Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2021/06/16 - Regular Meeting Agenda Packet
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA L. Dor ennis Michael REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Mayor Pro Tem June 16, 2021 Lynne B. Kennedy 10500 Civic Center Drive MemberCouncils of the City Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 rvo,� Ryan A. Hutchison Kristine D. Scott Sam Spagnolo FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD—CITY COUNCIL HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY—SUCCESSOR AGENCY—PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY CLOSED SESSION TRI-COMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M. REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00 p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings of meetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 909-774-2023. Live Broadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV-3). In response to the Governor's Executive Orders, the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health requirements, and to ensure the health and safety of our residents by limiting contact that could spread the COVID-19 virus, there will be no members of the public in attendance at the City Council/Fire District Meetings. Members of the City Council/Fire District and staff may participate in this meeting via a teleconference. In place of in-,person attendance, members of the public are encouraged to watch from the safety of their homes in one of the following ways: Live Streaming on the City's website at https://www.cityofrc.us/your-government/city-council-agendas or Local Cable: RCTV3 Programming Members of the public wishing to speak during public communication may call at the start of the meeting by dialing (909)774-2751, if speaking on a Public Hearing item, please dial in when the Public Hearing is being heard at (909)774-2751 to be added to the queue for public comment. Calls will be answered in the order received. Please note there may be up to a one (1) minute delay in RCTV3 programming and live stream on the City's website. The City of Rancho Cucamonga thanks you in advance for taking all precautions to prevent spreading the COVID-19 virus. If you are an individual with a disability and need a reasonable modification or accommodation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), please contact the City Clerk's Office at (909) 774-2023, 24 hours prior to the meeting so that the City can make reasonable arrangements. CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT Page 1 "Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive." CLOSED SESSION - 4:30 P.M. TRI-COMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION D1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. — (CITY) D2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFER PROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 — (CITY) D3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE'S INC. V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5-20CV02506JGBSP — (CITY) D4. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12467 BASELINE ROAD IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 1090331030000, 1090331040000, 1089581040000; NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND JOSEPH FILIPPI, JOSEPH FILIPPI WINERY AND VINEYARDS; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. — (CITY) D5. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) - SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT AND LOUISA OLLAGUE V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; CASE NO. CIVRS 1603632.- (CITY) CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT Page 2 "Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive." D6. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND CIVIC CENTER DRIVE IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBER 0208-331-40; AND 0208-331-47; NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER AND MATT BURRIS, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; AND CHRIS HYUN, JRC REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT CORP REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS.- CITY D7. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957 (TITLE: CITY ATTORNEY)-CITY E. RECESS — Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT Page 3 "Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive." REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS B1. Presentation of a Proclamation to Al Arguello, Longtime Member of Community and Arts Foundation, Inland Empire Market President at Bank of America for his Retirement after 53 years of Service. B2. Presentation of a Certificate of Recognition to Suzanne Buquet, Nancy Mendoza, and Soo Myland for their years of volunteer work at the Animal Center and for their dedicated service as Board Members of the Animal Care Foundation. B3. Presentation of the 2021 Public Technology Institute Solutions Award to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. B4. Presentation of Rancho Cucamonga's Ranking - 2021's Best & Worst Places to Raise a Family. C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to address the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period may resume after the regular business portion of CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT Page 4 "Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive." the agenda has been completed. CONSENT CALENDARS: The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted upon at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed by a Council Member for discussion. Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and Public Finance Authority. Council is acting in all capacities with respect to its actions on the Consent Calendars. D. CONSENT CALENDAR - D1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of June 2, 2021. D2. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the Total Amount of $1,793,749.51 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of$5,292,283.11 Dated May 24, 2021 Through June 06, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the Month of May in the Total Amount of$1,025,533.68. (CITY/FIRE) D3. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $16,083.79 Dated May 24, 2021 Through June 06, 2021. (CITY/FIRE) D4. Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of May 31, 2021 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE) D5. Consideration of an Amended and Restated Professional Services Agreement with Richards, Watson & Gershon, a Professional Corporation, for Legal Services. (CITY/FIRE/ PUBLIC FINANCE) D6. Consideration of Amendment No. 004 to the Professional Services Agreement with Inland Empire Property Services, Incorporated for Weed and Fire Hazard Abatement Services in the Amount of$10,000 and Authorize Appropriations in the Amount of$10,000 in both the Revenue and Expenditure Accounts. (FIRE) D7. Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Salary Schedules for Fiscal Year 2021-22. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021-012) (FIRE) D8. Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with CR&A, Inc. for the Fabrication, Personalization, Installation, and Removal of Armed Forces Banners in the Amount of$22,000 Annually; Not to Exceed $154,000 Over a Seven-Year Period. (CITY) D9. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements on the East Side of East Avenue and North of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) per the Improvement Agreement, Related to Case No. SUBTT18122, as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY) CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT Page 5 "Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive." D10.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Related to Tract No. 20080 as Complete, Located on the Northwest Corner of Hermosa Avenue and Victoria Street, Submitted by Hermosa, LLC, a Limited Liability Company. File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY) D11.Consideration of a Contract with Bligh Pacific for the Animal Care & Adoption Center - Roof Maintenance & Repair Project in the Amount of$185,780. (CITY) D12.Consideration of Amendment No. 01 to Professional Services Agreement with Siemens Mobility, Inc. (CO19-111)for Streetlight Knockdown Services for Fiscal Year 2021/22. (CITY) D13.Consideration of Amendment No. 01 to Professional Services Agreement with Siemens Mobility, Inc. (CO19-112) for Annual Streetlight Maintenance Services for Fiscal Year 2021/22. (CITY) D14.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of 6th Street and Charles Smith Avenue, Related to Case No. DRC2006-01012, as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY) D15.Consideration of an Agreement with the County of San Bernardino for the 800 MHz Radio Communications System Access/Paging and Equipment Maintenance Services, in an amount not to exceed $184,675 in FY 2021-22 and an Estimated Total Contract Amount of$923,375 over Five Years. (CITY) D16.Consideration to Adopt a Resolution, Approving the Salary Schedules for Fiscal Year 2021-22 for Job Classifications Employed by the City Including a Part-time Employee Benefit Summary. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-047) (CITY) D17.Consideration of a Contract with Gentry General Engineering, Inc., in an Amount of $252,796 plus a Contingency of $57,367 for the Citywide Concrete Repair - FY 2020/2021 Project. (CITY) D18.Consideration of an Appropriation in the Amount of$6,000 from the Fiber Optic Network Fund (Fund 711) for the Purchase of Fiber Optic Equipment from Power& Telephone. (CITY) D19.Consideration of a Contract with Pacific Contractors Group, Inc. for the Parks Painting Project FY 20-21 in the Amount of$75,340. (CITY) D20.Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Allocating Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation (RMRA) Program Funds for Fiscal Year 2021/22. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-049) (CITY) CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT Page 6 "Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive." E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) - SECOND READING/ADOPTION F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S) F1. Consideration of Public Convenience or Necessity DRC2021-00027- Grocery Outlet - A Request for a Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) Determination for Alcoholic Beverage Sales for Off-Site Consumption (Type-21 Off-Sale Beer, Wine, and Distilled Spirits) For a Grocery Store (Grocery Outlet) Located in the Community Commercial (CC) District at 9040 Foothill Boulevard —APN: 0208-101-20. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-046) (CITY) G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) - CITY/FIRE DISTRICT G1. Public Hearing for Consideration of Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 982, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further Reading, Amending Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Modify Administrative Procedures within the Development Code and Establish New Zoning Districts, Amend Land Uses and Definitions and Create New Development Standards for Industrial Development within the City. This Item is Exempt from the Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) (DRC2021-00170). (ORDINANCE NO. 982) (CITY) G2. Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution to Set Residential and Commercial Solid Waste Collection Rates Within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-048) (CITY) H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S) H1. Consideration to Adopt the Electric Vehicle (EV) Readiness Plan. (CITY) I. COUNCIL BUSINESS 11. Consideration of the City Council Library Subcommittee's Recommendation to Appoint Members to the Library Board of Trustees. (CITY) 12. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS (Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.) 13. INTERAGENCY UPDATES (Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.) J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS: CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT Page 7 "Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive." K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING L. ADJOURNMENT CERTIFICATION I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least Seventy-Two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the City's website. LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT Page 8 "Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive." i �s Ij Wrt *41t 1� a -s e®®e ANCH CUCAMONGR:. � r" ANIMAL CARE FOUNDATION •�e � RTE As Ik A� I S y �•'yy,t• � � �1/ i �p J'• •' .�t r. +/ •ram;-_ '� (�, l '' 'i ��-' 4L �A 6 � 1� � .� ■ #lot Ilk dot. oil,. i,• 1p .. �•,.``??��,,��,,��!! k� - � ,fir - ,Op — From a I I of u S, -� f Thankyou ! zt >3 r wo Wallet Hub"s 2021 Best Places to Raise a Family Rancho Cucamonga, CA Rank-. 32 A • � � �f� IL AW RANCHOCUCAMo • � � rip, NGA All-AinericaCfty 1 182 1 I I nl I I � � � � ♦ � � 20 ** 2 0 Wallet Hub"s 2021 Best Places to Raise a Family City of Rancho Cucamonga ranked . . . . . . . . . . .. .. � #32 in Nation and #8 in California Ra ncho Cucamonga, CA Ran k' 32 � I Analysis based on 5 categories , ' � � .r • � ' • Family Fun • Health & Safety � • � � � • Education & Child Care RANCHO • Affordability 00 CUCAMONGA � � y � • Socio-economics All-AmericaCfty 1 182 1 I I nl I I � � � � ♦ � � 20 %* 20 I nom &V AV • • • AV o �.. _^ „aa ,��:,. _o -h "`s. '.' a�3t +� �rraq - `, -- yjF,'�1� �ffi ,jjjj• • • I9 • 4-1 Z" it � RANCHO \ a: Is$ W, Z CUC ti r ! * 1 / R 4 y All-America CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 20 %* 20 Wallet 2021 Best Places to Raise a Famelly Health & Safet , . Key indicators of Health & Safety include : • Air Qualityand Water Quality , Access to Healthy Foods • Violent-Crime Rate Capitaper � • Property-Crime Rate per Capita • Driving Fatalities per Capita • Percentage of Residents FullyOf �a --- Vaccinated RANCHO CUCAMONGA - � All-America CRY NATY?f ull,C VICIFAalJF-. 20 %* 20 Wallet Hub"s 2021 Best Places to Raise a Family Education & Child Care 4V � Key indicators of Education & Child Care include : • School -System Quality • High School Graduation Rate � • Child -Care Costs N o • Child Day-Care Services per Capita " • Summer Learning Opportunities per Capita ° RANCHO CUCAMONGA All-America CRY 1 I I nl i 11011 i � 2 0 2 0 Wallet Hub"s 2021 Best Places to Raise a Family Affordability Key indicators of Affordability include : • Cost of Living .3 • Housing Affordability � - • Wallet Wellness (This metric is based on WalletHub s Best & Worst Cities for Wallet Fitness" ranking.) M RANCHO cucAnnoNca a All-AmericaCfty vAixxwti,avic i FA it ' �L• OLPH 1 1 2 0 2 0 Wallet Hub"s 2021 Best Places to Raise a Family Socio- Economics Key indicators of socio-economics include : • Unemployment Rate • Underemployment Rate • Foreclosure Rate • Share of Two- Parent Families s ss sss ssss sssss RANCHO _ " CUCAMONGA � All-America CRY 1 I I nl I I � � � � ♦ � � 2 0 2 0 Wallet Hub"s 2021 Best Places to Raise a Family Thank you Questions or Comments ? RANCHO CUCAMONGA All-AmericaCfty 1 I I nl E110 ♦ 20 ** 2 0 June 2, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY, SUCCESSOR AGENCY, PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY AND CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETINGS MINUTES The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a closed session on Wednesday, June 2, 2021, in the Tri-Communities Conference Room at the Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Mayor Michael called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Present were Council Members: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Sam Spagnolo, Mayor Pro Tern Lynne Kennedy, and Mayor L. Dennis Michael. Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; James L. Markman, City Attorney; Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services; Elisa Cox, Deputy City Manager/Cultural & Civic Services and Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development. A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) No public communications were made. C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS None. D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION D1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL— EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. —(CITY) D2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL— EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFER PROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 — (CITY) D3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL— EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE'S INC. V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP— (CITY) D4. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12467 BASELINE ROAD IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 1090331030000, 1090331040000, 1089581040000; NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND JOSEPH FILIPPI, JOSEPH FILIPPI WINERY AND VINEYARDS; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. — (CITY) D5. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF LAYTON STREET SOUTH OF LA MESA DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS FOR NEGOTIATING THE PRICE, TERMS OF PAYMENT, OR BOTH —(CITY) E. RECESS The closed session recessed at 6:30 p.m. June 2, 2021 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 1 of 6 Page 9 REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER- COUNCIL CHAMBERS The regular meetings of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Finance Authority, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council were held on June 2, 2021, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Mayor Michael called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present were Council Members: Ryan Hutchison, Kristine Scott, Sam Spagnolo, Mayor Pro Tern Lynne Kennedy, and Mayor L. Dennis Michael. Also present were: John Gillison, City Manager; James L. Markman, City Attorney, and Linda A. Troyan, MMC, Director of City Clerk Services. Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy led the Pledge of Allegiance. Responding to the spread of the Coronavirus(COVID-19)and social distancing requirements, City Manager Gillison announced that due to recent changes in the Governor's Executive Orders,the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health requirements, and to ensure the health and safety of Rancho Cucamonga residents by limiting contact that could spread the COVID-19 virus, there will be no members of the public in attendance at the City Council/Fire District Meetings and in place of in-person attendance, members of the public are encouraged to watch from the safety of their homes live from the City's website or on RCTV-3 for the meetings of June 2nd and June 16t". He noted that the City would resume in-person meetings starting with the Regular City Council Meeting on July 7, 2021. He stated members of the public wishing to speak during public communication or on a public hearing item will need to dial in to (909)774-2751 to be added to the queue for comment. Additional information on the Coronavirus pandemic and City resources and updates can be found at www.cityofrc.us/coronavirus. A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA None. B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS None. C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS None. D. CONSENT CALENDAR D1. Consideration of Meeting Minutes for the Regular Meetings of May 5, 2021 and May 19, 2021. D2. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Biweekly Payroll in the Total Amount of$3,371,860.60 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers(Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company)in the Total Amount of$8,643,721.36 Dated April 26, 2021 Through May 23, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the Month of April in the Total Amount of $5,720,139.25. (CITY/FIRE) D3. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $17,942.08 Dated April 26, 2021 Through May 23, 2021. (CITY/FIRE) June 2, 2021 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 2 of 6 Page 10 D4. Consideration to Renew an Agreement with the County of San Bernardino for the 800 MHz Radio Communications System Access/Paging and Equipment Maintenance Services for $147,480 in FY 2021-22 and an Estimated Total Contract Amount of$737,400 over Five Years. (FIRE) D5. Consideration to Release the Previously Submitted Improvement Agreement, Improvement Securities and Monumentation Cash Deposit by Owens Ct. Estates, LLC, Related to Case No. SUBTT16578, Located on the West Side of East Avenue, South of Victoria Street and Approve a New Improvement Agreement, Improvement Securities, and Monumentation Cash Deposit, Submitted by Blackstone Residential Operating Partnership, LP. (CITY) D6. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements on the South Side of 8th Street Between Hermosa Avenue and Archibald Avenue Located at 10013 8th Street, Related to Case No. DRC2017-00448, as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY) D7. Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Management Association. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-043) (CITY) D8. Consideration of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility's Wildfire Mitigation Plan 2021 Update. (CITY) D9. Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-044) (CITY) D10. Consideration to Award a Contract to Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., in the Amount of$121,309, Plus a 10% Contingency, and an Appropriation in the Amount of $147,080 for the School Crosswalk Improvements Project. (CITY) D11. Consideration of a Contract with FS Contractors, Inc., in an Amount of $204,350, Plus 10% Contingency and an Appropriation of$238,425, for the Hellman Avenue Sidewalk Improvements and ADA Ramps at Various Locations Project. (CITY) D12. Consideration of a Contract with National Utility Locators, LLC for Utility Marking Services in an Amount Not to Exceed $115,000 for FY 2021/2022. (CITY) D13. Consideration of Amendment No. 04 to the Agreement with Pacific Utility Installation, Inc. (CO19-085) in the Amount of $60,400 for the Civic Center East Lot Electric Line Extension Project and Authorization of an Appropriation in the Amount of$60,400. (CITY) D14. Consideration to Approve the Use of EBSCO to Provide Digital Full-Text Reference Database Content to the Rancho Cucamonga Public Library. (CITY) D15. Consideration of Resolutions Approving Covenants and Restrictions for Real Property pursuant to Government Code Section 54233. (RESOLUTIONS NO. 2021-041, 2021-042, FD 2021-008, FD 2021-009, FD 2021-010) (FIRE/CITY COUNCIL) MOTION: Moved by Council Member Hutchison, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, to approve Consent Calendar Items D1 through D15, with Council Member Scott abstaining from item D3 due to her employment with Southern California Gas Company. Motion carried, 5-0. E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) - SECOND READING/ADOPTION No items. June 2, 2021 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 3 of 6 Page 11 F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S) No items. G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM(S) — CITY/FIRE DISTRICT G1. Public Hearing for Consideration of a Resolution Denying General Plan Amendment DRC2018-00533 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2018-00534—Alan Smith for Arbor Express Carwash—A Request for General Plan and Zoning Map Amendments to Change the Land Use and Zoning Designation for One Project-Specific Parcel of Land (APN: 0208-291-03) from Low Medium (LM) Residential District to General Commercial (GC)District and for Two Non-Project Specific Adjacent Parcels of Land (0208-291- 01 and 0208-291-02) From Low Medium (LM) Residential District to Medium (M) Residential District Related to an Approved Carwash Located Approximately 200 Feet East of Archibald Avenue on the North Side of Arrow Route. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-045) (CITY) City Manager Gillison noted the receipt of a letter from the law firm representing Arbor Express Auto Wash requesting the continuance of the public hearing. He noted that the date of August 4, 2021, is agreeable by the applicant to continue the hearing date. Correspondence received was provided to the City Council. Mayor Michael announced that the item would not be heard and would be heard at a later date. Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing for anyone to comment that could not attend on August 4, 2021. No public communications were made. MOTION: Moved by Council Member Scott, seconded by Council Member Hutchison, to continue the Public Hearing item to the Regular City Council Meeting on August 4, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. Motion carried, 5-0. G2. Public Hearing for Consideration of Adoption of Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 981, Extending for an Additional 10 Months and 15 Days through April 20, 2022, an Existing Moratorium on the Approval of Applications for Building Permits or Other Entitlements for New Service Station Uses or the Expansion of Existing Service Station Uses in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Declaring the Urgency thereof and Making a Determination of Exemption Under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). (INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 981) (CITY) City Manager Gillison introduced Michael Smith, Principal Planner, who presented a PowerPoint providing an overview of extending an existing Moratorium on the approval of applications for building permits or other entitlements for new service station uses or expanding existing service station uses in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. He provided a summary of the proposed analysis on service stations upon approval of extending the existing Moratorium. The analysis would include: • The number and location of existing service stations in the City • Analysis of the land use benefits of service station to the community • Analysis of the fiscal benefits of service stations and comparison to other retail uses • Land use impacts of service stations on surrounding commercial districts and residential neighborhoods • Fiscal impacts to City for providing public safety services at service stations • Land use policies implemented through the General Plan update • Potential performance standards, conditions, that could be placed on future service stations Principal Planner Smith recommended that the City Council adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 981 entitled "An Urgency Zoning Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga enacted pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 establishing a Moratorium on the approval of applications for Building Permits or other Entitlements for new service station uses or the expansion of existing service station uses in the City of Rancho Cucamonga", by a four-fifths vote, waive full reading, and read by title only. June 2, 2021 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 4 of 6 Page 12 Mayor Michael opened the Public Hearing. No public communications were made. Mayor Michael closed the Public Hearing. Council requested information on current gas station locations and the correlation between alcohol sales and extended operating hours contributing to a higher number of service calls by the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department. The Mayor and City Council commended staff for the detailed staff report and noted the hard work ahead in the analysis of service stations upon approval of extending the Moratorium. MOTION: Moved by Council Member Scott, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, to adopt Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 981, extending for an additional 10 Months and 15 Days through April 20, 2022, an existing Moratorium on the approval of applications for Building Permits or other entitlements for new service station uses or the expansion of existing service station uses in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, declaring the Urgency thereof and making a determination of exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), by title only and waive further reading. Linda Troyan, City Clerk Services Director, read the title of Urgency Zoning Ordinance No. 981. VOTES NOW CAST ON MOTION: Moved by Council Member Scott, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy, to adopt Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 981, extending for an additional 10 Months and 15 Days through April 20, 2022, an existing Moratorium on the approval of applications for Building Permits or other entitlements for new service station uses or the expansion of existing service station uses in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, declaring the Urgency thereof and making a determination of exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), by title only and waive further reading. Motion carried 5-0. H. CITY MANAGERS STAFF REPORT(S) H1. Verbal Report of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (Drone) Utilized in Support of Incident Response. (CITY/FIRE) City Manager Gillison introduced Deputy Fire Chief Augie Barreda and Fire Captain Gabriel Ferrer, who presented a PowerPoint providing an overview of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (Drone) by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. Deputy Fire Chief Barreda thanked the City Council for their continuous support in innovative programs for the Fire Protection District. Fire Captain Ferrer provided information on certification/ training requirements, infrared camera for nocturnal emergencies, drone regulations, and examples of using the drone in different emergency scenarios. Mayor Michael inquired about the infrared camera on the drone and how far they fly the drone when operating. Fire Captain Ferrer replied that operators fly in the line of sight adhering to Airspace regulations. Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy inquired about the difference between a private drone owner vs. a government agency owning a drone and asked about the use of binoculars by the drone operators. Fire Captain Ferrer replied that there are certification, licensing, and training requirements as a government agency while private owners do not have the same requirements. He noted that binoculars used by drone operators are used for safety but not required. Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy noted that she hopes to to see guidelines for private drone operators in the future. June 2, 2021 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 5 of 6 Page 13 Mayor Michael and Members of the City Council commended the Fire Protection District for being proactive and innovative with technology advancements in public safety. I. COUNCIL BUSINESS 11. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS Council Member Hutchison requested that the meeting be adjourned in memory of Sergeant Dominic Vaca, a 17-year veteran of the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department who recently passed away in the line of duty. Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy thanked City staff for coordinating a Memorial Day ceremony that honored fallen soldiers at Freedom Courtyard in Central Park on Monday, May 31, 2021. 12. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES Council Member Spagnolo thanked the OmniTrans Board and staff for providing a tour for the City Council of the newly launched all-electric buses earlier in the day. Mr. Spagnolo commented that it is a move in the right direction as the new zero-emission buses are fully battery-operated and will provide eco-friendly public transportation for generations to come. J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS None. K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING None. L. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Michael adjourned the meeting at 7:51 p.m. in memory of Sergeant Dominic Vaca, a 17-year veteran of the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, who recently passed away in the line of duty. Respectfully submitted, Linda A. Troyan, MMC City Clerk Services Director Approved: June 2, 2021 1 Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Finance Authority and City Council Regular Meetings Minutes City of Rancho Cucamonga I Page 6 of 6 Page 14 S HONOR a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA m DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council President and Members of the Boards of Directors FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director Veronica Lopez, Accounts Payable Supervisor SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the Total Amount of $1,793,749.51 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $5,292,283.11 Dated May 24, 2021 Through June 06, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the Month of May in the Total Amount of $1,025,533.68. (CITY/FIRE) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District approve payment of demands as presented. Bi-weekly payroll is$996,544.44 and $797,205.07 for the City and the Fire District, respectively. Weekly check register amounts are $5,092,123.75 and $200,159.36 for the City and the Fire District, respectively. Electronic Debit Register amounts are $441,413.91 and $584,119.77 for the City and the Fire District, respectively. BACKGROUND: N/A ANALYSIS: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 —Weekly Check Register Attachment 2 — Electronic Debit Register Page 15 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Excluding So Calif Gas Company. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Ca Fire Amount AP 00012488 05/25/2021 AHUMADA,ALEXANDER R 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012489 05/25/2021 ALMAND,LLOYD 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012490 05/25/2021 BANTAU,VICTORIA 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012491 05/25/2021 BAZAL,SUSAN 0.00 865.08 865.08 AP 00012492 05/25/2021 BELL,MICHAEL L 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14 AP 00012493 05/25/2021 BERRY,DAVID 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32 AP 00012494 05/25/2021 BROCK,ROBIN 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32 AP 00012495 05/25/2021 CAMPBELL,GERALD 0.00 851.32 851.32 AP 00012496 05/25/2021 CAMPBELL,STEVEN 0.00 1,241.14 1,241.14 AP 00012497 05/25/2021 CARNES,KENNETH 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012498 05/25/2021 CLABBY,RICHARD 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68 AP 00012499 05/25/2021 CLOUGHESY,DONALD R 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78 AP 00012500 05/25/2021 CORCORAN,ROBERT ANTHONY 0.00 893.07 893.07 AP 00012501 05/25/2021 COSTELLO,DENNIS M 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78 AP 00012502 05/25/2021 COX,KARL 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012503 05/25/2021 CRANE,RALPH 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012504 05/25/2021 CROSSLAND,WILBUR 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012505 05/25/2021 CURATALO,JAMES 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32 AP 00012506 05/25/2021 DAGUE,JAMES 0.00 1,246.33 1,246.33 AP 00012507 05/25/2021 DE ANTONIO,SUSAN 0.00 893.07 893.07 AP 00012508 05/25/2021 DEANS,JACKIE 0.00 238.25 238.25 AP 00012509 05/25/2021 DOMINICK,SAMUEL A 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32 AP 00012510 05/25/2021 EAGLESON,MICHAEL 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14 AP 00012511 05/25/2021 EGGERS,BOB 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32 AP 00012512 05/25/2021 FEJERAN,TIM 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58 AP 00012513 05/25/2021 FRITCHEY,JOHN D 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012514 05/25/2021 HEYDE,DONALD 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012515 05/25/2021 INTERLICCHIA,ROSALYN 0.00 238.25 238.25 AP 00012516 05/25/2021 JERKINS,PATRICK 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58 AP 00012517 05/25/2021 KILMER,STEPHEN 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68 AP 00012518 05/25/2021 KIRKPATRICK,WILLIAM M 0.00 841.21 841.21 AP 00012519 05/25/2021 LANE,WILLIAM 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012520 05/25/2021 LARKIN,DAVID W 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58 AP 00012521 05/25/2021 LEE,ALLAN J 0.00 238.25 238.25 AP 00012522 05/25/2021 LENZE,PAUL E 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32 AP 00012523 05/25/2021 LONCAR,PHILIP 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68 AP 00012524 05/25/2021 LONGO,JOE 0.00 181.48 181.48 AP 00012525 05/25/2021 LUTTRULL,DARRELL 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012526 05/25/2021 MACKALL,BEVERLY 0.00 181.48 181.48 AP 00012527 05/25/2021 MAYFIELD,RON 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012528 05/25/2021 MCKEE,JOHN 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012529 05/25/2021 MCNEIL,KENNETH 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012530 05/25/2021 MICHAEL,L.DENNIS 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32 AP 00012531 05/25/2021 MORGAN,BYRON 0.00 1,838.72 1,838.72 AP 00012532 05/25/2021 MYSKOW,DENNIS 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68 AP 00012533 05/25/2021 NAUMAN,MICHAEL 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012534 05/25/2021 NEE,RON 0.00 865.08 865.08 User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 1 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page Nme: 08:35:29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Excluding So Calif Gas Company. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Ca Fire Amount AP 00012535 05/25/2021 NELSON,MARY JANE 0.00 181.48 181.48 AP 00012536 05/25/2021 NOREEN,ERIC 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78 AP 00012537 05/25/2021 O'BRIEN,TOM 0.00 1,379.46 1,379.46 AP 00012538 05/25/2021 PLOUNG,MICHAEL J 0.00 556.94 556.94 AP 00012539 05/25/2021 POST,MICHAEL R 0.00 1,377.34 1,377.34 AP 00012540 05/25/2021 PROULX,PATRICK 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14 AP 00012541 05/25/2021 REDMOND,MIKE 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012542 05/25/2021 ROBERTS,BRENT 0.00 893.07 893.07 AP 00012543 05/25/2021 ROBERTS,CHERYL L 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78 AP 00012544 05/25/2021 ROEDER,JEFF 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14 AP 00012545 05/25/2021 SALISBURY,THOMAS 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012546 05/25/2021 SMITH,RONALD 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012547 05/25/2021 SORENSEN,SCOTT D 0.00 1,873.16 1,873.16 AP 00012548 05/25/2021 SPAGNOLO,SAM 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012549 05/25/2021 SPAIN,WILLIAM 0.00 851.32 851.32 AP 00012550 05/25/2021 SULLIVAN,JAMES 0.00 505.96 505.96 AP 00012551 05/25/2021 TAYLOR,STEVEN 0.00 2,027.69 2,027.69 AP 00012552 05/25/2021 TULEY,TERRY 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14 AP 00012553 05/25/2021 VANDERKALLEN,FRANCIS 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012554 05/25/2021 VARNEY,ANTHONY 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32 AP 00012555 05/25/2021 WALTON,KEVIN 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58 AP 00012556 05/25/2021 YOWELL,TIMOTHY A 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00012557 05/26/2021 CDCE INC 0.00 540.00 540.00 AP 00012558 05/26/2021 GEOGRAPHICS 175.00 0.00 175.00 AP 00012559 05/26/2021 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 55,627.87 8,563.00 64,190.87 *** AP 00012560 05/26/2021 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 160.00 0.00 160.00 AP 00012561 05/26/2021 TICKETS.COM 727.93 0.00 727.93 AP 00012562 05/27/2021 BIBLIOTHECA LLC 14,520.71 0.00 14,520.71 AP 00012563 05/27/2021 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 1,249.90 0.00 1,249.90 AP 00012564 05/27/2021 DUMBELL MAN FITNESS EQUIPMENT,THE 0.00 803.25 803.25 AP 00012565 05/27/2021 GENERATOR SERVICES CO INC 0.00 859.98 859.98 AP 00012566 05/27/2021 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 1,267.15 0.00 1,267.15 AP 00012567 05/27/2021 HOSE MAN INC 98.44 0.00 98.44 AP 00012568 05/27/2021 KME FIRE APPARATUS 0.00 672.06 672.06 AP 00012569 05/27/2021 LN CURTIS AND SONS 0.00 367.23 367.23 AP 00012570 05/27/2021 MINUTEMAN PRESS 0.00 1,450.44 1,450.44 AP 00012572 05/27/2021 OFFICE DEPOT 4,588.14 363.43 4,951.57 *** AP 00012573 05/27/2021 PSA PRINT GROUP 38.79 0.00 38.79 AP 00012574 05/27/2021 SIEMENS MOBILITY INC 11,185.35 0.00 11,185.35 AP 00012575 05/27/2021 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 221.32 0.00 221.32 AP 00012576 05/27/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NEWS GROUP 384.00 0.00 384.00 AP 00012577 05/27/2021 SUNRISE FORD 617.32 0.00 617.32 AP 00012578 05/27/2021 THOMSON REUTERS WEST PUBLISHING CORP 331.00 0.00 331.00 AP 00012579 05/27/2021 VISTA PAINT 43.22 0.00 43.22 AP 00012580 06/02/2021 CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA/RANCHO CUCAMONGA 23,898.25 0.00 23,898.25 AP 00012581 06/02/2021 HAMPTON YOGA 80.50 0.00 80.50 AP 00012582 06/02/2021 RCCEA 1,540.25 0.00 1,540.25 User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 2 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page flme: 08:35:29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Excluding So Calif Gas Company. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Ca Fire Amount AP 00012583 06/02/2021 RCPFA 12,831.68 0.00 12,831.68 AP 00012584 06/02/2021 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 3,563,512.42 0.00 3,563,512.42 AP 00012585 06/03/2021 BRODART BOOKS CO 25,240.78 0.00 25,240.78 AP 00012586 06/03/2021 DEMCOINC 216.18 0.00 216.18 AP 00012587 06/03/2021 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 188.40 0.00 188.40 AP 00012588 06/03/2021 LN CURTIS AND SONS 0.00 538.64 538.64 AP 00012589 06/03/2021 MINUTEMAN PRESS 0.00 581.80 581.80 AP 00012590 06/03/2021 OFFICE DEPOT 374.10 424.02 798.12 *** AP 00012591 06/03/2021 SIEMENS MOBILITY INC 14,493.15 0.00 14,493.15 AP 00012592 06/03/2021 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 1,985.68 0.00 1,985.68 AP 00012593 06/03/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NEWS GROUP 4,898.46 0.00 4,898.46 AP 00417869 05/25/2021 RODRIGUEZ,VICTOR 0.00 619.50 619.50 AP 00417870 05/25/2021 TOWNSEND,JAMES 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78 AP 00417871 05/25/2021 WALKER,KENNETH 0.00 238.25 238.25 AP 00417872 05/26/2021 ACOSTA,GEORGE R 0.00 64.65 64.65 AP 00417873 05/26/2021 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 0.00 37.71 37.71 AP 00417874 05/26/2021 ALTA VISTA MOBILE HOME PARK 397.59 0.00 397.59 AP 00417875 05/26/2021 AMS PLANNING&RESEARCH CORP 8,500.00 0.00 8,500.00 AP 00417876 05/26/2021 ANDRADE,FERNANDO 3,933.60 0.00 3,933.60 AP 00417877 05/26/2021 ARROW TRAILER SUPPLIES INC 214.26 0.00 214.26 AP 00417878 05/26/2021 ASCENT ENVIRONMENTAL INC 9,510.75 0.00 9,510.75 AP 00417879 05/26/2021 ATLAS PLANNING SOLUTIONS 4,250.00 0.00 4,250.00 AP 00417880 05/26/2021 BARTEL ASSOCIATES LLC 0.00 1,527.00 1,527.00 AP 00417881 05/26/2021 BILL&WAGS INC 281.25 0.00 281.25 AP 00417882 05/26/2021 BRAUN BLAISING SMITH WYNNE 819.27 0.00 819.27 AP 00417883 05/26/2021 C V W D 0.00 612.31 612.31 AP 00417884 05/26/2021 C V W D 0.00 115.80 115.80 AP 00417885 05/26/2021 C V W D 0.00 27.60 27.60 AP 00417886 05/26/2021 CA LLC-ALTA LAGUNA MHP 400.00 0.00 400.00 AP 00417887 05/26/2021 CALIX INC 4,032.00 0.00 4,032.00 AP 00417888 05/26/2021 CALPELRA 1,090.00 0.00 1,090.00 AP 00417889 05/26/2021 CASA VOLANTE MOBILE HOME PARK 600.00 0.00 600.00 AP 00417890 05/26/2021 CHAMPION AWARDS&SPECIALTIES 127.15 0.00 127.15 AP 00417891 05/26/2021 CHAMPION FIRE SYSTEMS INC 1,204.55 0.00 1,204.55 AP 00417892 05/26/2021 CHAPARRAL HEIGHTS MOBILE HOME PARK 300.00 0.00 300.00 AP 00417893 05/26/2021 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 1,927.03 0.00 1,927.03 AP 00417894 05/26/2021 CIRCLEPOINT 5,947.50 0.00 5,947.50 AP 00417895 05/26/2021 CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC 15,817.50 0.00 15,817.50 AP 00417896 05/26/2021 CLASSIC SUPPLY CO 238.59 0.00 238.59 AP 00417897 05/26/2021 COUNTRY ESTATE FENCE CO INC 6,572.00 0.00 6,572.00 AP 00417898 05/26/2021 CURTIS J DAHLE ARCHITECT 12,236.00 0.00 12,236.00 AP 00417899 05/26/2021 DANIELS TIRE SERVICE 2,017.34 2,856.08 4,873.42 *** AP 00417900 05/26/2021 DELL MARKETING LP 18,743.63 0.00 18,743.63 AP 00417901 05/26/2021 DGO AUTO DETAILING 245.00 0.00 245.00 AP 00417902 05/26/2021 DOGOLDOGOL,MICHELLE 650.00 0.00 650.00 AP 00417903 05/26/2021 ELITE CUSTOMS CONSTRUCTION 1,400.00 0.00 1,400.00 AP 00417904 05/26/2021 EQUILIBRIUM COUNSELING SERVICES 375.00 0.00 375.00 User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 3 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page flne: 08:35:29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Excluding So Calif Gas Company. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Ca Fire Amount AP 00417905 05/26/2021 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS 0.00 463.35 463.35 AP 00417906 05/26/2021 FOREMOST PROMOTIONS 0.00 344.25 344.25 AP 00417907 05/26/2021 FRASURE,MICHAEL 1,351.37 0.00 1,351.37 AP 00417908 05/26/2021 GOLDEN STATE RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY 98,907.00 1,232.00 100,139.00 *** AP 00417909 05/26/2021 GRAINGER 637.54 34.91 672.45 *** AP 00417910 05/26/2021 GRAPHICS FACTORY PRINTING INC 123.91 0.00 123.91 AP 00417911 05/26/2021 GROVES ON FOOTHILL,THE 200.00 0.00 200.00 AP 00417912 05/26/2021 HERITAGE EDUCATION GROUP,THE 1,684.00 0.00 1,684.00 AP 00417913 05/26/2021 HMC ARCHITECTS 0.00 399.75 399.75 AP 00417914 05/26/2021 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 3,272.58 0.00 3,272.58 AP 00417915 05/26/2021 HOMETOWN AMERICA RAMONA VILLA 500.00 0.00 500.00 AP 00417916 05/26/2021 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 2,450.00 0.00 2,450.00 AP 00417917 05/26/2021 INLAND EMPIRE PROPERTY SERVICES INC 0.00 2,240.00 2,240.00 AP 00417918 05/26/2021 INLAND OVERHEAD DOOR COMPANY 1,165.50 3,324.00 4,489.50 *** AP 00417919 05/26/2021 INYO NETWORKS 11,119.50 0.00 11,119.50 AP 00417920 05/26/2021 JCA ENGINEERING INC 6,600.00 0.00 6,600.00 AP 00417921 05/26/2021 JLMC 20,650.00 0.00 20,650.00 AP 00417922 05/26/2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES INC 5,295.00 0.00 5,295.00 AP 00417923 05/26/2021 KOSMONT&ASSOCIATES INC 5,290.00 0.00 5,290.00 AP 00417924 05/26/2021 KVAC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC 1,218.39 4,462.23 5,680.62 *** AP 00417925 05/26/2021 LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD 21,060.00 0.00 21,060.00 AP 00417926 05/26/2021 LIFE-ASSIST INC 0.00 