i n . 3 i n . 2 i n . 1½ i n . 1 i n . ¾ i n . ½ i n . 3/ 8 i n . #4 #1 0 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #6 0 #1 0 0 #1 4 0 #2 0 0 Particle Size Distribution Report Tested By: TR Checked By: TR 4-5-21 (no specification provided) PL= LL= PI= D90= D85= D60= D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= Cc= USCS= AASHTO= * Olive Brown Silty Sand #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100.0 99.7 95.6 80.9 62.7 41.3 0.3330 0.2824 0.1383 0.1006 SM NCO-73182.4 EEI EEI 5932-E-SC Soil Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Source of Sample: Sieve Depth: 25.0 Sample Number: B-2 Date: Client: Project: Project No:Plate SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS? SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) PE R C E N T F I N E R 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 GRAIN SIZE - mm. 0.0010.010.1110100 % +3"Coarse % Gravel Fine Coarse Medium % Sand Fine Silt % Fines Clay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.4 54.3 41.3 6 i n . 3 i n . 2 i n . 1½ i n . 1 i n . ¾ i n . ½ i n . 3/ 8 i n . #4 #1 0 #2 0 #3 0 #4 0 #6 0 #1 0 0 #1 4 0 #2 0 0 Particle Size Distribution Report Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 APPENDIX C FIELD PERCOLATION DATA Well Installed? No Start Finish ft. ft.min. in. in./hr. 1 9:52 9:53 10.80 11.30 1 6.00 360.00 2 9:53 9:54 10.50 11.30 1 9.60 576.00 3 9:54 9:56 10.40 11.30 1.5 10.80 432.00 4 9:56 9:58 10.30 11.30 1.5 12.00 480.00 5 9:58 10:00 10.30 11.30 1.5 12.00 480.00 6 10:00 10:02 10.30 11.30 1.5 12.00 480.00 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Project "Midway Affordable"By BS Client National Community Renaissance Date 3/25/2021 Proj. No.NCO-73182.4 Page 1 of 2 PERCOLATION TEST Borehole ID B-4/P-1 Contractor EEI Equipment/Rig (HSA)/Truck-Mounted A300 Presoak Start 3/25/2021 Boring Diameter 8-inches Testing Start 3/25/2021 Boring Depth 11.3 in/hr Time Depth to Water Elapsed Time Testing Completion 3/25/2021 Yes Notes After pouring over 20 gallons into the boring hole the water was unable to hold a stable head of water. A presoak was not needed. Reading Start Finish Water Drop Perc. Rate Stabilized Percolation Rate =480.00 Well Installed? No Start Finish ft. ft.min. in. in./hr. 1 10:37 10:47 15.35 17.85 10 30.00 180.00 2 10:47 10:57 16.05 17.90 10 22.20 133.20 3 10:57 11:07 15.65 17.80 10 25.80 154.80 4 11:07 11:17 15.85 17.75 10 22.80 136.80 5 11:17 11:27 15.95 17.65 10 20.40 122.40 6 11:27 11:37 15.90 17.60 10 20.40 122.40 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Project "Midway Affordable"By BS Client National Community Renaissance Date 3/25/2021 Proj. No.NCO-73182.4 Page 2 of 2 PERCOLATION TEST Borehole ID B-5/P-2 Contractor EEI Equipment/Rig (HSA)/Truck-Mounted A300 Presoak Start 3/25/2021 Boring Diameter 8-inches Testing Start 3/25/2021 Boring Depth 19.15 in/hr Time Depth to Water Elapsed Time Testing Completion 3/25/2021 Yes Notes After pouring over 35 gallons into the boring hole the water was unable to hold a stable head of water. A presoak was not needed. Reading Start Finish Water Drop Perc. Rate Stabilized Percolation Rate =122.40 Geotechnical Evaluation Report – National Community Renaissance April 15, 2021 Proposed “Midway Affordable” Housing Development, Anaheim, California EEI Project NCO-73182.4 APPENDIX D EARTHWORK and GRADING GUIDELINES EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES GENERAL These guidelines present general procedures and recommendations for earthwork and grading as required on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill and installation of subdrains and excavations. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report are applicable to each specific project, are part of the earthwork and grading guidelines and would supersede the provisions contained hereafter in the case of conflict. Observations and/or testing performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in revised recommendations which could supersede these guidelines or the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report. Figures A through O is provided at the back of this appendix, exhibiting generalized cross sections relating to these guidelines. The contractor is responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthworks in accordance with provisions of the project plans and specifications. The project soil engineer and engineering geologist (geotechnical consultant) or their representatives should provide observation and testing services, and geotechnical consultation throughout the duration of the project. EARTHWORK OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING Geotechnical Consultant Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant (a soil engineer and engineering geologist) should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report, the approved grading plans, and applicable grading codes and ordinances. The geotechnical consultant should provide testing and observation so that determination may be made that the work is being completed as specified. It is the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant and keep them aware of work schedules and predicted changes, so that the consultant may schedule their personnel accordingly. All removals, prepared ground to receive fill, key excavations, and subdrains should be observed and documented by the project engineering geologist and/or soil engineer prior to placing any fill. It is the contractor’s responsibility to notify the engineering geologist and soil engineer when such areas are ready for observation. Corporate Office: 2195 Faraday Ave., Suite K, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7207  Ph: 760-431-3747 www.eeitiger.com Camarillo * Carlsbad * Pleasanton * Sacramento * Reno Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 2 Laboratory and Field Tests Maximum dry density tests to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with American Standard Testing Materials test method ASTM designation D-1557-78. Random field compaction tests should be performed in accordance with test method ASTM designations D-1556-82, D-2937 or D-2922 & D-3017, at intervals of approximately two feet of fill height per 10,000 sq. ft. or every one thousand cubic yards of fill placed. These criteria would vary depending on the soil conditions and the size of the project. The location and frequency of testing would be at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant Contractor’s Responsibility All clearing, site preparation, and earthwork performed on the project should be conducted by the contractor, with observation by geotechnical consultants and staged approval by the appropriate governing agencies. It is the contractor’s responsibility to prepare the ground surface to receive the fill to the satisfaction of the soil engineer, and to place, spread, moisture condition, mix and compact the fill in accordance with the recommendations of the soil engineer. The contractor should also remove all major deleterious material considered unsatisfactory by the soil engineer. It is the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with applicable grading guidelines, codes or agency ordinances, and approved grading plans. Sufficient watering apparatus and compaction equipment should be provided by the contractor with due consideration for the fill material, rate of placement, and climatic conditions. If, in the opinion of the geotechnical consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable weather, excessive oversized rock, deleterious material or insufficient support equipment are resulting in a quality of work that is not acceptable, the consultant will inform the contractor, and the contractor is expected to rectify the conditions, and if necessary, stop work until conditions are satisfactory. The contractor will properly grade all surfaces to maintain good drainage and prevent ponding of water. The contractor will take action to control surface water and to prevent erosion control measures that have been installed. SITE PREPARATION All vegetation including brush, trees, thick grasses, organic debris, and other deleterious material should be removed and disposed of offsite, and must be concluded prior to placing fill. Existing fill, soil, alluvium, colluvium, or rock materials determined by the soil engineer or engineering geologist as unsuitable for structural in-place support should be removed prior to fill placement. Depending upon the soil conditions, these materials may be reused as compacted fills. Any materials incorporated as part of the compacted fills should be approved by the soil engineer. Any underground structures such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells, pipelines, or other structures not located prior to grading are to be removed or treated in a manner recommended by the soil engineer. Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable ground extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition should be over excavated down to firm ground and approved by the soil engineer before compaction and filling operations continue. Over excavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed and moisture-conditioned should be recompacted to the minimum relative compaction as specified in these guidelines. Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 3 Existing ground which is determined to be satisfactory for support of the fills should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, or as directed by the soil engineer. After the scarified ground is brought to optimum moisture (or greater) and mixed, the materials should be compacted as specified herein. If the scarified zone is greater than 6 inches in depth, it may be necessary to remove the excess and place the material in lifts restricted to 6 inches in compacted thickness. Existing grind which is not satisfactory to support compacted fill should be over excavated as required in the geotechnical report or by the onsite soils engineer and/or engineering geologists. Scarification, discing, or other acceptable form of mixing should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large fragments or clods, until the working surface is reasonably uniform and free from ruts, hollows, hummocks, or other uneven features which would inhibit compaction as described above. Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical) gradient, the ground should be benched. The lowest bench, which will act as a key, should be a minimum of 12 feet wide and should be at least two feet deep into competent material, approved by the soil engineer and/or engineering geologist. In fill over cut slope conditions, the recommended minimum width of the lowest bench or key is at least 15 feet with the key excavated on competent material, as designated by the Geotechnical Consultant. As a general rule, unless superseded by the Soil Engineer, the minimum width of fill keys should be approximately equal to one-half (½) the height of the slope. Standard benching is typically four feet (minimum) vertically, exposing competent material. Benching may be used to remove unsuitable materials, although it is understood that the vertical height of the bench may exceed four feet. Pre stripping may be considered for removal of unsuitable materials in excess of four feet in thickness. All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and toe of fill benches should be observed and approved by the soil engineer and/or engineering geologist prior to placement of fill. Fills may then be properly placed and compacted until design grades are attained. COMPACTED FILLS Earth materials imported or excavated on the property may be utilized as fill provided that each soil type has been accepted by the soil engineer. These materials should be free of roots, tree branches, other organic matter or other deleterious materials. All unsuitable materials should be removed from the fill as directed by the soil engineer. Soils of poor gradation, undesirable expansion potential, or substandard strength characteristics may be designated unsuitable by the consultant and may require mixing with other earth materials to serve as a satisfactory fill material. Fill materials generated from benching operations should be dispersed throughout the fill area. Benching operations should not result in the benched material being placed only within a single equipment width away from the fill/bedrock contact. Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 4 Oversized materials, defined as rock or other irreducible materials with a maximum size exceeding 12 inches in one dimension, should not be buried or placed in fills unless the location of materials and disposal methods are specifically approved by the soil engineer. Oversized material should be taken offsite or placed in accordance with recommendations of the soil engineer in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. Oversized material should not be placed vertically within 10 feet of finish grade or horizontally within 20 feet of slope faces. To facilitate trenching, rock should not be placed within the range of foundation excavations or future utilities unless specifically approved by the soil engineer and/or the representative developers. If import fill material is required for grading, representative samples of the material should be analyzed in the laboratory by the soil engineer to determine its physical properties. If any material other than that previously analyzed is imported to the fill or encountered during grading, analysis of this material should be conducted by the soil engineer as soon as practical. Fill material should be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers that should not exceed six inches compacted in thickness. The soil engineer may approve thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved. Each layer should be spread evenly and mixed to attain uniformity of material and moisture suitable for compaction. Fill materials at moisture content less than optimum should be watered and mixed, and “wet” fill materials should be aerated by scarification, or should be mixed with drier material. Moisture conditioning and mixing of fill materials should continue until the fill materials have uniform moisture content at or above optimum moisture. After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture-conditioned and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density as determined by ASTM test designation, D 1557-78, or as otherwise recommended by the soil engineer. Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and should be reliable to efficiently achieve the required degree of compaction. Where tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill, or portion thereof, is below the required relative compaction or improper moisture content, the particular layer or portion will be reworked until the required density and/or moisture content has been attained. No additional fill will be placed in an area until the last placed lift of fill has been tested and found to meet the density and moisture requirements, and is approved by the soil engineer. Compaction of slopes should be accomplished by over-building the outside edge a minimum of three feet horizontally, and subsequently trimming back to the finish design slope configuration. Testing will be performed as the fill is horizontally placed to evaluate compaction as the fill core is being developed. Special efforts may be necessary to attain the specified compaction in the fill slope zone. Final slope shaping should be performed by trimming and removing loose materials with appropriate equipment. A final determination of fill slope compaction should be based on observation and/or testing of the finished slope face. Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 5 If an alternative to over-building and cutting back the compacted fill slope is selected, then additional efforts should be made to achieve the required compaction in the outer 10 feet of each lift of fill by undertaking the following: • Equipment consisting of a heavy short-shanked sheepsfoot should be used to roll (horizontal) parallel to the slopes continuously as fill is placed. The sheepsfoot roller should also be used to roll perpendicular to the slopes, and extend out over the slope to provide adequate compaction to the face slope. • Loose fill should not be spilled out over the face of the slope as each lift is compacted. Any loose fill spilled over a previously completed slope face should be trimmed off or be subject to re-rolling. • Field compaction tests will be made in the outer two to five feet of the slope at two to three foot vertical intervals, subsequent to compaction operations. • After completion of the slope, the slope face should be shaped with a small dozer and then re-rolled with a sheepsfoot to achieve compaction to near the slope face. Subsequent to testing to verify compaction, the slopes should be grid-rolled to achieve adequate compaction to the slope face. Final testing should be used to confirm compaction after grid rolling. • Where testing indicates less than adequate compaction, the contractor will be responsible to process, moisture condition, mix and recompact the slope materials as necessary to achieve compaction. Additional testing should be performed to verify compaction. • Erosion control and drainage devices should be designed by the project civil engineer in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agencies, and/or in accordance with the recommendations of the soil engineer or engineering geologist. EXCAVATIONS Excavations and cut slopes should be observed and mapped during grading by the engineering geologist. If directed by the engineering geologist, further excavations or over-excavation and refilling of cut areas should be performed. When fills over cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope should be observed by the engineering geologist prior to placement of the overlying fill portion of the slope. The engineering geologist should observe all cut slopes and should be notified by the contractor when cut slopes are started. If, during the course of grading, unanticipated adverse or potentially adverse geologic conditions are encountered, the engineering geologist and soil engineer should investigate, evaluate and make recommendations to mitigate (or limit) these conditions. The need for cut slope buttressing or stabilizing should be based on as-grading evaluations by the engineering geologist, whether anticipated previously or not. Unless otherwise specified in soil and geological reports, no cut slopes should be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies. Additionally, short-term stability of temporary cut slopes is the contractor’s responsibility. Earthwork and Grading Guidelines 6 Erosion control and drainage devices should be designed by the project civil engineer and should be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agencies, and/or in accordance with the recommendations of the soil engineer or engineering geologist. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdrains should be installed in accordance with the approved embedment material, alignment and details indicated by the geotechnical consultant. Subdrain locations or construction materials should not be changed or modified without approval of the geotechnical consultant. The soil engineer and/or engineering geologist may recommend and direct changes in subdrain line, grade and drain material in the field, pending exposed conditions. The location of constructed subdrains should be recorded by the project civil engineer. COMPLETION Consultation, observation and testing by the geotechnical consultant should be completed during grading operations in order to state an opinion that all cut and filled areas are graded in accordance with the approved project specifications. After completion of grading and after the soil engineer and engineering geologist have finished their observations, final reports should be submitted subject to review by the controlling governmental agencies. No additional grading should be undertaken without prior notification of the soil engineer and/or engineering geologist. All finished cut and fill slopes should be protected from erosion, including but not limited to planting in accordance with the plan design specifications and/or as recommended by a landscape architect. Such protection and/or planning should be undertaken as soon as possible after completion of grading. ATTACHMENTS Figure A – Transition Lot Detail Cut Lot Figure B – Transition Lot Detail Cut - Fill Figure C – Rock Disposal Pits Figure D – Detail for Fill Slope Toeing out on a Flat Alluviated Canyon Figure E – Removal Adjacent to Existing Fill Figure F – Daylight Cut Lot Detail Figure G – Skin Fill of Natural Ground Figure H – Typical Stabilization Buttress Fill Design Figure I – Stabilization Fill for Unstable Material Exposed in Portion of Cut Slope Figure J – Fill Over Cut Detail Figure K – Fill Over Natural Detail Figure L – Oversize Rock Disposal Figure M – Canyon Subdrain Detail Figure N – Canyon Subdrain Alternate Details Figure O – Typical Stabilization Buttress Subdrain Detail Figure P – Retaining Wall Backfill TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT LOT – MATERIAL TYPE TRANSITION 5' Minimum Pad Grade Overexcavate and Recompact Compacted Fill 3' Minimum* Unweathered Bedrock or Approved Material Typical Benching * The soils engineer and/or engineering geologist may recommend deeper overexcavation in steep cut-fill transitions. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT LOT – MATERIAL TYPE TRANSITION FIGURE A Engineering Solutions TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT – FILL – DAYLIGHT TRANSITION 5' Minimum Pad Grade Overexcavate and Recompact Compacted Fill 3' Minimum* Unweathered Bedrock or Approved Material Typical Benching * The soils engineer and/or engineering geologist may recommend deeper overexcavation in steep cut-fill transitions. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TRANSITION LOT DETAIL CUT – FILL – DAYLIGHT TRANSITION Engineering Solutions FIGURE B ROCK DISPOSAL PITS Large Rock/Boulder Fill lifts compacted over rock after embedment Granular material Compacted fill Size of excavation to be commensurate with rock size. Note: (1) Large rock is defined as having a diameter larger than 3 feet in maximum size. (2) Pit shall be excavated into compacted fill to a depth equal to half of the rock size. (3) Granular soil shall be pushed into the pit and then flooded around the rock using a sheepsfoot to help with compaction. (4) A minimum of 3 feet of compacted fill should be laid over each pit. (5) Pits shall have at least 15 feet of separation between one another, horizontally. (6) Pits shall be placed at least 20 feet from any fill slope. (7) Pits shall be used only in deep fill areas. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES ROCK DISPOSAL PITS Engineering Solutions FIGURE C DETAIL FOR FILL SLOPE TOEING OUT ON FLAT ALLUVIATED CANYON Toe of slope as shown on grading plan Original ground surface to be restored with compacted fill. Compacted fill Original ground surface Anticipated alluvial removal depth per soils engineer. Backcut varies for deep removals. A backcut shall not be made steeper than a slope of 1:1 or as necessary for safety Provide a 1:1 minimum projection from the toe of the slope as shown on considerations. the grading plan to the recommended depth. Factors such as slope height, site conditions, and/or local conditions could demand shallower projections. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES DETAIL FOR FILL SLOPE TOEING OUT ON A FLAT ALLUVIATED CANYON Engineering Solutions FIGURE D REMOVAL ADJACENT TO EXISTING FILL Adjoining Canyon Fill Compacted fill limits line Proposed additional compacted fill Temporary compacted fill for drainage only Qaf Qaf (Existing compacted fill) Qal (To be removed) To be removed before placing additional compacted fill Legend Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES REMOVAL ADJACENT TO EXISTING FILL Qaf - Artificial Fill Qal - Alluvium Engineering Solutions FIGURE E DAYLIGHT CUT LOT DETAIL Fill slope shall be recompacted at a 2:1 ratio (this may increase or decrease the area of the pad) Overexcavate and recompact fill Proposed finish grade 3' minimum blanket fill Avoid and/or clean up spillage of materials on the natural slope Bedrock or approved material Typical benching 2' minimum key depth Note: (1) Subdrain and key width requirements shall be determined based on exposed subsurface conditions and the thickness of overburden. (2) Pad overexcavation and recompaction shall be completed if determined as necessary by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES DAYLIGHT CUT LOT DETAIL Engineering Solutions FIGURE F SKIN FILL OF NATURAL GROUND 15' minimum to be maintained from proposed finish Original slope slope face to backcut Proposed finish grade 3' minimum Bedrock or approved materials Proposed finish grade 3' minimum key depth 2' minimum key depth 15' minimum key width Note: (1) The need and disposition of drains will be determined by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist based on site conditions. (2) Pad overexcavation and recompaction shall be completed if determined as necessary by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES SKIN FILL OF NATURAL GROUND Engineering Solutions FIGURE G TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS FILL DESIGN Outlets shall be spaced at 100' maximum intervals, and should extend 12" beyond the face of the slope at the finish of of rough grading 15' minimum Blanket fill if recommended by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist Design finish slope 10' minimum 25' maximum Typical benching 15' is typical Buttress or sidehill fill 4" diameter non-perforated outlet pipe and backdrain (see alternatives) 1'-2' clear Toe Heel Gravel-fabric drain material Bedrock 3' minimum key depth W = H/2 or a minimum of 15' Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS FILL DESIGN Engineering Solutions FIGURE H SKIN FILL OF NATURAL GROUND 15' minimum to be maintained from proposed finish Original slope slope face to backcut Proposed finish grade 3' minimum Bedrock or approved materials Proposed finish grade 3' minimum key depth 2' minimum key depth 15' minimum key width Note: (1) The need and disposition of drains will be determined by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist based on site conditions. (2) Pad overexcavation and recompaction shall be completed if determined as necessary by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES SKIN FILL OF NATURAL GROUND Engineering Solutions FIGURE G TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS FILL DESIGN Outlets shall be spaced at 100' maximum intervals, and should extend 12" beyond the face of the slope at the finish of of rough grading 15' minimum Blanket fill if recommended by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist Design finish slope 10' minimum 25' maximum Typical benching 15' is typical Buttress or sidehill fill 4" diameter non-perforated outlet pipe and backdrain (see alternatives) 1'-2' clear Toe Heel Gravel-fabric drain material Bedrock 3' minimum key depth W = H/2 or a minimum of 15' Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS FILL DESIGN Engineering Solutions FIGURE H STABILIZATION FILL FOR UNSTABLE MATERIAL EXPOSED IN PORTION OF CUT SLOPE Remove unstable material 15' minimum Proposed finished grade Unweathered bedrock or approved material H2 Remove: unstable material Compacted stabilization fill H1 1' minimum tilted back If recommended by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist, the remaining cut W2 portion of the slope may require removal and replacement with compacted fill. W1 Note: (1) Subdrains are required only if specified by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. (2) “W” shall be the equipment width (15') for slope heights less than 25 feet. For slopes greater than 25 feet “W” shall be determined by the project soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist. “W” shall never be less than H/2. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES STABILIZATION FILL FOR UNSTABLE MATERIAL EXPOSED IN PORTION OF CUT SLOPE Engineering Solutions FIGURE I FILL OVER CUT DETAIL Cut/Fill Contact: As shown on grading plan Maintain minimum 15' fill section from backcut to face of finish slope Compacted fill Cut/Fill Contact: As shown on as built H 3' minimum Original topography 2' minimum Cut slope Bench width may vary Lowest bench width 15' minimum or H/2 Bedrock or approved material Note: The cut sectioin shall be excavated and evaluated by the soils engineer/engineering geologist prior to constructing the fill portion. Note: Figure not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES FILL OVER CUT DETAIL Engineering Solutions FIGURE J FILL OVER NATURAL DETAIL SIDEHILL FILL Compacted Fill Proposed Grade Maintain Minimum 15' Width Toe of slope as shown on grading plan Provide a 1:1 minimum projection from design toe of slope to toe of key as shown on as built 4' Minimum Natural slope to be restored with compacted fill Bench Width May Vary Backcut Varies 3' Minimum 15' Minimum key width 2' X 3' Minimum key depth 2' minimum in bedrock or approved material Note: (1) Special recommendations shall be provided by the soils engineer/engineering geologist where the natural slope approaches or exceeds the design slope ratio. (2) The need for and disposition of drains would be determined by the soils engineer/engineering geologist based upon exposed conditions. Note: Figures not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES FILL OVER NATURAL DETAIL SIDEHILL FILL Engineering Solutions FIGURE K OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL View Normal to Slope Face Proposed Finish Grade 10' minimum (5) (2) 15' minimum (1) (7) (6) 20' minimum 15' minimum 5' minimum (3) Bedrock or Approved Material View Parallel to Slope Face Proposed Finish Grade 10' minimum (5) (7) (4) 10' minimum 100' maximum 3' minimum (8) 5' minimum (3) Bedrock or Approved Material Note: (1) One Equipment width or a minimum of 15 feet. (2) Height and width may vary depending on rock size and type of equipment used. Length of windrow shall be no greater than 100 feet maximum. (3) If approved by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. (4) Orientation of windrows may vary but shall be as recommended by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Unless recommended staggering of windrows is not necessary. (5) Areas shall be cleared for utility trenches, foundations, and swimming pools. (6) Voids in windrows shall be filled by flooding granular soil into place. Granular soil shall be any soil which has a unified soil classification system (Universal Building Code (UBC) 29-1). Designation of SM, SP, SW, GP, or GW. (7) After fill between windrows is placed and compacted with the lift of fill covering windrow, windrow shall be proof rolled with a D-9 dozer or equivalent. (8) Oversized rock is defined as larger than 12", and less than 4 feet in size. Approximate Scale: 1" = 30' 0 FT 18 FT 30 FT 60 FT Note: All distances are approximate EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL Engineering Solutions FIGURE L CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL Type A Proposed Compacted Fill Natural ground Colluvium and alluvium (remove) Typical benching See alternatives (Figure N) Type B Proposed Compacted Fill Natural ground Colluvium and alluvium (remove) Typical benching See alternatives (Figure N) Note: Alternatives, locations, and extent of subdrains should be determined by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist during actual grading. Note: Figures not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL Engineering Solutions FIGURE M CANYON SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE DETAILS Alternate 1: Perforated Pipe and Filter Material Filter material: Minimum volume of 9 feet3/linear foot. 12" Minimum 6" diameter ABS or PVC pipe or approved substitute with minimum 6" Minimum 8 (¼” diameter) perforations per linear foot in bottom half of pipe. ASTM D 2751, SDR 35 or ASTM D 1527, Schedule 40. ASTM D 3034, SDR 35 or ASTM D 1785, Schedule 40. For continuous run in excess of 500 feet use 8" diameter pipe. 6" Minimum Filter Material 6" Minimum Sieve Size Percent Passing 1" 100 ¾” 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No. 4 25-40 No. 8 18-33 No. 30 5-15 No. 50 0-7 No. 200 0-3 Alternate 2: Perforated Pipe, Gravel and Filter Fabric Minimum Overlap Minimum Overlap 6" 6" 6" Minimum Cover Minimum Bedding 4" 4" Minimum Bedding Gravel material 9 feet3/linear foot. Perforated pipe: see alternate 1. Gravel: Clean ¾” rock or approved substitute. Filter Fabric: Mirafi 140 or approved substitute. Note: Figures not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES CANYON SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE DETAILS Engineering Solutions FIGURE N TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS SUBDRAIN DETAIL 2' minimum 3' minimum 2' minimum 4" minimum pipe 2" minimum 4" minimum pipe 2" minimum 2" minimum Filter Material: Minimum of 5 ft3/linear foot of pipe or 4 ft3/linear foot of pipe when placed in square cut trench. Alternative In Lieu Of Filter Material: Gravel may be encased in approved filter fabric. Filter fabric shall be mirafi 140 or equivalent. Filter fabric shall be lapped a minimum of 12" on all joints. Minimum 4" Diameter Pipe: ABS-ASTM D-2751, SDR 35 or ASTM D-1527 schedule 40 PVC-ASTM D-3034, SDR 35 or ASTM D-1785 schedule 40 with a crushing strength of 1,000 pounds minimum, and a minimum of 8 uniformly spaced perforations per foot of pipe installed with perforations at bottom of pipe. Provide cap at upstream end of pipe. Slope at 2% to outlet pipe. Outlet pipe shall be connected to the subdrain pipe with tee or elbow. Note: (1) Trench for outlet pipes shall be backfilled with onsite soil. (2) Backdrains and lateral drains shall be located at the elevation of every bench drain. First drain shall be located at the elevation just above the lower lot grade. Additional drains may be required at the discretion of the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist. Filter Material – Shall be of the following specification or an approved equivalent: Filter Material Sieve Size Percent Passing 1" 100 ¾” 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No. 4 25-40 No. 8 18-33 No. 30 5-15 No. 50 0-7 No. 200 0-3 Gravel - Shall be of the following specification or an approved equivalent: Filter Material Sieve Size Percent Passing 1½" 100 No. 4 50 No. 200 8 Sand equivalent: Minimum of 50 Note: Figures not to scale EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDELINES TYPICAL STABILIZATION BUTTRESS SUBDRAIN DETAIL Engineering Solutions FIGURE O t _. PROVIDE .DRAINAGE SWALE 121N. 0 (t) A _. NATIVE BACKFILL COMPACTED TO 90% OF ASTM Dl557 1u- w_. w C/) DRAIN OR PROVIDE WEEP HOLES AS REQUIRED "11· • •• * OR AS REQUIRED FOR SAFETY NOTES (!) 4-INCH PERFORATED PVC SCHEDULE 40 OR APPROVED ALTERNATE. PLACE PERFORATION DOWN AND SURROUND WITH A MINIMUM OF 1 CUBIC FOOT PER LINEAL FOOT (1 FT. /FT.) OF 3/4 INCH ROCK OR APPROVED ALTERNATE AND WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC. ® PLACE DRAIN AS SHOWN WHERE MOISTURE MIGRATION THROUGH THE WALL IS UNDESIRABLE. EARTHWORK & GRADING GUIDELINES TYPICAL RETAINING WALL BACKFILL NOTE: FIGURE NOT TO SCALE EEI Engineering Solutions FIGURE P Attachment F Notice of Transfer of Responsibility Water Quality Management Plan  Notice of Transfer of Responsibility    Submission of this Notice of Transfer of Responsibility constitutes notice to the City of Anaheim that  responsibility for the Water Quality Management Plan (“WQMP”) for the subject property identified  below, and implementation of that plan, is being transferred from the Previous Owner (and his/ her  agent) of the site (or a portion thereof) to the New Owner, as further described below.    I. Previous Owner/ Previous Responsibility Party Information    Company/ Individual Name Contact Person  Street Address Title  City State Zip Phone    II. Information about Site Transferred    Name of Project   Title of WQMP Applicable to Site:  Street Address of Site  Tract Number(s) for Site Lot Numbers   Date WQMP Prepared (or Revised)    III. New Owner/ New Responsible Party Information    Company/ Individual Name Contact Person  Street Address Title  City State Zip Phone    IV. Ownership Transfer Information    General Description of Site Transferred  to New Owner    General Description of Portion of Project/ Parcel  Subject to WQMP Retained by Owner (if any)  Lot/ Tract Number(s) of Site Transferred to New Owner  Remaining Lot/ Tract Number(s) to WQMP still held by Owner (if any)  Date of Ownership Transfer    Note: When the Previous Owner is transferring a Site that is a portion of a larger project/ parcel  addressed by the WQMP, as opposed to the entire project/ parcel addressed by the WQMP, the  General Description of the Site transferred and the remainder of the project/ parcel no transferred  shall be set forth as maps attached to this notice.  These maps shall show those portions of the  project/ parcel addressed by the WQMP that are transferred to the New Owner (the Transferred  Site), those portions retained by the Previous Owner, and those portions previously transferred by  the Previous Owner.  Those portions retained by the Previous Owner shall be labeled “Previous  Owner,” and those portions previously transferred by the Previous Owner shall be labeled as  “Previously Transferred.”      V. Purpose of Notice of Transfer    The purposes of this Notice of Transfer of Responsibility are: 1) to track transfer of responsibility for  implementation and amendment of the WQMP when property to which the WQMP is transferred  from the Previous Owner to the New Owner, and 2) to facilitate notification to a transferee of  property subject to a WQMP that such New Owner is now the Responsible Party of record for the  WQMP for this portions of the site that it owns.    VI. Certifications    A. Previous Owner    I certify under penalty of law that I am no longer the owner of the Transferred Site as described in  Section II above.  I have provided the New Owner with a copy of the WQMP applicable to the  Transferred Site that the New Owner is acquiring from the New Owner.    Print Name of Previous Owner  Representative    Title  Signature of Previous Owner Representative Date        B. New Owner    I certify under penalty of law that I am the owner of the Transferred Site, as described in Section II  above, that I have been provided a copy of the WQMP, and that I have informed myself and  understand the New Owner’s responsibilities related to the WQMP, its implementation, and Best  Management Practices associated with it.  I understand that by signing this notice, the New Owner is  accepting all ongoing responsibilities for implementation and amendment of the WQMP for the  Transferred Site, which the New Owner has acquired from the Previous Owner.    Print Name of New Owner  Representative    Title  Signature of New Owner Representative Date        Attachment G Educational Materials To be provided during final engineering. Please visit www.ocwatersheds.com for educational materials as needed. Attachment H Conditions for Final WQMP Conditions for the Final WQMP For the Midway Affordable Housing Project 1. ROW improvements will need to be described in detail and the ROW significant redevelopment exhibit will be required to be included as part of the Final WQMP 2. Trash Provisions full capture screen BMPs will need to be designed accordingly to meeting the 1-year, 1-hour tributary area sizing requirements. Calculations to be provided in Final WQMP. 3. Additional infiltration testing may be required based on the difference between the 90”/hr infiltration rate used in preliminary design versus the 8”/hr infiltration rate nearby and pending final infiltration BMP locations. 4. Pre-treatment design will need to meet all city requirements once area drain system is finalized. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix G: Noise Impact Analysis Report THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK NORTH AMERICA | EUROPE | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA | ASIA WWW.FIRSTCARBONSOLUTIONS.COM Noise Impact Analysis Report Midway Townhomes Project City of Anaheim, Orange County, California Prepared for: City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 714.765.5238 Contact: Andy T. Uk, Associate Planner Prepared by: FirstCarbon Solutions 250 Commerce, Suite 250 Irvine, CA 92602 714.508.4100 Contact: Kerri Tuttle, Project Director Philip Ault, PM, Noise & Air Quality Scientist Date: May 5, 2021 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim–Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Table of Contents FirstCarbon Solutions iii Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................... v Section 1: Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 - Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives......................................................................... 1 1.2 - Project Summary ............................................................................................................... 2 Section 2: Noise and Vibration Fundamentals ................................................................................ 9 2.1 - Characteristics of Noise ..................................................................................................... 9 2.2 - Characteristics of Groundborne Vibration and Noise ..................................................... 13 Section 3: Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................................... 17 3.1 - Federal Regulations ......................................................................................................... 17 3.2 - State Regulations ............................................................................................................. 18 3.3 - Local Regulations ............................................................................................................. 19 Section 4: Existing Noise Conditions ............................................................................................. 25 4.1 - Existing Stationary Noise Sources.................................................................................... 25 4.2 - Existing Mobile Noise Sources ......................................................................................... 25 Section 5: Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis ............................................................ 27 5.1 - Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................................... 27 5.2 - Noise Levels That Would Conflict with Any Land Use Plan, Policy, or Regulation ........... 27 5.3 - Substantial Noise Increase in Excess of Standards .......................................................... 29 5.4 - Groundborne Vibration/Noise Levels .............................................................................. 33 5.5 - Excessive Noise Levels from Airport Activity ................................................................... 35 Appendix A: Noise Modeling Data Appendix B: Noise Impact Analysis Memorandum by LSA Associates List of Tables Table 1: Sound Terminology ................................................................................................................. 11 Table 2: Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels, Lmax ............................................... 12 Table 3: Vibration Levels of Construction Equipment .......................................................................... 14 Table 4: Summary of EPA Recommended Noise Levels to Protect Public Welfare ............................... 17 Table 5: Federal Transit Administration Construction Vibration Impact Criteria.................................. 18 Table 6: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Exposure (dBA CNEL or Ldn) ........................... 20 Table 7: State of California Interior and Exterior Noise Standards ....................................................... 22 List of Exhibits Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map ........................................................................................................... 3 Exhibit 2: Local Vicinity Map, Aerial Base ............................................................................................... 5 Exhibit 3: Site Plan .................................................................................................................................. 7 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Acronyms and Abbreviations FirstCarbon Solutions v Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ADT Average Daily Traffic AELUP Airport Environs Land Use Plan APN Assessor’s Parcel Number Caltrans California Department of Transportation CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level dB decibel dBA A-weighted decibel EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FCS FirstCarbon Solutions FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development in/sec inch per second Ldn Day-Night Average Sound Level Leq equivalent noise/sound level Lmax maximum noise/sound level MM Mitigation Measure OSB oriented strand board PPV peak particle velocity rms root mean square STC Standard Transmission Class TTM Tentative Tract Map VdB velocity in decibels THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Introduction FirstCarbon Solutions 1 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 - Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives This Noise Impact Analysis has been prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) to determine the off- site and on-site noise impacts associated with the construction and implementation of the proposed Midway Townhomes Project (proposed project) in the City of Anaheim, California. The following is provided in this report: • A description of the study area, project site, and proposed project. • Information regarding the fundamentals of noise and vibration. • A description of the local noise guidelines and standards. • A description of the existing noise environment. • An analysis of the potential short-term, construction-related noise and vibration impacts from the proposed project. • An analysis of long-term, operations-related noise and vibration impacts from the proposed project. • A comparative analysis to the findings of the Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346. Program EIR No. 330 concluded that buildout of the General Plan would have potentially significant and unavoidable traffic noise impacts, even with implementation of mitigation and applicable General Plan goals and policies. However, the analysis determined that buildout of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to substantial temporary or permanent increases in ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors and in groundborne vibration impacts. Also, with implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) 5.10-2, impacts from airport and airstrip activity would be reduced to less than significant. Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded that, similar to Program EIR No. 330, due to the scale of development activity associated with the Housing Opportunity Sites, many roadways within the City would still be expected to generate significant and unavoidable traffic noise impacts. However, also similar to Program EIR No. 330, the analysis determined that the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to substantial temporary or permanent increases in ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors and in groundborne vibration impacts. Finally, with implementation of MM 5.10-2 of Program EIR No. 330, impacts from airport and airstrip activity would be reduced to less than significant. No new significant impacts and no new mitigation were identified. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Introduction Noise Impact Analysis 2 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx 1.2 - Project Summary 1.2.1 - Site Location The proposed project is located at 110 West Midway Drive, in the City of Anaheim, in Orange County, California (Exhibit 1). The 2.26-acre project site is located on Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 082- 185-01, 082-185-47, 082-185-52, 082-185-53, and 082-185-59. The project site is located in the south-central portion of the City of Anaheim. It is located at the southwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and West Midway Drive, and east of a proposed townhome development and Interstate 5 (I-5) (Exhibit 2. Surrounding land uses include: North: West Midway Drive and Paul Revere Elementary School East: South Anaheim Boulevard and a parking lot for the Anaheim Marketplace South: A liquor store and Golden Skies Mobile Home Park West: Zeyn Street and a proposed townhome development 1.2.2 - Project Description The proposed project would include the demolition of all existing structures on the project site and the development of 86 housing units in a 4-story building (Exhibit 3). The proposed project would include 29 one-bedroom units, 35 two-bedroom units, and 22 three-bedroom units. The proposed project would also provide amenities including a pool, a playground, a dog park, a public flex space used for community programs, and a leasing office. The proposed project would include 129 parking spaces. The proposed project would provide 1,700 square feet of public flex space on the ground floor, providing for a variety of uses for the community. The ground floor would also contain a 3,300 square foot community center, which would include a clubroom for youth programs, as well as a leasing office. The proposed project would include an outdoor recreational courtyard with a tot lot, community gardens, a swimming pool, an outdoor fireplace lounge area, restrooms, and a dog park. In total, the proposed project would include 22,220 square feet of common open spaces and 6,172 square feet of private open space. Los Angeles OrangeCounty SanBernardinoCounty Orange County Los Angeles County 91 83 91 55 57 241 261 241 405 5 Orange C ounty Riverside County 60 110 710 5 605 10 5 405 22 133 1 1 210 P a c i f i c O c e a n Prado FloodControl Basin SantiagoReservoir ClevelandNationalForest San Dimas CovinaAlhambraEl Monte Pomona OntarioEast LosAngeles Walnut ChinoCommerce Whittier Norwalk Yorba LindaFullerton Anaheim OrangeLong Beach Garden Grove Seal Beach Santa Ana FountainValleyHuntingtonBeach Costa Mesa Irvine Lake Forest Newport Beach Laguna Hills Laguna Niguel San JuanCapistrano Bell Chino Hills UplandClaremont Montclair Laguna Woods Exhibit 1Regional Location Map Text Project Site Source: Census 2000 Data, The California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL). CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTNOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS 00550086 • 05/2021 | 1_regional.mxd Project Site Miles 0 5 102.5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 00550086 • 05/2021 | 2_local_aerial.mxd Exhibit 2Local Vicinity MapAerial Base Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery. CITY OF ANAHEIMMIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECTNOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS Cerritos Ave West Midway Dr Guinida Ln A n a h e i m B l v d Ball Rd Winston Rd O l i v e S t Katella Ave L e w i s S t Anaheim Blvd Disney Way 72 V e r m o n t A v e 5 Legend Project Site Feet 0 1,000 2,000500 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 00550086 05/2021 | 3_site_plan.cdr• Source: KTGY Architecture & Planning, March 26, 2020. CITY OF ANAHEIM MIDWAY TOWNHOMES PROJECT NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS Exhibit 3 Site Plan W E S T M I D W A Y D R I V E A N A H E I M B O U L E V A R D THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Noise and Vibration Fundamentals FirstCarbon Solutions 9 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx SECTION 2: NOISE AND VIBRATION FUNDAMENTALS 2.1 - Characteristics of Noise Noise is generally defined as unwanted or objectionable sound. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm, or when it has adverse effects on health. The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance, and in the extreme, hearing impairment. Noise effects can be caused by pitch or loudness. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations or cycles per second of a wave that result in the range of tone from high to low; higher-pitched sounds are louder to humans than lower-pitched sounds. Loudness is the intensity or amplitude of sound. Sound is produced by the vibration of sound pressure waves in the air. Sound pressure levels are used to measure the intensity of sound and are described in terms of decibels. The decibel (dB) is a logarithmic unit, which expresses the ratio of the sound pressure level being measured to a standard reference level. The 0 point on the dB scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Changes of 3 dB or less are only perceptible in laboratory environments. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dB or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant. The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the audible sound spectrum, so sound pressure level measurements can be weighted to better represent frequency-based sensitivity of average healthy human hearing. One such specific “filtering” of sound is called “A-weighting.” A- weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to a broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies that are audible to the human ear. Because decibels are logarithmic units, they cannot be added or subtracted by ordinary arithmetic means. For example, if one noise source produces a noise level of 70 dB, the addition of another noise source with the same noise level would not produce 140 dB; rather, they would combine to produce a noise level of 73 dB. As noise spreads from a source, it loses energy so that the farther away the noise receiver is from the noise source, the lower the perceived noise level. Noise levels diminish or attenuate as distance from the source increases based on an inverse square rule, depending on how the noise source is physically configured. Noise levels from a single-point source, such as a single piece of construction equipment at ground level, attenuate at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance (between the single-point source of noise and the noise-sensitive receptor of concern). Heavily traveled roads with few gaps in traffic behave as continuous line sources and attenuate roughly at a rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise and Vibration Fundamentals Noise Impact Analysis 10 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx 2.1.1 - Noise Descriptors 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 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 a 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 noise adjustments are added to the noise events occurring during the more sensitive hours. 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 are specified in terms of maximum levels denoted by Lmax for short-term noise impacts. Lmax reflects peak operating conditions and addresses the annoying aspects of intermittent noise. 2.1.2 - Noise Propagation From the noise source to the receiver, noise changes both in level and frequency spectrum. The most obvious is the decrease in noise as the distance from the source increases. The manner in which noise reduces with distance depends on whether the source is a point or line source, as well as ground absorption, atmospheric conditions (wind, temperature gradients, and humidity) and refraction, and shielding by natural and manmade features. Sound from point sources, such as an air conditioning condenser, a piece of construction equipment, or an idling truck, radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The attenuation or sound drop-off rate is dependent on the conditions of the land between the noise source and receiver. To account for this ground-effect attenuation (absorption), two types of site conditions are commonly used in noise models: soft-site and hard-site conditions. Soft-site conditions account for the sound propagation loss over natural surfaces such as normal earth and ground vegetation. For point sources, a drop-off rate of 7.5 dBA per each doubling of the distance (dBA/DD) is typically observed over soft ground with landscaping, as compared with a 6 dBA/DD drop-off rate over hard ground such as asphalt, concrete, stone and very hard packed earth. For line sources, such as traffic noise on a roadway, a 4.5 dBA/DD is typically observed for soft-site conditions compared to the 3 dBA/DD drop-off rate for hard-site conditions. Table 1 briefly defines these measurement descriptors and other sound terminology used in this section. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Noise and Vibration Fundamentals FirstCarbon Solutions 11 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Table 1: Sound Terminology Term Definition Sound A vibratory disturbance created by a vibrating object which, when transmitted by pressure waves through a medium such as air, can be detected by a receiving mechanism such as the human ear or a microphone. Noise Sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or otherwise undesirable. Ambient Noise The composite of noise from all sources near and far in a given environment. Decibel (dB) A unitless measure of sound on a logarithmic scale, which represents the squared ratio of sound-pressure amplitude to a reference sound pressure. The reference pressure is 20 micropascals, representing the threshold of human hearing (0 dB). A-Weighted Decibel (dBA) An overall frequency-weighted sound level that approximates the frequency response of the human ear. Equivalent Noise Level (Leq) The average sound energy occurring over a specified time period. In effect, Leq is the steady-state sound level that in a stated period would contain the same acoustical energy as the time-varying sound that actually occurs during the same period. Maximum and Minimum Noise Levels (Lmax and Lmin) The maximum or minimum instantaneous sound level measured during a measurement period. Day-Night Level (DNL or Ldn) The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 10 dB added to the A-weighted sound levels occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (nighttime). Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 5 dB added to the A-weighted sound levels occurring between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 10 dB added to the A- weighted sound levels occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Source: Data compiled by FCS 2018 2.1.3 - Traffic Noise The level of traffic noise depends on the three primary factors: (1) the volume of the traffic, (2) the speed of the traffic, and (3) the number of trucks in the flow of traffic. Generally, the loudness of traffic noise is increased by heavier traffic volumes, higher speeds, and greater number of trucks. Vehicle noise is a combination of the noise produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires. Because of the logarithmic nature of noise levels, a doubling of the traffic volume (assuming that the speed and truck mix do not change) results in a noise level increase of 3 dBA. Based on the Federal Highway City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise and Vibration Fundamentals Noise Impact Analysis 12 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Administration (FHWA) community noise assessment criteria, this change is “barely perceptible.” For reference, a doubling of perceived noise levels would require an increase of approximately 10 dBA. The truck mix on a given roadway also has an effect on community noise levels. As the number of heavy trucks increases and becomes a larger percentage of the vehicle mix, adjacent noise levels increase. 2.1.4 - Stationary Noise A stationary noise producer is any entity in a fixed location that emits noise. Examples of stationary noise sources include machinery, engines, energy production, and other mechanical or powered equipment and activities such as loading and unloading or public assembly that may occur at commercial, industrial, manufacturing, or institutional facilities. Furthermore, while noise generated by the use of motor vehicles over public roads is preempted from local regulation, the use of these vehicles is considered a stationary noise source when operated on private property such as at a construction-site, a truck terminal, or warehousing facility. The effects of stationary noise depend on factors such as characteristics of the equipment and operations, distance and pathway between the generator and receptor, and weather. Stationary noise sources may be regulated at the point of manufacture (e.g., equipment or engines), with limitations on the hours of operation, or with provision of intervening structures, barriers or topography. Construction activities are a common source of stationary noise. Construction-period noise levels are higher than background ambient noise levels but eventually cease once construction is complete. Construction is performed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on each construction-site and, therefore, would change the noise levels 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 2 shows typical noise levels of construction equipment as measured at a distance of 50 feet from the operating equipment. Table 2: Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels, Lmax Type of Equipment Impact Device? (Yes/No) Specification Maximum Sound Levels for Analysis (dBA at 50 feet) Impact Pile Driver Yes 95 Auger Drill Rig No 85 Vibratory Pile Driver No 95 Jackhammers Yes 85 Pneumatic Tools No 85 Pumps No 77 Scrapers No 85 Cranes No 85 Portable Generators No 82 Rollers No 85 City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Noise and Vibration Fundamentals FirstCarbon Solutions 13 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Type of Equipment Impact Device? (Yes/No) Specification Maximum Sound Levels for Analysis (dBA at 50 feet) Bulldozers No 85 Tractors No 84 Front-End Loaders No 80 Backhoe No 80 Excavators No 85 Graders No 85 Air Compressors No 80 Dump Truck No 84 Concrete Mixer Truck No 85 Pickup Truck No 55 Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel Source: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006. Highway Construction Noise Handbook. August. 2.1.5 - Noise from Multiple Sources Because sound pressure levels in decibels are based on a logarithmic scale, they cannot be added or subtracted in the usual arithmetical way. Therefore, sound pressure levels in decibels are logarithmically added on an energy summation basis. In other words, adding a new noise source to an existing noise source, both producing noise at the same level, will not double the noise level. Instead, if the difference between two noise sources is 10 dBA or more, the louder noise source will dominate and the resultant noise level will be equal to the noise level of the louder source. In general, if the difference between two noise sources is 0–1 dBA, the resultant noise level will be 3 dBA higher than the louder noise source, or both sources if they are equal. If the difference between two noise sources is 2–3 dBA, the resultant noise level will be 2 dBA above the louder noise source. If the difference between two noise sources is 4–10 dBA, the resultant noise level will be 1 dBA higher than the louder noise source. 2.2 - Characteristics of Groundborne Vibration and Noise Groundborne vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motion through a solid medium, specifically the ground, that has an average motion of zero and in which the motion’s amplitude can be described in terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. The effects of groundborne vibration typically only causes a nuisance to people, but in extreme cases, excessive groundborne vibration has the potential to cause structural damage to buildings. Although groundborne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects of the shaking of a building can be notable. Groundborne noise is an effect of groundborne vibration and only exists indoors, since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room, and may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise and Vibration Fundamentals Noise Impact Analysis 14 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Several different methods are used to quantify vibration amplitude such as the maximum instantaneous peak in the vibrations velocity, which is known as the peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root mean square (rms) amplitude of the vibration velocity. Because of the typically small amplitudes of vibrations, vibration velocity is often expressed in decibels—denoted as LV—and is based on the reference quantity of 1 micro inch per second. To distinguish these vibration levels referenced in decibels from noise levels referenced in decibels, the unit is written as “VdB.” Although groundborne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects of the shaking of a building can be notable. When assessing annoyance from groundborne vibration, vibration is typically expressed as rms velocity in units of decibels of 1 micro-inch per second, with the unit written in VdB. Typically, developed areas are continuously affected by vibration velocities of 50 VdB or lower. Human perception to vibration starts at levels as low as 67 VdB. Annoyance due to vibration in residential settings starts at approximately 70 VdB. Off-site sources that may produce perceptible vibrations are usually caused by construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads, while smooth roads rarely produce perceptible groundborne noise or vibration. Construction activities, such as blasting, pile driving and operating heavy earthmoving equipment, are common sources of groundborne vibration. Construction vibration impacts on building structures are generally assessed in terms of PPV. Typical vibration source levels from construction equipment are shown in Table 3. Table 3: Vibration Levels of Construction Equipment Construction Equipment PPV at 25 Feet (inches/second) rms Velocity in Decibels (VdB) at 25 Feet Water Trucks 0.001 57 Scraper 0.002 58 Bulldozer—small 0.003 58 Jackhammer 0.035 79 Concrete Mixer 0.046 81 Concrete Pump 0.046 81 Paver 0.046 81 Pickup Truck 0.046 81 Auger Drill Rig 0.051 82 Backhoe 0.051 82 Crane (Mobile) 0.051 82 Excavator 0.051 82 Grader 0.051 82 Loader 0.051 82 Loaded Trucks 0.076 86 City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Noise and Vibration Fundamentals FirstCarbon Solutions 15 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Construction Equipment PPV at 25 Feet (inches/second) rms Velocity in Decibels (VdB) at 25 Feet Bulldozer—Large 0.089 87 Caisson drilling 0.089 87 Vibratory Roller (small) 0.101 88 Compactor 0.138 90 Clam shovel drop 0.202 94 Vibratory Roller (large) 0.210 94 Pile Driver (impact-typical) 0.644 104 Pile Driver (impact-upper range) 1.518 112 Notes: PPV = peak particle velocity VdB = velocity in decibels Rms = root mean square Source: Compilation of scientific and academic literature, generated by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The propagation of groundborne vibration is not as simple to model as airborne noise. This is because noise in the air travels through a relatively uniform medium, while groundborne vibrations travel through the earth, which may contain significant geological differences. Factors that influence groundborne vibration include: • Vibration source: Type of activity or equipment, such as impact or mobile, and depth of vibration source; • Vibration path: Soil type, rock layers, soil layering, depth to water table, and frost depth; and • Vibration receiver: Foundation type, building construction, and acoustical absorption. Among these factors that influence groundborne vibration, there are significant differences in the vibration characteristics when the source is underground compared to at the ground surface. In addition, soil conditions are known to have a strong influence on the levels of groundborne vibration. Among the most important factors are the stiffness and internal damping of the soil and the depth to bedrock. Vibration propagation is more efficient in stiff clay soils than in loose sandy soils, and shallow rock seems to concentrate the vibration energy close to the surface, and can result in groundborne vibration problems at large distance from the source. Factors such as layering of the soil and depth to the water table can have significant effects on the propagation of groundborne vibration. Soft, loose, sandy soils tend to attenuate more vibration energy than hard, rocky materials. Vibration propagation through groundwater is more efficient than through sandy soils. There are three main types of vibration propagation: surface, compression, and shear waves. Surface waves, or Rayleigh waves, travel along the ground’s surface. These waves carry most of their energy along an expanding circular wave front, similar to ripples produced by throwing a rock into a pool of water. P- waves, or compression waves, are body waves that carry their energy along an expanding spherical wave front. The particle motion in these waves is longitudinal (i.e., in a “push-pull” fashion). P-waves City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise and Vibration Fundamentals Noise Impact Analysis 16 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx are analogous to airborne sound waves. S-waves, or shear waves, are also body waves that carry energy along an expanding spherical wave front. However, unlike P-waves, the particle motion is transverse, or side-to-side and perpendicular to the direction of propagation. As vibration waves propagate from a source, the vibration energy decreases in a logarithmic nature and the vibration levels typically decrease by 6 VdB per doubling of the distance from the vibration source. As stated above, this drop-off rate can vary greatly depending on the soil type, but it has been shown to be effective enough for screening purposes, in order to identify potential vibration impacts that may need to be studied through actual field tests. The vibration level (calculated below as PPV) at a distance from a point source can generally be calculated using the vibration reference equation: PPV = PPVref * (25/D)^n (in/sec) Where: PPVref = reference measurement at 25 feet from vibration source D = distance from equipment to property line n = vibration attenuation rate through ground According to Section 7 of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, an “n” value of 1.5 is recommended to calculate vibration propagation through typical soil conditions.1 1 Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Regulatory Setting FirstCarbon Solutions 17 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx SECTION 3: REGULATORY SETTING 3.1 - Federal Regulations 3.1.1 - United States Environmental Protection Agency In 1972, Congress enacted the Noise Control Act. This act authorized the United States Environmental Protection Agency (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) categories, as shown in Table 4. The EPA cautions that these identified levels are not standards because they do not take into account the cost or feasibility of the levels. 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 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 4: Summary of EPA Recommended Noise Levels to Protect Public Welfare Effect Level Area Hearing loss Leq(24) < 70 dB All areas Outdoor activity interference and annoyance Ldn < 55 dB Outdoors in residential areas, 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. Notes: Leq = equivalent noise/sound level dB = decibel (24) signifies an Leq duration of 24 hours. Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Protective Noise Levels, EPA 550/9-79-100. November. 3.1.2 - Federal Transit Administration The FTA has established industry accepted standards for vibration impact criteria and impact assessment. These guidelines are published in its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Regulatory Setting Noise Impact Analysis Report 18 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Manual.2 The FTA guidelines include thresholds for construction vibration impacts for various structural categories as shown in Table 5. Table 5: Federal Transit Administration Construction Vibration Impact Criteria Building Category PPV (in/sec) Approximate VdB I. Reinforced—Concrete, Steel or Timber (no plaster) 0.5 102 II. Engineered Concrete and Masonry (no plaster) 0.3 98 III. Non-Engineered Timber and Masonry Buildings 0.2 94 IV. Buildings Extremely Susceptible to Vibration Damage 0.12 90 Notes: VdB = vibration measured as rms velocity in decibels of 1 micro-inch per second PPV = peak particle velocity Source: Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September. 3.2 - State Regulations The State of California has established regulations that help prevent adverse impacts to occupants of buildings located near noise sources. Referred to as the “State Noise Insulation Standard,” it requires buildings to meet performance standards through design and/or building materials that would offset any noise source in the vicinity of the receptor. State regulations include requirements for the construction of new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single- family dwellings that are intended to limit the extent of noise transmitted into habitable spaces. These requirements are found in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24 (known as the Building Standards Administrative Code), Part 2 (known as the California Building Code), Appendix Chapters 12 and 12A. For limiting noise transmitted between adjacent dwelling units, the noise insulation standards specify the extent to which walls, doors, and floor-ceiling assemblies must block or absorb sound. For limiting noise from exterior noise sources, the noise insulation standards set an interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room with all doors and windows closed. In addition, the standards require preparation of an acoustical analysis demonstrating the manner in which dwelling units have been designed to meet this interior standard, where such units are proposed in an area with exterior noise levels greater than 60 dBA CNEL. The State has also established land use compatibility guidelines for determining acceptable noise levels for specified land uses. The City of Anaheim has adopted and modified those guidelines as described as follows. 2 Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Regulatory Setting FirstCarbon Solutions 19 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx 3.3 - Local Regulations The project site is located within the City of Anaheim and this analysis was performed using the City’s noise regulations. The City of Anaheim addresses noise in the Noise Element of its General Plan (2004) and in the City of Anaheim Municipal Code (2017). General Plan The City has adopted the State of California’s exterior noise and land use compatibility standards for land use development in the Noise Element of its General Plan, as shown in Table 6. The land use category that is applicable to this project is Residential Multiple Family. Under this designation, noise environments with ambient noise levels up to 65 dBA CNEL are considered “Normally Acceptable” for Residential Multiple Family land uses. Noise environments with ambient noise levels from 60 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL are considered “Conditionally Acceptable” for new Residential Multiple Family land uses developments; under this circumstance, development may be permitted only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements and needed noise insulation features are included in the proposed project design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and a fresh air supply system or air conditioning, will normally suffice as a noise insulation feature for these conditionally acceptable environments. In addition to the land use compatibility standards established by the City, the City of Anaheim has adopted the State of California’s interior and exterior noise standards, as shown in Table 6. According to this standard, for a hotel, interior noise levels up to 45 dBA CNEL are considered acceptable. The City of Anaheim General Plan contains goals and policies that address noise. The following goals and policies are presented in the City’s General Plan and are applicable to the proposed project: Goal 1.1 Protect sensitive land uses from excessive noise through diligent planning and regulation. Policies 3) Consider the compatibility of proposed land uses with the noise environment when preparing, revising or reviewing development proposals. 4) Require mitigation where sensitive uses are to be placed along transportation routes to ensure that noise levels are minimized through appropriate means of mitigation thereby maintaining quality of life standards. 5) Encourage proper site planning and architecture to reduce noise impacts. 6) Discourage the siting of sensitive uses in areas in excess of 65 dBA CNEL without appropriate mitigation. 7) Require that site-specific noise studies be conducted by a qualified acoustic consultant utilizing acceptable methodologies while reviewing the development of sensitive land uses or development that has the potential to impact sensitive land uses. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Regulatory Setting Noise Impact Analysis Report 20 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Goal 2.1 Encourage the reduction of noise from transportation-related noise sources such as motor vehicles, aircraft operations, and railroad movements. Policies 3) Require that development generating increased traffic and subsequent increases in the ambient noise level adjacent to noise-sensitive land uses provide appropriate mitigation measures. 5) Require sound walls, berms and landscaping along existing and future freeways and railroad rights-of-way to beautify the landscape and reduce noise, where appropriate. Goal 3.1 Protect residents from the effects of “spill over” or nuisance noise emanating from the City’s activity centers. Policies 1) Discourage new projects located in commercial or entertainment areas from exceeding stationary-source noise standards at the property line of proximate residential or commercial uses, as appropriate. 3) Enforce standards to regulate noise from construction activities. Particular emphasis shall be placed on the restriction of the hours in which work other than emergency work may occur. Discourage construction on weekends or holidays except in the case of construction proximate to schools where these operations could disturb the classroom environment. 4) Require that construction equipment operate with mufflers and intake silencers no less effective than originally equipped. 5) Encourage the use of portable noise barriers for heavy equipment operations performed within 100 feet of existing residences or make applicant provide evidence as to why the use of such barriers is infeasible. Table 6: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Exposure (dBA CNEL or Ldn) Land Use Category 55 60 65 70 75 80 Residential—Low-Density Single-Family, Duplex, and Mobile Homes Residential—Multi-Family City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Regulatory Setting FirstCarbon Solutions 21 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Land Use Category 55 60 65 70 75 80 Transient Lodging—Hotels, Motels Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries Office Buildings, Businesses, Commercial and Professional Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture Source: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2003. State of California General Plan Guidelines, Appendix C, Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of the Noise Element of the General Plan. October 2003. Key: Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice. Outdoor environment will seem noisy. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Regulatory Setting Noise Impact Analysis Report 22 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Land Use Category 55 60 65 70 75 80 Normally Unacceptable: New construction and development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made with needed noise insulation features included in the design. Outdoor areas must be shielded. Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. Construction costs to make the indoor environment acceptable would be prohibitive and the outdoor environment would not be usable. Table 7: State of California Interior and Exterior Noise Standards Land Use CNEL (dBA) Categories Uses Interior1 Exterior2 Residential Single- and multiple-family, duplex 453 65 Mobile homes — 654 Commercial Hotel, motel, transient housing 45 — Commercial retail, bank, restaurant 55 — Office building, research and development, professional offices 50 — Amphitheater, concert hall, auditorium, movie theater 45 — Gymnasium (Multipurpose) 50 — Sports Club 55 — Manufacturing, warehousing, wholesale, utilities 65 — Movie Theaters 45 — Institutional/Public Hospital, school classrooms/playgrounds 45 65 Church, library 45 — Open Space Parks — 65 Notes: CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level dBA = A-weighted decibel 1 Indoor environment excluding: bathrooms, kitchens, toilets, closets, and corridors 2 Outdoor environment limited to: • Private yard of single-family dwellings • Multiple-family private patios or balconies accessed from within the dwelling (Balconies 6 feet deep or less are exempt) • Mobile home parks • Park picnic areas • School playgrounds • Hospital patios 3 Noise level requirement with closed windows, mechanical ventilation or other means of natural ventilation shall be provided as per Chapter 12, Section 1205 of the Uniform Building Code. 4 Exterior noise levels should be such that interior noise levels will not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. Source: City of Anaheim 2004. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Regulatory Setting FirstCarbon Solutions 23 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Municipal Code The City of Anaheim Municipal Code addresses noise in Title 18, Zoning, Chapter 18.40, General Development Standards, Section 18.40.090, Sound Attenuation for Residential Developments, and Sound Pressure Levels in Title 5, Public Health and Safety, Chapter 6.70, Sound Pressure Levels, Section 6.70.010, Established. These ordinances are summarized below. According to the noise ordinances, sound produced in excess of the sound pressure levels permitted by the Municipal Code are objectionable and constitute an infringement upon the right and quiet enjoyment of property in the City. No person within the City shall create any sound radiated for extended periods from any premises that produces a sound pressure level at any point on the property line in excess of 60 dBA in accordance with the noise measurement requirements listed in this noise ordinance. The City has provided certain exemptions for various noise sources from its noise performance standards. For example, sound created by construction or building repair of any premises within the City shall be exempt from the applications of this chapter during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works or Building Official. For construction of residential development projects of single-family attached or multiple-family dwellings, exterior noise within common recreation areas shall be attenuated to a maximum of 65 dB CNEL, and interior noise levels shall be attenuated to a maximum of 45 dB CNEL, or to a level designated by the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the City. When measures to attenuate noise to the prescribed levels would compromise or conflict with the aesthetic value of the project, the Planning Commission may grant a deviation of 5 dB CNEL above prescribed exterior noise levels; such granted deviations do not pertain to interior noise levels. Program EIR No. 330 The following mitigation measures would apply to the proposed project: MM 5.10-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits for any project generating over 100 peak- hour trips, the project property owner/developers shall submit a final acoustical report prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The report shall show that the development will be sound-attenuated against present and projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter and railroad, to meet City interior and exterior noise standards. MM 5.10-2 Prior to issuance of a building permit, new development project property owner/developers shall use the most current available Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluating heliport and airport operations as well as land use compatibility and land use intensity in the proximity of Los Alamitos Joint Training Base and Fullerton Municipal Airport. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Regulatory Setting Noise Impact Analysis Report 24 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx Supplemental EIR No. 346 Supplemental EIR No. 346 concluded that, similar to Program EIR No. 330, due to the scale of development activity associated with the Housing Opportunity Sites, many roadways within the City would still be expected to generate significant and unavoidable noise impacts. However, the analysis concluded that all other impacts would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of the General Plan Noise Element policies, Municipal Code Standards, and MM 5.10-1 and MM 5.10-2 of Program EIR NO. 330. No new significant impacts and no new mitigation were identified. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Existing Noise Conditions FirstCarbon Solutions 25 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx SECTION 4: EXISTING NOISE CONDITIONS The following section describes the existing ambient noise environment of the project vicinity. 4.1 - Existing Stationary Noise Sources The proposed project site is located in the City of Anaheim, California. The project site is bounded by a proposed townhome development to the west, a mobile home park to the south, South Anaheim Boulevard to the east, and West Midway Drive to the north. Other stationary noise sources in the project vicinity include an elementary school and a maintenance facility equipment parking lot across Midway Drive. These surrounding land uses generate noise from typical parking lot activities and mechanical ventilation systems. 4.2 - Existing Mobile Noise Sources The primary noise source in the project area is traffic noise on South Anaheim Boulevard and West Midway Drive, while aircraft noise and train noise contribute minimally. A Noise Impact Analysis Memorandum was prepared for the proposed project by LSA Associates, dated April 9, 2021, that analyzed mobile source noise impacts to the proposed project to satisfy the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements for a project- specific noise impact analysis. The report is provided in Appendix B of this report. The analysis showed that combined exterior noise levels at all outdoor use areas (including the proposed pool, outdoor lounge, and courtyard patio areas) are expected to be below 65 CNEL. However, combined exterior noise levels at proposed building façades facing adjacent roadways are expected to range in excess of 65 dBA CNEL, and up to approximately 73 dBA CNEL.3 3 Noise levels in the memorandum were calculated to meet HUD noise requirements and were therefore expressed in terms of Ldn. As noted in the characteristics of noise discussion, CNEL and Ldn are within 1 dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable. In order to provide a conservative analysis, 1 dB was added to the calculated Ldn noise levels to estimate the CNEL noise level. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis FirstCarbon Solutions 27 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx SECTION 5: THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT ANALYSIS 5.1 - Thresholds of Significance According to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G, to determine whether impacts related to noise and vibration are significant environmental effects, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated. It should be noted that the significance criteria question (a), below, is from the Land Use and Planning section of the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist questions. However, this question addresses impacts related to conflicts with land use plans, which would include project-related conflicts to the noise land use compatibility standards of the Noise Element of the General Plan. Therefore, these impacts are addressed here. Would the proposed plan: a) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? b) Generate 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? c) Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? d) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 5.2 - Noise Levels That Would Conflict with Any Land Use Plan, Policy, or Regulation A significant impact would occur for the proposed Residential-Multiple Family land use development if the project would be exposed to transportation noise levels in excess of the City’s “normally acceptable” land use compatibility standard of 65 dBA CNEL or if the project were exposed to interior noise levels that would exceed the State of California’s interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. According to the Noise Element of the General Plan, environments with ambient noise levels up to 65 dBA CNEL are considered “Normally Acceptable” for Residential-Multiple Family land uses and environments with ambient noise levels from 60 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL are considered “Conditionally Acceptable.” In the event that conditions for the proposed type of land use have been designated “Conditionally Acceptable,” 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. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis Noise Impact Analysis Report 28 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice. Environments with ambient noise levels from 70 dBA to 75 dBA CNEL are considered “Normally Unacceptable,” while environments with ambient noise levels above 75 dBA CNEL are considered “Clearly Unacceptable,” for Residential-Multiple Family land uses. The dominant noise source on the project site is noise from traffic on local roadways adjacent to the project site. Thus, this land use compatibility analysis is conducted in comparison to the projected traffic noise levels that the proposed project would be exposed to. A Noise Impact Analysis memorandum was prepared for the proposed project by LSA Associates, dated April 9, 2021, that analyzed mobile source noise impacts to the proposed project to satisfy the HUD requirements for a project-specific noise impact analysis. The report is provided in Appendix B of this report. The analysis showed that combined mobile source exterior noise levels at all outdoor use areas are expected to be below 65 dBA CNEL due to shield from proposed structures. These noise levels are in compliance with the City of Anaheim noise regulations, and no mitigation is necessary. However, combined mobile source exterior noise levels at proposed building façades are expected to range in excess of 65 dBA CNEL. The façades within 100-feet of the nearest travel lane of South Anaheim Boulevard could experience traffic noise levels of approximately 73 dBA CNEL.4 Based on these mobile source exterior noise level conditions, the calculated interior noise levels, would be reduced to below 45 CNEL in all interior-courtyard facing units, provided windows can remain closed. Therefore, mechanical ventilation will be required for all units on-site in order to permit windows to remain closed for prolonged periods and to maintain acceptable interior noise levels. The proposed mechanical ventilation system must meet the criteria of the California Mechanical Code, including the capability to provide appropriate ventilation rates. The ventilation system shall not compromise the sound insulation capability of the exterior wall or be dependent on ventilation through windows. However, even with windows closed, habitable spaces of units with façades that have a direct line- of-site and are within 100-feet of the nearest travel lane of South Anaheim Boulevard would still experience noise levels in excess of the normally acceptable interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Therefore, the exterior wall assembly for these units shall be required to meet an overall exterior wall assembly Standard Transmission Class (STC) rating of STC-31. This exterior wall assembly may include, but is not limited to, fiber cement board siding or three-coat cement plaster, one layer of 0.5-inch-thick plywood or oriented strand board (OSB), 2-inch x 4-inch wood stud wall channels spaced at 16 inches and a minimum of R-19 fiberglass insulation, and one layer of 5/8-inch- thick Type X gypsum board. All windows for residential dwelling units in noise-sensitive rooms facing South Anaheim Boulevard shall have a minimum STC rating of 31. All other windows for residential dwelling units in noise-sensitive rooms shall have a minimum STC rating of 28. With implementation 4 Noise levels in the memorandum were calculated to meet HUD noise requirements and were therefore expressed in terms of Ldn. As noted in the characteristics of noise discussion, CNEL and Ldn are within 1 dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable. In order to provide a conservative analysis, 1 dB was added to the calculated Ldn noise levels to estimate the CNEL noise level. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis FirstCarbon Solutions 29 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx of the recommended measures as outlined above, interior noise levels would be below the normally acceptable interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Therefore, with implementation of MM NOI-1, traffic noise impacts to the proposed project would be reduced to ensure compliance with the City’s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. This analysis satisfies the requirements of Program EIR No. 330 MM 5.10-1 which requires the preparation of a site-specific acoustical analysis that shows that the development will be sound- attenuated against present and projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter and railroad, to meet City interior and exterior noise standards. Mitigation Measures MM NOI-1 To reduce potential traffic noise impacts that conflict with land use compatibility, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented for the project: • Mechanical ventilation systems such as air conditioning are required for all residential dwelling units so that windows can remain closed for a prolonged period of time. • The exterior wall assembly of all units facing and within 100-feet of the nearest travel lane of South Anaheim Boulevard shall meet or exceed an assumed exterior wall assembly that includes fiber cement board siding or three-coat cement plaster, one layer of 0.5-inch-thick plywood or oriented strand board (OSB), 2-inch x 4-inch wood stud wall channels spaced at 16 inches and a minimum of R-19 fiberglass insulation, and one layer of 5/8-inch-thick Type X gypsum board. All windows for residential dwelling units in noise-sensitive rooms directly facing South Anaheim Boulevard shall have a minimum Standard Transmission Class (STC) rating of 31. All other windows for residential dwelling units in noise- sensitive rooms shall have a minimum STC rating of 28. 5.3 - Substantial Noise Increase in Excess of Standards 5.3.1 - Construction Noise Impacts For purposes of this analysis, a significant impact would occur if construction activities would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels outside of the permissible hours for construction (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays or Saturdays, except for on national holidays) that would result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. Construction-related Traffic Noise Noise impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed project would be a function of the noise generated by construction equipment, equipment location, sensitivity of nearby land uses, and the timing and duration of the construction activities. One type of short-term noise impact that could occur during project construction would result from the increase in traffic flow on local streets, associated with the transport of workers, equipment, and materials to and from the project City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis Noise Impact Analysis Report 30 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx site. The transport of workers and construction equipment and materials to the project site would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Because workers and construction equipment would use existing routes, noise from passing trucks would be similar to existing vehicle-generated noise on these local roadways. Typically, a doubling of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) hourly volumes on a roadway segment is required in order to result in an increase of 3 dBA in traffic noise levels; which, as discussed in the characteristics of nose discussion above, is the lowest change that can be perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. Project-related construction trips would not be expected to double the hourly or daily traffic volumes along any roadway segment in the project vicinity. For this reason, short-term intermittent noise from construction trips would not be expected to result in a perceptible increase in hourly- or daily- average traffic noise levels in the project vicinity. Therefore, short-term construction-related noise impacts associated with the transportation of workers and equipment to the project site would be less than significant. Construction Equipment Operational Noise The second type of short-term noise impact is related to noise generated during construction on the project site. Construction is completed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on the site and, therefore, the noise levels surrounding the site 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 1 lists typical construction equipment noise levels, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor. 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. Impact equipment such as pile drivers are not expected to be used during construction of this project. The site preparation phase, which includes excavation and grading of the site, tends to generate the highest noise levels because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery and compacting equipment, such as bulldozers, draglines, backhoes, front loaders, roller 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. Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of scrapers, bulldozers, water trucks, haul trucks, and pickup trucks. Based on the information provided in Table 2, the maximum noise level generated by each scraper is assumed to be 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from this equipment. Each bulldozer would also generate 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by graders is approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. A characteristic of sound is that each doubling of sound sources with equal strength increases a sound level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates at some distance from the other equipment, a reasonable worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the acoustic center of a construction area. This would result in a reasonable worst-case hourly average of 86 dBA Leq. The acoustic center reference is used, because construction equipment must operate at City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis FirstCarbon Solutions 31 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx some distance from one another on a project site, and the combined noise level as measured at a point equidistant from the sources would (acoustic center) be the worst-case maximum noise level. The effect on sensitive receptors is evaluated below. The nearest off-site receptors are mobile homes located to the north of the project site, approximately 75 feet from the nearest acoustic center of construction activity where heavy construction equipment would operate during construction of the proposed project. At this distance, construction noise levels would range up to approximately 87 dBA Lmax, with a relative worst-case hourly average of 83 dBA Leq, if multiple pieces of heavy construction equipment operate simultaneously during construction of the proposed private street. Although there could be a relatively high single event noise exposure potential causing an intermittent noise nuisance, the effect of construction activities on longer-term (hourly or daily) ambient noise levels would be small but could result in a temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity that could result in annoyance or sleep disturbance of nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, limiting construction activities to the daytime hours would reduce the effects of noise levels produced by these activities on longer-term (hourly or daily) ambient noise levels, and would reduce potential impacts that could result in annoyance or sleep disturbances at nearby sensitive receptors. The City of Anaheim Municipal Code outlines the City’s standards for noise- producing construction activities. According to this ordinance, construction and building repair activities are exempt from the applications of the Municipal Code between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Therefore, compliance with the City’s Municipal Code required restrictions on permissible hours for construction activities would ensure that construction noise impacts would not result in substantial temporary increases at the off-site sensitive receptors above standards established in the General Plan or Municipal Code, and construction noise impacts on sensitive receptors in the project vicinity would be reduced to less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. This finding is consistent with the findings of Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346. The analysis of these EIRs determined that potential impacts related to substantial temporary or permanent increases in ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors would be less than significant. No additional analysis is required. 5.3.2 - Mobile Source Operational Noise Impacts A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels compared with those that would exist without the proposed project. As noted in the characteristics of noise discussion, audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dBA or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. A change of 5 dBA is considered the minimum readily perceptible change to the human ear in outdoor environments. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, an increase of 5 dBA or greater would be considered a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. A Traffic Statement Memorandum was prepared for the proposed project by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., dated April 15, 2021. According to this report, the proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 34 trips in the AM peak-hour, 42 trips in the PM peak-hour, and 517 daily trips. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis Noise Impact Analysis Report 32 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx According to existing traffic conditions there are approximately 1,900 average daily trips on Midway Drive, between the project entrance and South Anaheim Boulevard, and approximately 25,020 average daily trips on South Anaheim Boulevard south of Midway Drive.5 Therefore, the estimated project trips would not result in a doubling of traffic volumes along any roadway segment in the project vicinity on an hourly or on a 24-hour average basis. A characteristic of noise is that a doubling of sound sources with equal strength is required to result in a perceptible increase (defined to be a 3 dBA or greater) in noise levels. As a result, the proposed project would not result in even a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels along any roadway segment in the project vicinity, and any increase would be well below the 5 dBA increase that would be considered substantial. Therefore, impacts from project-related traffic noise levels would not result in a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels in excess of applicable standards, and the impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. This finding is consistent with the findings of Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346. The analysis of these EIRs determined that potential impacts related to substantial temporary or permanent increases in ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors would be less than significant. No additional analysis is required. 5.3.3 - Stationary Source Operational Noise Impacts The proposed project would include new stationary noise sources, such as typical parking lot activities and mechanical ventilation systems. A significant impact would occur if the proposed parking lot or mechanical ventilation systems exceed the City’s noise performance standard. According to the City’s noise ordinances, no person within the City shall create any sound radiated for extended periods from any premises that produces a sound pressure level at any point on the property line in excess of 60 dBA Leq in accordance with the noise measurement requirements listed in the noise ordinance. Mobile home residences on D Street, immediately south of the proposed project, would be located approximately 40-feet from the acoustic center of the nearest proposed parking area on the project site. Representative parking activities, such as vehicles cruising at slow speeds, door slamming, or cars starting, would generate approximately 60 dBA to 70 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Typical parking events take an average of less than one minute. Assuming a reasonable worst-case of a parking event occurring at each parking stall within 75-feet of a receptor in a single hour, the combined parking lot activity would generate reasonable worst-case hourly average noise levels of up to 57 dBA Leq as measured at the nearest receptor. This calculated noise levels assumes a conservative 6 dBA shielding reduction due to the proposed 6-foot-high masonry wall that would be constructed along the proposed project’s southern property line. Therefore, reasonable worst-case parking lot activities would not exceed the City’s noise performance standard of 60 dBA Leq. The impact of project-related parking lot activities on sensitive off-site receptors would be less than significant. 5 Iteris, Inc., 2021. Project at 110-229 W Midway Drive Traffic Impact Study. January 12. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis FirstCarbon Solutions 33 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx The parking lot noise calculation spreadsheet with the detailed modeling assumptions is included in Appendix A of this report. Proposed mechanical ventilation systems would also be a new stationary noise source on the project site. Noise levels from typical mechanical ventilation and pool pump equipment are anticipated to range up to approximately 60 dBA Leq at a distance of 25 feet. The nearest off-site receptors are mobile home residences on D street, immediately south of the project site. Proposed mechanical ventilation systems could be located approximately 90 feet from the nearest receptor, and the pool pump equipment would be inside a walled-in structure and located approximately 160 feet from this nearest receptor. At these distances, noise generated by mechanical ventilation and pool pump equipment operating simultaneously at full power would attenuate to approximately 44 dBA Leq at the nearest off-site residential receptors. This calculated noise levels assumes a conservative 6 dBA shielding reduction for pool equipment operational noise due to the proposed enclosure around the pool equipment and the proposed 6-foot-high masonry wall that would be constructed along the proposed project’s southern property line. No shielding reduction was assumed for the mechanical ventilation equipment which could be located on the exterior walls or roof of the proposed residential units, permitting a more direct line of sight to the nearest receptor. Therefore, the combined mechanical ventilation and pool pump equipment operational noise levels would not exceed the City’s noise performance standard of 60 dBA Leq. The impact of mechanical ventilation equipment operational noise levels on sensitive off-site receptors would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. The mechanical equipment noise calculation spreadsheet with the detailed modeling assumptions is included in Appendix A of this report. These findings are consistent with the findings of Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346. The analysis of these EIRs determined that potential impacts related to substantial temporary or permanent increases in ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors would be less than significant. No additional analysis is required. 5.4 - Groundborne Vibration/Noise Levels This section analyzes both construction and operational groundborne vibration and noise impacts. Groundborne vibrations consist of rapidly fluctuating motions within the ground that have an average motion of zero. Vibrating objects in contact with the ground radiate vibration waves through various soil and rock strata to the foundations of nearby buildings. Groundborne noise is generated when vibrating building components radiate sound, or noise generated by groundborne vibration. In general, if groundborne vibration levels do not exceed levels considered to be perceptible, then groundborne noise levels would not be perceptible in most interior environments. Therefore, this analysis focuses on determining exceedances of groundborne vibration levels. The City of Anaheim has not adopted a provision addressing the impacts of groundborne vibration levels. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the FTA’s vibration impact criteria are utilized. The FTA has established industry accepted standards for vibration impact criteria and impact assessment. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis Noise Impact Analysis Report 34 FirstCarbon Solutions Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx These guidelines are published in its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.6 These guidelines are summarized in Table 5. 5.4.1 - Short-term Construction Vibration Impacts A significant impact would occur if existing structures at the project site or in the project vicinity would be exposed to groundborne vibration levels in excess of levels established by the FTA’s Construction Vibration Damage Criteria for the listed type of structure. Of the variety of equipment used during construction, the small vibratory rollers that are anticipated to be used in the site preparation phase of construction would produce the greatest groundborne vibration levels. As shown in Table 3, small vibratory rollers produce groundborne vibration levels ranging up to 0.101 inch per second (in/sec) PPV at 25 feet from the operating equipment. The nearest off-site receptors are the residential homes located north-west of the project site, approximately 30 feet from the nearest construction footprint where vibratory rollers would potentially operate. At this distance, groundborne vibration levels could range up to 0.08 PPV from operation of a vibratory roller. This is below the FTA’s construction vibration damage criteria of 0.2 PPV for this type of structure—buildings of non-engineered timber and masonry construction. Therefore, construction-related groundborne vibration impacts would be considered less than significant as measured at the nearest residential land use, and no mitigation would be required. This less than significant impact finding is consistent with the groundborne vibration impact findings of Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346. These EIRs concluded that groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant. No additional analysis is required. 5.4.2 - Operational Vibration Impacts Implementation of the proposed project would not include any permanent sources that would expose persons in the project vicinity to groundborne vibration levels that could be perceptible without instruments at any existing sensitive land use in the project vicinity. Therefore, project operational activities would not generate excessive groundborne vibration levels as measured at off- site receptors, and the impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. In addition, there are no existing significant permanent sources of groundborne vibration in the project vicinity to which the proposed project would be exposed. This less than significant impact finding is consistent with the groundborne vibration impact findings of Program EIR No. 330 and Supplemental EIR No. 346. These EIRs concluded that groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant. No additional analysis is required. 6 Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September. City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report Thresholds of Significance and Impact Analysis FirstCarbon Solutions 35 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/0055/00550086/Noise Report/00550086 Midway Townhomes Project Noise Report.docx 5.5 - Excessive Noise Levels from Airport Activity A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels 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 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. The nearest public airport to the project site is the Fullerton Municipal Airport, located approximately 5.71 miles northwest of the project site. Because of the distance from and orientation of the airport runways, the project site is located well outside of the 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. The project site is also not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. While aircraft noise is occasionally audible on the project site from aircraft flyovers, aircraft noise associated with nearby airport activity would not expose people residing or working near the project site to excessive noise levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose persons residing or working in the project vicinity to noise levels from airport activity that would be in excess of normally acceptable standards for multi-family residential land use development. Impacts associated with public airport noise would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. This analysis satisfies the requirements of Program EIR No. 330 MM 5.10-2 which requires the preparation of a site-specific acoustical analysis that shows that uses the most current available Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluating heliport and airport operations as well as land use compatibility and land use intensity in the proximity of Los Alamitos Joint Training Base and Fullerton Municipal Airport. No further analysis is required. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix A: Noise Modeling Data THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Parking Lot activity Receptor:Closest Residence - south of Project No. Equipment Description Lmax Lmax Leq 1 parking lot activity 70 5 1 40 1 6 65.9 53.9 245301.4093 2 parking lot activity 70 6 1 50 1 6 64.0 51.8 150713.1859 3 parking lot activity 70 6 1 70 1 6 61.1 47.4 54924.630434 5 6 7 89 10 Notes:Lmax[4]66 Leq 57 [1] Percentage of time activity occurs each hour [2] Soft ground terrain between project site and receptor.[3] Minimum shielding due to proposed 6-foot high block wall along southern property line. [4] Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. Shielding (dBA)[3] Calculated (dBA) Energy Reference (dBA) 50 ft Quantity Usage factor[1] Distance to Receptor Ground Effect[2] Mechanical Equipment Noise Calculation Receptor:Closest Residence - south of Project Noise Level Calculation Prior to Implementation of Noise Attenuation Requirements No. Equipment Description Lmax Lmax Leq 1 Commercial grade mechanical ventilation equipment 60 1 100 90 1 0 48.9 43.3 21433.47051 2 Pool Equipment 60 1 100 160 1 6 37.9 29.8 958.2086302 34 5 6 7 89 10 Notes:Lmax[4]49 Leq 44 [1] Percentage of time activity occurs each hour [2] Soft ground terrain between project site and receptor.[3] Shielding due to terrain or structures [4] Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. Shielding (dBA)[3] Calculated (dBA) Energy Reference (dBA) 25 ft Quantity Usage factor[1] Distance to Receptor Ground Effect[2] City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Noise Impact Analysis Report FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix B: Noise Impact Analysis Memorandum by LSA Associates THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK      CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 Executive Park, Suite 200, Irvine, California  92614     949.553.0666     www.lsa.net    MEMORANDUM  DATE: April 9, 2020  TO: Stephen Stoewer, Senior Project Manager, City of Anaheim  FROM: Jason Lui, Associate Senior Noise Specialist  SUBJECT: Noise Impact Analysis for the Anaheim Midway Affordable Housing Project  INTRODUCTION  This Noise Impact Analysis memorandum for the Anaheim Midway Affordable Housing Project  (project) in Anaheim has been prepared to satisfy the Housing and Urban Development (HUD)  requirements for a project‐specific noise impact analysis by examining the impacts of the proposed  uses on the project site and evaluating the noise reduction measures required by the project. All  references used in this assessment are provided in Attachment A.  PROJECT LOCATION  The project site is located at 1441–1455 South Anaheim Boulevard on the southwest corner of  South Anaheim Boulevard and West Midway Drive. The site is a vacant lot with a single building and  was previously used for short‐term recreational vehicle (RV) parking. Figure 1 shows the project  location (all figures are provided in Attachment B).  PROJECT DESCRIPTION  The project would construct a new four‐story residential building that will house 85 affordable  workforce housing units with one manager unit for a total of 86 units. Each unit would have a patio  or balcony. The units would provide workforce housing for families and individuals whose earnings  are at 60 percent or below the area mean income. Figure 2 shows the project site plan.  REGULATORY SETTING  This Noise Impact Analysis focuses on the federal and City of Anaheim (City) noise requirements as  discussed below.  Federal Regulations  Title 24, Part 51B of the Code of Federal Regulations (24 CFR 51B) provides the noise regulations  under the HUD noise program, which includes actual standards, assigns implementation  responsibilities, describes review and approval procedures, and identifies special situations that may  warrant waivers of procedures or standards. The guidelines and procedures in HUD’s 2009 Noise  Guidebook were used to comply with 24 CFR 51B and evaluate potential noise impacts on the    4/9/21 (P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx)  2  proposed project. HUD has exterior and interior noise goals of 55 and 45 A‐weighted decibels (dBA)  day‐night average noise level (Ldn), respectively. These goals are recommended by the United States  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) but are not standards. Attenuation measures to meet the  interior noise goal shall be employed where feasible. To meet other program objectives, sites  exposed to a noise level not exceeding 65 dBA are acceptable and allowable as shown in Table A,  below. This table shows HUD’s site acceptability standards. The levels of acceptability are divided  into three noise zones: (1) acceptable; (2) normally unacceptable; and (3) unacceptable. As Table A  shows, sites that are exposed to noise levels not exceeding 65 dBA are normally acceptable. The  acceptable threshold may be shifted to 70 dBA in special circumstances pursuant to Section  51.105(a) in 24 CFR 51B. Noise levels that are above 65 dBA but not exceeding 75 dBA are normally  unacceptable, and noise levels that are above 75 dBA are unacceptable. For normally unacceptable  and unacceptable sites, special approvals and environmental review are required. In addition, sites  located in the normally unacceptable noise zone require a minimum 5 dBA additional noise  attenuation if noise levels are greater than 65 dBA but not exceeding 70 dBA or require a minimum  10 dBA additional noise attenuation if noise levels are greater than 70 dBA but not exceeding 75  dBA. Also, attenuation measures for sites located in the unacceptable noise zone require the  approval of HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development.  Table A: Site Acceptability Standards  Noise Zones Day‐Night Average Noise Level (dBA) Special Approvals and Requirements  Acceptable Not exceeding 65 dBA1 None  Normally Unacceptable Above 65 dBA but not exceeding 75 dBA Special Approvals2  Environmental Review3  Attenuation4  Unacceptable Above 75 dBA  Special Approvals2  Environmental Review3  Attenuation5  Source: HUD Noise Guidebook (HUD 2009).  1  The acceptable threshold may be shifted to 70 dBA in special circumstances pursuant to Section 51.105(a) in 24 CFR 51B.  2  See Section 51.104(b) in 24 CFR 51B for requirements.  3  See Section 51.104(b) in 24 CFR 51B for requirements.  4  5 dBA additional attenuation is required for sites above 65 dBA but not exceeding 70 dBA ,and 10 dBA additional attenuation is  required for sites above 70 dBA but not exceeding 75 dBA (see Section 51.104(a) in 24 CFR 51B).  5  Attenuation measures are to be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development for approval on a  case‐by‐case basis.   24 CFR 51B = Title 24, Part 51B of the Code of Federal Regulations  dBA = A‐weighted decibels   City of Anaheim  The City’s General Plan Noise Element has an exterior and interior noise standard of 65 and 45 dBA  Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), respectively (City of Anaheim 2004). Outdoor  environments for multifamily residences are limited to private patios or balconies accessed from  within the dwelling. Balconies 6 feet (ft) deep or less are exempt. The interior noise standard for  multifamily residences are based on closed windows and mechanical ventilation, or other means of  natural ventilation shall be provided based on Chapter 12, Section 1205, of the Uniform Building  Code.    4/9/21 (P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx)  3  EXISTING SETTING  Overview of the Existing Noise Environment  The primary existing noise sources in the project area are from vehicular traffic and train noise.  Vehicles traveling on South Anaheim Boulevard, West Midway Drive, Interstate 5 (I‐5), and other  roadways in the project vicinity contribute to traffic noise in the project area. Existing rail operations  located east of the project site include passenger and freight trains. Passenger trains include  Metrolink and Amtrak. Other sources of noise in the project area include noise generated from Paul  Revere Elementary School and commercial uses.  IMPACTS  Long‐Term Noise Impacts  Exterior Noise Levels  The HUD Noise Guidebook (HUD 2009) was used to assess potential noise impacts on the proposed  on‐site residential uses. Noise sources assessed on the proposed project site include aircraft, traffic,  and rail noise. Below is a detailed discussion of the three noise sources:   Aircraft Noise: Airports within 15 miles of the project site include Fullerton Municipal Airport,  John Wayne Airport, and Long Beach Airport. The airport noise contour for Fullerton Municipal  Airport was obtained from the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Fullerton Municipal Airport  (ALUC 2019). The airport noise contour for John Wayne Airport was obtained from the Airport  Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (ALUC 2008). The airport noise contour for Long  Beach Airport was obtained from the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUC 2004).  