1,375.15 1,375.15 AP 00417927 05/26/2021 LOZANO SMITH LLP 7,088.48 4,579.10 11,667.58 *** AP 00417928 05/26/2021 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 414.84 0.00 414.84 AP 00417929 05/26/2021 MAIN STREET SIGNS 17,008.34 0.00 17,008.34 AP 00417930 05/26/2021 MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC 37,213.69 2,428.71 39,642.40 *** AP 00417931 05/26/2021 MASTERCORP COMMERCIAL SERVICES LLC 517.20 0.00 517.20 AP 00417932 05/26/2021 MIDWEST TAPE 1,602.48 0.00 1,602.48 AP 00417933 05/26/2021 MIJAC ALARM COMPANY 72.00 1,279.00 1,351.00 *** AP 00417934 05/26/2021 MMASC 90.00 0.00 90.00 AP 00417935 05/26/2021 NAPA AUTO PARTS 817.07 578.64 1,395.71 *** AP 00417936 05/26/2021 NATIONAL CNG&FLEET SERVICE 565.00 0.00 565.00 AP 00417937 05/26/2021 NEW COLOR SILK SCREEN&GRAPHICS 294.16 0.00 294.16 AP 00417938 05/26/2021 NOVELTY PRINTING 0.00 903.71 903.71 AP 00417939 05/26/2021 NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 840.45 0.00 840.45 AP 00417940 05/26/2021 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTRS OF CA 1,175.00 99.00 1,274.00 *** AP 00417941 05/26/2021 ONTRAC 6.71 0.00 6.71 AP 00417942 05/26/2021 ONWARD ENGINEERING 5,202.50 0.00 5,202.50 AP 00417943 05/26/2021 OPEN APPS INC 4,283.06 0.00 4,283.06 AP 00417944 05/26/2021 PARS 3,500.00 0.00 3,500.00 AP 00417945 05/26/2021 PATTON SALES CORP 447.18 0.00 447.18 AP 00417946 05/26/2021 PINES MOBILE HOME PARK,THE 100.00 0.00 100.00 AP 00417947 05/26/2021 PINNACLE PETROLEUM INC 30,018.74 2,649.85 32,668.59 *** AP 00417948 05/26/2021 PLUMMER,JACQUES 0.00 295.00 295.00 AP 00417949 05/26/2021 PROHEALTH PARTNERS A MEDICAL GROUP INC 0.00 150.00 150.00 AP 00417950 05/26/2021 PROS CONSULTING INC 6,070.00 0.00 6,070.00 AP 00417951 05/26/2021 R3 CONSULTING GROUP INC 5,250.00 0.00 5,250.00 User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 4 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page Wme: 08:35:29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Excluding So Calif Gas Company. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Ca Fire Amount AP 00417952 05/26/2021 RAGAN,SANDRA 76.99 0.00 76.99 AP 00417953 05/26/2021 RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE 153.01 0.00 153.01 AP 00417954 05/26/2021 ROADLINE PRODUCTS INC 622.36 0.00 622.36 AP 00417955 05/26/2021 SAMMAN,MOHAMED T 2,527.00 0.00 2,527.00 AP 00417956 05/26/2021 SAN BERNARDINO CO AUDITOR CONT 8,049.00 0.00 8,049.00 AP 00417957 05/26/2021 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 0.00 12,289.88 12,289.88 AP 00417958 05/26/2021 SCOTT MCLEOD PLUMBING INC 0.00 391.00 391.00 AP 00417959 05/26/2021 SIEMENS MOBILITY INC 18,505.80 0.00 18,505.80 AP 00417960 05/26/2021 SILVER&WRIGHT LLP 518.56 1,725.00 2,243.56 *** AP 00417961 05/26/2021 SKIBBY,JOSEPHINE B. 100.00 0.00 100.00 AP 00417962 05/26/2021 SMITH PIPE AND SUPPLY INC 604.48 0.00 604.48 AP 00417964 05/26/2021 SOCAL OFFICE TECHNOLOGIES 11,540.60 0.00 11,540.60 AP 00417965 05/26/2021 SOUTH COAST AQMD 137.63 275.26 412.89 *** AP 00417976 05/26/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 36,133.99 891.29 37,025.28 *** AP 00417977 05/26/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 77.40 0.00 77.40 AP 00417978 05/26/2021 STEWART TITLE OF CALIFORNIA 500.00 0.00 500.00 AP 00417979 05/26/2021 STOTZ EQUIPMENT 1,543.26 0.00 1,543.26 AP 00417980 05/26/2021 STRATEGIC ECONOMICS INC 15,016.25 0.00 15,016.25 AP 00417981 05/26/2021 SUPERION LLC 495.00 0.00 495.00 AP 00417982 05/26/2021 SYCAMORE VILLA MOBILE HOME PARK 400.00 0.00 400.00 AP 00417983 05/26/2021 THE COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIONAL 0.00 750.00 750.00 AP 00417984 05/26/2021 TICKETS.COM 15,000.00 0.00 15,000.00 AP 00417985 05/26/2021 TINT CITY WINDOW TINTING 50.00 0.00 50.00 AP 00417986 05/26/2021 TIREHUB LLC 4,704.41 1,395.05 6,099.46 *** AP 00417987 05/26/2021 TORO TOWING 150.00 0.00 150.00 AP 00417988 05/26/2021 UNIVERSAL FLEET SUPPLY 0.00 11.92 11.92 AP 00417989 05/26/2021 VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES INC 4,000.00 0.00 4,000.00 AP 00417990 05/26/2021 VERIZON WIRELESS-LA 5,735.65 0.00 5,735.65 AP 00417991 05/26/2021 VERIZON WIRELESS-LA 0.00 4,761.84 4,761.84 AP 00417992 05/26/2021 VIRTUAL PROJECT MANAGER LLC 500.00 0.00 500.00 AP 00417993 05/26/2021 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 75.52 0.00 75.52 AP 00417994 05/26/2021 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 0.00 2,506.89 2,506.89 AP 00417995 05/26/2021 WELLS,JUDITH 43.12 0.00 43.12 AP 00417996 05/26/2021 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 10,155.00 0.00 10,155.00 AP 00417997 05/26/2021 WILSON&BELL AUTO SERVICE 5,018.90 0.00 5,018.90 AP 00417998 05/26/2021 YMCA,WEST END 5,018.13 0.00 5,018.13 AP 00417999 06/02/2021 AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE 24.58 0.00 24.58 AP 00418000 06/02/2021 AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE 4,311.14 0.00 4,311.14 AP 00418001 06/02/2021 AMERICAN REGISTRY FOR INTERNET NUMBERS LTD 150.00 0.00 150.00 AP 00418002 06/02/2021 AUERBACH POLLOCK FRIEDLANDER 250.00 0.00 250.00 AP 00418003 06/02/2021 BASE LINE BUSINESS PARK 491.98 0.00 491.98 AP 00418004 06/02/2021 BOB'S MUFFLER SHOP 200.00 0.00 200.00 AP 00418005 06/02/2021 C P GENERATOR INC 211.19 0.00 211.19 AP 00418006 06/02/2021 C V W D 216.75 0.00 216.75 AP 00418017 06/02/2021 C V W D 211,632.34 1,611.68 213,244.02 *** AP 00418018 06/02/2021 CAL PERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM 164.48 0.00 164.48 AP 00418019 06/02/2021 CALIFA GROUP 5,836.26 0.00 5,836.26 User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 5 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page Wine: 08:35:29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Excluding So Calif Gas Company. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Ca Fire Amount AP 00418020 06/02/2021 CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF THE TREASURER,STATE OF 29,000.00 0.00 29,000.00 AP 00418021 06/02/2021 CALIFORNIA,STATE OF 314.11 0.00 314.11 AP 00418022 06/02/2021 CALIFORNIA,STATE OF 127.52 0.00 127.52 AP 00418023 06/02/2021 CALIFORNIA,STATE OF 342.73 0.00 342.73 AP 00418024 06/02/2021 CALIFORNIA,STATE OF 32.26 0.00 32.26 AP 00418025 06/02/2021 CALIX INC 24,058.92 0.00 24,058.92 AP 00418026 06/02/2021 CALL2RECYCLE USA INC 0.40 0.00 0.40 AP 00418027 06/02/2021 CCS ORANGE COUNTY JANITORIAL INC 60,228.31 0.00 60,228.31 AP 00418028 06/02/2021 CHAMPION FIRE SYSTEMS INC 6,904.00 5,999.48 12,903.48 *** AP 00418029 06/02/2021 CHAVEZ,MANUEL 54.00 0.00 54.00 AP 00418030 06/02/2021 CHAVEZ,MINETTE 25.00 0.00 25.00 AP 00418031 06/02/2021 COVETRUS NORTH AMERICA 837.47 0.00 837.47 AP 00418032 06/02/2021 CREATIVE BRAIN LEARNING LLC 41.30 0.00 41.30 AP 00418033 06/02/2021 CRIME SCENE STERI-CLEAN LLC 540.00 0.00 540.00 AP 00418034 06/02/2021 DIG SAFE BOARD 66.22 0.00 66.22 AP 00418035 06/02/2021 DOG WASTE DEPOT 636.64 0.00 636.64 AP 00418036 06/02/2021 EIGHTH AVENUE ENTERPRISE LLC 227.63 0.00 227.63 AP 00418037 06/02/2021 ELK GROVE AUTO GROUP 22,950.05 0.00 22,950.05 AP 00418038 06/02/2021 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY INC 66.93 0.00 66.93 AP 00418039 06/02/2021 FORTUNE FENCING 720.00 0.00 720.00 AP 00418040 06/02/2021 FRONTIER COMM 230.64 538.17 768.81 *** AP 00418041 06/02/2021 FRONTIER COMM 141.00 328.99 469.99 *** AP 00418042 06/02/2021 FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS 0.00 8,111.89 8,111.89 AP 00418043 06/02/2021 GATEWAY PET CEMETERY&CREMATORY 130.00 0.00 130.00 AP 00418044 06/02/2021 GOSE,DALE 159.00 0.00 159.00 AP 00418045 06/02/2021 GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM INC 26,584.01 0.00 26,584.01 AP 00418046 06/02/2021 GRAINGER 2,655.64 0.00 2,655.64 AP 00418047 06/02/2021 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC 349.86 0.00 349.86 AP 00418048 06/02/2021 HAMILTON,MONIQUE 246.40 0.00 246.40 AP 00418049 06/02/2021 HENRY SCHEIN INC 0.00 245.28 245.28 AP 00418050 06/02/2021 HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC 1,232.78 0.00 1,232.78 AP 00418051 06/02/2021 HLP INC 189.70 0.00 189.70 AP 00418052 06/02/2021 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 2,645.00 0.00 2,645.00 AP 00418053 06/02/2021 INDUSTRIAL HARDWARE&SERVICE CO 1,609.50 0.00 1,609.50 AP 00418054 06/02/2021 INLAND OVERHEAD DOOR COMPANY 209.00 0.00 209.00 AP 00418055 06/02/2021 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER 589.41 0.00 589.41 AP 00418056 06/02/2021 JOHNNY ALLEN TENNIS ACADEMY 3,106.80 0.00 3,106.80 AP 00418057 06/02/2021 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC 245,649.29 0.00 245,649.29 AP 00418058 06/02/2021 LIFE-ASSIST INC 0.00 193.09 193.09 AP 00418059 06/02/2021 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 350.00 0.00 350.00 AP 00418060 06/02/2021 LIVE OAK DOG OBEDIENCE 930.00 0.00 930.00 AP 00418061 06/02/2021 MANAGEMENT PARTNERS INC 6,900.00 0.00 6,900.00 AP 00418062 06/02/2021 MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC 18,517.21 0.00 18,517.21 AP 00418063 06/02/2021 MCI 36.93 0.00 36.93 AP 00418064 06/02/2021 MEDIWASTE DISPOSAL 35.00 0.00 35.00 AP 00418065 06/02/2021 MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR 51.70 139.00 190.70 *** AP 00418066 06/02/2021 NAPA AUTO PARTS 44.61 1,605.97 1,650.58 *** User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 6 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page ilme: 08:35:29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Excluding So Calif Gas Company. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Cu Fire Amount AP 00418067 06/02/2021 NEW COLOR SILK SCREEN&GRAPHICS 176.71 0.00 176.71 AP 00418068 06/02/2021 NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 8,024.26 0.00 8,024.26 AP 00418069 06/02/2021 OCC BUILDERS INC 0.00 16,169.00 16,169.00 AP 00418070 06/02/2021 ONLY CREMATIONS FOR PETS INC 1,764.00 0.00 1,764.00 AP 00418071 06/02/2021 ONTARIO WINNELSON CO 130.92 0.00 130.92 AP 00418072 06/02/2021 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 60.17 0.00 60.17 AP 00418073 06/02/2021 PRISTINE UNIFORMS LLC 0.00 2,748.53 2,748.53 AP 00418074 06/02/2021 PRO SPRAY EQUIPMENT 45.26 0.00 45.26 AP 00418075 06/02/2021 QUADIENT INC 594.87 0.00 594.87 AP 00418076 06/02/2021 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 3,333.34 0.00 3,333.34 AP 00418077 06/02/2021 RANCHO SMOG CENTER 224.75 0.00 224.75 AP 00418078 06/02/2021 RESOURCE BUILDING MATERIALS 297.93 0.00 297.93 AP 00418079 06/02/2021 SAFETY CENTER INC 1,900.00 0.00 1,900.00 AP 00418080 06/02/2021 SAN ANTONIO REGIONAL HOSPITAL 0.00 90.00 90.00 AP 00418081 06/02/2021 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 15,443.92 0.00 15,443.92 AP 00418082 06/02/2021 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 64.92 0.00 64.92 AP 00418083 06/02/2021 SBPEA 2,474.02 0.00 2,474.02 AP 00418084 06/02/2021 SCL 0.00 4,615.81 4,615.81 AP 00418085 06/02/2021 SHAVER,DESIREE 235.00 0.00 235.00 AP 00418086 06/02/2021 SHERIFFS COURT SERVICES 100.00 0.00 100.00 AP 00418087 06/02/2021 SHOEMAKER,MARY 25.00 0.00 25.00 AP 00418088 06/02/2021 SHRED PROS 0.00 63.00 63.00 AP 00418091 06/02/2021 SOUTH COAST AQMD 688.15 0.00 688.15 AP 00418095 06/02/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,807.33 3,010.58 8,817.91 *** AP 00418096 06/02/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 42.62 0.00 42.62 AP 00418097 06/02/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 0.00 866.84 866.84 AP 00418098 06/02/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 0.00 924.63 924.63 AP 00418099 06/02/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 302.51 705.85 1,008.36 *** AP 00418100 06/02/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 618.31 1,442.71 2,061.02 *** AP 00418101 06/02/2021 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 11,741.92 0.00 11,741.92 AP 00418102 06/02/2021 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 2,893.17 0.00 2,893.17 AP 00418103 06/02/2021 STANLEY PEST CONTROL 1,910.00 530.00 2,440.00 *** AP 00418104 06/02/2021 UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC 0.00 33.76 33.76 AP 00418105 06/02/2021 UC REGENTS 94.00 0.00 94.00 AP 00418106 06/02/2021 ULINE 209.29 0.00 209.29 AP 00418107 06/02/2021 UNDERGROUND SVC ALERT OF SO CAL 89.20 0.00 89.20 AP 00418108 06/02/2021 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC 301.45 0.00 301.45 AP 00418109 06/02/2021 UNITED WAY 45.00 0.00 45.00 AP 00418110 06/02/2021 UPLAND ANIMAL HOSPITAL 394.00 0.00 394.00 AP 00418111 06/02/2021 UPS 121.99 0.00 121.99 AP 00418112 06/02/2021 UTILIQUEST 3,640.00 0.00 3,640.00 AP 00418113 06/02/2021 VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY 1,873.12 0.00 1,873.12 AP 00418114 06/02/2021 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 849.49 950.04 1,799.53 *** AP 00418115 06/02/2021 WATT,SAMANTHA 835.00 0.00 835.00 AP 00418116 06/02/2021 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 20,819.17 0.00 20,819.17 AP 00418117 06/02/2021 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 26,066.00 0.00 26,066.00 AP 00418118 06/02/2021 XEROX CORPORATION 281.09 0.00 281.09 User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 7 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page Wme: 08:35:29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Excluding So Calif Gas Company. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Ca Fire Amount AP 00418119 06/02/2021 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES 298.38 0.00 298.38 AP 00418120 06/02/2021 YI,KAITLIN 64.00 0.00 64.00 AP 00418121 06/02/2021 ZOETIS US LLC 108.05 0.00 108.05 Total City: $5,092,123.75 Total Fire: $200,159.36 Grand Total: , Note: *** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 8 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page fine: 08:35:29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Electronic Debit Reeister May 1,2021 to May 31,2021 DATE DESCRIPTION CITY FIRE AMOUNT 5/3 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 24.38 24.38 5/3 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 449.96 449.96 5/4 Bank Fee 98.05 98.05 5/4 U.S.BANK-Purchasing Card Payment 12,437.83 8,749.96 21,187.79 5/4 U.S.BANK-Corporate Card Payment 34,321.27 13,029.40 47,350.67 514 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 3,225.56 3,225.56 514 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 472.81 472.81 5/5 CALPERS-City-Retirement Account Deposit 10,010.92 10,010.92 5/5 CALPERS-City-Retirement Account Deposit 110,085.18 110,085.18 5/5 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 3,240.66 3,240.66 515 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 3,400.75 3,400.75 5/5 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 4,894.82 4,894.82 515 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 9,614.41 9,614.41 5/5 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 26,969.64 26,969.64 5/5 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 114,645.27 114,645.27 5/5 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 1,752.50 1,752.50 5/5 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 1,776.00 1,776.00 5/6 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT-Child Support Payments 3,700.60 3,700.60 516 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT-Child Support Payments 1,732.50 1,732.50 5/6 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 574.22 574.22 5/7 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 1,490.62 1,490.62 5/10 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 116.76 116.76 5110 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 73.88 73.88 5/11 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 173.60 173.60 5111 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 1,144.23 1,144.23 5/13 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 701.00 701.00 5/13 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 4,274.00 4,274.00 5/14 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 4,561.83 4,561.83 5/14 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 8,092.62 8,092.62 5/17 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 187.14 187.14 5/17 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 35,811.69 35,811.69 5/19 CALPERS-City-Retirement Account Deposit 56,111.91 56,111.91 5/19 CALPERS-City-Retirement Account Deposit 110,546.47 110,546.47 5/19 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 3,376.99 3,376.99 5/19 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 5,029.15 5,029.15 5/19 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 9,614.41 9,614.41 5/19 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 27,540.15 27,540.15 5/19 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 79,047.58 79,047.58 5/19 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 908.33 908.33 5/19 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 788.52 788.52 5/20 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT-Child Support Payments 3,700.60 3,700.60 5/20 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT-Child Support Payments 1,732.50 1,732.50 5/20 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 23,989.01 23,989.01 5/21 CALPERS-Fire-Retirement Account Deposit 189,530.23 189,530.23 5/21 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 549.50 549.50 5/21 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 11.04 11.04 5/24 WIRE PAYMENT-RCMU CAISO 87,898.85 87,898.85 5/24 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 512.00 512.00 5/24 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 51.43 51.43 5/26 Workers Comp-City Account Transfer 1,660.99 1,660.99 5/26 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 634.96 634.96 5/27 Workers Comp-Fire Account Transfer 465.00 465.00 TOTAL CITY 441,413.91 TOTAL FIRE 584,119.77 GRAND TOTAL 1,025,533.68 Page 24 ti NONRR � a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA m �l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council President and Members of the Boards of Directors FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director Veronica Lopez, Accounts Payable Supervisor SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $16,083.79 Dated May 24, 2021 Through June 06, 2021. (CITY/FIRE) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District approve payment of demands as presented. Weekly check register amounts are $15,242.47 and $841.32 for the City and the Fire District, respectively. BACKGROUND: N/A ANALYSIS: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Weekly Check Register Page 25 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT So Calif Gas Company Only. Agenda Check Register 5/24/2021 through 6/6/2021 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Ca Fire Amount AP 00417963 05/26/2021 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 140.43 343.70 484.13 *** AP 00418089 06/02/2021 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 13,865.02 497.62 14,362.64 *** AP 00418090 06/02/2021 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 1,237.02 0.00 1,237.02 Total City: $15,242.47 Total Fire: $841.32 Grand Total• Note: *** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: 1 Current Date: 06/07/2021 Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED-CK:Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Page Wine: 08:41:09 ti HONOR a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA m DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council President and Members of the Boards of Directors FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Lori E. Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director SUBJECT: Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of May 31, 2021 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District receive and file the attached current investment schedules for the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (District) as of May 31, 2021. BACKGROUND: The attached investment schedules as of May 31, 2021 reflect cash and investments managed by the Finance Department/Revenue Management Division and are in conformity with the requirements of California Government Code Section 53601 and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District's adopted Investment Policies as approved on November 18, 2020. ANALYSIS: The City's and District's Treasurers are each required to submit a quarterly investment report to the City Council and the Fire Board, respectively, in accordance with California Government Code Section 53646. The quarterly investment report is required to be submitted within 30 days following the end of the quarter covered by the report. However, the City and District Treasurers have each elected to provide this report on a monthly basis. FISCAL IMPACT: None. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The monthly investment schedule supports the City Council's core value of providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all by demonstrating the active, prudent fiscal management of the City's investment portfolio to ensure that financial resources are available to support the various services the City provides to all Rancho Cucamonga stakeholders. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Investment Schedule (City) Attachment 2 - Investment Schedule (Fire) Page 27 City of Rancho Cucamonga Portfolio Summary RANCHO May 31, 2021 CUCAMONGA Cash Dividends Closing Portfolio Holdings and Income Market Value PFM Managed Account $ 317,047.44 $ 255,908,896.54 PFM Cash Balance - 611,260.70 State Pool - 67,159,127.04 Passbook/Checking Accounts - 2,560,166.41 Total $ 317,047.44 $ 326,239,450.69 I certify that this report accurately reflects all City pooled investments and is in conformity with the investment policy adopted November 18, 2020. A copy of the investment policy is available in the Finance Department. The Investment Program herein shown provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six months' estimated expenditures. The attached Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal Agents is provided under the City's official Investment Policy. The provisions of the individual bond documents govern the management of these funds. A/ Jim arrington, Treasurer Date OTgTA(;HMENT 1 0 PfM Managed Account Summary Statement For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Transaction Summary-Managed Account Cash Transactions Summary- Managed Account Opening Market Value $255,103,204.66 Maturities/Calls 246,493.49 Maturities/Calls (245,000.00) Sale Proceeds 4,433,230.98 Principal Dispositions (4,422,374.02) Coupon/Interest/Dividend Income 362,644.86 Principal Acquisitions 5,289,957.73 Principal Payments 0.00 Unsettled Trades 0.00 Security Purchases (5,295,088.60) Change in Current Value 183,108.17 Net Cash Contribution (141.63) Reconciling Transactions 0.00 Closing Market Value $255,908,896.54 Earnings Reconciliation(Cash Basis)- Managed Account Cash Balance Interest/Dividends/Coupons Received 374,995.31 Closing Cash Balance $611,260.70 Less Purchased Interest Related to Interest/Coupons (5,130.87) Plus Net Realized Gains/Losses (52,817.00) Total Cash Basis Earninas $317,047.44 Earnings Reconciliation(Accrual Basis) Total Ending Amortized Value of Securities 255,613,403.53 Ending Accrued Interest 674,818.85 Plus Proceeds from Sales 4,433,230.98 Plus Proceeds of Maturities/Calls/Principal Payments 246,493.49 Plus Coupons/Dividends Received 362,644.86 Less Cost of New Purchases (5,295,088.60) Less Beginning Amortized Value of Securities (255,160,134.42) Less Beginning Accrued Interest (771,581.49) Total Accrual Basis Earnings $103,787.20 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 1 Page 29 0 PfM Portfolio Summary and Statistics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Account Summary Sector Allocation Description Par Value Market Value Percent U.S.Treasury Bond/ Note 156,880,000.00 160,458,615.58 62.71 —ABS o 1.31/o Supra-National Agency Bond/ Note 9,155,000.00 9,274,742.96 3.62 Cert of Deposit- Municipal Bond/ Note 1,475,000.00 1,492,174.50 0.58 FDIC Federal Agency Bond/ Note 52,675,000.00 52,859,044.35 20.66 0.48% Corporate Note 26,295,000.00 27,233,841.74 10.64 Corporate Note 10.64/o Certificate of Deposit- FDIC Insured 1,225,000.00 1,238,855.25 0.48 Fed Agy Bond/ Asset-Backed Security 3,350,000.00 3,351,622.16 1.31 - Note Managed Account Sub-Total 251,055,000.00 255,908,896.54 100.00% 20.66% Accrued Interest 674,818.85 Total Portfolio 251,055,000.00 256,583,715.39 Muni Bond/Note 0.58% Supra-National Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00 Agency Bond/Note US TSY Bond/Note 3.62% 62.71% Maturity Distribution Characteristics 30.53% Yield to Maturity at Cost 0.50% Yield to Maturity at Market 0.33% 20.07% 20.68% 20.01% Weighted Average Days to Maturity 961 8.51% 0-6 Months 6-12 Months 1-2 Years 2-3 Years 3-4 Years 4-5 Years Over 5 Years PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 2 Page 30 0 pfm Managed Account Issuer Summary For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Issuer Summary Credit Quality(S&P Ratings) Market Value Issuer of Holdings Percent A AMAZON.COM INC 1,457,531.70 0.57 NR 0.91% APPLE INC 8,184,141.42 3.20 0.89% A CARMAX AUTO OWNER TRUST 929,979.71 0.36 BBB+ 1.60% CHARLES SCHWAB 665,174.40 0.26 0.74% AA o AAA 1.21/o CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK 244,617.80 0.10 4.71% ENERBANK USA 245,389.80 0.10 AA- FANNIE MAE 32,450,355.15 12.67 2.81% FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS 8,570,002.50 3.35 FREDDIE MAC 11,838,686.70 4.63 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP 1,758,640.00 0.69 GM FINANCIAL CONSUMER AUTOMOBILE TRUST 375,767.74 0.15 GM FINANCIAL LEASINGTRUST 515,551.00 0.20 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC 1,892,196.70 0.74 AA+ HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES 529,557.19 0.21 87.13% HYUNDAI AUTO LEASE SECURITIZATION TRUST 280,597.44 0.11 HYUNDAI AUTO RECEIVABLES 540,105.41 0.21 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 1,566,085.50 0.61 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV 7,708,657.46 3.01 JP MORGAN CHASE&CO 606,815.80 0.24 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP 1,723,344.00 0.67 MEDALLION BANK UTAH 245,117.11 0.10 MERCEDES-BENZ AUTO LEASE TRUST 180,063.67 0.07 MICROSOFT CORP 460,994.63 0.18 MORGAN STANLEY 251,765.19 0.10 NOVARTIS AG 3,109,482.00 1.22 SAN MATEO-FOSTER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 1,492,174.50 0.58 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION 1,670,027.09 0.65 UNITED STATES TREASURY 160,458,615.58 62.69 US BANCORP 2,612,485.00 1.02 WAL-MART STORES INC 3,093,009.00 1.21 WELLS FARGO&COMPANY 251,965.35 0.10 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 3 Page 31 0 pfm Managed Account Issuer Summary For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Total $255,908,896.54 100.00% PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 4 Page 32 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value U.S.Treasury Bond / Note US TREASURY NOTES 912828X47 8,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 8,221,250.00 0.13 13,043.48 8,127,247.41 8,131,249.60 DTD 05/01/2017 1.875%04/30/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828XD7 3,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/12/20 11/13/20 3,079,218.75 0.16 153.69 3,051,126.99 3,053,906.40 DTD 06/01/2015 1.875%05/31/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZX1 8,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 7,998,437.50 0.14 4,198.90 7,999,038.09 8,003,750.40 DTD 06/30/2020 0.125%06/30/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828XO8 2,935.000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/28/20 09/28/20 3,035.775.98 0.13 19,620.72 2,998,829.79 3,000.579.05 DTD 07/31/2015 2.000%07/31/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YKO 8,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 8,202,500.00 0.14 14,125.68 8,135,813.25 8,138,750.40 DTD 10/15/2019 1.375%10/15/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828TY6 5,750,000.00 AA+ Aaa 10/30/20 11/05/20 5,921,152.34 0.15 4,316.41 5,873,044.66 5,876,679.40 DTD 11/15/2012 1.625%11/15/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828M80 8,400.000.00 AA+ Aaa 01/06/21 01/08/21 8,695.312.50 0.14 459.02 8,633,771.26 8,637.562.08 DTD 11/30/2015 2.000%11/30/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828N30 5,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/23/20 11/24/20 5,205,078.13 0.17 44,613.26 5,154,543.88 5,158,594.00 DTD 12/31/2015 2.125%12/31/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 9128283U2 2,400,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/17/20 11/20/20 2,515,031.25 0.19 19,052.49 2,487,349.17 2,490,000.00 DTD 01/31/2018 2.375%01/31/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 9128284A5 1,810,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/16/20 11/18/20 1,910,257.03 0.19 12,007.24 1,886,759.29 1,888,904.78 DTD 02/28/2018 2.625%02/28/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 912828P79 7,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 01/25/21 01/26/21 7,200,156.25 0.13 26,535.33 7,167,102.92 7,167.343.40 DTD 02/29/2016 1.500%02/28/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZD5 5,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 10/30/20 11/05/20 5,039,648.44 0.16 5,298.91 5,030,059.05 5,032,812.50 DTD 03/15/2020 0.500%03/15/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 9128284L1 5,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 10/06/20 10/07/20 5,329,882.81 0.17 11,956.52 5,246,265.46 5,249,219.00 DTD 04/30/2018 2.750%04/30/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 912828R69 3,500.000.00 AA+ Aaa 10/30/20 11/05/20 3,630.429.69 0.17 155.40 3,601,476.25 3,602.812.50 DTD 05/31/2016 1.625%05/31/2023 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 5 Page 33 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value U.S.Treasury Bond / Note US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZU7 6,500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 6,518,281.25 0.15 7,500.00 6,513,738.64 6,512,187.50 DTD 06/15/2020 0.250%06/15/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAF8 5,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 10/06/20 10/07/20 4,991,796.88 0.18 1,830.11 4,993,662.66 4,995,312.50 DTD 08/15/2020 0.125%08/15/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAK7 5,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/23/20 11/24/20 4,988,476.56 0.21 1,324.73 4,990,601.37 4,993,750.00 DTD 09/15/2020 0.125%09/15/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 9128286GO 8,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 8,600,312.50 0.18 48,016.30 8,482,076.41 8,465,000.00 DTD 02/28/2019 2.375%02/29/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828X70 3,615,000.00 AA+ Aaa 10/30/20 11/05/20 3,836,983.59 0.23 6,286.96 3,800,684.39 3,794,620.31 DTD 05/01/2017 2.000%04/30/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828Y87 5,670,000.00 AA+ Aaa 10/06/20 10/07/20 5,995,139.06 0.24 33,166.37 5,939,821.07 5,923,378.13 DTD 07/31/2019 1.750%07/31/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YE4 6,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 01/25/21 01/26/21 6,216,328.13 0.24 18,953.80 6,195,568.54 6,171,562.80 DTD 08/31/2019 1.250%08/31/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 9128282Y5 6,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 6,457,968.75 0.21 21,598.36 6,380,962.38 6,345,937.20 DTD 10/02/2017 2.125%09/30/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YM6 2,500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/16/20 11/18/20 2,616,796.88 0.31 3,260.87 2,601,013.52 2,592,187.50 DTD 10/31/2019 1.500%10/31/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YV6 5,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/23/20 11/24/20 5,239,843.75 0.30 204.92 5,208,943.63 5,185,937.50 DTD 11/30/2019 1.500%11/30/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 9128283Z1 6,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 6,663,750.00 0.23 41,698.37 6,562,583.64 6,505,312.80 DTD 02/28/2018 2.750%02/28/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZFO 2,750,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/17/20 11/20/20 2,769,335.94 0.34 2,329.23 2,766,991.82 2,749,140.63 DTD 03/31/2020 0.500%03/31/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAB7 4,500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 01/25/21 01/26/21 4,478,730.47 0.36 3,760.36 4,480,357.65 4,435,312.50 DTD 07/31/2020 0.250%07/31/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAB7 7,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 01/06/21 01/08/21 6,956,250.00 0.39 5,849.45 6,960,033.78 6,899,375.00 DTD 07/31/2020 0.250%07/31/2025 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 6 Page 34 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value U.S.Treasury Bond / Note US TREASURY NOTES 91282CBC4 3,900,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/06/21 05/07/21 3,837,082.03 0.73 6,140.88 3,838,007.84 3,840,890.82 DTD 12/31/2020 0.375%12/31/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CB03 2,650,000.00 AA+ Aaa 03/02/21 03/03/21 2,623,810.55 0.70 3,348.51 2,625,103.50 2,619,359.38 DTD 02/28/2021 0.500%02/28/2026 US TREASURY N/B NOTES 91282CBT7 3,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 04/02/21 04/06/21 2,973,632.81 0.93 3,811.48 2,974,444.11 2,997,187.50 DTD 03/31/2021 0.750%03/31/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 156,880,000.00 161,748,649.82 0.23 384,617.75 160,707,022.42 160,458,615.58 Supra-National Agency Bond / Note INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV 459058FY4 4,500,000.00 AAA Aaa 07/26/17 07/26/17 4,510,530.00 1.95 31,250.00 4,501,529.89 4,555,525.50 NOTE DTD 01/26/2017 2.000%01/26/2022 INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE 459058JV6 1,745,000.00 AAA Aaa 04/13/21 04/20/21 1,741,387.85 0.23 248.42 1,741,595.67 1,743,502.79 DTD 04/20/2021 0.125%04/20/2023 INTL BK RECON&DEVELOP NOTES 459058JM6 1,410,000.00 AAA Aaa 11/17/20 11/24/20 1,406,968.50 0.32 68.54 1,407,491.75 1,409,629.17 DTD 11/24/2020 0.250%11/24/2023 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 4581XODK1 1,500,000.00 AAA Aaa 02/19/21 02/23/21 1,576,950.00 0.47 5,614.58 1,571,854.66 1,566,085.50 NOTES DTD 01/16/2020 1.750%03/14/2025 Security Type Sub-Total 9,155,000.00 9,235,836.35 1.13 37,181.54 9,222,471.97 9,274,742.96 Municipal Bond/ Note SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST,CA TXBL GO 799055004 475,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/19/20 05/19/20 476,197.00 0.85 1,681.50 475,166.33 475,769.50 BO DTD 05/19/2020 1.062%08/01/2021 SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST,CA TXBL GO 799055OR2 500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/19/20 05/19/20 502,300.00 0.95 1,936.67 501,218.66 505,700.00 BO DTD 05/19/2020 1.162%08/01/2022 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 7 Page 35 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Municipal Bond/ Note SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST,CA TXBL GO 7990550SO 500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/19/20 05/19/20 503,385.00 1.05 2,110.00 502,290.45 510,705.00 BO DTD 05/19/2020 1.266%08/01/2023 Security Type Sub-Total 