The total noise level from all airports at the project site is calculated at 48.3 dBA Ldn. The  detailed calculation worksheets are provided in Attachment C.   Traffic Noise: Major roadways within 1,000 ft of the project site include South Anaheim  Boulevard and West Midway Drive. Also, I‐5 is within 1,000 ft of the western portion of the  project. Based on the Project at 110–229 W. Midway Drive Traffic Impact Study (Iteris 2021),  South Anaheim Boulevard and West Midway Drive have an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of  39,880 and 5,231 trips, respectively, under the General Plan (2035) Buildout With Project  condition. Receptors R‐1 through R‐7 represent the residential dwelling units, Receptor R‐8  represents the roof deck, Receptor R‐9 represents the outdoor patio and tot lot, and Receptor  R‐10 represents the pool area. The total traffic noise levels at Receptors R‐1 through R‐7 range  between 67.2 and 72.2 dBA Ldn, while total traffic noise levels at Receptors R‐8 through R‐10  range between 60.7 and 62.7 dBA Ldn. The detailed calculation worksheets are provided in  Attachment C.   Rail Noise: Railways within 3,000 ft of the project site include the Southern California Regional  Rail (SCRRA) Orange County line. This railway is located east of the project, and trains that  operate on this line include Metrolink, Amtrak, and freight trains. Train horns are not routinely  sounded at at‐grade crossings in the project area because the area is designated as a quiet zone.  The numbers of trips per day for Metrolink and Amtrak were determined based on the October  14, 2019, timetable for a worst‐case scenario. The numbers of freight trains each day were    4/9/21 (P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx)  4  estimated based on Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Office of Safety Analysis Rail Crossing  Inventory Data. The combined train noise level at Receptors R‐1 through R‐10 is 52.5 dBA Ldn.  The detailed calculation worksheets are provided in Attachment C.   Table B shows the exterior noise level from each of the three noise sources and the combined noise  level from the three noise sources for each receptor (Receptors R‐1 through R‐10). As discussed  above, Receptors R‐1 through R‐7 represent the ground‐floor and upper‐floor residential dwelling  units, and Receptors R‐8, R‐9, and R‐10 represent the roof deck, outdoor patio/tot lot, and pool,  respectively. The locations of the receptors are shown on Figure 3.  Table B: Exterior Noise Levels  Receptor No. Noise Levels (dBA Ldn)  Aircraft Train Traffic Total  R‐1 48.3 52.5 71.4 71.5  R‐2 48.3 52.5 72.2 72.3  R‐3 48.3 52.5 68.3 68.4  R‐4 48.3 52.5 67.6 67.8  R‐5 48.3 52.5 67.2 67.4  R‐6 48.3 52.5 67.5 67.7  R‐7 48.3 52.5 67.6 67.8  R‐8 48.3 52.5 62.0 62.6  R‐9 48.3 52.5 62.2 62.7  R‐10 48.3 52.5 59.9 60.7  Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).  dBA = A‐weighted decibels  Ldn = day‐night average noise level   As Table B shows, exterior noise levels at Receptors R‐8 through R‐10, which represent outdoor use  areas, range between 60.7 and 62.7 dBA Ldn. The noise levels at these receptors are considered  acceptable based on HUD’s Site Acceptability Standards because noise levels do not exceed 65 dBA  Ldn. As such, no noise reduction measures are required for the proposed residential outdoor use  areas.   However, exterior noise levels at Receptors R‐1 through R‐7 range between 67.4 and 72.3 dBA Ldn  and are considered normally unacceptable based on HUD’s Site Acceptability Standards because  noise levels are above 65 dBA Ldn but do not exceed 75 dBA Ldn. Ground‐floor patio and upper‐floor  balcony barriers that have a minimum height of 6 ft would provide a minimum noise attenuation of  5 dBA. Based on the City’s requirement for multifamily residences, balconies that are 6 ft deep or  less are exempt from the City’s exterior noise standard, which is similar to HUD’s Site Acceptability  Standards. Therefore, no exterior noise impacts would occur with the implementation of patio  barriers that have a minimum height of 6 ft for all ground‐floor residential dwelling units and  balcony barriers that have a minimum height of 6 ft and are more than 6 ft deep for all upper‐floor  residential dwelling units.    4/9/21 (P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx)  5  Interior Noise Levels  Table C shows the interior noise levels with windows open for each residential receptor (Receptors  R‐1 through R‐7). Interior noise levels were calculated using an exterior‐to‐interior noise reduction  of 12 dBA with windows open based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels (EPA 1978) and standard   Table C: Interior Noise Levels  Receptor No. Noise Levels (dBA Ldn) Reduction to Achieve  45 dBA Ldn (dBA) Exterior Interior1  R‐1 71.5 59.52 26.5  R‐2 72.3 60.3 27.3  R‐3 68.4 56.4 23.4  R‐4 67.8 55.8 22.8  R‐5 67.4 55.4 22.6  R‐6 67.7 55.7 22.7  R‐7 67.8 55.8 22.8  R‐8 62.6 —3 —  R‐9 62.7 — —  R‐10 60.7 — —  Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).  1  Interior noise level with windows open.  2  Numbers in bold represent noise levels that exceed the interior noise goal of 45 dBA Ldn.  3  This receptor represents a multifamily residential outdoor use area and has no interior spaces.  dBA = A‐weighted decibels  Ldn = day‐night average noise level   construction for Southern California (warm climate) with a combination of exterior walls, doors, and  windows. As shown in Table C, all seven receptors (Receptors R‐1 through R‐7) representing the  ground‐floor and upper‐floor residential dwelling units would have interior noise levels with  windows open that range between 55.4 and 60.3 dBA Ldn. These noise levels would exceed the  interior noise goal of 45 dBA Ldn. Therefore, mechanical ventilation systems such as air conditioning  would be required for all residential dwelling units on the project site so that windows can remain  closed for a prolonged period of time.  Also, Table C shows that an exterior‐to‐interior noise reduction of 22.4 to 27.3 dBA is required to  meet the interior noise goal of 45 dBA Ldn. To calculate and estimate the noise reduction provided by  an exterior wall assembly, the transmission loss at the octave band frequencies for wall material by  type is combined to provide an overall noise reduction. The rating of the wall and window or  windows within the assembly will have a rating often referred to as a sound transmission class (STC)  rating. The program INSUL was used to estimate the window ratings to ensure that compliance is  achieved. Based on standard building construction in Southern California, the following elements  make up the assumed exterior wall assembly:   Fiber cement board siding or three‐coat cement plaster   One layer of 0.5‐inch‐thick plywood or oriented strand board (OSB)    4/9/21 (P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx)  6   2‐inch x 4‐inch wood stud wall channels spaced at 16 inches and a minimum of R‐19 fiberglass  insulation   One layer of 5/8‐inch‐thick Type X gypsum board  In addition to the wall construction details, information from the VPI Quality Windows Endurance  Series, which is energy and sound rated, was used to determine window STC ratings. The required  window STC ratings and the composite noise level reduction are based on the project site plan along  with assumed floor plans and project details. Assuming windows that have a minimum STC rating of  28, a noise reduction of 27.7 dBA would occur at noise‐sensitive rooms, such as living rooms and  bedrooms, containing two exposed walls and two windows resulting in an interior noise level of 44.6  dBA Ldn (72.3 dBA ‐ 27.7 dBA = 44.6 dBA). Because noise levels are less than 0.5 dBA under the  required threshold, it is recommended that noise‐sensitive rooms facing South Anaheim Boulevard  be upgraded to a minimum STC of 31. For standard noise‐sensitive rooms with one exposed wall and  one window, a noise reduction of 30.1 dBA would occur, and interior noise levels would be less than  noise‐sensitive rooms with two exposed walls and two windows. The results of the INSUL model are  shown in Appendix D. Should architectural details in the final design plans be less adequate than  those assumed above, a supplemental memorandum may be required to confirm that interior noise  levels are reduced to 45 dBA Ldn or below.  NOISE REDUCTION MEASURES  The following measures would be required for the proposed project:   Mechanical ventilation systems such as air conditioning are required for all residential dwelling  units so that windows can remain closed for a prolonged period of time.   All ground‐floor residential dwelling units shall have a patio barrier that has a minimum height  of 6 ft, and all upper‐floor residential dwelling units with balconies greater than 6 ft in depth  shall have a balcony barrier that has a minimum height of 6 ft.    The exterior wall assembly shall meet or exceed the assumed exterior wall assembly that  includes fiber cement board siding or three‐coat cement plaster, one layer of 0.5‐inch‐thick  plywood or OSB, 2‐inch x 4‐inch wood stud wall channels spaced at 16 inches and a minimum of  R‐19 fiberglass insulation, and one layer of 5/8‐inch‐thick Type X gypsum board. All windows for  residential dwelling units in noise‐sensitive rooms facing South Anaheim Boulevard shall have a  minimum STC rating of 31. All other windows for residential dwelling units in noise‐sensitive  rooms shall have a minimum STC rating of 28.  CONCLUSION  The primary noise source in the project area is traffic noise on South Anaheim Boulevard and West  Midway Drive, while aircraft noise and train noise contribute minimally. Exterior noise levels for  Receptors R‐1 through R‐7, representing the multifamily residential dwelling units, are in the  normally unacceptable range between 60.7 and 72.3 dBA Ldn, while exterior noise levels for  Receptors R‐8 through R‐10, representing the multifamily residential outdoor use areas (roof deck,  patio/tot lot, and pool), are in the acceptable range between 60.7 and 62.7 dBA Ldn. Based on these    4/9/21 (P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx)  7  noise levels, in order to meet the minimum HUD standards for attenuation, mechanical ventilation  systems such as air conditioning would be required for all residential dwelling units so that windows  can remain closed for a prolonged period of time. All ground‐floor residential dwelling units would  require a patio barrier that has a minimum height of 6 ft, and all upper‐floor residential dwelling  units with balconies greater than 6 ft in depth, would require a balcony barrier that has a minimum  height of 6 ft. To meet the HUD 45 dBA Ldn interior standard, the exterior wall assembly shall meet  or exceed the assumed exterior wall assembly that includes fiber cement board siding or three‐coat  cement plaster, one layer of 0.5‐inch‐thick plywood or OSB, 2‐inch x 4‐inch wood stud wall channels  spaced at 16 inches and a minimum of R‐19 fiberglass insulation, and one layer of 5/8‐inch‐thick  Type X gypsum board. All windows for residential dwelling units in noise‐sensitive rooms facing  South Anaheim Boulevard shall have a minimum STC rating of 31. All other windows for residential  dwelling units in noise‐sensitive rooms shall have a minimum STC rating of 28. With implementation  of the recommended measures as outlined above, interior noise levels would be below the HUD  interior noise standard of 45 dBA Ldn.    Attachments: A: References  B: Figures 1 through 3  C: HUD Noise Worksheets  D: INSUL Model Printouts  NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS  APRIL 2021 ANAHEIM MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA   P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx «04/09/21»  ATTACHMENT A    REFERENCES  Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). 2004. Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan. December 1.  Website: http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/data/pd_alup.pdf (accessed April 2021).  _____. 2008. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. April 17. Website:  https://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/JWA_AELUP‐April‐17‐2008.pdf (accessed  April 2021).  _____. 2019. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Fullerton Municipal Airport. February 21. Website:  https://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/AELUP%20for%20FMA%2005092019.pdf  (accessed April 2021).  City of Anaheim. 2004. General Plan Noise Element. May.  Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Office of Safety Analysis. Crossing Inventory and Accident  Reports. Website: https://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/PublicSite/Crossing/ Crossing.aspx (accessed April 2020).  Iteris, Inc. 2021. Project at 110–229 W. Midway Drive Traffic Impact Study. January 12.  United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 2009. HUD Noise Guidebook.  Website: https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/313/hud‐noise‐guidebook/ (accessed  April 2021).   United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1978. Protective Noise Levels, Condensed  Version of EPA Levels Document, EPA 550/9‐79‐100. November.  NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS  APRIL 2021 ANAHEIM MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA   P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx «04/09/21»  ATTACHMENT B    FIGURES 1 THROUGH 3  Figure 1: Project Location and Vicinity  Figure 2: Site Plan  Figure 3: Receptor Locations  Service Layer Credits: Copyright:(c) 2014 Esri MIDWAY DR A N A H E I M B L V D SOURCE: Nearmap (05/16/2020)I:\AHM1804.03\GIS\MXD\Noise\ProjectLocation_Noise.mxd (3/31/2021) FIGURE 1 Anaheim Midway Affordable Housing ProjectProject Location and Vicinity LEGENDProject Location 0 50 100 FEET SanBernardinoCountyÃÃ142 ÃÃ261 ÃÃ133 ÃÃ72 ÃÃ73 ÃÃ90 ÃÃ39 ÃÃ1 ÃÃ55 ÃÃ22 ÃÃ19 ÃÃ241 ÃÃ71 ÃÃ91 ÃÃ57 ÃÃ60 ProjectLocation §¨¦10 §¨¦10 §¨¦105 §¨¦710 §¨¦605 §¨¦5 §¨¦405 §¨¦5 Project Vicinity SO U R C E : KT G Y A r c h i t e c t u r e + P l a n n i n g FE E T 10 0 50 0 FIGURE 2 I: \ A H M 1 8 0 4 . 0 3 \ G \ Sit e _ P l a n . a i ( 3 / 3 1 / 2 0 2 1 ) An a h e i m M i d w a y A f f o r d a b l e H o u s i n g P r o j e c t Site Plan LE G E N D Re c e p t o r L o c a Ɵ on R- 1 SO U R C E : KT G Y A r c h i t e c t u r e + P l a n n i n g FE E T 10 0 50 0 FIGURE 3 I: \ A H M 1 8 0 4 . 0 3 \ G \ Re c e p t o r _ L o c a t i o n s . a i ( 4 / 8 / 2 0 2 1 ) An a h e i m M i d w a y A f f o r d a b l e H o u s i n g P r o j e c t Receptor Locations R- 5 R -5 R- 5 R- 4 R -4 R- 4 R- 9 R -9 R- 9 R- 3 R -3 R- 3 R- 1 R -1 R- 1 R- 8 R -8 R- 8 R- 1 0 R -1 0 R- 1 0 R- 2 R -2 R- 2 R- 6 R -6 R- 6 R- 7 R -7 R- 7 NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS  APRIL 2021 ANAHEIM MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA   P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx «04/09/21»  ATTACHMENT C    HUD NOISE WORKSHEETS  Noise (EA Level Reviews)    General requirements Legislation Regulation  HUD’s noise regulations protect  residential properties from  excessive noise exposure. HUD  encourages mitigation as  appropriate.  Noise Control Act of 1972    General Services Administration  Federal Management Circular 75‐ 2: “Compatible Land Uses at  Federal Airfields”  Title 24 CFR 51  Subpart B  References  https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental‐review/noise‐abatement‐and‐ control    1. What activities does your project involve? Check all that apply:   ☒ New construction for residential use    NOTE: HUD assistance to new construction projects is generally prohibited if  they are located in an Unacceptable zone, and HUD discourages assistance for  new construction projects in Normally Unacceptable zones.  See 24 CFR  51.101(a)(3) for further details.   Continue to Question 2.     ☐ Rehabilitation of an existing residential property    NOTE: For major or substantial rehabilitation in Normally Unacceptable zones,  HUD encourages mitigation to reduce levels to acceptable compliance standards.   For major rehabilitation in Unacceptable zones, HUD strongly encourages  mitigation to reduce levels to acceptable compliance standards.  See 24 CFR 51  Subpart B for further details.     Continue to Question 2.     ☐ A research demonstration project which does not result in new construction  or reconstruction, interstate, land sales registration, or any timely emergency  assistance under disaster assistance provisions or appropriations which are  provided to save lives, protect property, protect public health and safety,  remove debris and wreckage, or assistance that has the effect of restoring  facilities substantially as they existed prior to the disaster   Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue  to the Worksheet Summary below.    ☐ None of the above   Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue  to the Worksheet Summary below.    2. Complete the Preliminary Screening to identify potential noise generators in the  vicinity (1000’ from a major road, 3000’ from a railroad, or 15 miles from an airport).    Indicate the findings of the Preliminary Screening below:   ☐ There are no noise generators found within the threshold distances above.    Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue  to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide a map showing the location of the  project relative to any noise generators.       ☒ Noise generators were found within the threshold distances.   Continue to Question 3.     3. Complete the Noise Assessment Guidelines to quantify the noise exposure. Indicate  the findings of the Noise Assessment below:  ☐ Acceptable:  (65 decibels or less; the ceiling may be shifted to 70 decibels in  circumstances described in §24 CFR 51.105(a))    Indicate noise level here:       Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue  to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide noise analysis, including noise level  and data used to complete the analysis.      ☒ Normally Unacceptable:  (Above 65 decibels but not exceeding 75 decibels;  the floor may be shifted to 70 decibels in circumstances described in 24 CFR  51.105(a))     Indicate noise level here:      If project is rehabilitation:    Continue to Question 4. Provide noise analysis, including noise level and  data used to complete the analysis.     If project is new construction:   Is the project in a largely undeveloped area1?  ☒ No    Continue to Question 4. Provide noise analysis, including noise level  and data used to complete the analysis, and any other relevant  information.                                                                       1 A largely undeveloped area means the area within 2 miles of the project site is less than 50 percent developed  with urban uses and does not have water and sewer capacity to serve the project.        67.4 to 72.3 dBA Ldn  ☐ Yes   Your project requires completion of an Environmental Impact  Statement (EIS) pursuant to 51.104(b)(1)(i). Elevate this review to an EIS‐ level review.     ☐ Unacceptable:  (Above 75 decibels)    Indicate noise level here:      If project is rehabilitation:   HUD strongly encourages conversion of noise‐exposed sites to land uses  compatible with high noise levels. Consider converting this property to a non‐ residential use compatible with high noise levels.    Continue to Question 4. Provide noise analysis, including noise level  and data used to complete the analysis, and any other relevant  information.          If project is new construction:   Your project requires completion of an Environmental Impact Statement  (EIS) pursuant to 51.104(b)(1)(i). You may either complete an EIS or provide  a waiver signed by the appropriate authority. Indicate your choice:    ☐ Convert to an EIS   Provide noise analysis, including noise level and data used to complete  the analysis.   Continue to Question 4.        ☐ Provide waiver    Provide an Environmental Impact Statement waiver from the Certifying  Officer or the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and  Development per 24 CFR 51.104(b)(2) and noise analysis, including noise  level and data used to complete the analysis.        Continue to Question 4.            4. HUD strongly encourages mitigation be used to eliminate adverse noise impacts.  Explain in detail the exact measures that must be implemented to mitigate for the  impact or effect, including the timeline for implementation. This information will be  automatically included in the Mitigation summary for the environmental review.             ☒ Mitigation as follows will be implemented:                  Provide drawings, specifications, and other materials as needed to describe  the project’s noise mitigation measures. Continue to the Worksheet Summary.      ☐ No mitigation is necessary.    Explain why mitigation will not be made here:                   Continue to the Worksheet Summary.   Worksheet Summary   Compliance Determination  Provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was  based on, such as:    Map panel numbers and dates   Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates   Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers   Any additional requirements specific to your region                      Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required?   ☒ Yes  ☐ No       See Noise Impact Analysis memorandum.      1) Mechanical ventilation systems such as air conditioning are required for all residential  dwelling units. 2) A minimum 6 ft high ground floor patio and upper floor balcony barriers are  required for all residential dwelling units. 3) Building façade upgrades such as higher than  standard construction or double‐paned windows are required for all residential dwelling units .  See Noise Impact Analysis memorandum.   %2 2      &$22#212*/2222+2 2 2)02 22,2 2 -"(2  2'2 2!.2  1441, 1445, and 1455 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 City of Anaheim Acceptable 2035 Acceptable 2021 Normally Unacceptable 2019 60.7 to 72.3 4/9/2021 Anaheim Midway Affordable Housing Project 48.3 52.5 59.9 to 72.2 Fullerton Municipal Airport John Wayne Airport Long Beach Yes No Yes No Yes No N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 480 20,040 2,880 49,420 2,135 69,800 62.6 38.1 2019 17.2 46.5 2008 48.3 32.7 42.3 2004 4/9/2021        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 1,168 1,396 1,282 N/A 0 13 54 N/A 0 87 105 85 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 96 123 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-1 Receptor R-1 0.81 387,052 438,917 63.5 3 60.5 1 59.3 1 4,659 41.6 71.4 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 62.3 3 70.863.0 1 0.23 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 339 69.0 48.0 0 15 69.0 33.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 169 66.0 0 66.0 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 56.0 15 41.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 1,206 1,434 1,320 N/A 0 11 52 N/A 0 21 39 20 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 94 57 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-2 Receptor R-2 0.81 387,052 438,917 63.0 3 60.0 1 59.2 1 4,659 62.4 72.2 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 62.2 3 71.262.6 1 0.13 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 192 69.5 52.0 0 0 69.5 52.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 66.3 0 66.3 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 62.0 0 62.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 1,176 1,404 1,290 N/A 0 50 92 N/A 0 21 39 25 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 133 57 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-3 Receptor R-3 0.81 387,052 438,917 63.5 3 60.5 1 59.3 1 4,659 62.5 68.3 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 62.3 3 64.763.0 1 0.14 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 206 66.0 53.0 3 0 63.0 53.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 62.8 3 59.8 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 62.0 0 62.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 1,115 1,343 1,229 N/A 0 132 174 N/A 0 17 36 105 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 215 55 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-4 Receptor R-4 0.81 387,052 438,917 63.5 3 60.5 1 59.3 1 4,659 63.8 67.6 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 62.5 3 61.263.0 1 0.26 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 383 62.8 56.0 3 0 59.8 56.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 58.7 3 55.7 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 63.0 0 63.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 1,009 1,237 1,123 N/A 0 272 314 N/A 0 16 35 245 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 355 55 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-5 Receptor R-5 0.81 387,052 438,917 64.3 3 61.3 1 60.3 1 4,659 64.5 67.2 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 63.3 3 44.663.8 1 0.47 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 693 58.0 59.0 15 0 43.0 59.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 54.5 15 39.5 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 63.0 0 63.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 948 1,176 1,062 N/A 0 312 353 N/A 0 71 90 285 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 395 110 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-6 Receptor R-6 0.81 387,052 438,917 65.0 0 65.0 1 63.5 1 4,659 53.5 67.5 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 63.5 0 42.867.3 1 0.47 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 693 57.0 53.0 15 5 42.0 48.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 50.0 15 35.0 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 57.0 5 52.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 915 1,143 1,029 N/A 0 318 360 N/A 0 122 141 305 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 401 161 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-7 Receptor R-7 0.81 387,052 438,917 65.2 0 65.2 1 63.8 1 4,659 49.5 67.6 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 63.8 0 42.867.6 1 0.56 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 826 57.0 50.0 15 6 42.0 44.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 50.0 15 35.0 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 54.0 6 48.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 1,101 1,329 1,215 N/A 0 66 108 N/A 0 134 152 132 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 150 171 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-8 Receptor R-8 0.81 387,052 438,917 63.5 15 48.5 1 48.5 1 4,659 39.0 62.0 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 63.5 15 61.651.5 1 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 442 65.0 47.0 5 15 60.0 32.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 61.0 5 56.5 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 53.0 15 38.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 1,074 1,302 1,188 N/A 0 96 138 N/A 0 141 159 145 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 180 178 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-9 Receptor R-9 0.81 387,052 438,917 64.0 15 49.0 1 48.5 1 4,659 39.1 62.2 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 63.5 15 61.851.8 1 0.32 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 472 63.0 52.0 3 15 60.0 37.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 60.0 3 57.0 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 50.0 15 35.0        %&&&&&&&'(&&&&&&&&)****+&,c-     cZccBc;cc cHc ?9P:Yc 2c Jc   c!/c>XAc<cSFCc _c 4]c 5c@1cGc`c6Dc  c^QUc$cNcOVc0I cM\Lc[caccbcE . K     3c 7c Rc cc  "W T8c=c #c   Interstate 5 (I-5) South Anaheim Boulevard West Midway Drive 1,017 1,245 1,131 N/A 0 143 185 N/A 0 178 197 200 65 55 55 35 35 35 30 30 30 233,557 15,350 387,052 5,231 99 38,851 734 46,191 9,319 295 9.7 2019 9.6 2035 2035 228 216 0 6,221 40 9.6 Receptor R-10 Receptor R-10 0.81 387,052 438,917 64.5 15 49.5 1 48.0 1 4,659 38.1 59.9 4/9/2020 1 1.4 4,659 4,659 2.3 0.81 8,680 63.0 15 59.151.8 1 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.79 0.79 46,191 6,221 14,596 590 60.0 51.0 3 15 57.0 36.0 1 0.81 148 119 119 1.8 0.79 170 58.0 3 55.0 1 0.81 20 16 16 1.8 0.79 23 49.0 15 34.0 'x#MNx$BOq;txrWxJx?lx V x     x x  %x C`ixT.LSx vx ,o<sY!x 0123456667899x:x x ]xUxKx  ()xIGZx x &xFx/=mxbXx _x xd[xx> \ "x u -njx x axEwx+xegx*x^ AxhQxDxfx  x xPk@xpHxcxRx x x Receptor R-1 through R-10 Southern California Regional Rail Authority - Transit Southern California Regional Rail Authority - Freight 2,500 2,500 64 0 29 0 0.171 0.448 1 1 5 0 50 Bolted No 50 0 50 Bolted No 4/2/2021 DNL Calculator - HUD Exchange https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/dnl-calculator/1/4 Home (/)>Programs (/programs/)>Environmental Review (/programs/environmental- review/)>DNL Calculator DNL Calculator The Day/Night Noise Level Calculator is an electronic assessment tool that calculates the Day/Night Noise Level (DNL) from roadway and railway tra 4/2/2021 DNL Calculator - HUD Exchange https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/dnl-calculator/2/4 Vehicle Type Cars Medium Trucks Heavy Trucks E 4/2/2021 DNL Calculator - HUD Exchange https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/dnl-calculator/3/4 Train DNL 0 47 Calculate Rail #1 DNL 47 Reset Railroad #2 Track Identi 4/2/2021 DNL Calculator - HUD Exchange https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/dnl-calculator/4/4   Combined DNL for all Road and Rail sources 0 Combined DNL including Airport Site DNL with Loud Impulse Sound Calculate Reset   Mitigation Options If your site DNL is in Excess of 65 decibels, your options are: No Action Alternative: Cancel the project at this location Other Reasonable Alternatives: Choose an alternate site Mitigation Contact your Field or Regional Environmental O NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS  APRIL 2021 ANAHEIM MIDWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA   P:\AHM1804.03\Noise\Product\Noise Memo.docx «04/09/21»  ATTACHMENT D    INSUL MODEL PRINTOUTS  (]� INSUL lnitials:JStephens r-.""' ......_70 ---- Outdoor To Indoor Sound Transmission (v9.0.22) Program copyright Marshall Day Acoustics 2017 Margin of error is generally within STC ±3 dB -Key No. 4862Job Name:Job No.:Date:4/6/2021File Name:MidwayAffordableExtWall_SAnaheim.cns -Lp incident --- -Lptotal 60 _,.. .. -....... -..,:I Lp element 1 50 �� LIi r, • Lp element 2 :.. 40 - Comment: Two Exposed Walls and Two Windows Facing South Anaheim Bouelvard 30 � .. --20 -, 10 � � 50 63 80 125 200 315 500 800 1k25 2k 3k15 5kFrequency (Hz) Octave Band Centre Freauencv (Hz Source 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k Overall dBA Incident sound level (freefield) 78.0 76.0 74.3 71.9 68.9 68.2 67.7 66.4 65.4 64.6 64.0 63.7 64.6 64.8 63.2 61.8 60.6 58.5 56.6 55.8 54.3 73 Path Element 1 , STL -27 -24 -25 -23 -23 -19 -26 -26 -30 -32 -37 -39 -41 -42 -42 -42 -42 -42 -45 -43 -45 Facade Shape factor Level diff. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insertion Loss 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Area(+ 1 0LogA) (116 ft2] 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 Element sound level contribution 51 52 49 49 46 49 42 40 35 33 27 25 24 23 21 20 19 17 12 13 9 41 Element 2 , STL -27 -24 -25 -23 -23 -19 -26 -26 -30 -32 -37 -39 -41 -42 -42 -42 -42 -42 -45 -43 -45 Facade Shape factor Level diff. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insertion Loss 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Area(+ 1 0LogA) (116 ft2] 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 Element sound level contribution 52 52 49 49 47 49 43 43 39 36 31 28 26 24 21 20 19 17 13 17 13 42 Receiver Room volume(-10LogV) (1400 ft3] -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 Reverberation time (s) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 RT (+10LogT) -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 Equation Constant 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 Room sound level 54 55 52 52 49 52 45 43 38 36 30 28 27 26 24 23 22 20 15 16 12 44 (]� INSUL lnitials:JStephens I.._ I I 70 I",, ....... Outdoor To Indoor Sound Transmission (v9.0.22) Program copyright Marshall Day Acoustics 2017 Margin of error is generally within STC ±3 dB - Key No. 4862Job Name:Job No.:Date:4/6/2021File Name:MidwayAffordableExtWall.cns -Lp incident --- -Lptotal 60 ..... I Lp element 1 50 t :-. .� • Lp element 2 I 1='i 40 �-Comment: One Exposed Wall and One Window Facing South Anaheim Boulevard 30 �):;� 20 -..... � 50 63 80 125 200 315 500 800 1k25 2k 3k15 5k Frequency (Hz) Octave Band Centre Freauencv (Hz Source 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k Overall dBA Incident sound level (freefield) 78.0 76.0 74.3 71.9 68.9 68.2 67.7 66.4 65.4 64.6 64.0 63.7 64.6 64.8 63.2 61.8 60.6 58.5 56.6 55.8 54.3 73 Path Element 1 , STL -26 -24 -25 -23 -22 -19 -25 -23 -26 -29 -33 -36 -39 -41 -42 -42 -42 -42 -44 -39 -41 Facade Shape factor Level diff. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insertion Loss 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Area(+ 1 0LogA) (116 ft2] 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 Element sound level contribution 52 52 49 49 47 49 43 43 39 36 31 28 26 24 21 20 19 17 13 17 13 42 Element 2 , STL -26 -24 -25 -23 -22 -19 -25 -23 -26 -29 -33 -36 -39 -41 -42 -42 -42 -42 -44 -39 -41 Facade Shape factor Level diff. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insertion Loss 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Area(+ 1 0LogA) (116 ft2] 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 Element sound level contribution 52 52 49 49 47 49 43 43 39 36 31 28 26 24 21 20 19 17 13 17 13 42 Receiver Room volume(-10LogV) (1400 ft3] -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 Reverberation time (s) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 RT (+10LogT) -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 Equation Constant 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 Room sound level 55 55 52 52 50 52 46 46 42 39 34 31 29 27 24 23 22 20 16 20 16 45 (]� INSUL lnitials:JStephens I.._ I I 70 I",, ....... Outdoor To Indoor Sound Transmission (v9.0.22) Program copyright Marshall Day Acoustics 2017 Margin of error is generally within STC ±3 dB - Key No. 4862Job Name:Job No.:Date:4/6/2021File Name:MidwayAffordableStandardExtWall.cns -Lp incident --- -Lptotal 60 ..... I Lp element 1 50 HL..-·-r-... 14. 40 ...., Comment: StandardExtWall Two Exposed Walls and Two Windows 30 ., � 20 I ___,...._ .A.. 50 63 80 125 200 315 500 800 1k25 2k 3k15 5k Frequency (Hz) Octave Band Centre Freauencv (Hz Source 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k Overall dBA Incident sound level (freefield) 78.0 76.0 74.3 71.9 68.9 68.2 67.7 66.4 65.4 64.6 64.0 63.7 64.6 64.8 63.2 61.8 60.6 58.5 56.6 55.8 54.3 73 Path Element 1 , STL -26 -24 -25 -23 -22 -19 -25 -23 -26 -29 -33 -36 -39 -41 -42 -42 -42 -42 -44 -39 -41 Facade Shape factor Level diff. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insertion Loss 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Area(+ 1 0LogA) (116 ft2] 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 Element sound level contribution 52 52 49 49 47 49 43 43 39 36 31 28 26 24 21 20 19 17 13 17 13 NAN Receiver Room volume(-10LogV) [1400 ft3] -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 -31 Reverberation time (s) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 RT (+10LogT) -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 -5.2 Equation Constant 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 Room sound level 52 52 49 49 47 49 43 43 39 36 31 28 26 24 21 20 19 17 13 17 13 42 City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix H: Traffic Statement THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK kimley-horn.com 401 B Street, Suite 600, San Diego, CA 92101 619-234-9411 MEMORANDUM To: National CORE From: Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., PTOE, RSP Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Date: April 15, 2021 Subject: Midway Affordable – Traffic Statement The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a Traffic Statement for the proposed Midway Affordable site in the City of Anaheim, CA. The City of Anaheim requires traffic studies to be prepared in accordance with the City of Anaheim Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Analysis, the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, and the Orange County Transportation Authority 2019 Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The need for a traffic impact study within the City of Anaheim is based on the estimated peak hour trip generation and how the generated trips would impact operations on the nearby intersections. The need for Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) analysis within the City of Anaheim is based on the screening criteria provided in the City’s guidelines. Proposed Project The proposed site is located on the southwest corner of the Midway Drive and Anaheim Boulevard intersection as seen in Exhibit 1. The proposed site plan is provided as Exhibit 2. The project site is currently occupied by a car manufacturer vehicle overflow parking, and a vacant office building. The Midway Affordable site is proposed to be a 100% affordable housing project including 86 affordable housing dwelling units with 1,700 square feet of flexible space for community services. The flexible space will be accessed primarily by residents in the development or in the surrounding area within walking distance. Per the current Land Use Plan in the General Plan, last amended September 2020 (included as Exhibit 3), the proposed site is currently zoned as a “RM” – Medium Density Residential and the proposed project would be an allowed use within this zone. Traffic from the proposed site would not be expected to use intersections or highways that are a part of Orange County Transportation Authority’s CMP and would not require further analysis for the congestion management plan Transportation Analysis Methodology Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), signed by the Governor in 2013, changed the way transportation impacts are identified. Specifically, the legislation has directed the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to look at different metrics for identifying transportation as an impact in the California Environmental Quality kimley-horn.com 401 B Street, Suite 600, San Diego, CA 92101 619-234-9411 Act (CEQA). The Final OPR guidelines were released in December 2018 and identified VMT as the preferred metric moving forward. The City of Anaheim published their Traffic Impact Study Guidelines for CEQA Analysis in June 2020 and adopted thresholds of significance related to VMT. The guidelines also state that site specific traffic studies analyzing site access and LOS should abide by the requirements outlined in the City’s Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. VMT Analysis The City’s Traffic Impact Study Guidelines for CEQA Analysis include screening criteria for three project types that can be presumed to result in a less-than-significant transportation impact. The “Type 3: Project Type Screening” section provides a list of project types that are local serving in nature, including affordable housing and a community center. The proposed project would fall under this “Type 3” determination and would be screened out from a full VMT assessment as it is presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact regarding conflict or inconsistency with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3. LOS Analysis The City’s Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies provides minimum criteria for when a traffic impact study may be required. A project may be exempt from Traffic Impact Study requirements if the anticipated trip generation for the site is less than 100 vehicle trips during the peak hours. To determine the daily traffic characteristics of the site, trip generation rates and peak hour traffic generation characteristics from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition were applied to the proposed uses. ITE Code 221, Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise), was applied to the 86 dwelling units in the proposed building. ITE Code 495, Recreational Community Center, was also applied to the 1,700 square feet of flexible community space provided on site. This space will primarily serve residents of the development or the nearby areas within walking distance and is unlikely to generate many trips. However, this community center space was accounted for as a conservative approach. Table 1 displays the trip generation of the proposed site. Trip generation was estimated for the AM and PM peak hours and daily traffic. As shown in the table, the proposed project would generate far less than 100 vehicle trips during the peak hours and would be exempt from requiring further traffic analyses. kimley-horn.com 401 B Street, Suite 600, San Diego, CA 92101 619-234-9411 Table 1 – Trip Generation Summary ITE Trip Generation, 10th Edition Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Use Units Rate Trip % of ADT In Out Total % of ADT In Out Total Proposed Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) Midway Affordable Housing Units 86 / du 5.44 / du 468 7% 8 23 31 8% 23 15 38 Recreational Community Center Flexible Community Space 1,700 SF 28.82 / ksf 49 6% 2 1 3 8% 2 2 4 Net Trip Generation 517 10 24 34 25 17 42 Notes: du = dwelling units Trip rates references from ITE Trip Generation, 10th Edition Findings Based on the City’s project screening criteria for VMT analysis, affordable housing projects are presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact due to their local serving nature. Based on the estimated trip generation, the proposed project would generate less than 100 weekday peak hour vehicle trips and would not trigger further traffic analyses in accordance with the City’s Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. As a result of the findings of this traffic statement memo, the proposed Midway Affordable project located at the southwest corner of the Midway Drive and Anaheim Boulevard should not require further VMT analysis or a traffic study. ATTACHMENTS  Exhibit 1 – Proposed Project Site Location  Exhibit 2 – Proposed Project Site Plan  Exhibit 3 – City of Anaheim General Plan Land Use Plan Map kimley-horn.com 401 B Street, Suite 600, San Diego, CA 92101 619-234-9411 Exhibit 1 – Proposed Project Site Location Legend Site Location W Midway Drive 5 W Ball Rd P1TRP2T ELEC / PHONECATVTRP3P4TRP1TRP2TELEC / PHONE CATV TRP3P4TRP1TRP2TELEC / PHONECATVTRP3P4TR P1 TRP2TELEC / PHONE CATV P2TR TRP3115849-PLEX6-PLEX6-PLEX6-PLEXB - 21 B - 16 B - 11 40414243818211211415315415515683113 DW 13'13' R 6 0 . 0 ' 2 6 . 0 ' 26.0'26.0' 12.7' 5.0'11.0' 8.6'14.0'8.4' W . M I D W A Y D R I V E S . A N A H E I M B L V D 10.0'Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 C O N C E P T U A L D E S I G N J a n u a r y 2 9 , 2 0 2 0 A 1 . 0 S I T E P L A N 0 3 0 6 0 1 5 T u c k - U n d e r P a r k i n g w i t h 3 R e s i d e n t i a l F l o o r s A b o v e P r o j e c t D a t a W . M i d w a y D r i v e & S . A n a h e i m B l v d , A n a h e i m , C A 9 2 8 0 5 G r o s s S i t e A r e a 2 . 2 6 A C D w e l l i n g U n i t s 8 6 D U D e n s i t y 3 8 D U / A C U n i t S u m m a r y : U n i t P l a n U n i t T y p e T o t a l R a t i o 1 B e d r o o m 1 b d / 1 b a 2 9 3 3 . 7 % 2 B e d r o o m 2 b d / 1 b a 3 5 4 0 . 7 % 3 B e d r o o m 3 b d / 2 b a 2 2 2 5 . 6 % T o t a l s 8 6 P a r k i n g S u m m a r y : P a r k i n g R e q u i r e d R e q ' d R a t i o 1 B e d r o o m 1 s p a c e s / D U 0 2 9 s p a c e s 2 B e d r o o m 1 . 5 s p a c e s / D U 0 5 3 s p a c e s 3 B e d r o o m 2 s p a c e s / D U 0 4 4 s p a c e s T o t a l R e q u i r e d 1 2 6 s p a c e s 1 . 4 6 s p / u n i t R e s i d e n t i a l P a r k i n g P r o v i d e d G a r a g e S p a c e s ± 0 1 8 s p a c e s T a n d e m S p a c e s ± 0 2 1 s p a c e s C a r p o r t S p a c e s ± 0 1 0 s p a c e s O p e n S p a c e s ± 0 7 7 s p a c e s ± 1 2 6 s p a c e s 1 . 4 6 s p a c e s / u n i t P u b l i c U s e - O n S i t e ± 0 0 5 s p a c e s T o t a l P r o v i d e d ± 1 3 1 s p a c e s ± 1 7 0 0 s . f . P u b l i c U s e w i t h 2 L e v e l s o f u n i t s a b o v e ± 3 3 0 0 s . f . o f L e a s i n g a n d R e s i d e n t A m e n i t y w i t h 2 L e v e l s o f u n i t s a b o v e 4 F l o o r s o f R e s i d e n t i a l U n i t s R e s i d e n t i a l E n t r y a n d B i k e S t o r a g e a t F i r s t F l o o r P r o p o s e d A c c e s s f o r M o b i l e H o m e P a r k P a r k i n g S h a r e d P r i v a t e D r i v e P r o p o s e d ( S . Z e y n S t r e e t V a c a t e d ) P o o l P o o l B l d g P a t i o L o b b y F l e x S p a c e A m e n i t i e s C l u b r o o m L e a s i n g O f f i c e s E n t r y Trash T o t L o t C a r p o r t s T a n d e m P a r k i n g L a u n d r y R o o m a t E a c h F l o o r Gate Mnt. U t i l i t i e s TrashStaging Trash P1TRP2T ELEC / PHONECATV TRP3P4 TRP1TRP2T ELEC / PHONE CATV TRP3P4TRP1TRP2T ELEC / PHONECATV TR P3 P4 TR P1 TRP2T ELEC / PHONE CATV P2TR TRP3115849-PLEX6-PLEX6-PLEX6-PLEXB - 21 B - 16 B - 11 40414243818211211415315415515683113 3 4 ' - 0 " 24'-0" 1 2 " M i n 12' - 8 " 10' - 8 " 1 0 ' - 8 " 13'-4"10'-8" 12' - 1 0 " 5'- 0 " 9'- 1 " 7'- 1 " 34'-0 " 24'-0" 12" M i n 12'- 8 " 10'- 8 " 10'-8 " 13'-4"10'-8" 12'-1 0 " 5'-0 " 9'-1 " 7'-1 " 34'-0" 24'- 0 " 12" Min 12'-8"10'-8"10'-8" 13'-4 " 10'- 8 " 12'-10"5'-0"9'-1"7'-1" DW 34'- 0 " 24'-0" 12" M i n 12'-8 " 10'-8 " 10'- 8 " 13'-4"10'-8" 12'- 1 0 " 5'-0" 9'-1 " 7'-1" 34' - 0 " 24'-0" 12 " M i n 1 2 ' - 8 " 1 0 ' - 8 " 10' - 8 " 13'-4"10'-8" 12 ' - 1 0 " 5' - 0 " 9'- 1 " 7' - 1 " 34'-0" 24'- 0 " 12" Min 12'-8"10'-8"10'-8" 13'-4 " 10'- 8 " 12'-10"5'-0"9'-1"7'-1" W . M I D W A Y D R I V E S . A N A H E I M B L V D 30.0' 3 0 . 0 ' 2 4 . 6 ' 26.0' 2 6 . 0 ' 94.0' 2 6 . 0 ' 26.0' R 6 0 . 0 ' 2 6 . 0 ' Architecture + Planning888.456.5849ktgy.com National CORE9421 Haven AvenueRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 M I D W A Y A F F O R D A B L E A N A H E I M , C A # 2 0 2 0 - 0 3 3 7 C O N C E P T U A L D E S I G N J a n u a r y 2 9 , 2 0 2 0 A 1 . 1 S I T E P L A N F I R E A C C E S S P L A N 0 3 0 6 0 1 5 T u c k - U n d e r P a r k i n g w i t h 3 R e s i d e n t i a l F l o o r s A b o v e P u b l i c U s e & A m e n i t y w i t h 2 L e v e l s o f u n i t s a b o v e 4 F l o o r s o f R e s i d e n t i a l U n i t s M a x 1 5 0 ' H o s e P u l l P o o l P o o l B l d g L o b b y F l e x S p a c e A m e n i t i e s C l u b r o o m L e a s i n g O f f i c e s T r a s h F i r e A c c e s s T u r n i n g R a d i u s F i r e A c c e s s T u r n a r o u n d G a t e M n t . U t i l i t i e s Trash Staging T r a s h R i g h t O n l y E n t r y & E x i t Shared Private Drive Proposed(S. Zeyn Street Vacated)Fire Access Lane §¨5 §¨5 |91 |91 |57 |57 |55 |241|91 E L A P A L M A A V E W BAL L R D W L INCOL N AV E E SANTA ANA CANYON RD S EU C L I D S T W L A P A L M A A V E E MIRAL O M A A V E E BAL L R D W KATEL L A A V E E NOHL R A N C H R D S SU N K I S T S T N T U S T I N A V E E SERRAN O A V E W ORANGE AV E S E A S T S T N EU C L I D S T S STAT E C O L L E G E B L V D E KATEL L A A V E S DAL E A V E S HAR B O R B L V D S W A L N U T S T S KNO T T A V E E CANYON RIM RD CERRITOS AV E N E A S T S T S BRO O K H U R S T S T S L E W I S S T N IMP E R I A L H W Y E ORANGETHORPE AV E E RIV E R D A L E A V E E CERRITOS AV E CRESCENT AV E S WE S T S T S NINTH S T S MA G N O L I A A V E N MA G N O L I A A V E S W E I R C A N Y O N R D N K R A E M E R B L V D E SOU T H S T N L A K E V I E W A V E N M I L L E R S T E L I N C O L N A V E S WE S T E R N A V E N BRO O K H U R S T S T S HAS T E R S T S RIO V I S T A S T E ORANGEWOOD AV E S GIL B E R T S T W CERRITOS AV E S IMP E R I A L H W Y E WAGNER AV E N ACA C I A S T N B L U E G U M S T E CHAPMAN AV E N DAL E A V E S FAIR M O N T B L V D E CROWTHER AV E E BROADWAY W BROADWAY N STA T E C O L L E G E B L V D E GENE AU T R Y W A Y KNO T T A V E S DO U G L A S S R D S MA N C H E S T E R A V E N JEFF E R S O N S T N RAY M O N D A V E N PL A C E N T I A A V E W CHAPMAN AV E S RICHF I E L D R D S DISNE Y L A N D D R S BEA C H B L V D N G L A S S E L L S T S N O H L R A N C H R D W CRESCENT AV E S ANA H E I M H I L L S R D N SANTIAGO BL V D N L E M O N S T BAL L RD N ANA H E I M B L V D N SU N K I S T S T S R O Y A L O A K R D N RIO V I S T A S T N L O A R A S T N KEL L O G G D R ORANGETHORPE AV E B E A C H B L V D WE S T E R N A V E S MEATS AV E S CL E M E N T I N E S T L INCOL N AV E KEL L O G G D R W DISNEY WAY W ROMNEYA DR W ORANGETHORPE AV E S A N A H E I M B L V D N THE CITY DR E FRONTERA ST KATEL L A A V E N BEA C H B L V D W BROADWAY E HOWEL L A V E N HAR B O R B L V D W ORANGEWOOD AV E L A P A L M A A V E ORANGE AV E N TU S T I N S T DAL E A V E S BRO O K H U R S T R D W KATEL L A A V E W L I N C O L N A V E BEA C H B L V D W BROADWAY S H A R B O R B L V D S MA N C H E S T E R A V E S D I S N E Y L A N D D R S BEA C H B L V D E SANTA ANA CANYON RD W CRESCENT AV E W CERRITOS AV E E BROADWAY N H A R B O R B L V D E ORANGETHORPE AV E N KEL L O G G D R E ORANGETHORPE AV E W BROADWAY E ORANGETHORPE AV E S L E W I S S T S MA N C H E S T E R A V E W CHAPMAN AV E S MA G N O L I A A V E S H A R B O R B L V D W CHAPMAN AV E W CERRITOS AV E N DAL E A V E W CRESCENT AV E S A N A H E I M B L V D 1211 Mixed-Use Designation Description Maximum Density (FAR) Typical Implementation Zone(s) Mixed-U se Mid To a llo w flexib ility fo r pa rc els tha t c o uld tra n sitio n fro m strip c o m m erc ia l uses to residen tia l o r a m ix o f residen tia l, c o m m erc ia l a n d o ffic e develo pm en t. Allo ws residen tia l in either a sta n d-a lo n e o r m ixed-use c o n figura tio n a n d c o uld in c lude live-wo rk un its, duplexes, a n d to wn ho uses in a ho rizo n ta l o r vertic a l m ixed-use pa ttern . Residen tia l develo pm en t in these a rea s em pha sizes qua lity a n d o ffers a va riety o f a m en ities. A m ix o f c o m m erc ia l uses wo uld c o n tin ue to a llo w fo r a ra n ge o f c o m m un ity-servic e reta il, o ffic e, a n d servic e c o m m erc ia l uses. U p to 27 du/a c with a m a xim um FAR o f 0.10 MU Mixed-U se Medium To a llo w flexib ility fo r pa rc els tha t c o uld tran sitio n fro m strip c o m m erc ia l uses to residen tia l o r a m ix o f residen tia l, c o m m erc ia l, a n d o ffic e develo pm en t. Allo ws residen tia l in either a sta n d-a lo n e o r m ixed-use c o n figura tio n . Residen tia l develo pm en t in these a rea s em pha sizes qua lity a n d o ffers a va riety o f a m en ities. A m ix o f c o m m erc ia l uses wo uld c o n tin ue to a llo w fo r a ra n ge o f c o m m un ity-servic e reta il, o ffic e, a n d servic e c o m m erc ia l uses. U p to 36 du/a c with a m a xim um FAR o f 0.35 MU Mixed-U se High To a llo w a m ix o f uses in c ludin g residen tia l, c o m m erc ia l, servic es, ho tel, a n d pro fessio n a l o ffic e uses in a high-qua lity en viro n m en t. The fo c us o f this design a tio n is o n c rea ted a pedestria n -frien dly en viro n m en t, in c ludin g in c rea sed c o n n ec tivity a n d c o m m un ity ga therin g spa c es. U ses a n d a c tivities a re design ed to gether in a n in tegra ted fa shio n to c rea te a dyn a m ic urb a n en viro n m en t. Co n tin uo us c o m m erc ia l street fro n ta ge o n the first a n d, perha ps, sec o n d flo o rs, suppo rted b y residen tia l a n d/o r o ffic e uses a b o ve, is the typic a l pa ttern o f vertic a lly m ixed lan d use. U ses m a y a lso b e m ixed in a ho rizo n ta l o r m ulti-use pa ttern . Sta n d-a lo n e uses within a m ulti-use pro jec t n eed to b e in tegra ted in to a n o vera ll pro jec t design a n d c o n n ec ted to o ther a djo in in g uses b y pla za , pro m en a des, a n d la n dsc a ped c o rrido rs, a n d sho uld in c lude c o m m o n a rc hitec tura l them es a n d sign a ge. Typic a l residen tia l uses c o uld in c lude sta c ked fla ts, live-wo rk un its, to wn ho uses, a n d a rtist-style lo fts. Residen tia l develo pm en t in these a rea s em pha sizes qua lity a n d o ffers a va riety o f a m en ities. U p to 60 du/a c with a m a xim um FAR o f 0.35 MU Mixed-U se U rb a n Co re To a llo w a m ix o f uses in c ludin g residen tia l, c o m m erc ia l, servic es, ho tel, a n d pro fessio n a l o ffic e uses in a high-qua lity en viro n m en t. The fo c us o f this design a tio n is o n c rea ted a pedestria n -frien dly en viro n m en t, in c ludin g in c rea sed c o n n ec tivity a n d c o m m un ity ga therin g spa c es. U ses a n d a c tivities a re design ed to gether in a n in tegra ted fa shio n to c rea te a dyn a m ic urb a n en viro n m en t. Co n tin uo us c o m m erc ia l street fro n ta ge o n the first a n d, perha ps, sec o n d flo o rs, suppo rted b y residen tia l a n d/o r o ffic e uses a b o ve, is the typic a l pa ttern o f vertic a lly m ixed la n d use. U ses m a y a lso b e m ixed in a ho rizo n ta l o r m ulti-use pa ttern . Sta n d-a lo n e uses within a m ulti-use pro jec t n eed to b e in tegra ted in to a n o vera ll pro jec t design a n d c o n n ec ted to o ther a djo in in g uses b y pla za , pro m en a des, a n d la n dsc a ped c o rrido rs, a n d sho uld in c lude c o m m o n a rc hitec tura l them es a n d sign a ge. Typic a l residen tia l uses c o uld in c lude sta c ked fla ts, live-wo rk un its, to wn ho uses, a n d a rtist-style lo fts. Residen tia l develo pm en t in these a rea s em pha sizes qua lity a n d o ffers a va riety o f a m en ities. U p to 100 du/a c with a m a xim um FAR o f 3.00 DMU , PTMU No n -Residen tia l Mixed-U se En c o ura ges a m ix o f c o m m erc ia l a n d o ffic e uses, b ut pro hib its residen tia l uses where residen tia l uses a re n o t c o m pa tib le with surro un din g la n d uses. All uses, den sities a n d in ten sities, o ther tha n residen tia l uses, tha t a re perm itted b y the Mixed-U se design a tio n a re a llo wed within the No n -Residen tia l Mixed-U se design a tio n . This designation is limited to the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan area. 3.00 Spec ific Pla n Open Space and Recreation Designation Description Maximum Density (FAR) Typical Implementation Zone(s) Open Spa c e Area s in ten ded to rem a in in n a tura l o pen spa c e; utility ea sem en ts tha t will pro vide rec rea tio n a l a n d tra il a c c ess to An a heim ’s residen ts; hea vily la n dsc a ped freewa y rem n a n t pa rc els, a n d la n d a rea s surro un din g m a jo r wa ter fea tures. 0.10 OS Pa rks Ac tive a n d pa ssive rec rea tio n a l uses suc h a s pa rks, tra ils, a thletic fields, in terpretive c en ters a n d go lf c o urses. 0.10 PR, SP Wa ter U ses Wa ter b o dies, suc h a s the Sa n ta An a River, la kes, a n d reservo irs, a n d o ther wa ter-rela ted uses suc h a s flo o d c o n tro l c ha n n els a n d dra in a ge b a sin s. 0.10 OS, PR, SP k In a dditio n to the typic a l zo n in g design a tio n s listed a b o ve, o ther zo n in g design a tio n s m a y im plem en t the Gen era l Pla n (i.e., Spec ific Pla n s a n d Overla y Z o n es), whic h c o uld further restric t m a xim um den sities. Fo r a llo wa b le den sities within Spec ific Pla n a rea s, plea se refer to the a pplic a b le Spec ific Pla n . Sin c e a llo wa b le uses within the In stitutio n a l la n d use design a tio n va ry sign ific a n tly (e.g., o ffic es, tra n spo rta tio n fa c ilities, lib ra ries, c o m m un ity c en ters, fire sta tio n s, etc .), the FAR fo r the In stitutio n a l design a tio n a lso va ries sign ific a n tly. Term s: du/a c = dwellin g un its per gro ss a c re FAR = Flo o r Area Ra tio Typic a l Im plem en ta tio n Z o n e Desc riptio n s: RH = Sin gle-Fa m ily Hillside Residen tia l C-R = Regio n a l Co m m erc ia l RS = Sin gle-Fa m ily Residen tia l C-G = Gen era l Co m m erc ia l RM = Multiple-Fa m ily Residen tia l C-NC = Neighb o rho o d Cen ter Co m m erc ia l O-L = L o w In ten sity Offic e Z o n e MU = Mixed U se Overla y PR = Pub lic Rec rea tio n O-H = High In ten sity Offic e Z o n e PTMU = Pla tin um Tria n gle Mixed-U se Overla y SP = Sem i-Pub lic I = In dustria l DMU = Do wn to wn Mixed U se Overla y OS = Open Spa c e Z o n e (SC) = Sc en ic Co rrido r Overla y T = Tra n sitio n Please refer to the Land Use Element of the General Plan for a more detailed descriptionof each land use designation and for density limits in Specific Areas of the City. No tes: Public and Quasi-Public Facilities Designation Description Maximum Density (FAR) Typical Implementation Zone(s) Sc ho o ls Existin g pub lic a n d la rger, esta b lished priva te sc ho o ls, in c ludin g elem en ta ry, jun io r a n d high sc ho o ls. Future sc ho o ls m a y b e develo ped in o ther la n d use design a tio n s thro ugh pro c edures esta b lished in the Z o n in g Co de. Tra de sc ho o ls o r o ther jo b tra in in g fa c ilities m a y b e develo ped in va rio us n o n -residen tia l la n d use a rea s un der the pro c edures esta b lished in the Z o n in g Co de. N/A SP In stitutio n a l Existin g fa c ilities o r kn o wn pla n n ed pub lic a n d qua si-pub lic uses, in c ludin g go vern m en t o ffic es, tra n spo rta tio n fa c ilities, pub lic o r priva te c o lleges a n d un iversities, pub lic utilities, ho spita ls, la rge a ssisted livin g fa c ilities, c o m m un ity c en ters, m useum s a n d pub lic lib ra ries. To the exten t po ssib le, in stitutio n a l fa c ilities sho uld b e c lustered in a c tivity c en ters to suppo rt o ther sim ila r uses a n d b en efit fro m a c c ess to va rio us m o des o f tra n spo rta tio n . Additio n a l uses, in c ludin g a ssem b ly area s a n d da y c a re fa c ilities, m a y b e develo ped in o ther la n d use design a tio n s un der the pro c edures esta b lished in the Z o n in g Co de. The m a xim um flo o r a rea ra tio reflec ts the po ten tia l fo r high-rise o ffic es used b y go vern m en ta l o r qua si-pub lic a gen c ies. Additio n a l in ten sity pro visio n s a re a ddressed in the Z o n in g Co de. U p to 3.00 SP Ra ilro a d Pa ssen ger, c o m m uter, a n d freight ra ilro a ds N/A In term o da l Tra n spo rta tio n Cen ter Iden tifies a pla n n ed m a jo r in term o da l tra n spo rta tio n c en ter in The Pla tin um Tria n gle. The in term o da l tra n spo rta tio n c en ter wo uld fit in to the urb a n , m ixed-use en viro n m en t pla n n ed fo r The Pla tin um Tria n gle, pro vidin g a m ultitude o f tra n spo rta tio n o ptio n s fo r residen ts, em plo yees a n d visito rs o f The Pla tin um Tria n gle a n d n ea rb y An a heim Reso rt. N/A k Commercial Designation Description Maximum Density (FAR) Typical Implementation Zone(s) Neighb o rho o d Cen ter To serve the surro un din g residen tia l n eighb o rho o d o r c luster o f surro un din g residen tia l n eighb o rho o ds. Develo pm en t sho uld b e c o m pa tib le in sc a le a n d design with a dja c en t residen tia l a rea s, a n d sho uld b e design ed to en c o ura ge pedestria n usa ge. Not intended to encourage strip commercial dev elopment or large, regionally-serv ing, retail uses. 0.45 C-NC Regio n a l Co m m erc ia l Serves a la rger a rea tha n Neighb o rho o d Cen ters a n d in c lude regio n a l-servin g c o m m erc ia l uses. Allo wa b le uses c o uld in c lude la rge depa rtm en t sto res, spec ia lty sto res, thea ters, a n d resta ura n ts. The Regio n a l Co m m erc ia l design a tio n a lso a llo ws fo r lim ited pro fessio n a l o ffic es. 0.50 C-R Gen era l Co m m erc ia l Ac c o m m o da tes a va riety o f la n d uses, in c ludin g tho se iden tified in the Neighb o rho o d Cen ter design a tio n a n d m a y, b ut n o t n ec essa rily, serve the a dja c en t n eighb o rho o d o r surro un din g c lusters o f n eighb o rho o ds. In a dditio n to so m e o f the uses desc rib ed in the c o m m erc ia l c en ter desc riptio n . Highwa y-servin g uses suc h a s fa st fo o d resta ura n ts, a uto o rien ted uses suc h a s tire sto res, servic e sta tio n s, a uto pa rts sto res, a n d o ther sta n d-a lo n e reta il uses a re a lso en visio n ed. 0.50 C-G Co m m erc ia l Rec rea tio n In ten ded to pro vide fo r to urist a n d en terta in m en t rela ted in dustries, suc h a s them e pa rks, ho tels, to urist o rien ted reta il, m o vie thea ters, a n d o ther visito r-servin g fa c ilities. Implemented by v arious Specific Plan Zones, which further define the maximum dev elopment intensities within this designation. N/A Spec ific Pla n Office Designation Description Maximum Density (FAR) Typical Implementation Zone(s) Offic e-L o w Sm a ll-sc a le o ffic e uses, in c ludin g lo c a l b ra n c hes o f fin a n c ia l in stitutio n s, lega l servic es, in sura n c e servic es, rea l esta te, a n d m edic a l o r den ta l o ffic es a n d suppo rt servic es. It is in ten ded to fa c ilita te o ffic e develo pm en t o f up to three sto ries in height a s sta n d-a lo n e pro jec ts o r within a b usin ess pa rk settin g. 0.50 O-L Offic e-High Higher den sity o ffic e uses tha t ha ve a t lea st fo ur sto ries. Fo c used in a rea s pla n n ed fo r m o re c o n c en tra ted urb a n develo pm en t suc h a s The Pla tin um Tria n gle, key lo c a tio n s a lo n g tra n sit ro utes, m a jo r in tersec tio n s, o r in c lo se pro xim ity to sign ific a n t a c tivity c en ters. Typic a l uses wo uld in c lude n a tio n a l o r regio n a l o ffic es fo r fin a n c ia l in stitutio n s, Fo rtun e 500 c o m pa n ies, a n d m edic a l-rela ted o ffic e c o m plexes. 2.00 O-H Industrial Designation Description Maximum Density (FAR) Typical Implementation Zone(s) In dustria l In dustria l-rela ted uses, in c ludin g resea rc h a n d develo pm en t uses, tec hn o lo gy c en ters, c o rpo ra te a n d suppo rt o ffic e uses; b usin ess pa rks, a ssem b ly a n d light m a n ufa c turin g, repa ir a n d o ther servic e fa c ilities; wa reho usin g a n d distrib utio n c en ters; a n d, lim ited, em plo yee-servin g reta il uses. 0.50 I Residential Designation Description Density (Dwelling Units per Acre) Typical Implementation Zone(s) Esta te Den sity L a rge-lo t sin gle-fa m ily sub divisio n s o f a c usto m c ha ra c ter. Typic a l develo pm en t c o n sists o f sin gle-fa m ily residen c es o n lo ts o f 22,000 to 43,560 squa re feet. This land use designation is limited to the Hill and Canyon Area. 0-1.5 RH-1, RH-2 L o w Den sity Co n ven tio n a l sin gle-fa m ily deta c hed sub divisio n s. Typic a l develo pm en t c o n sists o f sin gle-fa m ily residen c es o n lo ts o f 5,000 to 10,000 squa re-feet. 0-6.5 RS-1, RS-2, RS-3, RH-3 L o w-Medium Hillside Bo th a tta c hed a n d deta c hed sin gle-fa m ily residen c es in hillside a rea s. L o t sizes in these a rea s a re typic a lly sm a ller, ha vin g typic a l m in im um lo t sizes o f less tha n 5,000 squa re-feet, due to the slo pin g to po gra phy a n d a sso c ia ted reduc tio n in develo pa b le a rea . Develo pm en t is o ften “c lustered” in o rder to reduc e site gra din g while m a xim izin g the preserva tio n o f o pen spa c e. This land use designation is limited to the Hill and Canyon Area. 0-6.0 RS-3(SC), RS-4(SC), RM-2(SC) L o w-Medium Den sity A wide ra n ge o f residen tia l uses, in c ludin g deta c hed, sm a ll-lo t sin gle-fa m ily residen c es, a tta c hed sin gle-fa m ily residen c es, pa tio ho m es, zero lo t lin e residen c es, duplexes, to wn ho uses, a n d m o b ile ho m e pa rks. 0-18.0 RS-4, RM-1, RM-2, RM-3 Medium Den sity Multiple-fa m ily livin g en viro n m en t with design a m en ities, suc h a s priva te o pen spa c e o r rec rea tio n a rea s, b usin ess servic es, swim m in g po o ls, etc . Typic a l develo pm en t in c ludes a pa rtm en t c o m plexes. 0-36.0 RM-3, RM-3.5, RM-4 Mid Den sity A wide ra n ge o f residen tia l uses, in c ludin g deta c hed, sm a ll-lo t sin gle-fa m ily ho m es, a tta c hed sin gle-fa m ily ho m es, pa tio ho m es, zero lo t lin e ho m es, duplexes, a n d to wn ho uses. 0-27.0 RM-3, RM-3.5 Co rrido r Residen tia l Residen tia l develo pm en t o n m in im um o n e-a c re pro jec t sites fo r sin gle-fa m ily a tta c hed to wn ho use style ho usin g typic a lly fro n tin g o n a rteria l highwa ys a n d in c o rpo ra tin g a rea r a c c ess drive o r servic e a lley. This designation is intended to prov ide for housing opportunities along the City’s arterial corridors. 0-13.0 RM-1 Adopted: May 25, 2004, City Council Resolution No. 2004-95 as amended thereafterLatest Revision Date: June 9,2020 City Council Resolution No. 2020-056 & 2020-061 This m a p m a y n o t represen t the m o st c urren t in fo rm a tio n a va ila b lea n d m a y b e revised witho ut prio r n o tic e to the user. The Pla n n in g Servic es Divisio n sta ff o f the Pla n n in g Depa rtm en t sho uld b ec o n sulted fo r the m o st c urren t in fo rm a tio n . 2,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,0001,000 Feet10 10.5 Miles µ G E N E R A L G E N E R A LLand UseLand Use City o f An a heim , Ca lifo rn ia City o f An a heim , Ca lifo rn ia PP LL AA NNPPllaann THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions Appendix I: Sewer Study THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions I.1 - Approved Project-Specific Sewer Study THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Anaheim DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Anaheim City Hall 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 TEL: 714.765.5176 FAX: 714.765.5161 To: William Grigsby, Principal Civil Engineer, Design Services From: Keith Linker, Principal Civil Engineer, Development Services CC: Esperanza Rios, Associate Civil Engineer, Development Services Date: May 13, 2021 RE: Alternatives for Correction of Existing Sewer Deficiency in “North Katella Sewer” The purpose of this memo is to outline to possible improvements presently known that would correct the existing deficiency in the North Katella Sewer. As outlined in the attached PSOMAS Study (dated May 6, 2021) the correction identified for this deficiency was a cross-connection/bypass of flow from the North Katella Sewer to the South Katella Sewer. However, specifics as to the construction method and design detail was not identified in that study as it was not part of the scope. Presently, a development proposed at 110 Midway Drive has been identified as having an impact on the North Katella Sewer and therefore is obligated to perform the correction that will accomplish the goal of relieving the deficiency, presumably by creating or constructing said cross-connection/bypass prior to building permit issuance. Therefore, some of the alternatives that City Staff are aware of, based on discussions with you and your staff, are offered for consideration below. 1. Design – to the satisfaction and approval of the City – a bypass sewer that is demonstrated (through calculations) to provide the required flow between the North Katella Sewer and the South Katella Sewer. Construct said improvement, which includes the following actions/steps: a. Obtain a Right of Way Construction Permit, RCP, for the Construction of the Sewer including Site Specific Traffic Control Plans. 2. Explore with the support of a confined entry contractor and in coordination with City Staff, the possibility of opening up 2 existing bypass pipes (one 15” and one 8”) that were sealed about 10 years ago. a. A RCP shall be obtained from the Public Works Department to access the bypass pipes and for any additional related construction activities. 3. Propose an alternative approach to accomplish the same goal as the bypass would accomplish, which is to relieve the deficiency in the North Katella Sewer while not creating any deficiencies elsewhere. Attachment: PSOMAS Study of 5/6/2021 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Keith Linker From: Mike Swan Date: May 6, 2021 Subject: Sewer Study – 110 W. Midway Dr. City Project Tracking No.: OTH2021-01349 The purpose of this memorandum is to document a sewer study prepared for the proposed Midway Affordable Apartments consisting of 86 dwelling units (du), 1,700 square foot (sf) public use flex space, and 3,330 sf leasing/resident amenity space. The site consists of Assessor Parcel Nos. (APN) 082-185-01, 082-185-47 and 082-185-48, 082-185-52, and 082-185-53, with an area of approximately 1.9 acres. The project would include the demolition of the existing Anaheim Resort RV Park office on the northwest corner of the site, consisting of 4,591 sf of commercial use. The site is bounded on the north by Midway Drive and on the east by Anaheim Boulevard, on the west by Zeyn Street and on the south by the existing Golden Skies Mobile Home Park as shown on Figure 1. Sewage from the existing site currently discharges to the 8-inch VCP sewer along Anaheim Boulevard and the 12-inch pipeline along Midway Drive. According to the Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CAMPSS), dated December 2017, and the updated modeling from the South Central Anaheim Sewer Study (SCASS) dated May 2020, sewer generation from the site and adjacent parcels to the north and south in the Existing and Buildout System computer model scenarios were loaded as commercial use based on acreage to the existing 12-inch VCP sewer running westerly down Midway Drive. Sewage from the project site is proposed to discharge at manholes SW086411 on Midway Drive and SW096307 on Anaheim Boulevard. The existing commercial load of 1.42 gpm, or about 2,050 gpd, for the project site of 1.93 acres will be removed from manhole SW086411 in Midway Drive. Sewage from the proposed 86 DUs will add an average load of 12.54 gpm, or 18,060 gpd, to manhole SW086411. The community flex space, clubhouse, restrooms, utility rooms, and pool building will add 7.75 gpm, or 2,515 gpd, to manhole SW096307 in Anaheim Blvd. The existing and proposed manhole loading with flow generation is summarized in Table 1. Flow factors are in gallons per day (gpd)/acre, gpd/du, and gpd/thousand square feet (ksf). The existing downstream sewer collection system and the location of the proposed project site are shown on Figure 2. In addition, the proposed Legacy and Avanti Townhomes development sewer flow generations were loaded to manholes along Willow Street in both the exiting and buildout model runs. The proposed flow factor for apartment units is 210 gpd/du based on the Central Anaheim Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CAMPSS). As shown in Table 1, the proposed flow decrease from the existing commercial site is 2,050 gpd and the proposed flow increase for the project to 110 W. Midway Sewer Study Page 2 of 3 May 6, 2021 2ANA015038 2 Midway Drive is 20,575 gpd, for a total average daily flow increase to the sewer collection system of 18,525 gpd. Table 1 – Existing and Proposed Manhole Flow Loading The Existing Condition Scenario plus the peak project flow over a 24-hour simulation period and the maximum depth-to-Diameter (d/D) ratios for the sewer collection system from the latest hydraulic model are shown in Table 2. The sewer system manholes are shown in detail in the immediate vicinity of the project on Figure 1 with manhole numbers corresponding to the Upstream and Downstream IDs in Table 2. The entire downstream sewer collection system is shown graphically on Figure 2 with manhole numbers at key locations shown. Flow from the project runs westerly in Midway, southerly in Harbor Blvd. and westerly in Katella Ave. There are two parallel sewers in Harbor Boulevard west of the 5 Freeway and Manchester Avenue. The project flows split into an 18-inch line on the west and 15-inch on the east. They connect to the northerly line on Katella Avenue and continue to flow westerly. Downstream of Harbor Boulevard, the northerly line is 21-inch in diameter increasing to 24-inch at Disneyland Drive. It increases to 27-inch after Walnut Street and eventually discharges to the Orange County Sanitation District trunk sewer system in Euclid Street. The model was updated to match as-built slopes along the easterly Harbor Blvd sewer line. Prior to making these updates, there were capacity deficient pipeline reaches upstream of the pipe diversion on Disney Way. As shown on Table 2, Existing Scenario, the existing condition shows a maximum d/D ratios of 0.61 in the easterly Harbor Boulevard 15-inch line so the deficiencies were eliminated after adjusting the slopes to match as-builts. Downstream of the project there is a capacity deficient sewer segment on the northerly Katella Avenue line. There is a maximum 110 W. Midway Sewer Study Page 3 of 3 May 6, 2021 2ANA015038 3 d/D of 1.0, well above the d/D criteria of 0.75 for lines 12 inches in diameter and larger and 0.67 for lines 10 inches and smaller. Based on this analysis, the system has capacity deficiencies in the downstream collection system from the proposed project. However these deficiencies have come up in previous sewer studies and as a parallel system, if the northerly line does flow full, it will eventually spill into the southerly line at certain existing points where the parallel lines are interconnected and it won’t spill. The Buildout Condition Scenario plus the project flows and d/D ratios for the sewer collection system from the hydraulic model are shown in Table 3. As seen in Table 3, Buildout Scenario, there are deficiencies present in the northerly Katella Avenue line for five sewer segments just upstream of Disneyland Drive and two segments between Walnut and 9th Street. The same parallel system in Katella Avenue line described above in the Existing Scenario applies to the Buildout Scenario as well. In the Buildout Scenario, the flows are slightly higher but the full flows shown are actually just over 1.0 with the highest Q over Qfull being only 1.06. So the hydraulic grade line will not surcharge these manholes appreciably and the sewer has 10 to 12 feet of cover in these reaches. The South Central Anaheim Sewer Study (SCASS) identifies improvement projects that would free up capacity along the northerly Katella line. Conclusion Sewer system improvements upstream of Harbor and Katella are not required for the proposed Midway Affordable Apartments consisting of 86 dwelling units (DU), 1,700 square foot (sf) public use flex space, and 3,330 sf leasing/resident amenity space. However, model results show insufficient capacity within certain segments of the northerly Katella sewer of the parallel Katella system that are exacerbated by the increased sewer flow generated by the proposed project for both existing and buildout demand scenarios. And there are improvements recommended in the SCASS to alleviate these capacity deficient sewer segments that could be implemented. Attachments: Figures 1 & 2, Tables 2 & 3, Site Plan Exhibit Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityFIGURE 1LOCATION MAP MIDWAY DR SW096 3 0 7 A N A H E I M B L V D SW086 4 1 1 SW096 3 0 5 SW086 4 0 9 SW086 4 0 8 SW086 4 0 7 ZE Y N S T EXISTING GOLDEN SKIES MOBILE HOME PARK PROJECT SITEAPN:082-185-53082-185-01 082-185-52082-185-47082-185-48 12" 8" 15" PROPOSED AVANTI TOWNHOMES PROPOSED LEGACY DEVELOPMENT WI L L O W S T 18"SW086 4 0 6 SW086 4 0 5 5- F W Y M A N C H E S T E R A V E Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityFIGURE 1LOCATION MAP -160 gpm - Amount over capacity +1,215 gpm - Amount of available capacity (limiting reach) -160 gpm-45 gpmKATELLA AVE EU C L I D S T 9T H S T WA L N U T S T DI S N E Y L A N D D R OT0574 4 5 SW0504 3 0 HA R B O R B L V D SW076 4 3 2 18" 21" MIDWAY DR 5- F W Y SW0663 3 2 SW0664 3 0 SW0873 1 9 SW086 3 2 6 SW096 3 0 7 AN A H E I M B L V D PROJECT SITE 8" 12"18" 15" 24"27" M A N C H E S T E R A V E DISNEY WAY +1,215 gpm+2,655 gpm FIGURE 2 TRIBUTARY BASIN MAP Table 2 - Existing Land Use Scenario Plus Project Street Cross Street Upstrm MH-Dwnstrm MH Size (in) Length (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Peak Flow (gpm) d/D Anaheim SW096307-SW096305 8 361 0.002 68 0.38 Anaheim SW096305-SW086411 12 135 0.006 117 0.23 SW086411-SW086409 12 284 0.002 149 0.32 Zeyn SW086409-SW086408 12 292 0.002 149 0.32 Lemon SW086408-SW086407 12 93 0.003 149 0.31 SW086407-SW086406 15 196 0.002 158 0.24 Clementine SW086406-SW086405 15 292 0.002 158 0.24 Willow SW086405-SW086313 15 207 0.002 430 0.41 Yucca SW086313-SW086312 15 174 0.001 436 0.48 5-FWY SW086312-SW086321 15 14 0.023 436 0.23 SW086321-SW086322 18 412 0.002 557 0.38 SW086322-SW086323 18 70 0.002 557 0.37 SW086323-SW086324 18 232 0.002 557 0.38 SW086324-SW086325 18 167 0.002 557 0.38 SW086325-SW086326 18 126 0.002 637 0.41 SW086326-SW086327 15 26 0.003 311 0.31 SW086327-SW086309 15 46 0.002 311 0.37 SW086309-SW086310 15 357 0.002 311 0.36 SW086310-SW065317 15 31 0.002 311 0.36 SW065317-SW086311 15 306 0.002 432 0.43 SW086311-SW087101 15 339 0.002 500 0.47 SW087101-SW087102 15 41 0.002 550 0.49 SW087102-SW087103 15 297 0.002 592 0.52 SW087103-SW087104 15 43 0.002 615 0.53 SW087104-SW087105 15 291 0.001 653 0.55 SW087105-SW087106 15 340 0.001 675 0.61 Disney SW087106-SW087304 15 340 0.001 297 0.35 SW087304-SW087305 15 330 0.003 392 0.39 SW087305-SW087306 15 333 0.002 443 0.41 SW087306-SW087319 15 319 0.005 444 0.42 Katella SW087319-SW076432 21 56 0.002 444 0.28 SW086326-SW076416 18 114 0.011 326 0.19 SW076416-SW075417 18 355 0.002 326 0.28 SW075417-SW076418 18 167 0.005 813 0.36 SW076418-SW076419 18 297 0.001 813 0.51 SW076419-SW076420 18 276 0.002 813 0.51 SW076420-SW076421 18 226 0.001 813 0.51 SW076421-SW076422 18 228 0.001 813 0.51 SW076422-SW076423 18 270 0.001 813 0.51 SW076423-SW076224 18 267 0.001 813 0.57 Disney SW076224-SW076425 18 312 0.002 1,251 0.62 SW076425-SW076402 18 189 0.002 1,251 0.60 SW076402-SW076403 18 238 0.002 1,251 0.59 SW076403-SW076404 18 236 0.002 1,251 0.58 Katella SW076404-SW076432 18 235 0.003 1,251 0.51 E A S T E R L Y H A R B O R W E S T E R L Y H A R B O R Manchester M I D W A Y Page 1 of 2 Table 2 - Existing Land Use Scenario Plus Project Street Cross Street Upstrm MH-Dwnstrm MH Size (in) Length (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Peak Flow (gpm) d/D Harbor SW076432-SW076431 21 41 0.002 1,690 0.59 SW076431-SW076430 21 23 0.053 1,690 0.23 SW076430-SW076429 21 267 0.002 1,690 0.58 SW076429-SW076428 21 265 0.002 1,772 0.60 SW076428-SW076427 21 39 0.018 1,772 0.32 SW076427-SW076417 21 449 0.002 1,782 0.61 SW076417-SW076312 21 384 0.002 1,946 0.64 SW076312-SW076311 21 374 0.002 2,690 1.00 SW076311-SW076310 21 253 0.002 2,690 1.00 SW076310-SW076309 21 249 0.002 2,690 1.00 SW076309-SW066430 21 261 0.002 2,690 1.00 Disneyland SW066430-SW066424 24 44 0.002 3,409 0.75 SW066424-SW066428 24 19 0.002 3,152 0.71 SW066428-SW066427 24 265 0.002 3,152 0.70 SW066427-SW066423 24 332 0.002 3,152 0.70 SW066423-SW066426 24 314 0.002 3,152 0.70 SW066426-SW066332 24 340 0.002 3,152 0.70 Walnut SW066332-OT066331 24 25 0.002 3,238 0.72 OT066331-OT066329 27 661 0.002 5,079 0.81 OT066329-OT057445 27 658 0.002 5,079 0.81 9th OT057445-OT057447 27 143 0.009 5,076 0.47 OT057447-OT057448 27 450 0.008 5,076 0.47 OT057448-OT057449 27 83 0.014 5,076 0.41 OT057449-OT057450 27 566 0.005 5,077 0.55 OT057450-OT057342 27 98 0.005 5,094 0.55 OT057342-OT057339 27 681 0.005 5,094 0.55 Euclid OT057339-SW050430 27 603 0.007 5,094 0.51 N O R T H E R L Y K A T E L L A Page 2 of 2 Table 3 - Buildout Land Use Scenario Plus Project Street Cross Street Upstrm MH-Dwnstrm MH Size (in) Length (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Peak Flow (gpm) d/D Anaheim SW096307-SW096305 8 361 0.002 85 0.42 Anaheim SW096305-SW086411 12 135 0.006 146 0.25 SW086411-SW086409 12 284 0.002 178 0.35 Zeyn SW086409-SW086408 12 292 0.002 178 0.35 Lemon SW086408-SW086407 12 93 0.003 178 0.34 SW086407-SW086406 15 196 0.002 189 0.27 Clementine SW086406-SW086405 15 292 0.002 189 0.26 Willow SW086405-SW086313 15 207 0.002 467 0.43 Yucca SW086313-SW086312 15 174 0.001 473 0.50 5-FWY SW086312-SW086321 15 14 0.023 473 0.24 SW086321-SW086322 18 412 0.002 601 0.39 SW086322-SW086323 18 70 0.002 601 0.39 SW086323-SW086324 18 232 0.002 601 0.40 SW086324-SW086325 18 167 0.002 601 0.40 SW086325-SW086326 18 126 0.002 726 0.44 SW086326-SW086327 15 26 0.003 346 0.33 SW086327-SW086309 15 46 0.002 346 0.40 SW086309-SW086310 15 357 0.002 346 0.38 SW086310-SW065317 15 31 0.002 346 0.38 SW065317-SW086311 15 306 0.002 468 0.45 SW086311-SW087101 15 339 0.002 535 0.49 SW087101-SW087102 15 41 0.002 585 0.51 SW087102-SW087103 15 297 0.002 627 0.53 SW087103-SW087104 15 43 0.002 650 0.55 SW087104-SW087105 15 291 0.001 688 0.56 SW087105-SW087106 15 340 0.001 713 0.64 Disney SW087106-SW087304 15 340 0.001 312 0.36 SW087304-SW087305 15 330 0.003 407 0.40 SW087305-SW087306 15 333 0.002 458 0.42 SW087306-SW087319 15 319 0.005 460 0.42 Katella SW087319-SW076432 21 56 0.002 459 0.28 SW086326-SW076416 18 114 0.011 380 0.20 SW076416-SW075417 18 355 0.002 380 0.30 SW075417-SW076418 18 167 0.005 868 0.38 SW076418-SW076419 18 297 0.001 868 0.53 SW076419-SW076420 18 276 0.002 868 0.53 SW076420-SW076421 18 226 0.001 868 0.53 SW076421-SW076422 18 228 0.001 868 0.53 SW076422-SW076423 18 270 0.001 868 0.53 SW076423-SW076224 18 267 0.001 868 0.59 Disney SW076224-SW076425 18 312 0.002 1,329 0.65 SW076425-SW076402 18 189 0.002 1,329 0.62 SW076402-SW076403 18 238 0.002 1,328 0.61 SW076403-SW076404 18 236 0.002 1,328 0.61 Katella SW076404-SW076432 18 235 0.003 1,329 0.53 M I D W A Y Manchester E A S T E R L Y H A R B O R W E S T E R L Y H A R B O R Page 1 of 2 Table 3 - Buildout Land Use Scenario Plus Project Street Cross Street Upstrm MH-Dwnstrm MH Size (in) Length (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Peak Flow (gpm) d/D Harbor SW076432-SW076431 21 41 0.002 1,783 0.61 SW076431-SW076430 21 23 0.053 1,782 0.24 SW076430-SW076429 21 267 0.002 1,783 0.61 SW076429-SW076428 21 265 0.002 1,864 0.62 SW076428-SW076427 21 39 0.018 1,865 0.33 SW076427-SW076417 21 449 0.002 1,874 0.63 SW076417-SW076312 21 384 0.002 2,039 0.66 SW076312-SW076311 21 374 0.002 2,782 1.00 SW076311-SW076310 21 253 0.002 2,782 1.00 SW076310-SW076309 21 249 0.002 2,782 1.00 SW076309-SW066430 21 261 0.002 2,782 1.00 Disneyland SW066430-SW066424 24 44 0.002 3,498 0.76 SW066424-SW066428 24 19 0.002 3,241 0.72 SW066428-SW066427 24 265 0.002 3,241 0.72 SW066427-SW066423 24 332 0.002 3,241 0.72 SW066423-SW066426 24 314 0.002 3,241 0.72 SW066426-SW066332 24 340 0.002 3,241 0.72 Walnut SW066332-OT066331 24 25 0.002 3,331 0.74 OT066331-OT066329 27 661 0.002 5,169 1.00 OT066329-OT057445 27 658 0.002 5,169 1.00 9th OT057445-OT057447 27 143 0.009 5,166 0.48 OT057447-OT057448 27 450 0.008 5,166 0.48 OT057448-OT057449 27 83 0.014 5,166 0.41 OT057449-OT057450 27 566 0.005 5,167 0.56 OT057450-OT057342 27 98 0.005 5,185 0.56 OT057342-OT057339 27 681 0.005 5,185 0.56 Euclid OT057339-SW050430 27 603 0.007 5,185 0.52 N O R T H E R L Y K A T E L L A Page 2 of 2 ELEC / PHONECATVFIRERISERELEC / PHONE CATV FIRE RISERELEC / PHONECATVFIRERISER ELEC / PHONE CATV FIRERISER 0 S C A L E : 1 " = 2 0 ' 1 0 2 0 4 0 0 S C A L E : 1 " = 2 0 ' 1 0 2 0 4 0 A n a h e i m B l v d P O C # 1 - C o m m u n i t y F l e x s p a c e ( w / R e s t r o o m s ) - R e s i d e n t i a l C l u b h o u s e , U t i l i t y R o o m , R e s t r o o m s - P o o l B u i l d i n g w / R e s t r o o m s M i d w a y P O C # 1 - 4 3 U n i t s ( 5 0 % ) Midway POC #2-43 Units (50%) City of Anaheim– Midway Townhomes Project Appendix N Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions I.2 - South Central Anaheim Sewer Study THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CITY OF ANAHEIM South Central Anaheim Sewer Study May 2020 Prepared by 3 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 200 Santa Ana, CA 92707 South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction/Objective ................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 Existing System Description........................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Ball Road System ...................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Katella Avenue System ............................................................................. 2-2 3.0 Development of Alternatives and Initial Analysis .................................... 3-1 3.1 Alternatives Development ........................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Initial Analysis .......................................................................................... 3-2 3.3 Conclusions of Initial Analysis ................................................................. 3-5 4.0 Concept Design Analysis ............................................................................. 4-1 5.0 Study Summary ............................................................................................ 5-1 6.0 Future Preliminary Design.......................................................................... 6.1 South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Figures Figure 1: Ball and Katella Tributary Areas Figure 2: Ball Road Study Area Figure 3: Katella Avenue Study Area Figure 4: Alternative 1 – Ball Road Reverse Sewer Figure 5: Alternative 2 – Ball Road Interties at Palm Street Figure 6: Alternative 3 – Ball Road to Orangewood Avenue Figure 7: Alternative 4A – Katella Avenue at Anaheim Way to Orangewood Ave Figure 8: Alternative 4B – Katella Avenue at Lewis Street to Orangewood Ave Figure 9: Alternative 5 – Manchester Avenue to Katella Avenue Figure 10: Alternative 6 – Katella Avenue Interties at Harbor Blvd Figure 11: Alternative 7 – Cerritos Avenue Improvement Figure 12: Critical Reach Flow – Existing and Proposed Tables Table 1: Ball Road Pre-Improvement Buildout Capacity Table 2: Katella Avenue Pre-Improvement Buildout Capacity Table 3: Summary of Improvement Alternatives Table 4: Improvement Cost Estimates Table 5A: Critical Reach Capacity Table 5B: Development Units per 100 gpm Capacity Table 6: Ball Road Post-Improvement Buildout Capacity Table 7: Katella Avenue Post-Improvement Buildout Capacity – Including DLR South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Exhibits Exhibit I: Alternative 1 – Ball Road Reverse Sewer Exhibit II: Alternative 2 – Ball Road Diversions Near Palm Street Exhibit III: Alternative 4A – Katella Avenue at Anaheim Way to Orangewood Alternative 4B – Katella Avenue at Lewis Street to Orangewood Exhibit IV: Alternative 6 – Katella Avenue Diversion at Harbor Blvd Exhibit V: Alternative 7B – Cerritos Avenue at Walnut Street Improvement Exhibit VI: Alternative 8 – Katella Avenue Interties at Walnut Street Appendices Appendix A: Sewer Studies and Development Activity Appendix B: Datum Adjustment Calculation Rationale South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 1-1 SOUTH CENTRAL ANAHEIM SEWER STUDY 1.0 Introduction/Objective The goal of the study is to analyze alternatives and develop recommended capital improvements that will eliminate buildout capacity constraints in the current sewer model and maximize the capacity of the existing collection system to provide for future development within the southern portion of the Central Anaheim Area. The Central Anaheim Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CAMPSS) model and recent sewer study modeling identifies two areas within the study area that exhibit capacity constraints. One is the Ball Road system on either side of Harbor Blvd. and the other is the parallel Katella Avenue sewer system downstream of Harbor Blvd. These two major sewer systems serve portions of the downtown Anaheim area, the entire Resort Area, Disneyland and most of The Platinum Triangle area and are illustrated on Figure 1. The CAMPSS dated December 2017 along with the hydraulic model developed for that master plan was used as a starting point for this study. It should be noted that the hydraulic model has been updated periodically since the completion of the master plan through developer sewer studies so that the existing land use and sewer loading is current based on approved development projects. Also, the City provided a list of development activity within the study area to confirm that the model had been updated to include the loading associated with new developments. The model was updated as needed based on this data. The list of sewer studies and City development activity is included in Appendix A. The General Plan Land Use data used to project future flows within the model buildout scenario matches the current existing General Plan Land Use provided by the City dated November 6, 2019. Updated buildout model loading includes the specific land use designations included in the Anaheim Resort, Disneyland Resort and Hotel Circle Specific Plans and the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. In addition to the above updates, the buildout scenario increased non- residential loading by 25% to account for underutilized land and site redevelopment. Similarly, residential uses were increased by 5% to account for potential changes in demographics and/or density. As part of this study, potential future flow from the Disneyland Resort (DLR) property is also evaluated. The DLR areas that may be redeveloped include existing surface parking lots that are tributary to study area pipelines. Sewer flows for these potential development areas are estimated based on the maximum of 75 hotel rooms per acre and the CAMPSS sewer loading factor of 150 gallons per day per room. Much of the pipeline data including invert elevations, slopes and pipeline configurations in this model is still based on the previous Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CCAAMPSS) model. That model was converted from Hydra software to InfoSewer in the CAMPSS and updated to include numerous capital improvements constructed since South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 1-2 preparation of the CCAAMPSS. As part of this analysis, the model was adjusted to reflect research on the record drawings of storm drain and sewer improvement projects in the study area. In parallel with this plan research and model refinement, alternative improvements that could potentially reduce or divert flow from the sewer lines that are experiencing capacity constraints in the buildout scenario condition noted earlier were investigated to determine their feasibility. South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 2-1 2.0 Existing System Description 2.1 Ball Road System Capacity issues currently exist on the Ball Road sewer system between Harbor Blvd. and the I-5 Freeway. There is an existing 18” sewer segment with a length of approximately 130’ that was identified for improvement to a 24” line for buildout flows based on the CAMPSS. Figure 1 shows the location of the pipeline reaches with capacity issues and also the associated tributary pipelines that contribute flow to these reaches, including the Ball Road segment identified in the CAMPSS. The Ball Road sewer system tributary area (Model 21) is also shown on Figure 1. The CAMPSS established a maximum depth-to-Diameter (d/D) criteria to evaluate the capacity of existing sewer pipelines. This value represents the depth of peak dry weather flow divided by the diameter of the pipeline. This allows capacity remaining in the pipeline (above the maximum d/D) for wet weather conditions. The buildout peak flows and the pipeline capacities in the northerly and southerly Ball Road sewer pipelines between Lemon Street and the I-5 Freeway are shown in Table 1. The pipeline capacity based on the maximum d/D criteria is shown in the table as “Analysis Flow” along with the capacity d/D shown as “Analysis d/D Ratio.” The excess capacity available and the amount of flow exceeding the pipeline capacity is shown as “Analysis Excess,” with the flow amounts exceeding the capacity shown as a negative value in red. Figure 2 shows this same area with the flow in excess of capacity for critical reaches identified as a negative value in red and the capacity remaining in critical reaches shown as positive values in blue. Critical reaches are those reaches which exceed the pipeline capacity or limit the amount of flow that can be diverted to them with the minimum capacity available. As shown, the critical reach in the northerly pipeline at Harbor Blvd., identified in the CAMPSS, is nearing capacity with only 14 GPM available. Another critical reach identified is a short reach of the southerly Ball Road pipeline at Lemon Street. Sewer record drawings for the siphon between Lemon Street and the southerly Ball Road line are shown incorrectly on Plan 4229. They show SW085429 connecting to the southerly 24” line at SW086201 with a 0.5’ drop, which is how it was depicted in the GIS, and modeled. From researching storm drain and newer sewer improvement plans and confirmed from Google street view, a new manhole was constructed about 20’ easterly of SW086201, presumably on the existing 15” line that drops into the 24” at SW086201. That would change the drop across the siphon but it is unknown by how much without dipping the manholes. They could have also replaced that 20’ portion of 15” with 24” between SW086201 and the new manhole as well. Otherwise that short portion of 15” pipe and the siphon will restrict flow from going in that direction as the model currently has about 23% of the flow going through the siphon. Also, that portion of the 15” pipeline is likely over capacity as shown on Figure 2. The details of this siphon need to be ascertained in order to accurately determine whether there is a capacity constraint downstream; because if most of the flow coming down Lemon Street is sent through the northerly Ball Road line there may be a constraint in the reach just downstream of Harbor Blvd. and potentially other reaches before the two lines join up again under the freeway at South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 2-2 SW075202. From SW075202 westerly on Ball Road the model shows there is adequate additional capacity all the way to the discharge to the OCSD trunk at Euclid Street. 2.2 Katella Avenue System The primary capacity constraint appears to be the Katella Avenue sewer system which has the largest tributary area and serves much of the densest land uses in the City, including Disneyland/California Adventure, the Resort Area and The Platinum Triangle as well as other areas. From its downstream connection to OCSD’s Euclid Avenue trunk sewer system, the Katella Avenue system consists of two parallel sewers between Euclid Avenue and Harbor Blvd. (approximately 7,920 feet in distance), with diameters ranging from 21” to 27” in the northerly line and 24” the entire length of the southerly line. At Harbor Blvd. the inverts of the northerly and southerly lines are about equal. Just downstream of Harbor, the northerly line drops down and is generally about a 1 to 2 feet deeper than the southerly line until 9th Street where the inverts of the two lines are closer to the same elevation again. The two parallel lines are connected at only three locations; one just downstream of Harbor Blvd., one just downstream of Disneyland Drive/West Street, and one at 9th Street. The first two connections are via 8” diameter lines arranged in a triangular pattern between three manholes. The small diameter and slopes of these two triangular connections allow for very limited capacity to equalize flow between the north and south. The 9th Street interconnection is a 24” diameter line with diameters close to the same elevation so it helps equalize flows in the two lines more effectively. The tributary basins for the two parallel Katella Avenue sewers are depicted on Figure 1. The northerly Katella Avenue sewer tributary area is shown in green and the southerly Katella Avenue sewer tributary area is shown in blue. The buildout peak flows and the pipeline capacities in the northerly and southerly Katella Avenue sewer pipelines between Harbor and Euclid are shown in Table 2. The d/D criteria for these pipelines along Katella Avenue is equal to a maximum of 0.75. This allows capacity remaining in the pipeline (above 0.75 d/D) for wet weather conditions. The pipeline capacity at a d/D of 0.75 is shown in the table as “Analysis Flow.” The excess capacity available and the amount of flow exceeding the pipeline capacity is shown as “Analysis Excess,” with the flow amounts exceeding the capacity shown as a negative value in red. The capacity is exceeded in the northerly pipeline between Hotel Way and Disneyland Drive and again between Walnut Street and 9th Street. The deficient pipeline reaches are identified on Figure 1 along with the tributary pipeline reaches that contribute flow to the deficient pipelines. There is available capacity in the southerly Katella pipeline under buildout conditions. The available capacity in the southerly pipeline is limited to 483 gpm just upstream of Disneyland Drive, highlighted in yellow in Table 1. Downstream of Disneyland Drive the available capacity is equal to 2,277 gpm. Based on these results, equalizing the flow between these two pipelines could help relieve the capacity issues in the northerly pipeline. Figure 3 shows the Katella study area with the flow in excess of capacity for critical reaches identified as a negative value in red and the capacity remaining in critical reaches shown as positive values in blue. South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 3-1 3.0 Development of Alternatives and Initial Analysis 3.1 Alternatives Development Some of the potential improvements (alternatives) that were considered are listed then described in detail below. Following the initial analysis described for each alternative in this section, some alternatives were deemed infeasible and are dropped from further consideration. In a subsequent section the feasibility of the remaining alternatives will be analyzed further through more detailed plan research to determine if any fatal flaws such as profile problems or major utility conflicts come to light that would make them infeasible. • Alternative 1 – Ball Road Reverse Sewer - A reverse sewer in Ball Road diverting sewer flow from its current path westerly towards a capacity constraint on Ball Road to the east towards a new 15” stub-out being provided by OCSD on their proposed State College Avenue trunk sewer. • Alternative 2 – Ball Road Diversion at Palm - Diversion between the northerly and southerly pipelines in Ball Road near Palm Street to more effectively distribute flow between the two pipelines. • Alternative 3 – Ball Road to Orangewood - A sewer running from Ball Road and Palm Street southeasterly along Palm Street, the 5 Freeway and Anaheim Way all the way to Orangewood Avenue to connect to the existing OCSD trunk. This alignment would divert flow from Ball Road and both the northerly and southerly Katella lines. • Alternative 4A – Katella at Anaheim Way to Orangewood - A sewer starting at Katella Avenue and running southeasterly along Anaheim Way diverting sewage from the southerly Katella line to the OCSD trunk on Orangewood Avenue. • Alternative 4B – Katella at Lewis to Orangewood - A sewer from Katella Avenue southerly in Lewis Street and southeasterly in Anaheim Way to the OCSD trunk on Orangewood Avenue diverting sewage from the southerly Katella line to the OCSD trunk on Orangewood Avenue. • Alternative 5 – Manchester to Katella - A sewer in Manchester Avenue from the west side of the I-5 Freeway southeasterly along Manchester Avenue and southerly in Clementine Street to Katella Avenue diverting flow from the northerly Katella sewer to the southerly Katella sewer. • Alternative 6 – Katella Diversion at Harbor – Diversion(s) between the northerly and southerly Katella pipelines near Harbor Boulevard to more effectively distribute flow between the two pipelines. • Alternative 7A – Cerritos Diversion Operational Change – Implement the diversion gates at Walnut Street and Cerritos Avenue to divert flow from the north in Walnut South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 3-2 Avenue to the west in Cerritos Avenue, thus diverting flow currently entering the northerly Katella pipeline at Walnut Ave. • Alternative 7B – Cerritos Improvement – Construct new 24” pipeline in Cerritos Avenue from Walnut Street to 9th Street to connect to the existing 24” pipeline to the west. This improvement would connect to Walnut with an intertie/diversion structure just south of the sewer coming from DLR at Cerritos and further divert flow away from Walnut Avenue and the northerly Katella lines, particularly potential future flow from DLR. 3.2 Initial Analysis Alternative 1 - Ball Road Reverse Sewer A 15” stub-out is being provided to the east for the City by OCSD on their State College Avenue trunk sewer at Ball Road. The City’s current sewer in Ball Road picks up flow primarily from the area north of Ball Road and sends it westerly down Ball Road. We initially looked at intercepting flow at East Street and sending it easterly in Ball Road (bucking grade). Based on record drawings for the City’s Ball Road sewer (Plan 672) the elevation of the sewer at East Street is lower than the depth of the State College stub and, as such, reversing flow from this location is not feasible. The next chance to pick up flow would be to move easterly to the existing City sewer that comes down diagonally from McCloud Street through an easement to Ball Road. A reverse sewer from this location does provide sufficient slope to discharge easterly to State College. This reverse sewer would cover a distance of approximately 660’ and, from the model, would divert a peak flow of 133 gpm from the southerly Ball Road pipeline to the OCSD State College trunk and away from the Ball Road system. A map of this tributary area is shown on Figure 4. Alternative 2 - Ball Road Diversion at Palm In the Ball Road/Harbor Blvd. intersection area there was also a critical reach in the model although the detailed plan research discovered that the most critical section has a somewhat steeper slope than what was in the model. However, this tributary basin does collect flow from a substantial area including the area shown in orange on Figure 1 and all the area to the north from major sewer trunks coming down from Lemon Street and East Street. Therefore, whatever refinement can be made to this collection system that increases capacity will help provide for additional development. It was determined that changes were made to the parallel sewers between Lemon Street and Harbor Blvd. over the years. This area is illustrated on Figure 5. Plans show a previous 18” interconnection between the 18” northerly Ball Road line to the 24” southerly Ball Road line (just westerly of Palm Street) which have been plugged and filled with sand slurry. Additionally, when the 18” sewer along the northerly side of Ball Road was constructed the existing 8” line coming in diagonally from the north was intercepted at a manhole on that line (SW085321) and the 8” line to the southerly line was plugged. Either or both interconnections could potentially be re-installed to help balance flow downstream. South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 3-3 Alternative 3 - Ball Road to Orangewood This alternative provides a major diversion and would take flow from the Ball Road trunk at Palm Street just east of Harbor Blvd. and divert it all the way southeasterly to OCSD’s Orangewood trunk sewer. This potential alignment is shown on Figure 6 and would cover some 10,623’. Based on invert elevations in the sewer model for the upstream manhole at Ball Road and Palm Street and the downstream OCSD manhole at Anaheim Way and Orangewood, the elevation difference is 10.62’ for an average slope of less than 0.001. This slope is too flat and doesn’t consider any potential utility conflicts that would cause it to be even flatter in certain reaches and/or require a siphon(s). It should be noted that the calculated slope may not be accurate due to potential differences in datums at the manholes. If these manholes were dipped in the future, this or other alternatives could potentially become more or less feasible. For now, this alternative will not be considered further due to its flat slope and extreme length. Alternative 4A - Katella at Anaheim Way to Orangewood Alternative 4A runs along the southerly portion of the above alternative 3 from Katella Avenue to Orangewood. It is illustrated on Figure 7 and is approximately 3,617’ in length. Based on the sewer model invert elevation at Katella Avenue (SW097416) and the manhole at Orangewood (SW109102), the elevation drop is 4.06’ for an average slope of 0.0011, which is flat but potentially feasible, especially if dipping manhole elevations results in an increase in the slope. Alternative 4B - Katella at Lewis to Orangewood Similar to Alternative 4A, Alternative 4B would also run from Katella Avenue to Orangewood but would run down Lewis Street from Katella to Anaheim Way instead of down Anaheim Way the entire route from Katella. This alternative, illustrated on Figure 8, would divert less flow than alternative 4A and has a length of approximately 3,143’. Based on the sewer model invert data for the manhole at Katella and Lewis (SW108101) and the manhole at Orangewood (SW109102), the elevation drop is 4.48’ for a slope of 0.0014, which is flat but potentially feasible, especially if dipping manhole elevations results in an increase in the slope. Alternative 5 - Manchester to Katella This alternative would run from the Midway sewer extension just west of the I-5 Freeway southeasterly down Manchester Avenue and southerly down Clementine Street to Katella Avenue. This alignment is illustrated on Figure 9 with a length of 3,774’. Based on the sewer model invert data, the average slope is equal to 0.0016, which is also quite flat but potentially feasible. This alternative would divert flow from the northerly Katella to the southerly Katella line. Alternative 6 - Katella Diversion at Harbor At the Harbor Blvd/Katella Avenue intersection there are two places where there is evidence from previous plan sets that connections have been plugged and could likely be re-instated to balance flows in the downstream parallel 21” and 24” Katella Avenue sewers. These are illustrated on Figure 10 in dashed red lines. There is also the potential for installing a larger line than the existing 8” intertie just downstream of these locations (SW076431 to SW076424) or a new line from SW076432 to the manhole labeled ADDEDMH, which is not currently in the South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 3-4 model but was added at some point. Any of these interties would divert flow to the southerly Katella line since the southerly line is 0.08 lower than the northerly line (difference between SW07432 and SW076411 according to Plan 20806). Opening up one or more of the dashed connections or enlarging one or both of the existing 8” lines would likely provide additional reliability in case either one of the parallel Katella lines approaches full flow or surcharged condition and would also provide more pipeline storage before a spill could occur. It should be noted the northerly line between SW076431 and SW076430 drops at 5.33%, which puts the northerly line over a foot deeper than the southerly line downstream of the 8” triangular connection. Alternative 7A - Cerritos Diversion Operational Change Another potential for creating additional capacity in the Katella system would be to take advantage of slide gates in the diversion manhole recently constructed at the Walnut Street/Cerritos Avenue intersection. By adjusting the slide gates, a siphon connection from the Walnut Street sewer under a storm drain would divert flow from Walnut Street above Cerritos Avenue to the existing 18” Cerritos Avenue sewer. Gates currently send 100% of the flow south down Walnut but the gates could be adjusted to potentially send up to100% of the flow coming down Walnut Street through the siphon to Cerritos Avenue. This operational change would reduce the flow to the northerly Katella sewer by up to 1,769 gpm. The resulting d/D along the 18” pipeline in Cerritos Avenue would be 0.80 at peak flow, slightly above the capacity criteria of 0.75. It is recommended to conduct flow monitoring to confirm any capacity constraints in the existing Cerritos 18” sewer once the flow is diverted from Walnut to Cerritos by changing the gate positions. Alternative 7B – Cerritos Improvement Additional pipeline improvements would increase the amount of flow diverted to Cerritos Avenue. Alternative 7B, illustrated on Figure 11, includes constructing approximately 1,194’ of new 24” pipeline in Cerritos Avenue from Walnut Street to 9th Street to connect to previously improved 24” pipeline to the west. The proposed pipeline would be constructed deeper than the existing alignment to pass under an existing storm drain at Walnut and Cerritos and connect to Walnut Street with an intertie/diversion structure just south of the sewer entering Walnut from the DLR property. This improvement would further divert flow away from Walnut Avenue and the northerly Katella lines, particularly potential future flow from DLR. The existing peak flow from DLR that would be diverted from Walnut Street to Cerritos Avenue equals 252 gpm. This alternative is recommended as a potential improvement for future flow from DLR (up to approximately 360 gpm) for the development of the existing surface lot area located at Cerritos and Walnut. It was conservatively assumed that the lot area would be developed with the maximum amount of hotel rooms, equal to 75 rooms per acre. Additional, future flow could also be generated from the Downtown Disney area that contains buildings that are no longer in use (formerly AMC Theater, ESPN Zone, and Rainforest Café). South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 3-5 3.3 Conclusions of Initial Analysis Table 3 shows a summary of the various remaining alternatives from above including: • the modeled peak flow diverted based on buildout conditions • where the given flow is diverted from to relieve a capacity issue • where the flow is diverted to • estimated construction pipeline length and cost, and • if the alternative appears to be feasible Planning-level Cost Estimates are detailed in Table 4. The configuration of the siphon at the intersection of Ball Road and Lemon Street should be determined through manhole dipping. If the siphon connects to a 15” pipeline it is recommended that the 20-foot reach downstream of the connection be upsized to 24” to eliminate modeled capacity deficiency and equalize flow between the northerly and southerly Ball Road pipelines. Based on initial evaluation of the alternatives, the improvement projects recommended for further detailed analysis include the following: Alternative 1 – Ball Road Reverse Sewer to State College Alternative 2 – Ball Road Diversion at Palm Street to balance flow Alternative 4A or 4B – Katella Avenue diversion to OSCD trunk at Orangewood Alternative 6 – Katella Avenue Diversion at Harbor Blvd. to balance flow Alternative 7A and 7B – Cerritos Avenue Diversion to divert flow from Walnut Street and northerly Katella line to Cerritos Alternative 5, to divert flow from the northerly Katella to the southerly Katella down Manchester at Midway may be feasible, however, alternative 6 to intertie the two Katella pipelines at Harbor is preferred. The Midway diversion could potentially divert sewer flows beyond the capacity of the southerly Katella line while the intertie alternative is less costly and helps to better balance flows between the two lines. Table 5 shows the net result of the above recommended improvements within the critical reaches of the study area pipelines along Ball Road and Katella Avenue. For each pipeline segment, the existing available capacity at peak flow is shown (negative values are flows over capacity) and then the amount of capacity added (positive) or removed (negative) by each alternative. The balance is the critical reach capacity with the recommended improvements. The locations of the critical reaches and the available capacities under existing and improved conditions are shown on Figure 12. There is a potential for future peak flow to the northerly Katella pipeline at Walnut Street from DLR of up to approximately 590 gpm for future development of the surface parking lot located at Walnut Street and Katella Avenue. This assumes that the entire lot area is South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 3-6 developed with 75 hotel rooms per acre. As seen in Table 5, there is a balance of 839 gpm within the northerly Katella (Disney to 9th) pipeline, showing available capacity for this potential flow. Tables 6 and 7 show the modeled pipeline capacities at buildout with the above recommended improvements, including potential future flow from DLR. For the Alternative 4 diversion from Katella to Orangewood, Alternative 4A was assumed as the preferred alternative (over Alternative 4B). These tables are similar to Tables 1 and 2 which show the available capacity in the study area at buildout for the existing system. As shown on Tables 6 and 7, there are no longer deficient pipelines in either the Ball Road or Katella Avenue systems. The minimum capacity available is within the northerly Katella Avenue system between Walnut Street and 9th Street. Additional capacity in the northerly pipeline along Katella Avenue could be gained by diverting additional flow to the southerly pipeline at Harbor Boulevard (Alternative 6). South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 4-1 4.0 Concept Design Analysis As mentioned previously, this section of the study will take a deeper dive into each remaining alternative including more detailed plan research, datum analyses, and review of other major utility plans such as storm drain facilities to determine if there are fatal flaws that might remove an alternative from further consideration. Alternative 1 - Ball Road Reverse Sewer This alternative involves picking up flows coming down diagonally from the extension of McCloud Street through an easement to Ball Road (SW106203), reversing the sewer from this point and sloping down to the east in Ball Road (bucking grade), and ultimately discharging into the 15” stub-out provided for the City by OCSD on the east side of their State College Avenue 54” trunk sewer at Ball Road. This reverse sewer would cover a distance of approximately 660’. The available invert information suggests there is enough vertical clearance to reverse the sewer but will require the existing 15” stub-out provided by OCSD to be lowered approximately 0.75 feet to 1.5 feet from its existing location, based on invert datum analysis. This is calculated and shown on Exhibit I. However, the initial analysis using surface elevations and sewer invert depths conflicts with the datum analysis, so manhole survey and dipping is recommended and should be conducted during preliminary design. Alternative 2 - Ball Road Diversions near Palm Street At the Harbor Blvd/Palm Street intersection there are two locations where there is evidence from previous plan sets that connections have been plugged and could likely be re-instated to better balance flows in the downstream parallel northerly and southerly Ball Road sewers. The 18” sewer between SW085322 and SW086133 intercepts the flow from the southerly 24” sewer and diverts it north to the 18” sewer. The record drawings also indicate the existing connection is concrete encased to cross under the 18” City CCP water main. This 18” connection was later abandoned and filled with sand slurry. Based on the review of available record drawings, there is enough vertical clearance to remove and reconstruct the connection to reverse the flow to the south into manhole SW086133 and modify the manhole bench. The existing 18” CCP water main may cause complications during construction due to its size, close proximity to the sewer pipe (1’ vertical clearance), and constricted workspace between SW085322 and SW086133. The concrete encasement may also need to be removed, carefully to avoid damaging the existing manhole structures. Just to the east, the 8” sewer coming down from the north was intercepted by the construction of the 18” northerly Ball Road sewer and captured in SW085321. The pipe between SW085321 and SW086102 was left in place, abandoned and filled with slurry mix. Therefore, the available information indicates the existing 8” sewer may be re-instated and reconstructed in place. If a larger diameter interconnection is determined to be required, a complete utility investigation will be required to assess the vertical alignment of the pipe. South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 4-2 It has been noted the existing 8” sewer from the north connects to SW086102 in an obtuse angle, approximately 105°. The City may explore the construction of a new sewer from SW085321 to 16’± downstream of SW086102 to improve the connection angle. These three potential diversions are shown on Exhibit II. Alternative 4A – Katella Avenue at Anaheim Way to Orangewood Avenue Alternative 4A starts in the intersection of Anaheim Way and Katella Avenue at SW097416 and runs due east to Anaheim Way. It then turns south along Anaheim Way to the 39” OCSD sewer in the southerly portion of Orangewood Avenue with a total length of approximately 3,420’. Based on sewer record information, survey dips conducted by the City, and benchmark information at Katella Avenue (SW097416) and the manhole at Orangewood Avenue (SW109102), the elevation drop is 3.54’ for an average slope of 0.0010; which is flat but potentially feasible, especially if dipping manhole elevations results in an increase in the slope. This is shown and calculated in Exhibit III. A complete utility investigation and manhole survey needs to be completed to confirm the horizontal and vertical feasibility of this alignment. Upon conceptual review of available utility information, known utility crossings include but are not limited to: • 43” MWD water transmission line on the south side of Katella Avenue with an approximate 5’ cover (about 8.5’ to bottom). The 21” sewer in Katella that needs to cross this is approximately 10’ deep, which would at a minimum require special design and construction methods to be determined through discussions with MWD. o Anticipated construction methods include, but are not limited to, double containment of proposed sewer and special wrap around MWD transmission line. • Caltrans storm drain laterals of unknown diameter or depth in Anaheim Way constructed as part of the I-5 realignment in the year 2000. o An information request to Caltrans has been submitted. Psomas is waiting for records to be provided by Caltrans. • 16” City of Anaheim water line in Orangewood Avenue. • 51” Caltrans storm drain in Orangewood with an approximate 5.5’ cover (10.5’ to the bottom of the pipe). • 96” RCP OCPW storm drain crossing Anaheim Way from west side of Lewis Street with an average cover of 8’ (17.67” to bottom of pipe). • An existing 10” sewer in Anaheim Way crosses over the 96” RCP with a cover of approximately 7’ per plan number 20456. The proposed sewer in Anaheim Way will need to cross the 96” storm drain approximately 1,400’ south of Katella Avenue. With an anticipated sewer cover of 10’, this crossing does not appear to be viable. To become feasible, either a sewer siphon or replacement of the crossing South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 4-3 portion of the 96” RCP with a squash box could be considered. A more detailed utility investigation and manhole survey would need to be conducted to confirm these preliminary findings, if this alternative is to considered further. Alternative 4B - Katella at Lewis Street to Orangewood Avenue Similar to Alternative 4A, Alternative 4B would also run from Katella Avenue to Orangewood but would run down Lewis Street from Katella to Anaheim Way instead of down Anaheim Way the entire route from Katella. This alternative is approximately 3,160’ in length, with an approximate elevation drop of 5.12’ for an average slope of 0.0016. This is shown and calculated in Exhibit III. A complete utility investigation and manhole survey needs to be completed to confirm the horizontal and vertical feasibility of this alignment. Upon conceptual review of available utility information, known utility crossings in Lewis Street include but are not limited to: • 43” MWD water transmission line on the south side of Katella Avenue with an approximate 8’ cover (about 11.5’ to bottom). The 21” sewer in Katella is approximately 10’ deep, so this constraint alone could render this alternative infeasible. Special design and construction methods to be determined through discussions with MWD will be required. o Anticipated construction methods include, but are not limited to, double containment of proposed sewer and special wrap around MWD transmission line. • 34” MWD water transmission line on the east side of Lewis Street with an approximate 7’ cover (about 10’ to bottom). • Telephone conduit in the east side of Lewis Street with an approximate 5’ cover. • 12” Gas line in the east side of Lewis Street with an approximate 4.5’ cover. • 12” DIP City of Anaheim water line in the west side of Lewis Street with an approximate 4’ cover. • 96” RCP Caltrans storm drain in the west side of Lewis Street with an average 8’ cover (17.5’ to the bottom of the pipe). o The proposed sewer in Lewis Street will need to cross the storm drain approximately 650’ south of Katella Avenue. With an anticipated sewer cover of 10’ this crossing does not appear to be viable making this alternative infeasible. o To make this alignment feasible a sewer siphon may be explored or the crossing portion of 96” RCP removed and replaced with a squash box. o A more detailed utility investigation and manhole survey would need to be conducted to confirm these preliminary findings, if this alternative were to be considered further. South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 4-4 Alternative 6 - Katella Diversion at Harbor At the Harbor Blvd/Katella Avenue intersection there are two locations where there is evidence from previous plan sets that connections have been plugged and could likely be re-instated to better balance flows in the downstream parallel 21”-24” Katella Avenue sewers. Based on record drawing information and datum adjustment assumptions there is enough vertical clearance to re- instate these connections. The vertical alignment will need to be verified through a comprehensive manhole survey and utility research investigations. The known existing utilities within the proposed alignment limits are an 8-5/8” gas line, 8” jet fuel line, and 20” City water line. There is also the potential for installing a larger line than the existing 8” intertie just downstream of these locations (SW076431 to SW076424) or a new line from SW076432 to the manhole labeled ADDEDMH, which was not previously in the GIS or sewer model but was added at some point. Any of these interties would divert flow to the southerly Katella line since the southerly line is 0.08’ lower than the northerly line (difference between SW07432 and SW076411 according to Plan 20806). Based on the available information the connection from SW0876432 to SW076411 or from SW0876411 to ADDEDMH have the more favorable slope and operational flexibility to provide additional capacity in the Katella system pending a full utility investigation. These potential diversions are illustrated on the Figure 10 aerial photo and detailed on Exhibit IV. Alternative 7A - Cerritos Diversion Operational Change A diversion manhole at the confluence of the Walnut Street and Cerritos Avenue sewers with sluice gates provides the capability to re-direct flow from Walnut Street north of Cerritos through a 15” siphon under an existing storm drain to the 18” sewer in Cerritos. This existing 18” Cerritos sewer then continues westerly to connect to the recently constructed 24” sewer near 9th Street that flows further west and outfalls to the OCSD Euclid Trunk Sewer. The sluice gates could be adjusted to direct up to 100% of this flow (up to 1,769 gpm) to the 18” sewer in Cerritos, thus reducing flow going south on Walnut and to the northerly Katella line. As part of this 7A project, along with adjusting the sluice gates, flow monitoring should be conducted downstream in the 18” Cerritos line to determine the hydraulic capacity of the 15” siphon and the actual vs. modeled d/D in the 18” Cerritos line. If enough flow can be diverted to the Cerritos line to cause a deficiency in that line and/or if more capacity is required for DLR, then Alternative 7B could be implemented. Alternative 7B – Cerritos Improvement In order to take full advantage of the existing 24” Cerritos sewer, and to provide additional capacity for DLR, a diversion manhole can be constructed just south of OT065317 where the Walnut sewer changes from 24” to 27” and the 18” comes in from the east. From this new manhole sewage could continue south or be diverted through a drop manhole westerly to Cerritos and under the existing 72” RCP storm drain. From that point where it crosses under the storm drain there is adequate slope due to the extra depth of the existing 24” Cerritos sewer to gravity flow the approximately 1,190 feet to connect to that sewer. This alternative would also eliminate South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 4-5 the need for the 15” siphon and allow more flow to be diverted westerly. And as a bonus, flow from the existing 18” in the vacated Cerritos easement sewer coming from DLR could be diverted westerly. Due to the elevation difference between the lowered sewer and Walnut sewer a 7’ drop manhole would need to be constructed just upstream of the 72” storm drain crossing. A detail of the concept design for this alternative in the Walnut/Cerritos intersection is illustrated on Exhibit V. Alternative 8 - Katella Avenue Interties at Walnut Street (added for consideration during this concept design phase) At the Harbor Boulevard/Walnut Street intersection there is evidence from previous plan sets that a connection between SW066416 and SW066418 has been plugged and the possibility of constructing a connection from the north Katella sewer to the south Katella sewer was explored to better balance flows in the downstream parallel Katella Avenue sewers. Based on record drawing information the southerly line is 0.15 higher than the northerly line (difference between SW066418 and SW066332 according to Plan 20186 and 756). Therefore, these alternatives are not feasible. This is illustrated and calculated on Exhibit VI. The potential of re-instating the connection between SW066416 and SW066418 was also reviewed. This re-instated connection would need to cross the northerly Katella sewer. This connection will be approximately 55’ in length at an approximate slope of 0.0318. Based on record drawing information the sewer connection’s upstream invert is at 114.05’ and will not be able to cross the northerly Katella sewer by gravity. The approximate invert of the 24” sewer at the crossing is at 112.13’ invert (114.13’ to the pipe crown). A sewer siphon or the reconstruction of the sewer in Walnut Street upstream of SW066416 at a flatter slope may be considered during the design phase. South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 5-1 5.0 Study Summary Through the two-step analysis process detailed above, two phases of improvements are recommended as follows: Phase 1 Priority Projects • Ball Road Interties at Palm Street (Alternative 2) • Katella Avenue Interties at Harbor Blvd. (Alternative 6) • Cerritos Avenue Diversion Operational Change (Alternative 7A) Phase 2 Projects • Ball Road Reverse Sewer (Alternative 1) • Katella Avenue at Anaheim Way or at Lewis to Orangewood (Alternative 4A or 4B) • Cerritos Avenue Diversion at Walnut and Pipeline Extension (Alternative 7B) As described above, these projects along with the alternatives that were analyzed but aren’t currently recommended are summarized on Table 3 with detailed cost estimates shown on Table 4 and capacity gained shown on Table 5A. South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Page 6-1 6.0 Future Preliminary Design For all of the Phase 1 and 2 projects listed above, with the exception of Alternatives 4A and 4B, the analysis completed herein indicates there should be no fatal flaws with design and construction of the improvements. However, this analysis is not to the preliminary design level and sewer and storm drain manholes should be surveyed and dipped during design to confirm design details. Following the manhole survey phase, the existing 18” water line in Ball Road (Alternative 2) may need to be potholed depending on results of the survey. In addition, the two manholes on either end of the Lemon Street to Ball Road siphon plus the next downstream manhole on Ball Road should be surveyed and dipped to confirm the hydraulics of that siphon so that the flow split to each of the two downstream Ball Road lines can be confirmed. For Alternative 6, the Katella and Harbor interties, the westerly manhole interties are preferred due to the ability to divert more flow to the southerly Katella line but if intertying the easterly manholes is to be considered the 20” water line may need to be potholed. If a decision is made to proceed with preliminary design of Alternatives 4A and 4B, additional plan research and likely potholing will be required to determine if they are feasible due to the location of storm drains and MWD water lines as discussed herein. Katella North Ball Road FIGURE 1BALL AND KATELLA TRIBUTARY AREAS ORANGEWOOD AVE KATELLA AVE CERRITOS AVE BALL ROAD LE W I S S T ST A T E C O L L E G E B L V D VERMONT A VE L E M O N S T 9T H S T DIS N E Y L A N D D R WE S T S T ORANGEWOOD OCSDCONNECTION OUTFALL TO OCSD LEGEND BALL ROAD BASIN KATELLA SOUTH BASIN KATELLA NORTH BASIN E A S T S T PIPELINES CONTRIBUTING TO DEFICIENCY WA L N U T S T Katella South DEFICIENT PIPELINES Katella North OR Katella South H A R B O R B L V D HA R B O R B L V D Katella North Katella South WA L N U T S T WE S T S T 9T H S T BALL ROAD HA R B O R ALL PIPELINESTRIBUTARY TOLEMON ST A N A H E I M B L V D FIGURE 2BALL ROAD STUDY AREA BALL ROAD HA R B O R B L V D L E M O N S T 18" 24" SIPHON SW085429 SW086201 ADDED MH +787 gpm +14 gpm +200 gpm - Amount of available capacity (limiting reach) -200 gpm - Amount over capacity -720 gpm in 15" SW075202 L E M O N S T gpm - Amount of available capacity (limiting reach) gpm - Amount over capacity FIGURE BALL ROAD STUDY AR BALL ROAD HA R B O R B L V D 18" 24" S SW086201 ADDED MH +787 gpm +14 gpm -720 gpm in 15" FIGURE 3KATELLA AVENUE STUDY AREA KATELLA AVE HA R B O R B L V D +200 gpm - Amount of available capacity (limiting reach) -200 gpm - Amount over capacity KATELLA AVE DI S N E Y L A N D D R . DI S N E Y L A N D D R . WA L N U T NI N T H S T -199 gpm -1,682gpm +550 gpm +2,286 gpm HO T E L W A Y New Reverse Sewer FIGURE 4ALTERNATIVE 1BALL ROAD REVERSE SEWER BALL ROAD ST A T E C O L L E G E B L V D OUTFALL TO OCSD AREA DIVERTED TO OCSD PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT LEGEND 133 gpm - Peak flow diverted $708,614 PROJECT COST FIGURE 5ALTERNATIVE 2BALL ROAD INTERTIES AT PALM ST BALL ROAD HA R B O R B L V D L E M O N S T 18" 24" SIPHON SW085429 SW086201 ADDED MH SW085318SW085317 SW085321 SW085102 SW085322 SW074416 SW075203 SW086104SW075202 SW074429 PROPOSED INTERCONNECTION OPTION LEGEND 300+/- gpm - Peak flow diverted $70,253 PROJECT COST PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT BALL ROAD HA R B O R B L V D ORANGEWOOD AVE A N A H E I M W A Y FIGURE 6ALTERNATIVE 3BALL ROAD TO ORANGEWOOD PA L M S T LE W I S S T KATELLA AVE MIDWAY DR 2,675 gpm - Peak flow diverted PROJECT COSTLEGEND $10,374,011 FIGURE 8ALTERNATIVE 4BKATELLA AT LEWIS TO ORANGEWOOD KATELLA AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE A N A H E I M W A Y ORANGEWOOD AVE FIGURE 7ALTERNATIVE 4AKATELLA AT ANAHEIM WAY TO ORANGEWOOD KATELLA AVE A N A H E I M W A Y LE W I S S T 411 gpm - Peak flow diverted 164 gpm - Peak flow diverted PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT $3,486,830 PROJECT COSTLEGEND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT $3,053,831 PROJECT COSTLEGEND FIGURE 9ALTERNATIVE 5MANCHESTER AVE TO KATELLA AVE MIDWAY DR HA R B O R B L V D CL E M E N T I N E S T DISNEY WAY M A N C H E S T E R A V E KATELLA AVE 407 gpm - Peak flow diverted PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT $3,989,037 PROJECT COSTLEGEND 20 0 - 5 0 0 gp m - P e a k f l o w d i v e r t e d KA T E L L A A V E HARBOR BLVD 15 " 18 " 24 " 21 " 21" 21 " 18 " 2- 1 2 " 8" 8" 50 F E E T SW 0 8 7 3 1 9 SW 0 8 7 3 0 7 SW 0 7 6 4 3 2 SW 0 7 6 4 1 1 SW 0 7 6 4 3 1 SW 0 7 6 4 3 0 SW 0 7 6 4 2 4 HA R B O R 8 HA R B O R 7 AD D E D M H FIGURE 10 ALTERNATIVE 6 K ATELLA INTERTIES AT HARBOR LE G E N D EX I S T I N G S E W E R P R O P O S E D I N T E R C O N N E C T I O N O P T I O N PR O J E C T C O S T $5 3 , 7 2 3 35 0 g p m Pe a k F l o w 1, 2 5 0 g p m Pe a k F l o w Al t 6 50 0 + g p m D i v e r t e d FIGURE 11ALTERNATIVE 7CERRITOS IMPROVEMENT CERRITOS AVE WA L N U T S T OPEN GATE TO SEND FLOW WEST(CLOSED GATE SENDS FLOW SOUTH)Alt 7A - Open GateUp to 1,769 gpm - Peak flow diverted PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT $2,524,337 PROJECT COSTLEGEND Alt 7B - Cerritos Pipeline252 gpm - Peak flow diverted(plus future DLR flow) 15" Katella North Basin Katella South Basin Ball Road FIGURE 12CRITICAL REACH FLOWEXISTING AND PROPOSED ORANGEWOOD AVE KATELLA AVE CERRITOS AVE BALL ROAD LE W I S S T ST A T E C O L L E G E B L V D VERMONT A VE L E M O N S T 9T H S T DI S N E Y L A N D D R WE S T S T ORANGEWOOD OCSDCONNECTION OUTFALL TO OCSD LEGEND BALL ROAD BASIN KATELLA SOUTH BASIN KATELLA NORTH BASIN E A S T S T DEFFICIENT PIPES WA L N U T S T DLD to Harbor 9th to DLD Ball Road North Existing +14 gpm (Alt 2: +300 gpm) Improved +314 gpm Ball Road South Existing +787 gpm (Alt 1: +133 gpm) (Alt 2: -300 gpm) Improved +620 gpm Katella North (DLD to Harbor): Existing -199 gpm (Alt 6: +/- 500 gpm) Improved +301 gpm Katella South (DLD to Harbor): Existing +550 gpm (Alt 4A: +411 gpm) (Alt 6: -500 gpm) Improved +461 gpm Katella North (9th to DLD): Existing -1,682 gpm (Alt 6: +500 gpm) (Alt 7A: +1,769 gpm) (Alt 7B: +252 gpm) Improved +839 gpm Katella South (9th to DLD): Existing +2,286 gpm Proposed +2,249 gpm Alt 1 133 gpm Priority Alt 2 +/- 300 gpm HA R B O R B L V D Priority Alt 6 +/- 500 gpm Priority Alt 7A 1,769 gpm Alt 7B 252 gpm NOTE: "Existing" and "Proposed" flow rates represent the deficient (negative) or available (positive)capacity in a critical reach of pipeline. Both use the model buildout demand scenario. Alt 4B 164 gpm Alt 4A 411 gpm H A R B O R B L V D A N A H E I M B L V D PIPELINES CONTRIBUTING TO DEFICIENCYOR Cr o s s - s t r e e t F r o m I D T o I D Fr o m I n v (f t ) T o I n v ( f t ) Di a m e t e r (i n ) Le n g t h (f t ) Ex i s t i n g Fl o w (g p m ) d / D R a t i o An a l y s i s Fl o w (g p m ) Analysis Excess (gpm)Analysis d/D Ratio Le m o n SW 0 8 5 4 2 9 SW 0 8 5 4 3 0 13 9 . 4 0 13 9 . 3 5 18 32 . 0 1, 0 4 6 0. 5 9 1, 4 4 8 402 0.75 SW 0 8 5 4 3 0 SW 0 8 5 3 2 0 13 9 . 3 5 13 8 . 9 7 18 25 3 . 7 1, 0 4 7 0. 5 9 1, 4 4 8 401 0.75 Ca m b r i d g e SW 0 8 5 3 2 0 SW 0 8 5 3 1 8 13 8 . 9 7 13 8 . 6 8 18 19 8 . 6 1, 0 7 9 0. 6 1 1, 4 4 5 366 0.75 SW 0 8 5 3 1 8 SW 0 8 5 3 1 7 13 8 . 6 8 13 7 . 8 3 18 56 4 . 2 1, 0 8 0 0. 6 1 1, 4 4 7 368 0.75 SW 0 8 5 3 1 7 SW 0 8 5 3 2 1 13 7 . 8 3 13 7 . 6 0 18 15 4 . 8 1, 1 3 7 0. 6 3 1, 4 4 7 310 0.75 Pa l m SW 0 8 5 3 2 1 SW 0 8 5 3 2 2 13 7 . 6 0 13 7 . 4 6 18 94 . 2 1, 1 6 7 0. 6 4 1, 4 4 5 278 0.75 SW 0 8 5 3 2 2 SW 0 7 4 4 1 7 13 7 . 4 6 13 7 . 1 4 18 28 5 . 9 1, 1 6 7 0. 7 1 1, 2 4 0 73 0.75 Ha r b o r SW 0 7 4 4 1 7 SW 0 7 4 4 1 6 13 7 . 1 4 13 7 . 0 0 18 13 0 . 2 1, 2 2 4 0. 7 4 1, 2 3 8 14 0.75 SW 0 7 4 4 1 6 SW 0 7 5 2 0 3 13 7 . 0 0 13 6 . 9 8 18 15 . 3 44 8 0. 3 9 1, 2 4 6 798 0.75 Cr o s s - s t r e e t F r o m I D T o I D Fr o m I n v (f t ) T o I n v ( f t ) Di a m e t e r (i n ) Le n g t h (f t ) Ex i s t i n g Fl o w (g p m ) d / D R a t i o An a l y s i s Fl o w (g p m ) Analysis Excess (gpm)Analysis d/D Ratio Le m o n AD D E D M H SW 0 8 6 2 0 1 13 9 . 2 8 13 9 . 2 2 15 19 . 8 1, 7 0 2 1. 0 0 98 2 -720 0.63 SW 0 8 6 2 0 1 SW 0 8 6 1 0 8 13 9 . 0 2 13 8 . 6 7 24 25 0 . 3 1, 7 0 5 0. 5 1 30 1 4 1309 0.75 Ca m b r i d g e SW 0 8 6 1 0 8 SW 0 8 6 1 0 7 13 8 . 6 7 13 8 . 5 7 24 74 . 9 1, 7 0 5 0. 5 1 30 1 8 1313 0.75 Cl a r e m o n t SW 0 8 6 1 0 7 SW 0 8 6 1 0 6 13 8 . 5 7 13 8 . 4 7 24 65 . 7 1, 7 3 8 0. 5 2 30 1 6 1278 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 6 SW 0 8 6 1 0 5 13 8 . 4 7 13 7 . 9 3 24 38 9 . 9 1, 7 3 8 0. 5 2 30 1 6 1279 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 5 SW 0 8 6 1 0 4 13 7 . 9 3 13 7 . 5 2 24 29 0 . 1 1, 7 4 0 0. 5 2 30 1 5 1275 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 4 SW 0 8 6 1 0 3 13 7 . 5 2 13 7 . 4 6 24 40 . 5 1, 7 4 0 0. 5 2 30 2 3 1282 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 3 SW 0 8 6 1 0 2 13 7 . 4 6 13 7 . 3 7 24 65 . 6 1, 7 4 0 0. 5 2 30 1 8 1278 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 2 SW 0 8 6 1 0 1 13 7 . 3 7 13 7 . 2 5 24 86 . 7 1, 7 4 0 0. 5 2 30 1 0 1270 0.75 Pa l m SW 0 8 6 1 0 1 SW 0 8 6 1 3 3 13 7 . 2 5 13 7 . 2 4 24 9. 7 1, 8 5 7 0. 5 3 30 6 1 1204 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 3 3 SW 0 7 5 2 0 4 13 7 . 2 4 13 6 . 8 3 24 28 9 . 4 1, 8 5 7 0. 5 4 30 1 5 1158 0.75 Ha r b o r SW 0 7 5 2 0 4 SW 0 7 5 2 0 6 13 6 . 8 3 13 6 . 7 0 24 86 . 3 1, 8 5 7 0. 5 3 31 2 7 1271 0.75 SW 0 7 5 2 0 6 SW 0 7 5 2 0 3 13 6 . 7 0 13 6 . 6 3 24 49 . 9 1, 8 5 7 0. 5 3 31 2 3 1267 0.75 SW 0 7 5 2 0 3 SW 0 7 5 2 0 5 13 6 . 6 3 13 6 . 4 8 24 10 1 . 8 2, 3 0 4 0. 6 0 31 1 4 810 0.75 5 F w y SW 0 7 5 2 0 5 SW 0 7 5 2 0 2 13 6 . 4 8 13 6 . 0 0 24 31 8 . 7 2, 3 3 5 0. 6 1 31 2 1 787 0.75 BA L L R O A D S O U T H BA L L R O A D N O R T H TA B L E 1 - B A L L R O A D P R E - I M P R O V E M E N T B U I L D O U T C A P A C I T Y Cr o s s - s t r e e t F r o m I D T o I D Fr o m I n v (f t ) T o I n v ( f t ) Di a m e t e r (i n ) Le n g t h (f t ) Ex i s t i n g Fl o w (g p m ) d / D R a t i o An a l y s i s Fl o w (g p m ) Analysis Excess (gpm)Analysis d/D Ratio Ha r b o r SW 0 8 7 3 1 9 SW 0 7 6 4 3 2 12 0 . 1 0 12 0 . 0 0 21 56 . 0 34 9 0. 2 5 2, 3 9 5 2,045 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 3 2 SW 0 7 6 4 3 1 12 0 . 0 0 11 9 . 9 3 21 41 . 3 1, 5 9 0 0. 5 6 2, 3 8 7 797 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 3 1 SW 0 7 6 4 3 0 11 9 . 9 3 11 8 . 7 0 21 23 . 1 1, 5 9 0 0. 2 3 13 , 0 2 3 11,433 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 3 0 SW 0 7 6 4 2 9 11 8 . 7 0 11 8 . 2 1 21 26 7 . 3 1, 5 9 0 0. 5 6 2, 3 9 3 802 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 2 9 SW 0 7 6 4 2 8 11 8 . 2 1 11 7 . 7 4 21 26 4 . 7 1, 6 7 1 0. 5 8 2, 3 9 4 723 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 2 8 SW 0 7 6 4 2 7 11 7 . 7 4 11 7 . 0 5 21 39 . 3 1, 6 7 2 0. 3 1 7, 4 6 2 5,790 0.75 Ho t e l W a y SW 0 7 6 4 2 7 SW 0 7 6 4 1 7 11 7 . 0 5 11 6 . 2 4 21 44 8 . 9 1, 6 8 2 0. 5 8 2, 3 9 3 711 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 1 7 SW 0 7 6 3 1 2 11 6 . 2 4 11 5 . 5 5 21 38 4 . 2 1, 8 4 6 0. 6 2 2, 3 9 2 546 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 1 2 SW 0 7 6 3 1 1 11 5 . 5 5 11 4 . 8 8 21 37 4 . 4 2, 5 9 1 0. 8 1 2, 3 9 3 -198 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 1 1 SW 0 7 6 3 1 0 11 4 . 8 8 11 4 . 4 2 21 25 2 . 8 2, 5 9 1 0. 8 1 2, 3 9 3 -198 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 1 0 SW 0 7 6 3 0 9 11 4 . 4 2 11 3 . 9 7 21 24 9 . 0 2, 5 9 1 0. 8 1 2, 3 9 2 -199 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 9 SW 0 6 6 4 3 0 11 3 . 9 7 11 3 . 5 0 21 26 0 . 6 2, 5 9 1 0. 8 1 2, 3 9 3 -198 0.75 Di s n e y l a n d D r . SW 0 6 6 4 3 0 SW 0 6 6 4 2 4 11 3 . 5 0 11 3 . 4 2 24 44 . 1 3, 1 2 2 0. 7 0 3, 4 3 4 311 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 4 SW 0 6 6 4 2 8 11 3 . 4 2 11 3 . 3 9 24 19 . 3 2, 8 6 5 0. 6 6 3, 3 8 4 519 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 8 SW 0 6 6 4 2 7 11 3 . 3 9 11 2 . 9 1 24 26 5 . 2 2, 8 6 5 0. 6 6 3, 4 2 2 556 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 7 SW 0 6 6 4 2 3 11 2 . 9 1 11 2 . 3 2 24 33 1 . 9 2, 8 6 5 0. 6 6 3, 4 1 8 553 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 3 SW 0 6 6 4 2 6 11 2 . 3 2 11 1 . 7 5 24 31 4 . 1 2, 8 6 5 0. 6 6 3, 4 1 8 553 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 6 SW 0 6 6 3 3 2 11 1 . 7 5 11 1 . 1 4 24 34 0 . 4 2, 8 6 5 0. 6 6 3, 4 2 0 555 0.75 SW 0 6 6 3 3 2 OT 0 6 6 3 3 1 11 1 . 1 4 11 1 . 0 9 24 25 . 0 3, 0 3 4 0. 6 8 3, 4 1 8 384 0.75 Wa l n u t S t r e e t OT 0 6 6 3 3 1 OT 0 6 6 3 2 9 11 1 . 0 9 10 9 . 9 0 27 66 0 . 7 6, 3 6 6 1. 0 0 4, 6 8 7 -1,679 0.75 Ni n t h S t r e e t OT 0 6 6 3 2 9 OT 0 5 7 4 4 5 10 9 . 9 0 10 8 . 7 2 27 65 7 . 6 6, 3 6 6 1. 0 0 4, 6 8 4 -1,682 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 4 5 OT 0 5 7 4 4 7 10 8 . 7 2 10 7 . 5 0 27 14 3 . 0 6, 3 5 4 0. 5 4 10 , 1 8 3 3,830 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 4 7 OT 0 5 7 4 4 8 10 7 . 5 0 10 3 . 6 8 27 45 0 . 3 6, 3 5 4 0. 5 4 10 , 1 8 0 3,827 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 4 8 OT 0 5 7 4 4 9 10 3 . 6 8 10 2 . 5 0 27 83 . 4 6, 3 5 4 0. 4 7 13 , 1 3 5 6,782 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 4 9 OT 0 5 7 4 5 0 10 2 . 5 0 99 . 6 1 27 56 5 . 5 6, 3 5 5 0. 6 4 7, 8 8 6 1,531 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 5 0 OT 0 5 7 3 4 2 99 . 6 1 99 . 1 1 27 98 . 1 6, 3 7 2 0. 6 4 7, 8 9 2 1,519 0.75 OT 0 5 7 3 4 2 OT 0 5 7 3 3 9 99 . 1 1 95 . 6 4 27 68 1 . 0 6, 3 7 2 0. 6 4 7, 8 8 6 1,514 0.75 Eu c l i d S t OT 0 5 7 3 3 9 SW 0 5 0 4 3 0 95 . 6 4 91 . 7 2 27 60 3 . 4 6, 3 7 2 0. 5 9 8, 9 0 3 2,531 0.75 KA T E L L A N O R T H TA B L E 2 - K A T E L L A A V E N U E P R E - I M P R O V E M E N T B U I L D O U T C A P A C I T Y Cr o s s - s t r e e t F r o m I D T o I D Fr o m I n v (f t ) T o I n v ( f t ) Di a m e t e r (i n ) Le n g t h (f t ) Ex i s t i n g Fl o w (g p m ) d / D R a t i o An a l y s i s Fl o w (g p m ) Analysis Excess (gpm)Analysis d/D Ratio Ha r b o r SW 0 8 7 3 0 7 SW 0 7 6 4 1 1 12 0 . 1 1 12 0 . 0 0 24 56 . 5 2, 0 3 8 0. 5 1 3, 6 0 4 1,566 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 1 1 SW 0 7 6 4 2 4 12 0 . 0 0 11 9 . 9 0 24 52 . 5 2, 0 3 8 0. 5 1 3, 6 0 5 1,567 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 2 4 SW 0 7 6 4 1 0 11 9 . 9 0 11 9 . 3 4 24 27 8 . 2 2, 7 8 2 0. 6 2 3, 6 0 3 820 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 1 0 SW 0 7 6 4 0 9 11 9 . 3 4 11 9 . 0 2 24 15 9 . 1 2, 8 4 0 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 9 769 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 0 9 SW 0 7 6 4 0 8 11 9 . 0 2 11 8 . 7 0 24 15 8 . 6 2, 8 5 5 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 4 749 0.75 Ho t e l W a y SW 0 7 6 4 0 8 SW 0 7 6 4 0 7 11 8 . 7 0 11 8 . 5 8 24 60 . 0 2, 8 5 5 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 3 749 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 0 7 SW 0 7 6 4 0 5 11 8 . 5 8 11 7 . 9 5 24 31 8 . 3 2, 8 5 5 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 2 748 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 0 5 SW 0 7 6 4 3 3 11 7 . 9 5 11 7 . 8 3 24 56 . 4 2, 8 5 5 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 9 754 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 3 3 SW 0 7 6 3 0 8 11 7 . 8 3 11 7 . 0 8 24 37 9 . 5 2, 8 5 5 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 5 750 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 8 SW 0 7 6 3 0 7 11 7 . 0 8 11 6 . 7 2 24 17 6 . 0 2, 8 5 4 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 4 750 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 7 SW 0 7 6 3 0 6 11 6 . 7 2 11 6 . 3 2 24 20 2 . 5 2, 8 5 4 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 5 750 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 6 SW 0 7 6 3 0 5 11 6 . 3 2 11 6 . 0 9 24 11 3 . 2 2, 8 5 4 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 2 748 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 5 SW 0 7 6 3 0 4 11 6 . 0 9 11 5 . 5 7 24 26 1 . 9 3, 0 5 4 0. 6 6 3, 6 0 5 551 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 4 SW 0 7 6 3 0 3 11 5 . 5 7 11 5 . 3 5 24 10 9 . 7 3, 0 5 4 0. 6 6 3, 6 0 9 554 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 3 SW 0 7 6 3 0 2 11 5 . 3 5 11 4 . 7 9 24 27 9 . 0 3, 0 5 4 0. 6 6 3, 6 0 4 550 0.75 Di s n e y l a n d D r . SW 0 7 6 3 0 2 SW 0 6 6 4 1 7 11 4 . 7 9 11 4 . 6 8 24 53 . 3 85 6 0. 3 2 3, 5 9 3 2,737 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 1 7 SW 0 6 6 4 2 2 11 4 . 6 8 11 4 . 1 3 24 27 5 . 5 1, 1 1 3 0. 3 6 3, 6 0 4 2,492 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 2 SW 0 6 6 4 2 1 11 4 . 1 3 11 3 . 4 7 24 33 0 . 6 1, 1 2 1 0. 3 7 3, 6 0 4 2,483 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 1 SW 0 6 6 4 2 0 11 3 . 4 7 11 2 . 9 7 24 25 0 . 1 1, 1 4 1 0. 3 7 3, 6 0 8 2,467 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 0 SW 0 6 6 4 1 9 11 2 . 9 7 11 2 . 8 1 24 79 . 7 1, 3 1 3 0. 4 0 3, 5 9 9 2,286 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 1 9 SW 0 6 6 4 1 8 11 2 . 8 1 11 2 . 1 4 24 33 8 . 3 1, 3 1 3 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 5 2,293 0.75 Wa l n u t S t r e e t SW 0 6 6 4 1 8 SW 0 6 6 3 2 8 11 2 . 1 4 11 1 . 4 8 24 32 9 . 5 1, 3 1 3 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 4 2,292 0.75 SW 0 6 6 3 2 8 SW 0 6 6 3 2 7 11 1 . 4 8 11 0 . 8 1 24 33 1 . 3 1, 3 1 3 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 3 2,290 0.75 SW 0 6 6 3 2 7 SW 0 6 6 3 2 5 11 0 . 8 1 11 0 . 1 6 24 32 6 . 9 1, 3 1 4 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 5 2,291 0.75 SW 0 6 6 3 2 5 SW 0 6 6 3 2 4 11 0 . 1 6 10 9 . 5 6 24 29 9 . 2 1, 3 1 4 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 3 2,289 0.75 Ni n t h S t r e e t SW 0 6 6 3 2 4 OT 0 5 7 4 4 4 10 9 . 5 6 10 9 . 4 8 24 42 . 9 1, 3 1 4 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 8 2,294 0.75 SW 0 5 7 3 3 9 SW 0 5 7 3 3 8 10 5 . 9 9 10 5 . 2 8 24 35 6 . 0 84 4 0. 3 1 3, 6 0 4 2,760 0.75 Eu c l i d S t SW 0 5 7 3 3 4 SW 0 5 7 3 3 3 10 3 . 4 4 10 3 . 1 7 24 36 . 1 84 4 0. 2 3 6, 8 8 2 6,038 0.75 KA T E L L A S O U T H TA B L E 2 - K A T E L L A A V E N U E P R E - I M P R O V E M E N T B U I L D O U T C A P A C I T Y ( C O N T . ) Al t # L o c a t i o n Pe a k Di v e r t e d (g p m ) Di v e r t F r o m D i v e r t T o L F Pr o j e c t C o s t i n c l . En g , A d m i n , & CM (1 ) Fe a s i b l e N o t e s 1 Ba l l R o a d R e v e r s e S e w e r 13 3 S o u t h B a l l S t a t e C o l l e g e O C S D 6 6 3 7 0 8 , 6 1 4 $ Y e s Preferred 2 Ba l l R o a d I n t e r t i e s a t P a l m 30 0 + / - N o r t h B a l l S o u t h B a l l 5 1 7 0 , 2 5 3 $ Y e s B a l a n c e F l o w - P r e f e r r e d 18 5 7 S o u t h B a l l 40 7 N o r t h K a t e l l a 41 1 S o u t h K a t e l l a 4A Ka t e l l a @ A n a h e i m W a y t o O r a n g e w o o d 41 1 S o u t h K a t e l l a O r a n g e w o o d O C S D 3 , 6 1 7 3 , 4 8 6 , 8 3 0 $ Y e s Preferred (over Alt 4B) 4B Ka t e l l a @ L e w i s t o O r a n g e w o o d 16 4 S o u t h K a t e l l a O r a n g e w o o d O C S D 3 , 1 4 3 3 , 0 5 3 , 8 3 1 $ Y e s Option (Alt 4A Preferred) 5 Ma n c h e s t e r t o K a t e l l a 40 7 N o r t h K a t e l l a S o u t h K a t e l l a 3 , 7 7 4 3 , 9 8 9 , 0 3 7 $ Y e s Alt 6 Preferred 6 Ka t e l l a I n t e r t i e s a t H a r b o r 20 0 - 5 0 0 N o r t h K a t e l l a S o u t h K a t e l l a 3 9 5 3 , 7 2 3 $ Y e s B a l a n c e F l o w - P r e f e r r e d 7A Ce r r i t o s - A d j u s t G a t e s 88 5 - 1 7 6 9 N o r t h K a t e l l a C e r r i t o s / E u c l i d 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 $ Y e s Preferred 7B Ce r r i t o s - P i p e l i n e 2 5 2 N o r t h K a t e l l a C e r r i t o s / E u c l i d 1 , 1 9 4 2 , 4 7 4 , 3 3 7 $ Y e s Preferred Le g e n d : Ph a s e 1 P r i o r i t y P r o j e c t s Ph a s e 2 P r o j e c t s Cu r r e n t l y N o t R e c o m m e n d e d (2 ) E i t h e r A l t 4 A o r A l t 4 B i s r e c o m m e n d e d , n o t b o t h . (1 ) T h e t o t a l p r o j e c t c o s t t o i n c l u d e E n g i n e e r i n g a n d o t h e r T e c h n i c a l S e r v i c e s , C o n t r a c t A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , P e r m i t t i n g a n d C o n s t r u c t i o n M a n a g e m e n t w a s a s s u m e d t o b e a n ad d i t i o n a l 4 5 % o f t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t e s t i m a t e . TA B L E 3 - S U M M A R Y O F I M P R O V E M E N T A L T E R N A T I V E S 10 , 6 2 3 3 10 , 3 7 4 , 0 1 1 $ Ba l l R o a d t o O r a n g e w o o d Or a n g e w o o d O C S D S l o p e < 0 . 0 0 1 No Al t # L o c a t i o n Pi p e L e n g t h (f t ) Se l e c t e d Di a m e t e r ( i n ) No . o f Ma n h o l e s Co n s t r u c t i o n Co s t Pr o j e c t C o s t i n c l . E n g , Admin, & CM (1) 1 Ba l l R o a d R e v e r s e S e w e r 66 3 12 3 $4 8 8 , 7 0 0 $708,614 2 Ba l l R o a d I n t e r t i e s a t P a l m 51 18 0 $4 8 , 4 5 0 $70,253 3 Ba l l R o a d t o O r a n g e w o o d 10 , 6 2 3 10 44 $7 , 1 5 4 , 4 9 0 $10,374,011 4A Ka t e l l a a t A n a h e i m W a y t o O r a n g e w o o d 3, 6 1 7 10 12 $2 , 4 0 4 , 7 1 0 $3,486,830 4B Ka t e l l a a t L e w i s t o O r a n g e w o o d 3, 1 4 3 10 12 $2 , 1 0 6 , 0 9 0 $3,053,831 5 Ma n c h e s t e r t o K a t e l l a 3, 7 7 4 12 14 $2 , 7 5 1 , 0 6 0 $3,989,037 6 Ka t e l l a I n t e r t i e s a t H a r b o r B l v d 39 18 0 $3 7 , 0 5 0 $53,723 7A Ce r r i t o s - A d j u s t G a t e s (2 ) 0 - - - $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 7B Ce r r i t o s - P i p e l i n e (3 ) 1, 1 9 4 2 4 6 $ 1 , 7 0 6 , 4 3 9 $ 2 , 4 7 4 , 3 3 7 2 Ba l l R o a d I n t e r t i e s a t P a l m 51 18 0 $4 8 , 4 5 0 $70,253 6 Ka t e l l a I n t e r t i e s a t H a r b o r B l v d 39 18 0 $3 7 , 0 5 0 $53,723 7A Ce r r i t o s - A d j u s t G a t e s (2 ) 0 - - - $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 $173,975 1 Ba l l R o a d R e v e r s e S e w e r 66 3 12 3 $4 8 8 , 7 0 0 $708,614 4 Ka t e l l a t o O r a n g e w o o d ( A l t 4 A ) 3, 6 1 7 10 12 $2 , 4 0 4 , 7 1 0 $3,486,830 7B Ce r r i t o s - P i p e l i n e (3 ) 1, 1 9 4 2 4 6 $ 1 , 7 0 6 , 4 3 9 $ 2 , 4 7 4 , 3 3 7 $6,669,780 Le g e n d : Di a m e t e r Cost per LF Ph a s e 1 P r i o r i t y P r o j e c t s 10 $630 Ph a s e 2 P r o j e c t s 12 $690 Cu r r e n t l y N o t R e c o m m e n d e d 15 $820 18 $950 21 $ 1 , 0 5 0 24 $1,190 Ma n h o l e s $10,500 EA TA B L E 4 - I M P R O V E M E N T C O S T E S T I M A T E S CO S T F O R P R E F E R R E D A L T E R N A T I V E S To t a l P h a s e 2 P r o j e c t s (1 ) T h e t o t a l p r o j e c t c o s t t o i n c l u d e E n g i n e e r i n g a nd o t h e r T e c h n i c a l S e r v i c e s , C o n t r a c t A d m i n i s t r a t i o n, P e r m i t t i n g a n d C o n s t r u c t i o n Ma n a g e m e n t w a s a s s u m e d t o b e a n a d d i t i o n a l 4 5 % o f t he c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t e s t i m a t e . (3 ) C o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t i n c r e a s e d b y 1 5 % f o r e x t r a d e ep p i p e l i n e a n d m a n h o l e s . (2 ) C o s t i s f o r f l o w m o n i t o r i n g a n d e n g i n e e r i n g a n a ly s i s . To t a l P h a s e 1 P r i o r i t y P r o j e c t s Single-Family Units Apartment Units Hotel Rooms Ball North Starting Capacity 14 32 38 54 Phase 1 (Alt 2: +300 gpm)314 723 861 1,206 Ball South Starting Capacity 787 1,813 2,159 3,022 Phase 1 (Alt 2: -300 gpm)487 1,122 1,336 1,870 Phase 2 (Alt 1: +133 gpm)620 1,428 1,701 2,381 Katella North (DLD to Harbor) Starting Capacity -199 -458 -546 -764 Phase 1 (Alt 6: +500 gpm)301 694 826 1,156 Katella South (DLD to Harbor) Starting Capacity 550 1,267 1,509 2,112 Phase 1 (Alt 6: - 500 gpm)50 115 137 192 Phase 2 (Alt 4A: +411 gpm)461 1,062 1,264 1,770 Katella North (Ninth to DLD) Starting Capacity -1,682 -3,875 -4,613 -6,459 Phase 1 (Alts 6 & 7A: +2,269 gpm)587 1,352 1,610 2,254 Phase 2 (Alt 7B: +252 gpm)839 1,933 2,301 3,222 Katella South (Ninth to DLD)2,286 5,267 6,270 8,778 Land Use Factor (gpd/unit) Peaked Factor (gpd/unit)(1) Units per 100 gpm Capacity Single Family Residential 250 625 230 Apartment 210 525 274 Hotel 150 375 384 (1) Peaked Factor = 2.5 x Average Factor (based on residential peaking) TABLE 5B - DEVELOPMENT UNITS PER 100 GPM CAPACITY TABLE 5A - CRITICAL REACH CAPACITY Sewer System Cumulative Available Capacity (gpm) Cumulative Development Potential Note: Positive values are excess capacity available and negative values are amounts over capacity. Cr o s s - s t r e e t F r o m I D T o I D Fr o m I n v (f t ) T o I n v ( f t ) Di a m e t e r (i n ) L e n g t h ( f t ) Ex i s t i n g Fl o w (g p m ) d / D R a t i o An a l y s i s Fl o w (g p m ) Analysis Excess (gpm)Analysis d/D Ratio Le m o n SW 0 8 5 4 2 9 SW 0 8 5 4 3 0 13 9 . 4 0 13 9 . 3 5 18 32 . 0 1, 0 4 6 0. 5 9 1, 4 4 8 402 0.75 SW 0 8 5 4 3 0 SW 0 8 5 3 2 0 13 9 . 3 5 13 8 . 9 7 18 25 3 . 7 1, 0 4 7 0. 5 9 1, 4 4 8 401 0.75 Ca m b r i d g e SW 0 8 5 3 2 0 SW 0 8 5 3 1 8 13 8 . 9 7 13 8 . 6 8 18 19 8 . 6 1, 0 7 9 0. 6 1 1, 4 4 5 366 0.75 SW 0 8 5 3 1 8 SW 0 8 5 3 1 7 13 8 . 6 8 13 7 . 8 3 18 56 4 . 2 1, 0 8 0 0. 6 1 1, 4 4 7 368 0.75 SW 0 8 5 3 1 7 SW 0 8 5 3 2 1 13 7 . 8 3 13 7 . 6 0 18 15 4 . 8 1, 1 3 7 0. 6 3 1, 4 4 7 310 0.75 Pa l m SW 0 8 5 3 2 1 SW 0 8 5 3 2 2 13 7 . 6 0 13 7 . 4 6 18 94 . 2 1, 1 6 7 0. 6 4 1, 4 4 5 278 0.75 SW 0 8 5 3 2 2 SW 0 7 4 4 1 7 13 7 . 4 6 13 7 . 1 4 18 28 5 . 9 81 7 0. 5 6 1, 2 4 0 423 0.75 Ha r b o r SW 0 7 4 4 1 7 SW 0 7 4 4 1 6 13 7 . 1 4 13 7 . 0 0 18 13 0 . 2 87 4 0. 5 8 1, 2 3 8 363 0.75 SW 0 7 4 4 1 6 SW 0 7 5 2 0 3 13 7 . 0 0 13 6 . 9 8 18 15 . 3 32 2 0. 3 3 1, 2 4 6 924 0.75 Cr o s s - s t r e e t F r o m I D T o I D Fr o m I n v (f t ) T o I n v ( f t ) Di a m e t e r (i n ) L e n g t h ( f t ) Ex i s t i n g Fl o w (g p m ) d / D R a t i o An a l y s i s Fl o w (g p m ) Analysis Excess (gpm)Analysis d/D Ratio Le m o n AD D E D M H SW 0 8 6 2 0 1 13 9 . 2 8 13 9 . 2 2 24 19 . 8 1, 5 6 7 0. 3 9 43 9 9 2832 0.75 SW 0 8 6 2 0 1 SW 0 8 6 1 0 8 13 9 . 0 2 13 8 . 6 7 24 25 0 . 3 1, 5 6 9 0. 4 9 30 1 4 1445 0.75 Ca m b r i d g e SW 0 8 6 1 0 8 SW 0 8 6 1 0 7 13 8 . 6 7 13 8 . 5 7 24 74 . 9 1, 5 6 9 0. 4 9 30 1 8 1449 0.75 Cl a r e m o n t SW 0 8 6 1 0 7 SW 0 8 6 1 0 6 13 8 . 5 7 13 8 . 4 7 24 65 . 7 1, 6 0 2 0. 4 9 30 1 6 1414 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 6 SW 0 8 6 1 0 5 13 8 . 4 7 13 7 . 9 3 24 38 9 . 9 1, 6 0 2 0. 4 9 30 1 6 1414 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 5 SW 0 8 6 1 0 4 13 7 . 9 3 13 7 . 5 2 24 29 0 . 1 1, 6 0 4 0. 4 9 30 1 5 1410 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 4 SW 0 8 6 1 0 3 13 7 . 5 2 13 7 . 4 6 24 40 . 5 1, 6 0 4 0. 4 9 30 2 3 1418 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 3 SW 0 8 6 1 0 2 13 7 . 4 6 13 7 . 3 7 24 65 . 6 1, 6 0 4 0. 4 9 30 1 8 1414 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 0 2 SW 0 8 6 1 0 1 13 7 . 3 7 13 7 . 2 5 24 86 . 7 1, 6 0 4 0. 4 9 30 1 0 1406 0.75 Pa l m SW 0 8 6 1 0 1 SW 0 8 6 1 3 3 13 7 . 2 5 13 7 . 2 4 24 9. 7 1, 7 2 1 0. 5 1 30 6 1 1340 0.75 SW 0 8 6 1 3 3 SW 0 7 5 2 0 4 13 7 . 2 4 13 6 . 8 3 24 28 9 . 4 2, 0 7 1 0. 5 7 30 1 5 944 0.75 Ha r b o r SW 0 7 5 2 0 4 SW 0 7 5 2 0 6 13 6 . 8 3 13 6 . 7 0 24 86 . 3 2, 0 7 1 0. 5 6 31 2 7 1057 0.75 SW 0 7 5 2 0 6 SW 0 7 5 2 0 3 13 6 . 7 0 13 6 . 6 3 24 49 . 9 2, 0 7 1 0. 5 6 31 2 3 1053 0.75 SW 0 7 5 2 0 3 SW 0 7 5 2 0 5 13 6 . 6 3 13 6 . 4 8 24 10 1 . 8 2, 3 9 2 0. 6 2 31 1 4 722 0.75 5 F w y SW 0 7 5 2 0 5 SW 0 7 5 2 0 2 13 6 . 4 8 13 6 . 0 0 24 31 8 . 7 2, 4 2 3 0. 6 2 31 2 1 698 0.75 BA L L R O A D N O R T H BA L L R O A D S O U T H TA B L E 6 - B A L L R O A D P O S T - I M P R O V E M E N T B U I L D O U T C A P A C I T Y Cr o s s - s t r e e t F r o m I D T o I D Fr o m I n v (f t ) T o I n v ( f t ) Di a m e t e r (i n ) Le n g t h (f t ) Ex i s t i n g Fl o w (g p m ) d / D R a t i o An a l y s i s Fl o w (g p m ) Analysis Excess (gpm)Analysis d/D Ratio Ha r b o r SW 0 8 7 3 1 9 SW 0 7 6 4 3 2 12 0 . 1 0 12 0 . 0 0 21 56 . 0 34 9 0. 2 5 2, 3 9 5 2,045 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 3 2 SW 0 7 6 4 3 1 12 0 . 0 0 11 9 . 9 3 21 41 . 3 1, 1 1 3 0. 4 6 2, 3 8 7 1,274 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 3 1 SW 0 7 6 4 3 0 11 9 . 9 3 11 8 . 7 0 21 23 . 1 1, 1 1 3 0. 1 9 13 , 0 2 3 11,910 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 3 0 SW 0 7 6 4 2 9 11 8 . 7 0 11 8 . 2 1 21 26 7 . 3 1, 1 1 3 0. 4 6 2, 3 9 3 1,279 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 2 9 SW 0 7 6 4 2 8 11 8 . 2 1 11 7 . 7 4 21 26 4 . 7 1, 1 9 5 0. 4 7 2, 3 9 4 1,200 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 2 8 SW 0 7 6 4 2 7 11 7 . 7 4 11 7 . 0 5 21 39 . 3 1, 1 9 5 0. 2 6 7, 4 6 2 6,266 0.75 Ho t e l W a y SW 0 7 6 4 2 7 SW 0 7 6 4 1 7 11 7 . 0 5 11 6 . 2 4 21 44 8 . 9 1, 2 0 5 0. 4 8 2, 3 9 3 1,188 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 1 7 SW 0 7 6 3 1 2 11 6 . 2 4 11 5 . 5 5 21 38 4 . 2 1, 3 7 0 0. 5 1 2, 3 9 2 1,022 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 1 2 SW 0 7 6 3 1 1 11 5 . 5 5 11 4 . 8 8 21 37 4 . 4 2, 1 1 7 0. 6 8 2, 3 9 3 276 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 1 1 SW 0 7 6 3 1 0 11 4 . 8 8 11 4 . 4 2 21 25 2 . 8 2, 1 1 7 0. 6 8 2, 3 9 3 276 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 1 0 SW 0 7 6 3 0 9 11 4 . 4 2 11 3 . 9 7 21 24 9 . 0 2, 1 1 7 0. 6 8 2, 3 9 2 275 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 9 SW 0 6 6 4 3 0 11 3 . 9 7 11 3 . 5 0 21 26 0 . 6 2, 1 1 7 0. 6 8 2, 3 9 3 276 0.75 Di s n e y l a n d D r i v e SW 0 6 6 4 3 0 SW 0 6 6 4 2 4 11 3 . 5 0 11 3 . 4 2 24 44 . 1 2, 6 5 3 0. 6 2 3, 4 3 4 780 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 4 SW 0 6 6 4 2 8 11 3 . 4 2 11 3 . 3 9 24 19 . 3 2, 3 7 7 0. 5 8 3, 3 8 4 1,007 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 8 SW 0 6 6 4 2 7 11 3 . 3 9 11 2 . 9 1 24 26 5 . 2 2, 3 7 7 0. 5 8 3, 4 2 2 1,044 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 7 SW 0 6 6 4 2 3 11 2 . 9 1 11 2 . 3 2 24 33 1 . 9 2, 3 7 7 0. 5 8 3, 4 1 8 1,041 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 3 SW 0 6 6 4 2 6 11 2 . 3 2 11 1 . 7 5 24 31 4 . 1 2, 3 7 7 0. 5 8 3, 4 1 8 1,041 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 6 SW 0 6 6 3 3 2 11 1 . 7 5 11 1 . 1 4 24 34 0 . 4 2, 3 7 7 0. 5 8 3, 4 2 0 1,043 0.75 SW 0 6 6 3 3 2 OT 0 6 6 3 3 1 11 1 . 1 4 11 1 . 0 9 24 25 . 0 3, 0 8 3 0. 6 9 3, 4 1 8 335 0.75 Wa l n u t S t r e e t OT 0 6 6 3 3 1 OT 0 6 6 3 2 9 11 1 . 0 9 10 9 . 9 0 27 66 0 . 7 4, 4 3 0 0. 7 2 4, 6 8 7 256 0.75 Ni n t h S t r e e t OT 0 6 6 3 2 9 OT 0 5 7 4 4 5 10 9 . 9 0 10 8 . 7 2 27 65 7 . 6 4, 4 3 0 0. 7 2 4, 6 8 4 254 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 4 5 OT 0 5 7 4 4 7 10 8 . 7 2 10 7 . 5 0 27 14 3 . 0 4, 4 3 0 0. 4 4 10 , 1 8 3 5,754 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 4 7 OT 0 5 7 4 4 8 10 7 . 5 0 10 3 . 6 8 27 45 0 . 3 4, 4 3 0 0. 4 4 10 , 1 8 0 5,750 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 4 8 OT 0 5 7 4 4 9 10 3 . 6 8 10 2 . 5 0 27 83 . 4 4, 4 3 0 0. 3 8 13 , 1 3 5 8,706 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 4 9 OT 0 5 7 4 5 0 10 2 . 5 0 99 . 6 1 27 56 5 . 5 4, 4 3 1 0. 5 1 7, 8 8 6 3,455 0.75 OT 0 5 7 4 5 0 OT 0 5 7 3 4 2 99 . 6 1 99 . 1 1 27 98 . 1 4, 4 5 0 0. 5 1 7, 8 9 2 3,442 0.75 OT 0 5 7 3 4 2 OT 0 5 7 3 3 9 99 . 1 1 95 . 6 4 27 68 1 . 0 4, 4 5 0 0. 5 1 7, 8 8 6 3,437 0.75 Eu c l i d S t OT 0 5 7 3 3 9 SW 0 5 0 4 3 0 95 . 6 4 91 . 7 2 27 60 3 . 4 4, 4 5 0 0. 4 7 8, 9 0 3 4,453 0.75 KA T E L L A N O R T H TA B L E 7 - K A T E L L A A V E N U E P O S T - I M P R O V E M E N T B U I L D O U T C A P A C I T Y - I N C L U D I N G D L R Cr o s s - s t r e e t F r o m I D T o I D Fr o m I n v (f t ) T o I n v ( f t ) Di a m e t e r (i n ) Le n g t h (f t ) Ex i s t i n g Fl o w (g p m ) d / D R a t i o An a l y s i s Fl o w (g p m ) Analysis Excess (gpm)Analysis d/D Ratio Ha r b o r SW 0 8 7 3 0 7 SW 0 7 6 4 1 1 12 0 . 1 1 12 0 . 0 0 24 56 . 5 1, 6 5 3 0. 4 5 3, 6 0 4 1,951 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 1 1 SW 0 7 6 4 2 4 12 0 . 0 0 11 9 . 9 0 24 52 . 5 2, 1 2 9 0. 5 2 3, 6 0 5 1,477 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 2 4 SW 0 7 6 4 1 0 11 9 . 9 0 11 9 . 3 4 24 27 8 . 2 2, 8 7 3 0. 6 3 3, 6 0 3 730 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 1 0 SW 0 7 6 4 0 9 11 9 . 3 4 11 9 . 0 2 24 15 9 . 1 2, 9 3 1 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 9 678 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 0 9 SW 0 7 6 4 0 8 11 9 . 0 2 11 8 . 7 0 24 15 8 . 6 2, 9 4 6 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 4 658 0.75 Ho t e l W a y SW 0 7 6 4 0 8 SW 0 7 6 4 0 7 11 8 . 7 0 11 8 . 5 8 24 60 . 0 2, 9 4 6 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 3 658 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 0 7 SW 0 7 6 4 0 5 11 8 . 5 8 11 7 . 9 5 24 31 8 . 3 2, 9 4 5 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 2 657 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 0 5 SW 0 7 6 4 3 3 11 7 . 9 5 11 7 . 8 3 24 56 . 4 2, 9 4 5 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 9 663 0.75 SW 0 7 6 4 3 3 SW 0 7 6 3 0 8 11 7 . 8 3 11 7 . 0 8 24 37 9 . 5 2, 9 4 5 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 5 659 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 8 SW 0 7 6 3 0 7 11 7 . 0 8 11 6 . 7 2 24 17 6 . 0 2, 9 4 5 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 4 659 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 7 SW 0 7 6 3 0 6 11 6 . 7 2 11 6 . 3 2 24 20 2 . 5 2, 9 4 5 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 5 660 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 6 SW 0 7 6 3 0 5 11 6 . 3 2 11 6 . 0 9 24 11 3 . 2 2, 9 4 5 0. 6 4 3, 6 0 2 657 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 5 SW 0 7 6 3 0 4 11 6 . 0 9 11 5 . 5 7 24 26 1 . 9 3, 1 4 5 0. 6 8 3, 6 0 5 460 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 4 SW 0 7 6 3 0 3 11 5 . 5 7 11 5 . 3 5 24 10 9 . 7 3, 1 4 5 0. 6 7 3, 6 0 9 464 0.75 SW 0 7 6 3 0 3 SW 0 7 6 3 0 2 11 5 . 3 5 11 4 . 7 9 24 27 9 . 0 3, 1 4 5 0. 6 8 3, 6 0 4 459 0.75 Di s n e y l a n d D r i v e SW 0 7 6 3 0 2 SW 0 6 6 4 1 7 11 4 . 7 9 11 4 . 6 8 24 53 . 3 87 2 0. 3 2 3, 5 9 3 2,721 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 1 7 SW 0 6 6 4 2 2 11 4 . 6 8 11 4 . 1 3 24 27 5 . 5 1, 1 4 8 0. 3 7 3, 6 0 4 2,456 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 2 SW 0 6 6 4 2 1 11 4 . 1 3 11 3 . 4 7 24 33 0 . 6 1, 1 5 7 0. 3 7 3, 6 0 4 2,447 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 1 SW 0 6 6 4 2 0 11 3 . 4 7 11 2 . 9 7 24 25 0 . 1 1, 1 7 6 0. 3 7 3, 6 0 8 2,431 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 2 0 SW 0 6 6 4 1 9 11 2 . 9 7 11 2 . 8 1 24 79 . 7 1, 3 5 0 0. 4 0 3, 5 9 9 2,249 0.75 SW 0 6 6 4 1 9 SW 0 6 6 4 1 8 11 2 . 8 1 11 2 . 1 4 24 33 8 . 3 1, 3 5 0 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 5 2,255 0.75 Wa l n u t S t r e e t SW 0 6 6 4 1 8 SW 0 6 6 3 2 8 11 2 . 1 4 11 1 . 4 8 24 32 9 . 5 1, 3 5 0 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 4 2,254 0.75 SW 0 6 6 3 2 8 SW 0 6 6 3 2 7 11 1 . 4 8 11 0 . 8 1 24 33 1 . 3 1, 3 5 0 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 3 2,252 0.75 SW 0 6 6 3 2 7 SW 0 6 6 3 2 5 11 0 . 8 1 11 0 . 1 6 24 32 6 . 9 1, 3 5 1 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 5 2,254 0.75 SW 0 6 6 3 2 5 SW 0 6 6 3 2 4 11 0 . 1 6 10 9 . 5 6 24 29 9 . 2 1, 3 5 1 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 3 2,252 0.75 Ni n t h S t r e e t SW 0 6 6 3 2 4 OT 0 5 7 4 4 4 10 9 . 5 6 10 9 . 4 8 24 42 . 9 1, 3 5 1 0. 4 0 3, 6 0 8 2,257 0.75 SW 0 5 7 3 4 0 SW 0 5 7 3 3 9 10 6 . 5 3 10 5 . 9 9 24 26 7 . 3 85 8 0. 3 2 3, 6 0 2 2,744 0.75 Eu c l i d S t SW 0 5 7 3 3 4 SW 0 5 7 3 3 3 10 3 . 4 4 10 3 . 1 7 24 36 . 1 85 8 0. 2 3 6, 8 8 2 6,024 0.75 KA T E L L A S O U T H TA B L E 7 - K A T E L L A A V E N U E P O S T - I M P R O V E M E N T B U I L D O U T C A P A C I T Y - I N C L U D I N G D L R ( C O N T . ) E X H I B I T I A L T E R N A T I V E 1 - B A L L R O A D R E V E R S E S E W E R E X H I B I T I I A L T E R N A T I V E 2 - B A L L R O A D D I V E R S I O N S N E A R P L A M S T R E E T E X H I B I T I I I A L T E R N A T I V E 4 A - K A T E L L A A V E N U E A T A N A H E I M W A Y T O O R A N G E W O O D A V E N U E A L T E R N A T I V E 4 B - K A T E L L A A T L E W I S S T R E E T T O O R A N G E W O O D A V E N U E E X H I B I T I V A L T E R N A T I V E 6 - K A T E L L A D I V E R S I O N A T H A R B O R E X H I B I T V A L T E R N A T I V E 7 B - C E R R I T O S I M P R O V E M E N T E X H I B I T V I A L T E R N A T I V E 8 - K A T E L L A A V E N U E I N T E R T I E S A T W A L N U T S T R E E T South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Appendix A Sewer Studies and Development Activity Sewer Study Location Basin1 OTH # Notes Kaiser Permanente Water Treatment Plant adjacent to City Hall Ball La Palma Workforce Housing in Buena Park @ La Palma Colony Anaheim Blvd s/o Broadway Ball Laundromat Lincoln Blvd @ Dale 1881 W. Lincoln w/o Crescent Packing House Anaheim Blvd s/o Santa Ana Ball 2011-00606 Colony Park - Phases III & IV s/o Santa Ana e/o Olive Ball Nor-Cal Beverages Commercial & Olive Central Plaza Anaheim Blvd & Ball Ball Schrieber Foods in City of Fullerton 1881 W. Lincoln (revised use)w/o Crescent N/A (Gp 5 - Mdl 7 Amdmt 3) 1531 E. Lincoln between East St. & State College Ball 1825 Orange Orange e/o Nutwood Ball Ball Road Basin (OCWD)n/o Honda Ctr 1200 S. Phoenix 2013-00650 801 S. Anaheim Blvd South St. & Anaheim Blvd Ball 2726 W. Lincoln Blvd e/o Dale 928 Webster Ave n/o Ball 641 S. Brookhurst s/o Orange 2013-00684 2301 W. Lincoln Ave (Parkgate)e/o Gilbert 2014-00690 Church - 1380 S. Sanderson between 57 Fwy & SA River 2014-00694 2651 W. Lincoln combination w/ 2726 W. Lincoln 2014-00693 1254 E. Lincoln combination w/ 1531 E. Lincoln Ball 2014-00705 South St. & Westgate w/ portion of OCWD parcel 2014-00707 Domain e/o Anaheim Blvd.btwn Santa Ana & Ellsworth Ball 2011-00606 1341 W. La Palma Ave.e/o N. Arbor Street 2014-00738 Dialysis Unit 1700 Lewis Lewis just s/o Howell Katella So.2014-00749 Trumark Homes Riverdale School Site East Anaheim Anaheim Blvd/La Palma (161 condos)Peer Review Kimley Horn Sage Development Site 415 S. Anaheim Hills Road 2015-00794 1700 S. Harbor Hotel Site Harbor & Disney Way Katella No.2016-00831 Disneyland & East Gateway Disneyland 2016-00845 this project was pulled Anabella Hotel Katella e/o West St Katella So.2016-00841 1721 S. Manchester Hotel/Rests.Anaheim Blvd & Katella Katella So.2016-00882 Element Hotel S. Manchester & Alro Katella So.2016-00893 Hampton Inn & Suites 130 W. Katella Katella So.2016-00902 Shopoff 530-unit Development 901 East South Street Ball 2016-00908 368-unit Apartment 1600 West Lincoln Ave 2016-00914 West Anaheim Area Crowne Plaza Hotel (200 rooms)1441 Manchester Katella No.2016-00921 406-unit Apartment 1065 N. Pacificenter Drive 2017-00941 East Anaheim SP Area 60 Condominiums 6509 E. Serrano Ave 2017-00983 East Anaheim Area Anaheim Hotel 1601 S. Anaheim Blvd Katella So.2017-00989 29 Attached Single-Family Homes 740 E. La Palma Ave 2017-01030 125 hotel rooms 1730 S. Clementine St Katella So.2018-01031 Bottle Logic Brewery 1060 Armando St.2018-01071 East Anaheim SP Area Avanti Townhomes 100 W. Cerritos Ave Katella So.2018-01102 La Palma Senior Asstd Living 5710 E. La Palma Ave 2019-01146 East Anaheim SP Area 156 Condominiums 200 Midway (replace RV Park)Katella No.2019-01136 City of Anaheim Sewer Studies A-1 Sewer Study Location Basin1 OTH # Notes City of Anaheim Sewer Studies Center of Hope 1355 Salvation Place NA 600-Bed Homeless Shelter Rennaisance Apts (269 units)1122 Anaheim Blvd. 2019-01191 PT Boundary Shift 710 Katella NA City reccomending denial Disneyland Hotel SS (700 rooms)1601 Disneyland Drive NA pulled plug Disney Vacation Club s/o Disneyland Hotel on Walnut Katella No. Garden Walk 321 W. Katella Ave 2020-01242 Jim Kolk study support Holden Anaheim Hills Senior Living 5275 East Nohl Ranch Rd In Central Area Completed, under construction or deep in development review Project cancelled or on hold 1) If text is filled in under this column flow is tributary to that particular tributary basin in this study. Where text is in italics flow is potentially at least partially tributary to that basin via diversion structures. For non-italicized text in this column, flow is 100 percent tributary to the basin noted. A-2 Pr o j e c t N a m e Ty p e O f U s e Ph a s e Ad d r e s s De s c r i p t i o n MO L L E R R E T A I L Al c o h o l i c B e v e r a g e Sa l e s - O f f S a l e Ap p r o v e d 1 3 3 1 E K A T E L L A A V E 1 0 7 To a l l o w t h e s a l e o f b e e r a n d w i n e f o r o f f - s i t e c o n s u m p t i o n i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h a n e w co n v e n i e n c e m a r k e t l o c a t e d o n t h e g r o u n d f l o o r o f a n e x i s t i n g m i x e d - u s e de v e l o p m e n t . AL P H A G I F T M A R T BE E R A N D W I N E Co n v e n i e n c e S t o r e s A p p r o v e d 1 6 5 0 S H A R B O R B L V D D A D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f P u b l i c C o n v e n i e n c e o r N e c e s s i t y t o p e r m i t o f f - s a l e b e e r a n d w i n e sa l e s w i t h i n a n e x i s t i n g h o t e l g i f t s h o p . PA R A L L E L A P T S I G N PR O G R A M Dw e l l i n g s - M u l t i p l e - Fa m i l y Ap p r o v e d 1 1 0 5 E K A T E L L A A V E T o p e r m i t a c o o r d i n a t e d s i g n p r o g r a m f o r t h e P a r a l l e l a p a r t m e n t c o m m u n i t y . AF F O R D A B L E AP A R T M E N T H O M E S Dw e l l i n g s - M u l t i p l e - Fa m i l y Ap p r o v e d 21 2 1 S M A N C H E S T E R A V E + Th e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s a p p r o v a l o f T i e r 2 d e n s i t y b o n u s i n c e n t i v e s t o c o n s t r u c t a 1 0 2 - un i t a f f o r d a b l e a p a r t m e n t c o m p l e x w i t h a c h i l d c a r e f a c i l i t y a n d c o m m u n i t y g a r d e n . WE S T C O A S T EM T / S T A D I U M GA T E W A Y Ed u c a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t i o n s - Bu s i n e s s Ap p r o v e d 19 0 0 S S T A T E C O L L E G E BL V D 1 7 5 To p e r m i t a b u s i n e s s s c h o o l w i t h i n a n e x i s t i n g o f f i c e b u i l d i n g ( W e s t C o a s t E M T Tr a i n i n g ) . GR A N D L E G A C Y A T TH E P A R K Ho t e l s & M o t e l s A p p r o v e d 1 6 5 0 S H A R B O R B L V D To a m e n d a p e r m i t f o r a p r e v i o u s l y - a p p r o v e d a n d c o n s t r u c t e d 1 9 9 - r o o m * h o t e l w i t h a r o o f t o p r e s t a u r a n t l i m i t e d t o h o t e l g u e s t s o n l y t o a l l o w t h e r e s t a u r a n t t o b e o p e n t o th e p u b l i c , w i t h a c c e s s o r y e n t e r t a i n m e n t , a c o v e r c h a r g e , a n d f e w e r p a r k i n g s p a c e s th a n a r e r e q u i r e d b y t h e Z o n i n g C o d e . WY N D H A M G A R D E N AN A H E I M Ho t e l s & M o t e l s A p p r o v e d 5 1 5 W K A T E L L A A V E Th e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s a v a r i a n c e t o p e r m i t t w o w a l l s i g n s o n a d j a c e n t e l e v a t i o n s o n an e x i s t i n g , r e c e n t l y r e m o d e l e d h o t e l ( W y n d h a m G a r d e n A n a h e i m , f o r m e r l y R a m a d a Pl a z a A n a h e i m ) . AN A H E I M P L A Z A H o t e l s & M o t e l s A p p r o v e d 1 7 0 0 S H A R B O R B L V D To c o n s t r u c t a 5 8 0 - r o o m , 8 - s t o r y h o t e l w i t h 5 0 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f m e e t i n g s p a c e - 25 , 6 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f r e s t a u r a n t s p a c e - 2 0 , 1 8 8 s q u a r e f e e t o f c o n c i e r g e l o u n g e sp a c e - f e w e r p a r k i n g s p a c e s t h a n r e q u i r e d b y t h e C o d e - a n d , a r e q u e s t t o a d o p t a de v e l o p m e n t a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e C i t y o f A n a h e i m a n d G o o d H o p e I n t e r n a t i o n a l fo r t h e p r o p o s e d h o t e l p r o j e c t . CA M B R I A H O T E L & SU I T E S Ho t e l s & M o t e l s A p p r o v e d 1 0 1 E K A T E L L A A V E Th e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s a p p r o v a l t o r e v i s e t h e e l e v a t i o n s a n d m a t e r i a l s f o r a pr e v i o u s l y - a p p r o v e d 3 5 2 - r o o m h o t e l a n d r e s t a u r a n t d e v e l o p m e n t . FE R G U S O N EN T E R P R I S E S , I N C In d u s t r y - H e a v y A p p r o v e d 7 1 0 E B A L L R D Th e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s a p p r o v a l o f t h e f o l l o w i n g l a n d u s e e n t i t l e m e n t s : ( i ) a co n d i t i o n a l u s e p e r m i t t o p e r m i t i n d u s t r i a l l y - r e l a t e d r e t a i l s a l e s a n d o u t d o o r s t o r a g e in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h a n e x i s t i n g h e a t i n g a n d c o o l i n g , a p p l i a n c e , a n d p l u m b i n g s u p p l y bu s i n e s s - a n d ( i i ) a v a r i a n c e t o p e r m i t l e s s p a r k i n g t h a n r e q u i r e d p e r t h e A n a h e i m Mu n i c i p a l C o d e . HA R M O N Y F U N E R A L SE R V I C E S / C R E M A Mo r t u a r i e s Ap p r o v e d 1 5 5 0 S L E W I S S T To p e r m i t a c r e m a t o r y b u s i n e s s t o e m b a l m h u m a n r e m a i n s w i t h i n a n e x i s t i n g in d u s t r i a l b u i l d i n g . MI G U E L I T O S T A C O S Re s t a u r a n t - Ge n e r a l / A l c o h o l i c Be v e r a g e S a l e O n - S a l e Ap p r o v e d 1 4 4 0 S A N A H E I M B L V D I 0 1 a m i n o r c o n d i t i o n a l u s e p e r m i t t o p e r m i t o n p r e m i s e c o n s u m p t i o n o f a l c o h o l i c be v e r a g e s 1 of 4 CI T Y D E V E L O P M E N T A C T I V I T Y F O R S I N C E 2 0 1 5 A-3 Pr o j e c t N a m e Ty p e O f U s e Ph a s e Ad d r e s s De s c r i p t i o n ZO V ' S S I G N R e s t a u r a n t s - G e n e r a l A p p r o v e d 1 8 0 1 E K A T E L L A A V E To a l l o w t w o a d d i t i o n a l w a l l ( a w n i n g ) s i g n s a t a n e x i s t i n g r e s t a u r a n t ( Z o v s ) t h a t ex c e e d t h e s i z e a n d n u m b e r o f p e r m i t t e d s i g n s . SE L F S T O R A G E PA R K I N G E X P A N S I O N Se l f - S t o r a g e A p p r o v e d N O S I T E A D D R E S S + To a l l o w a p a r k i n g l o t e x p a n s i o n w i t h a r e d u c e d f r o n t l a n d s c a p e d s e t b a c k i n co n j u n c t i o n w i t h a n e x i s t i n g s e l f - s t o r a g e f a c i l i t y . FL A M I N G O SH O W G I R L S Se x - O r i e n t e d B u s i n e s s Ap p r o v e d 6 1 8 E B A L L R D F l a m i n g o S h o w g i r l s HO U S E O F B L U E S IC O N I C E L E M E N T Si g n s A p p r o v e d 3 2 1 W K A T E L L A A V E + Th e a p p l i c a n t p r o p o s e s A d j u s t m e n t N o . 1 0 t o t h e D i s n e y l a n d R e s o r t S p e c i f i c P l a n , an a m e n d m e n t t o C h a p t e r 1 8 . 1 1 4 o f t h e A n a h e i m M u n i c i p a l C o d e , a n d a n am e n d m e n t t o C o n d i t i o n a l U s e P e r m i t N o . 4 0 7 8 t o r e v i s e t h e C o o r d i n a t e d S i g n a g e Pr o g r a m f o r A n a h e i m G a r d e n W a l k , i n c l u d i n g p e r m i t t i n g a n i c o n / t h e m e d s i g n a g e el e m e n t , f o r t h e H o u s e o f B l u e s a t A n a h e i m G a r d e n W a l k . RE S I D E N C E I N N EL E C T R O N I C S I G N Si g n s A p p r o v e d 6 4 0 W K A T E L L A A V E To p e r m i t a n e l e c t r o n i c m e s s a g e b o a r d s i g n t h a t w o u l d b e v i s i b l e f r o m t h e p u b l i c ri g h t - o f - w a y w i t h i n a h o t e l c o m p l e x w i t h a g r e a t e r h e i g h t t h a n p e r m i t t e d b y t h e Zo n i n g C o d e . JE F F E R S O N P T S I G N S S i g n s A p p r o v e d 1 7 8 1 S C A M P T O N A V E + To p e r m i t a c o o r d i n a t e d s i g n p r o g r a m t o p e r m i t s i g n s l a r g e r t h a n p e r m i t t e d b y t h e Zo n i n g C o d e i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h t h e r e c e n t l y - c o n s t r u c t e d J e f f e r s o n P l a t i n u m T r i a n g l e ap a r t m e n t c o m m u n i t y . JP I C O O R D I N A T E D SI G N P R O G R A M Si g n s A p p r o v e d 13 2 2 E G E N E A U T R Y W A Y + To p e r m i t a c o o r d i n a t e d s i g n p r o g r a m i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h t h e J e f f e r s o n a t S t a d i u m Pa r k P h a s e s A & B a p a r t m e n t c o m m u n i t i e s . LA Z V A L E T P A R K I N G V a l e t P a r k i n g A p p r o v e d 15 2 0 - 1 8 5 5 S H A R B O R BL V D Mi n o r C U P f o r v a l e t s e r v i c e s a t m u l t i p l e p r o p e r t i e s ( 1 5 2 0 , 1 5 4 0 , 1 6 0 0 , 1 6 0 4 , 1 8 5 5 S . Ha r b o r ) CO R E A T A - T O W N SI G N S Dw e l l i n g s - M u l t i p l e - Fa m i l y Co m p l e t e 1 8 1 5 S W E S T S I D E D R Th e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s t o p e r m i t a c o o r d i n a t e d s i g n p r o g r a m f o r t h e C o r e a t A - T o w n ap a r t m e n t c o m m u n i t y w i t h i n t h e P l a t i n u m T r i a n g l e O v e r l a y z o n e . PL A T I N U M V I S T A Dw e l l i n g s - M u l t i p l e - Fa m i l y Co m p l e t e 1 1 0 5 E K A T E L L A A V E R e v i e w f i n a l s i t e p l a n t o p e r m i t a 3 8 6 u n i t a p a r t m e n t d e v e l o p m e n t HA M P T O N I N N & SU I T E S Ho t e l s & M o t e l s C o m p l e t e 1 0 0 - 1 3 0 W K A T E L L A A V E To d e m o l i s h a v a c a n t m o t e l ( f o r m e r l y A r e n a I n n & S u i t e s ) a n d c o n s t r u c t a f i v e - s t o r y , 17 8 - r o o m h o t e l w i t h a s h o r t e r e n t r y d r i v e l e n g t h a n d f e w e r p a r k i n g s p a c e s t h a n re q u i r e d b y t h e Z o n i n g C o d e . A T O W N M E T R O AM E N D M E N T Mi x e d U s e P l a t i n u m Tr i a n g l e Co m p l e t e 1 4 0 4 E K A T E L L A A V E To a m e n d t h e D e v e l o p m e n t A g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e C i t y o f A n a h e i m a n d P T M e t r o , LL C f o r t h e A - T o w n M e t r o P r o j e c t t o a d d a t e r m e x t e n s i o n m i l e s t o n e a t t h e s e v e n an d o n e - h a l f y e a r m a r k . 17 0 0 L E W I S Dw e l l i n g s - S i n g l e - F a m i l y At t a c h e d Co n s t r u c t i o n 1 7 0 0 S L E W I S S T Ne w 1 5 3 - u n i t a t t a c h e d s i n g l e - f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l p r o j e c t w i t h m o d i f i e d s e t b a c k s be t w e e n b u i l d i n g s , a T e n t a t i v e T r a c t M a p f o r c o n d o m i n i u m p u r p o s e s a n d a De v e l o p m e n t A g r e e m e n t t o a l l o w d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t d e s c r i b e d ab o v e . 2 of 4 A-4 Pr o j e c t N a m e Ty p e O f U s e Ph a s e Ad d r e s s De s c r i p t i o n RA D I S S O N B L U E HO T E L Ho t e l s & M o t e l s C o n s t r u c t i o n 1 6 0 1 S A N A H E I M B L V D A c o n d i t i o n a l u s e p e r m i t f o r t h e a p p r o v a l o f a h o t e l w i t h a g r e a t e r b u i l d i n g h e i g h t a n d hi g h e r f l o o r a r e a r a t i o t h a n a l l o w e d b y t h e C o d e , a n d a v a r i a n c e f o r f e w e r t r e e s a l o n g th e I n t e r s t a t e 5 f r o n t a g e t h a n r e q u i r e d b y t h e C o d e . T h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i n c l u d e s a 12 - s t o r y , 3 2 6 - r o o m h o t e l a n d a f o u r - l e v e l p a r k i n g g a r a g e . T h e h o t e l w o u l d i n c l u d e am e n i t i e s o n t h e g r o u n d l e v e l , i n c l u d i n g a s w i m m i n g p o o l , r e s t a u r a n t , m e e t i n g sp a c e , f i t n e s s r o o m , c o f f e e s h o p , a n d g i f t s h o p . T h e 1 2 t h f l o o r w o u l d i n c l u d e a ro o f t o p p o o l , s u n d e c k , a n d r e s t a u r a n t a n d b a r . T h e r o o f - t o p r e s t a u r a n t a n d b a r i s pr o p o s e d f o r h o t e l g u e s t u s e o n l y * . *A N o t i c e o f I n t e n t t o a d o p t a M i t i g a t e d N e g a t i v e D e c l a r a t i o n w a s m a i l e d t o su r r o u n d i n g p r o p e r t i e s o n M a r c h 1 9 , 2 0 1 8 , w h i c h i n c o r r e c t l y s t a t e d t h a t b o t h t h e gr o u n d f l o o r a n d 1 2 t h f l o o r r e s t a u r a n t s w o u l d b e l i m i t e d t o u s e b y h o t e l g u e s t s o n l y . HI L T O N G A R D E N I N N / HO M E 2 S U I T E S Ho t e l s & M o t e l s C o n s t r u c t i o n 1 4 4 1 S M A N C H E S T E R A V E Th e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s a G e n e r a l P l a n A m e n d m e n t a n d S p e c i f i c P l a n A m e n d m e n t t o cr e a t e a n e w d e n s i t y c a t e g o r y f o r t h e A n a h e i m R e s o r t S p e c i f i c P l a n ( S P 9 2 - 2 ) - Mi n o r C o n d i t i o n a l U s e P e r m i t t o a l l o w v a l e t p a r k i n g - V a r i a n c e t o a l l o w a n a r r o w e r la n d s c a p e d s t r e e t s e t b a c k t h a n r e q u i r e d b y t h e C o d e a n d t o a l l o w t w o w a l l s i g n s t h a t ar e v i s i b l e f r o m t h e s a m e v a n t a g e p o i n t - F i n a l S i t e P l a n t o c o n f i r m t h e P r o j e c t co m p l i e s w i t h t h e A R S P - a n d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e A d j u s t m e n t f o r a r e d u c t i o n i n t h e nu m b e r o f p a r k i n g s p a c e s r e q u i r e d b y t h e C o d e . T h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i n c l u d e s a s i x - st o r y , 2 2 3 - r o o m d u a l - b r a n d e d h o t e l w i t h t w o l e v e l s o f s u b t e r r a n e a n p a r k i n g . T h e ho t e l s w o u l d i n c l u d e a m e e t i n g r o o m a n d r e t a i l s h o p o n t h e g r o u n d f l o o r a n d g u e s t am e n i t i e s o n t h e g r o u n d l e v e l a n d s e c o n d l e v e l , i n c l u d i n g a s w i m m i n g p o o l , br e a k f a s t r o o m s , a n d f i t n e s s r o o m . ST A R W O O D E L E M E N T AN A H E I M Ho t e l s & M o t e l s C o n s t r u c t i o n 2 0 0 W A L R O W A Y To d e m o l i s h a v a c a n t c o m m e r c i a l b u i l d i n g ( f o r m e r l y B e r g s t r o m s C h i l d r e n s S t o r e ) an d c o n s t r u c t a n e w f i v e - s t o r y , 1 7 4 - r o o m h o t e l w i t h a n a r r o w e r s t r e e t l a n d s c a p e se t b a c k , n a r r o w e r i n t e r i o r b u i l d i n g a n d l a n d s c a p e s e t b a c k s , m o r e w a l l s i g n s t h a n al l o w e d , a n d f e w e r p a r k i n g s p a c e s t h a n r e q u i r e d b y t h e Z o n i n g C o d e . WE S T I N H o t e l s & M o t e l s C o n s t r u c t i o n 1 0 3 0 W K A T E L L A A V E To c o n s t r u c t a 6 3 4 - r o o m , 8 - s t o r y h o t e l w i t h 4 2 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f m e e t i n g s p a c e a n d 31 , 1 7 9 s q u a r e f e e t o f r e s t a u r a n t a n d r e t a i l s p a c e - t o e s t a b l i s h a z e r o s e t b a c k a l o n g th e e a s t s i d e o f t h e p r o j e c t , a d j a c e n t t o t h e A n a h e i m C o n v e n t i o n C e n t e r - a n d , a re q u e s t t o a d o p t a d e v e l o p m e n t a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e C i t y o f A n a h e i m a n d F J S , In c . f o r t h e p r o p o s e d h o t e l p r o j e c t . JW M A R R I O T T AN A H E I M Ho t e l s & M o t e l s C o n s t r u c t i o n 1 7 7 5 S C L E M E N T I N E S T To c o n s t r u c t a 4 6 6 - r o o m , 1 2 - s t o r y h o t e l w i t h t w o l e v e l s o f s u b t e r r a n e a n p a r k i n g a n d a f r o n t s e t b a c k t h a t i s s m a l l e r t h a n r e q u i r e d b y t h e Z o n i n g C o d e . 3 of 4 A-5 Pr o j e c t N a m e Ty p e O f U s e Ph a s e Ad d r e s s De s c r i p t i o n CA M B R I A H O T E L A N D SU I T E S Ho t e l s & M o t e l s C o n s t r u c t i o n 17 2 1 S M A N C H E S T E R A V E + Th e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s a p p r o v a l o f a f i n a l s i t e p l a n t o c o n s t r u c t a 1 2 - s t o r y , 3 5 2 - r o o m ho t e l , t h r e e r e s t a u r a n t t e n a n t s p a c e s a n d o n e - l e v e l o f s u b t e r r a n e a n p a r k i n g . Ap p l i c a n t s u b s e q u e n t l y r e q u e s t e d r e v i s e d e l e v a t i o n s u n d e r D E V 2 0 1 6 - 0 0 0 3 8 A . ME N A G E H O T E L H o t e l s & M o t e l s C o n s t r u c t i o n 1 2 2 1 S H A R B O R B L V D Re n o v a t i o n o f a l l g u e s t r o o m s , l o b b y a n d r e s t r o o m s . N o e x t e r i o r i m p r o v e m e n t s pr o p o s e d a s p a r t o f t h i s p r o j e c t . JE F F E R S O N S T A D I U M PA R K Mi x e d U s e P l a t i n u m Tr i a n g l e Co n s t r u c t i o n 1 8 0 0 E G E N E A U T R Y W A Y Ne w m i x e d - u s e p r o j e c t c o n s i s t i n g o f 1 , 0 7 9 r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s , 9 , 8 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t o f re t a i l s p a c e , a p u b l i c p a r k , a n d a n e t w o r k o f l o c a l s t r e e t s . BR E W H E I M Al c o h o l i c B e v e r a g e Ma n u f a c t u r i n g P l a n C h e c k 1 9 2 1 - 1 9 3 1 E W R I G H T C I R Th e a p p l i c a n t r e q u e s t s a p p r o v a l o f t h e f o l l o w i n g l a n d u s e e n t i t l e m e n t s t o p e r m i t al c o h o l i c b e v e r a g e m a n u f a c t u r i n g ( a b r e w e r y ) w i t h i n a n e x i s t i n g i n d u s t r i a l b u i l d i n g : (i ) a c o n d i t i o n a l u s e p e r m i t t o a l l o w a t a s t i n g r o o m t h a t e x c e e d s 7 5 0 s q u a r e f e e t - an d , ( i i ) a p a r k i n g v a r i a n c e t o p e r m i t f e w e r p a r k i n g s p a c e s t h a n r e q u i r e d b y t h e Zo n i n g C o d e . 7- 1 1 C O N V E N I E N C E ST O R E Co n v e n i e n c e S t o r e s P l a n C h e c k 1 8 1 8 S L E W I S S T To a m e n d T i t l e 1 8 o f t h e A n a h e i m M u n i c i p a l C o d e t o m o d i f y C h a p t e r 1 8 . 2 0 (P l a t i n u m T r i a n g l e ( P T M U ) O v e r l a y Z o n e ) t o a d d s m a l l c o m m e r c i a l b u i l d i n g s t o t h e li s t o f d e v e l o p m e n t a g r e e m e n t e x e m p t i o n s - a p p r o v e a C o n d i t i o n a l U s e P e r m i t t o co n s t r u c t a n e w 3 , 0 6 0 s q u a r e f o o t c o n v e n i e n c e m a r k e t - a n d , m a k e a d e t e r m i n a t i o n of P u b l i c C o n v e n i e n c e o r N e c e s s i t y f o r t h e s a l e o f b e e r a n d w i n e f o r o f f - p r e m i s e s co n s u m p t i o n . JE F F E R S O N P L A T I N U M I & I I Dw e l l i n g s - M u l t i p l e - Fa m i l y Pl a n C h e c k 1 7 8 1 S C A M P T O N A V E Ne w 4 0 0 - u n i t r e s i d e n t i a l c o m p l e x . P r o j e c t a r e a i n c l u d e s 4 . 2 2 a c r e s n o r t h o f W r i g h t Ci r c l e . DE V A R E A G O F A - TO W N Dw e l l i n g s - M u l t i p l e - Fa m i l y Pl a n C h e c k 1 5 8 9 E G E N E A U T R Y W A Y A 1 5 4 - u n i t c o n d o m i n i u m d e v e l o p m e n t w i t h b u i l d i n g s e t b a c k s a d j a c e n t t o t h e s t r e e t th a t a r e l e s s t h a n t h e m i n i m u m w i d t h r e q u i r e d b y C o d e ( 1 0 f e e t r e q u i r e d - 2 . 5 f e e t pr o p o s e d ) . D e v A r e a G o f t h e A - T o w n M a s t e r S i t e P l a n A- T O W N DE V E L O P M E N T A R E A H Dw e l l i n g s - S i n g l e - F a m i l y At t a c h e d Pl a n C h e c k 1 4 3 0 E T R I A D S T 84 d w e l l i n g u n i t s l o c a t e d w i t h i n 2 8 t r i p l e x t o w n h o m e b u i l d i n g s t h a t a r e l o c a t e d c l o s e r to e a c h o t h e r t h a n m i n i m u m d i s t a n c e r e q u i r e d b y C o d e ( 2 0 f e e t r e q u i r e d - 1 1 . 8 f e e t pr o p o s e d ) . A - T o w n D e v e l o p m e n t A r e a H . WE S T G A T E TI M E S H A R E GA R D E N W A L K Ho t e l s & M o t e l s P l a n C h e c k 5 0 0 W D I S N E Y W A Y Ne w H o t e l C o n s t r u c t i o n : C o n s t r u c t a 7 s t o r y t i m e s h a r e w i t h 3 9 9 u n i t s ( 4 8 4 , 3 7 7 s q ft ) , r e s t a u r a n t , l o b b y , s a l e s a r e a , a n d d e c k a r e a . 4 of 4 A-6 23416108GeneralCommercial0.81 ac0.5 max FAR17,729 max SF 08248213GeneralCommercial1.19 ac0.5 max FAR25,975 max SF 08246134General Commercial2.1 ac0.5 max FAR45,768 max SF 08248116GeneralCommercial0.47 ac0.5 max FAR10,160 max SF 08218553Residential-Medium1.22 ac36 max du/ac44 max du/ac(A)08218551Residential-Medium0.39 ac36 max du/ac14 max du/ac 08249230General Commercial0.75 ac0.5 max FAR16,256 max SF 08214037General Commercial1.02 ac0.5 max FAR22,223 max SF 08213031General Commercial1.16 ac0.5 max FAR25,244 max SF 08248112General Commercial1.23 ac0.5 max FAR26,796 max SF (E) 08218541Residential-Medium0.25 ac36 max du/ac9 max du/ac 08246120GeneralCommercial1.07 ac0.5 max FAR23,250 max SF 08240404General Commercial0.52 ac0.5 max FAR11,330 max SF 08248206GeneralCommercial2.59 ac0.5 max FAR56,442max SF 08248107General Commercial1.38 ac0.5 max FAR29,981 max SF 08218546Residential-LowMedium0.84 ac18 max du/ac15 max du/ac 23416107General Commercial0.37 ac0.5 max FAR8,090 max SF 08246125General Commercial1.85 ac0.5 max FAR40,300 max SF 08222015General Commercial0.1 ac0.5 max FAR2,150 max SF 08247124Industrial0.35 ac0.5 max FAR7,621 max SF 08218528Residential-Medium0.12 ac36 max du/ac4 max du/ac 08240403General Commercial0.3 ac0.5 max FAR6,432 max SF 08246130General Commercial1.36 ac0.5 max FAR29,559 max SF 08218527Residential-Medium0.14 ac36 max du/ac5 max du/ac 23416111General Commercial1.76 ac0.5 max FAR38,281 max SF 08213016General Commercial14.18 ac0.5 max FAR308,839 max SF 08246138General Commercial1.11 ac0.5 max FAR24,074 max SF 08218531Residential-Medium0.13 ac36 max du/ac5 max du/ac 08218526Residential-Medium0.13 ac36 max du/ac5 max du/ac 08218501Residential-Medium0.13 ac36 max du/ac5 max du/ac 08218529Residential-Medium0.12 ac36 max du/ac4 max du/ac 08218530Residential-Medium0.14 ac36 max du/ac5 max du/ac 23416126General Commercial0.26 ac0.5 max FAR5,732 max SF 08218552Residential-Medium0.26 ac36 max du/ac9 max du/ac 23416109General Commercial0.29 ac0.5 max FAR6,257 max SF 08248214General Commercial1.23 ac0.5 max FAR26,851 max SF 23416112General Commercial1.56 ac0.5 max FAR33,948 max SF 08246135General Commercial1.08 ac0.5 max FAR23,604 max SF 08213032General Commercial1.12 ac0.5 max FAR24,295 max SF 08246132General Commercial1.2 ac0.5 max FAR26,130 max SF 08248208General Commercial4.7 ac0.5 max FAR102,280 max SF 08246129General Commercial1.37 ac0.5 max FAR29,943 max SF 08247121General Commercial0.67 ac0.5 max FAR14,656 max SF 23416110General Commercial0.95 ac0.5 max FAR20,669 max SF 08248114General Commercial2.38 ac0.5 max FAR51,932 max SF 08249229School0.23 ac 08246124General Commercial0.75 ac0.5 max FAR16,380 max SF 08213014General Commercial0.9 ac0.5 max FAR19,538 max SF 23416104General Commercial1.2 ac0.5 max FAR26,227 max SF 08249225School0.69 ac (C)08218539Residential-Medium0.13 ac36 max du/ac5 max du/ac (D) 08218540Residential-Medium0.01 ac36 max du/ac0 max du/ac 08246139General Commercial1.86 ac0.5 max FAR40,614 max SF 08246115General Commercial1.21 ac0.5 max FAR26,367 max SF 08223071General Commercial19.49 ac0.5 max FAR424,508 max SF 08247122General Commercial1.11 ac0.5 max FAR24,070 max SF 08218547Residential-Medium0.26 ac36 max du/ac9 max du/ac08218548Residential-Medium0.01 ac36 max du/ac0 max du/ac 08249206School1.22 ac 23416113General Commercial1.43 ac0.5 max FAR31,122 max SF 23416105General Commercial1.59 ac0.5 max FAR34,548 max SF (B)08218535Residential-Medium0.13 ac36 max du/ac5 max du/ac 08218559Residential-Medium0.25 ac36 max du/ac9 max du/ac 08218558Residential-Medium4.17 ac36 max du/ac150 max du/ac 08218556Residential-Low Medium9.03 ac18 max du/ac162 max du/ac 08223053General Commercial10.85 ac0.5 max FAR236,326 max SF 08222018General Commercial1.83 ac0.5 max FAR39,949 max SF 08246123General Commercial1.25 ac0.5 max FAR27,121 max SF 08246131General Commercial1.46 ac0.5 max FAR31,865 max SF 08221401General Commercial10.3 ac0.5 max FAR224,395 max SF 08222016General Commercial0.31 ac0.5 max FAR6,734 max SF 08222017General Commercial1.06 ac0.5 max FAR23,163 max SF 08248115General Commercial0.3 ac0.5 max FAR6,445 max SF 08247123Industrial0.26 ac0.5 max FAR5,754 max SF (A) (B) (C)(D) (E) BERRY ALRO C L I F T O N WINSTON I R I S C L A U D I N A C L A R E M O N T HILL L E M O N MIDWAY PALAIS C A M B R I D G E Z E Y N C L I F T O N C L A U D I N A T E C H N O L O G Y P E T A L GUINIDA MARGATE PALAIS L E M O N O L I V E A L L E C C E R R I T O S C L A U D I N A A N A H E I M A N A H E I M CERRITOS BALL BALL M A NCHESTER C L E M E N T I N E M i d t o w n G e n e r a l P l a n L a n d U s e §¨5 §¨5 |91 |91 |57 |57 |55 |241|91 Map Location °0 200 400 Feet Aerial Photography from May 2010.Aerial Photography from May 2010. City of AnaheimGIS CentralNovember 06, 2019 1 inch = 167 feet Key to Features Legal Lot Lines Midtown Selected Parcels Assessed Parcels Residential Commercial Industrial Office Public and Quasi-Public Facilities Open Space and Recreation Low Density Low Medium Density Medium Density General Commercial Commercial Recreation Industrial Office-Low School Institutional Railroad Open Space Parks §¨¦5 A-7 South Central Anaheim Sewer Study Appendix B Datum Adjustment Calculation Rationale DATUM ADJUSTMENT RATIONALE AND CALCULATIONS To complete the feasibility analysis, adjustments and assumptions were made to place all the inverts being reviewed in the same vertical plane per alternative as discussed below. Alternative 1 - Ball Road Reverse Sewer The OCSD plans prepared by Lee & Ro in 2017 (C12012 & C5011) were used as a benchmark in our analysis. The goal was to find the vertical adjustment required to bring the referenced plans (673, 674, and 3739) to a common vertical plane. To achieve this, a common manhole in the record drawings was used to calculate datum adjustments. Beginning with manhole SW106206 in the intersection of Ball Road and State College Boulevard, it was noted this manhole was common to both the OCSD plans and City of Anaheim Plan Number 3739 (c.1959). The westerly 12” outlet was shown at a 154.76’ invert in OCSD plan C5011 and 150.77’ invert in plan 3739. Therefore, the calculated adjustment from plan number 3739 to OCSD is: Datum Adjustment = 154.76 – 150.77 = +3.99 (1) Then, manhole SW106205 near the Ball Road and State College intersection was common to both City of Anaheim Plan Number 3739 and 674 (c.1955). The center of the manhole was shown at an invert of 150.51 in plan number 3739 and 151.00 in plan number 674. Therefore, the calculated adjustment from plan number 674 to 3739 is: Datum Adjustment = 150.51 – 151.00 = -0.49 (2) Using the calculations/assumptions above the calculated vertical plane adjustment from plan number 674 to the OCSD plans is: Datum Adjustment = +3.99 + -0.49 = 3.50 (3) Since plan number 673 is part of the same plan set as plan number 674 the same datum adjustment may be used as calculated in equation 3. Alternative 2 - Ball Road Diversions near Palm Street The City of Anaheim plan 21791 prepared in 1997 was used as a benchmark in our analysis. The objective was to find the vertical adjustment required to bring the referenced plan (20115) to a common vertical plane. To achieve this, a common manhole in the record drawings was used for the datum adjustments. Manhole SW085322 was common to both City of Anaheim Plan Number 21791 and 20115 (c.1996). The easterly inlet of SW085322 was constructed with a 6-foot long 18” stub-out; the upstream end of the stub was noted at an invert of 135.58 in plan number 200115. This 18” stub was the starting and connection point of the 18” shown in plan 21791, this connection point was at 135.43. Therefore, the calculated adjustment from plan number 20115 to plan 21791 is: Datum Adjustment = 135.43 – 135.58 = -0.15 (4) B-1 Alternative 4A – Katella Avenue at Anaheim Way to Orangewood Avenue and Alternative 4B - Katella at Lewis Street to Orangewood Avenue The North American Vertical Datum adjustment of 1988 (NAVD88) was used as a benchmark in our feasibility study. Our objective was to find the vertical adjustments required to bring the referenced plans to a common vertical plane. To complete this, a common manhole in the record drawings, survey information, and historical benchmark elevations were used. First, the record plans (1624, 119473, 20456, 20459, and 265334) were reviewed for benchmark information noted in the plans. The following benchmark information was noted in the plans. • Plan No. 1624 (c.1955) No benchmark information • Plan No. 19473 (c.1994) BM 9A-19-95 @ Elevation 146.10 • Plan No. 20456 & 20459 (c.1995) BM 15-0078 (PM 36.2) @ Elevation 138.24 • Plan No. 26534 (c. 2017) BM 9A-22 @ Elevation 151.99 (NAVD88) Plan No. 26534 was already in the NAVD88 datum and therefore did not require any vertical adjustment to shown elevations. Second, historical benchmark information was then reviewed for BM 9A-19. Per the historical recorded elevation for this benchmark, the benchmark elevation noted in the plans (146.10) corresponded to NGVD29. The elevation in NAVD88 was recorded as148.22. Therefore, the calculated adjustment to elevate plan number 19473 from NGVD29 to NAVD88 is: Datum Adjustment = 148.22 – 146.10 = +2.12 (5) Third, manhole SW097416 was common to both City of Anaheim Plan Number 19473 and 1624. The center of SW097416 was shown at a 129.98 invert (132.10 adjusted to NAVD88 per equation (5)) in plan number 19473 and 124.40 in plan number 1624. Therefore, the calculated adjustment from plan 1624 to NAVD88 is: Datum Adjustment = 132.10 – 124.40 = +7.70 (6) Alternative 7B – Cerritos Improvement The North American Vertical Datum adjustment of 1988 (NAVD88) was used as a benchmark in our feasibility study. Our objective was to find the vertical adjustments required to bring the referenced plans to a common vertical plane. To complete this, a common manhole in the record drawings, survey information, and historical benchmark elevations were used. First, the record plans (1624, 119473, 20456, 20459, and 265334) were reviewed for benchmark information noted in the plans. The following benchmark information was noted in the plans. • Plan No. 838 & 839 (c.1954) No benchmark information • Plan No. 37160 (c.2016) BM 8A-40 @ Elevation 126.63 (NAVD88) • Plan No. 38375 (c.2018) (NAVD88) • Plan No. 20404 (c. 1997) BM 9A-13-95 @ Elevation 125.07 (NGVD29) B-2 Plan No. 37160 and 38375 were already in the NAVD88 datum and therefore did not require any vertical adjustment to shown elevations. Second, historical benchmark information was then reviewed for BM 9A-13. This benchmark appears to have been destroyed as it is not in the City’s record. The City was able to provide Orange County benchmark information for a benchmark in the same intersection (Katella and West). Per the historical recorded elevation for this nearby benchmark, the benchmark elevation noted for NGVD29 was 124.5 and NAVD88 was recorded as 126.9. Therefore, the calculated adjustment to elevate plan number 20404 from NGVD29 to NAVD88 is: Datum Adjustment = 126.9 – 124.5 = +2.4 (7) Alternative 8 - Katella Avenue Interties at Walnut Street The City of Anaheim plan 20186 prepared by UMA Engineering in 1996 was used as a benchmark in our analysis. The objective was to find the vertical adjustment required to bring the referenced plans (755, 756, and OCSD South Anaheim Interceptor Sheet 8) to a common vertical plane. To achieve this, a common manhole in the record drawings was used for the datum adjustments. Manhole OT066331 in the intersection of Katella Avenue and Walnut Street was common to both City of Anaheim Plan Number 20186 and OCSD South Anaheim Interceptor Sheet 8 (c.1959). The center of OT066331 was shown at an 112.10 invert in plan number 20186 and 112.25 in OCSD’s plan. Therefore, the calculated adjustment from OCSD’s plan to plan 20186 is: Datum Adjustment = 112.10 – 112.25 = -0.15 (8) Then, manhole OT057444 in the intersection of Katella Avenue and Ninth Street was common to both OCSD South Anaheim Interceptor Sheet 8 and City of Anaheim Plan Number 755 (c.1955). The center of OT057444 was shown at an invert of 109.80 in OCSD’s plan and 104.73 in plan number 755. Therefore, the calculated adjustment from plan number 755 to OCSD’s plan is: Datum Adjustment = 109.80 – 104.73 = +5.07 (9) Using the calculations/assumptions above the calculated vertical plane adjustment from plan number 755 to plan 20186 is: Datum Adjustment = -0.15 + 5.07 = +4.92 (10) Since plan number 756 is part of the same plan set as plan number 755 the same datum adjustment may be used as calculated in equation 10. B-3 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK March 16, 2021 City of Anaheim, Planning Department 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Affordable Housing Density Bonus for Midway Affordable Housing Project, located at 110 W Midway Drive, City of Anaheim To Whom It May Concern: The applicant, National CORE, is requesting approval of Affordable Housing Density Bonus for the Midway Affordable Housing, located at 110 west Midway Drive in the City of Anaheim. The 96,150- square foot project site consists of a four-story affordable housing development with associated landscaping and recreational opportunities for the families. The project will maximize the site’s future potential and contributes toward the City’s objective to help the State of California’s affordable housing crisis. The 2.36-acre project is located in the southwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Midway Avenue, within a walkable distance to the approximate retails, Paul Revere elementary school cross Midway Avenue, and Oasis Family Resource Center on the Midway Avenue. The 100% family affordable housing project includes up to 86 units, mixing with 29 one-bedroom units, 35 two- bedroom units, and 22 three-bedroom units. In addition to the living spaces, the project also provides substantial community amenities onsite to the residents and surrounding communities. A 1,700 square feet public flex space is located at the corner of Midway Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard on the ground floor, providing broad and various uses. A 3,300 square feet community center is located in Anaheim Boulevard on the ground floor, including a clubroom for Boy and Girl scouts and YMCA programs, a leasing office where to run the supportive services and programs, such as economic mobility programs, health and wellness, and child after school care programs. The essence of good design embraces comfortable human scale, visual charm, nurturing landscapes and well-proportioned spaces formed by appropriately positioned and articulated architecture. The contemporary 4-story building proposes two levels of residential units over double height public flex space and community center to create a walkable storefront on Anaheim Boulevard and the corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Midway Avenue, four stories of residential units along most of the Midway avenue and Zeyn street, and three levels of units over tuck-under parking facing interior parking court. An outdoor recreational courtyard is located next to the indoor community amenities acting as a social hub for the community. The courtyard includes a shaded kid’s playground, community gardens, a ATTACHMENT NO. 6 Midway Affordable Housing Density Bonus/Zone Change Request March 16, 2021 Page 2 of 3 swimming pool, an outdoor fireplace lounge area, a bathroom and dog washing station, and a dog relieve area. A vertical decorative metal screen with landscape buffer is provided between the carports and the courtyard. The project also includes a lookout roof deck for residents to entertain, relax, and enjoy the Disneyland fireworks right cross the Interstate 5 (I-5). Vehicular access to the site and surface parking will be provided off of Anaheim Boulevard and shared private Zeyn Street. The main entrance from Anaheim Boulevard also provides the access service for Golden Skies Mobile Home Park to the south. A vehicular gate is provided at the parking court to secure the residents parking from the public parking. Pedestrian circulation is provided by a pathway along the courtyard and Zeyn Street, which will connect to the existing City sidewalks along Anaheim Boulevard and Midway Avenue. Density Calculation The 2.36-ac project is allowed a maximum of 36 du/ac by right in the RM-4 zone, which equals to maximum allowable 81 dwelling units. By providing 35% of the 81 units for extremely-low income households, which equals to 28 dwelling units, 36% of the 81 units for very-low income households, which equals to 29 dwelling units, and 35% of the 81 units for low income households, which equals to 28 dwelling units, the Midway Affordable Housing project is allowed a 50% density bonus per Section 65915 of the California Government Code, which equals to 41 dwelling units. The project only requests 5 dwelling units, which equals to a 6% density bonus. Therefore, a total of 86 dwelling units is proposed, resulting in a maximum density of 38 du/ac. Parking Paragraph (4) of subdivision (p) of Section 65915 of the California Government Code does not require any parking for a special needs housing development that is located within one-half mile of a fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day. Bus route 47 and 47A on Anaheim are located within 1.5 miles and operates more than eight times per day. Non-special needs affordable units have a parking requirement of 0.5 spaces per unit, as described under Subsection (A) of paragraph (2) of the same subdivision and section. Manager, flex space and community center parking ratios are determined by Section 18.42 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. As shown in the table in below, a total of 131 parking spaces are provided for the development, 69 spaces more than required. Uses No. of Units Parking Ratio Required Parking Supportive Units 8 no mini. parking req. 0 Affordable Units 77 0.5/du 39 2-Bd Manager 1 2.25/du 2.25 Community Center (sqft) 3,300 1/250 sf 13.2 Flex Space (sqft) 1,700 1/250 sf 6.8 Total Required Parking 61.25 Total Provided Parking 128 Midway Affordable Housing Density Bonus/Zone Change Request March 16, 2021 Page 3 of 3 The affordable housing project is requesting incentives that are allowed under City of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.52.090. 1.Reduction in Structural Setbacks for a Lot with Multiple Street Frontages. Pursuant to the City of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.06.090 Multiple-Family Residential (RM-4) zone, a project abutting an arterial highway shall have an average landscape setback of not less than twenty (20) feet in depth, with a minimum fifteen (15) feet permitted. The project is requesting 2 feet setbacks from Anaheim Boulevard and 5.5 feet setbacks from Midway Avenue. 2.Increase in the Maximum Building Height (up to four stories). Pursuant to the City of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.06.060 Multiple-Family Residential (RM-4) zone, the maximum height for multiple-family is 40 feet or 3 stories. The project is requesting a four-story development with the maximum height of 50 feet. 3. Reduction in interior landscape setback to 5 feet. 4. Reduction in Unit size. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 949.567.3460. Thank you. Sincerely, Xiaofan Li, AICP Senior Project Manager, Planning KTGY Architecture + Planning ATTACHMENT NO. 7