1,475,000.00 1,481,882.00 0.95 5,728.17 1,478,675.44 1,492,174.50 Federal Agency Bond / Note FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133EG5D3 1,500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 01/27/17 01/27/17 1,500,000.00 2.03 10,488.33 1,500,000.00 1,519,354.50 DTD 01/27/2017 2.030%01/27/2022 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133EHHH9 4,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/02/17 05/02/17 3,992,000.00 1.96 6,186.67 3,998,532.31 4,067,700.00 DTD 05/02/2017 1.920%05/02/2022 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3134GBVA7 3,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 06/29/17 06/29/17 3,000,000.00 1.93 24,383.33 3,000,000.00 3,059,679.00 DTD 06/29/2017 1.925%06/29/2022 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO5G4 4,260,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 4,261,192.80 0.24 4,171.25 4,260,903.71 4,267,838.40 DTD 07/10/2020 0.250%07/10/2023 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3137EAEW5 4,800,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 4,802,928.00 0.23 2,766.67 4,802,257.96 4,807,329.60 DTD 09/04/2020 0.250%09/08/2023 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3137EAEZ8 1,700,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/03/20 11/05/20 1,698,470.00 0.28 295.14 1,698,760.36 1,701,543.60 DTD 11/05/2020 0.250%11/06/2023 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135G06H1 4,400,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/23/20 11/25/20 4,394,984.00 0.29 122.22 4,395,843.62 4,404,092.00 DTD 11/25/2020 0.250%11/27/2023 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GOX24 4,325,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 4,557,122.75 0.36 28,112.50 4,520,565.65 4,502,705.60 DTD 01/10/2020 1.625%01/07/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO4Z3 4,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 07/21/20 07/21/20 4,009,400.00 0.45 9,111.11 4,007,747.66 3,986,824.00 DTD 06/19/2020 0.500%06/17/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO4Z3 5,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/24/20 09/28/20 5,017,800.00 0.42 11.388.89 5,015,258.62 4,983,530.00 DTD 06/19/2020 0.500%06/17/2025 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133ELR71 3,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 07/21/20 07/21/20 3,007,110.00 0.45 6,208.33 3,005,870.57 2,982,948.00 DTD 07/02/2020 0.500%07/02/2025 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 8 Page 36 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Federal Agency Bond / Note FANNIE MAE NOTES 3136G4ZJ5 2,500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 07/21/20 07/21/20 2,499,000.00 0.63 5,642.36 2,499,172.51 2,490,015.00 DTD 07/21/2020 0.625%07/21/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135G05X7 2,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 10/30/20 11/05/20 1,988,500.00 0.50 2,000.00 1,989,863.74 1,976,976.00 DTD 08/27/2020 0.375%08/25/2025 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3137EAEX3 2,300,000.00 AA+ Aaa 09/23/20 09/25/20 2,293,077.00 0.44 1,629.17 2,294,022.08 2,270,134.50 DTD 09/25/2020 0.375%09/23/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135G06G3 1,390,000.00 AA+ Aaa 11/12/20 11/13/20 1,387,720.40 0.53 463.33 1,387,970.91 1,377,816.65 DTD 11/12/2020 0.500%11/07/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135G06G3 4,500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 12/02/20 12/04/20 4,494,465.00 0.53 1,500.00 4,495,015.73 4,460,557.50 DTD 11/12/2020 0.500%11/07/2025 Security Type Sub-Total 52,675,000.00 52,903,769.95 0.65 114,469.30 52,871,785.43 52,859,044.35 Corporate MICROSOFT CORP(CALLABLE)NOTE 594918BW3 455,000.00 AAA Aaa 02/14/17 02/14/17 455,000.00 2.40 3,488.33 455,000.00 460,994.63 DTD 02/06/2017 2.400%02/06/2022 WAL-MART STORES INC CORP(CALLABLE) 931142DU4 3,000,000.00 AA Aa2 06/21/18 06/21/18 2,913,840.00 3.04 32,508.33 2,970,438.39 3,093,009.00 NOTE DTD 10/20/2017 2.350%12/15/2022 APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES 037833AK6 3,390,000.00 AA+ Aal 05/06/19 05/06/19 3,348,574.20 2.73 6,328.00 3,370,082.66 3,528,400.14 DTD 05/03/2013 2.400%05/03/2023 APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES 037833DV9 1,440,000.00 AA+ Aal 05/11/20 05/11/20 1,444,737.60 0.64 600.00 1,443,067.54 1,455,893.28 DTD 05/11/2020 0.750%05/11/2023 APPLE INC(CALLABLE)BONDS 037833CG3 3,000,000.00 AA+ Aal 02/11/19 02/11/19 3,019,140.00 2.86 28,000.00 3,010,004.51 3,199,848.00 DTD 02/09/2017 3.000%02/09/2024 CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES 808513BN4 660,000.00 A A2 03/16/21 03/18/21 659.670.00 0.77 1,003.75 659,692.58 665,174.40 (CALLABLE) DTD 03/18/2021 0.750%03/18/2024 AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES 023135BW5 1,455,000.00 AA- Al 05/10/21 05/12/21 1,452,875.70 0.50 345.56 1,452,914.46 1,457,531.70 DTD 05/12/2021 0.450%05/12/2024 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 9 Page 37 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Corporate US BANK NA CINCINNATI(CALLABLE) 90331HPL1 2,500,000.00 AA- Al 10/30/20 11/05/20 2,640,450.00 0.69 18,506.94 2,621,455.46 2,612,485.00 CORPORA DTD 01/21/2020 2.050%01/21/2025 NOVARTIS CAPITAL CORP 66989HAP3 3,000,000.00 AA- Al 09/24/20 09/28/20 3,144,750.00 0.63 15.604.17 3,122,054.97 3,109,482.00 DTD 02/14/2020 1.750%02/14/2025 ]PMORGAN CHASE&CO CORP NOTES 46647PBY1 610,000.00 A- A2 02/09/21 02/16/21 610,000.00 0.56 1,001.67 610,000.00 606,815.80 (CALLABLE DTD 02/16/2021 0.563%02/16/2025 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP NOTES 539830BE8 1,600,000.00 A- A3 03/05/21 03/09/21 1,714,864.00 1.05 11,600.00 1,707,785.07 1,723,344.00 (CALLABLE) DTD 02/20/2015 2.900%03/01/2025 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP 369550BG2 1,600,000.00 A- A2 03/05/21 03/09/21 1,757,296.00 1.09 2,488.89 1,748,648.84 1,758,640.00 DTD 05/11/2018 3.500%05/15/2025 BANK OF NY MELLON CORP(CALLABLE) 06406RAOO 1,685,000.00 A Al 01/28/21 02/01/21 1,684,005.85 0.76 4,317.81 1,684,071.33 1,670,027.09 CORPOR DTD 01/28/2021 0.750%01/28/2026 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORPORATE 38141GXS8 1,900,000.00 BBB+ A2 02/12/21 02/17/21 1,903,876.00 0.81 4,918.63 1,903,654.64 1,892,196.70 NOTES DTD 02/12/2021 0.855%02/12/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 26,295,000.00 26,749,079.35 1.55 130,712.08 26,758,870.45 27,233,841.74 DepositCertificate of WELLS FARGO BANK NA 949763S64 245,000.00 NR NR 01/29/20 01/29/20 245,000.00 1.90 38.26 245,000.00 251,965.35 DTD 01/29/2020 1.900%01/30/2023 MORGAN STANLEY PVT BANK 6176OA607 245,000.00 NR NR 01/30/20 01/30/20 245,000.00 1.85 1,514.97 245,000.00 251,765.19 DTD 01/30/2020 1.850%01/30/2023 ENERBANK USA 29278TOD5 245,000.00 NR NR 07/24/20 07/24/20 245,000.00 0.45 24.16 245,000.00 245,389.80 DTD 07/24/2020 0.450%07/24/2024 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK 169894AT9 245,000.00 NR NR 07/29/20 07/29/20 245.000.00 0.50 10.07 245,000.00 244,617.80 DTD 07/29/2020 0.500%07/29/2025 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 10 Page 38 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Certificate of Deposit- FDIC Insured MEDALLION BANK UTAH 58404DHO7 245,000.00 NR NR 07/30/20 07/30/20 245.000.00 0.55 7.38 245,000.00 245,117.11 DTD 07/30/2020 0.550%07/30/2025 Security Type Sub-Total 1,225,000.00 1,225,000.00 1.06 1,594.84 1,225,000.00 1,238,855.25 Asset-Backed Security MBALT 2021-A A3 58770GAC4 180,000.00 AAA Aaa 01/20/21 01/27/21 179,981.80 0.25 20.00 179,983.90 180,063.67 DTD 01/27/2021 0.250%01/16/2024 HALST 2021-A A4 44891TAD8 280,000.00 AAA Aaa 01/12/21 01/20/21 279,976.70 0.42 52.27 279,978.86 280,597.44 DTD 01/20/2021 0.420%12/16/2024 GMALT 2021-1 A4 36261RADO 515,000.00 NR Aaa 02/17/21 02/24/21 514,922.24 0.33 51.93 514,927.42 515,551.00 DTD 02/24/2021 0.330%02/20/2025 HAROT 2021-1 A3 43813GAC5 530,000.00 NR Aaa 02/17/21 02/24/21 529,990.30 0.27 39.75 529,990.92 529,557.19 DTD 02/24/2021 0.270%04/21/2025 HART 2021-A A3 44933LAC7 540,000.00 AAA NR 04/20/21 04/28/21 539,943.19 0.38 91.20 539,944.40 540,105.41 DTD 04/28/2021 0.380%09/15/2025 GMCAR 2021-1 A3 36261LAC5 375,000.00 AAA Aaa 01/12/21 01/20/21 374,940.30 0.35 54.69 374,944.86 375,767.74 DTD 01/20/2021 0.350%10/16/2025 CARMX 2021-1 A3 14316NAC3 120,000.00 AAA NR 01/20/21 01/27/21 119,976.29 0.34 18.13 119,977.95 120,009.60 DTD 01/27/2021 0.340%12/15/2025 CARMX 2021-2 A3 14314OAC8 810,000.00 AAA NR 04/13/21 04/21/21 809,825.45 0.52 187.20 809,829.51 809,970.11 DTD 04/21/2021 0.520%02/17/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 3,350,000.00 3,349,556.27 0.38 515.17 3,349,577.82 3,351,622.16 Managed Account Sub-Total 251,055,000.00 256,693,773.74 0.50 674,818.85 255,613,403.53 255,908,896.54 Securities Sub-Total $251,055,000.00 $256,693,773.74 0.50% $674,818.85 $255,613,403.53 $255,908,896.54 Accrued Interest $674,818.85 Total Investments $256,583,715.39 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 11 Page 39 0 Pfm Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt U.S.Treasury Bond I Note US TREASURY NOTES 912828X47 8,000,000.00 NOMURA 101.64 8,131,249.60 (90,000.40) 4,002.19 0.92 0.08 DTD 05/01/2017 1.875%04/30/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828XD7 3,000,000.00 CITIGRP 101.80 3,053,906.40 (25,312.35) 2,779.41 0.99 0.08 DTD 06/01/2015 1.875%05/31/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZX1 8,000,000.00 WELLS_F 100.05 8,003,750.40 5,312.90 4,712.31 1.09 0.08 DTD 06/30/2020 0.125%06/30/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828XO8 2,935,000.00 BONY 102.23 3,000,579.05 (35,196.93) 1,749.26 1.16 0.09 DTD 07/31/2015 2.000%07/31/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YKO 8,000,000.00 CITIGRP 101.73 8,138,750.40 (63,749.60) 2,937.15 1.37 0.11 DTD 10/15/2019 1.375%10/15/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828TY6 5,750,000.00 CITIGRP 102.20 5,876,679.40 (44,472.94) 3,634.74 1.45 0.11 DTD 11/15/2012 1.625%11/15/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828M80 8,400,000.00 CITIGRP 102.83 8,637,562.08 (57,750.42) 3,790.82 1.48 0.11 DTD 11/30/2015 2.000%11/30/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 912828N30 5,000,000.00 NOMURA 103.17 5,158,594.00 (46,484.13) 4,050.12 1.56 0.12 DTD 12/31/2015 2.125%12/31/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 9128283U2 2,400,000.00 CITIGRP 103.75 2,490,000.00 (25,031.25) 2,650.83 1.64 0.12 DTD 01/31/2018 2.375%01/31/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 9128284A5 1,810,000.00 CITIGRP 104.36 1,888,904.78 (21,352.25) 2,145.49 1.72 0.13 DTD 02/28/2018 2.625%02/28/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 912828P79 7,000,000.00 BNP_PAR 102.39 7,167,343.40 (32,812.85) 240.48 1.74 0.13 DTD 02/29/2016 1.500%02/28/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZD5 5,000,000.00 WELLS_F 100.66 5,032,812.50 (6,835.94) 2,753.45 1.79 0.13 DTD 03/15/2020 0.500%03/15/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 9128284L1 5,000,000.00 CITIGRP 104.98 5,249,219.00 (80,663.81) 2,953.54 1.88 0.14 DTD 04/30/2018 2.750%04/30/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 912828R69 3,500,000.00 NOMURA 102.94 3,602,812.50 (27,617.19) 1,336.25 1.97 0.15 DTD 05/31/2016 1.625%05/31/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZU7 6,500,000.00 WELLS_F 100.19 6,512,187.50 (6,093.75) (1,551.14) 2.04 0.16 DTD 06/15/2020 0.250%06/15/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAF8 5,000,000.00 HSBC 99.91 4,995,312.50 3,515.62 1,649.84 2.21 0.17 DTD 08/15/2020 0.125%08/15/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAK7 5,000,000.00 NOMURA 99.88 4,993,750.00 5,273.44 3,148.63 2.30 0.18 DTD 09/15/2020 0.125%09/15/2023 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 12 Page 40 0 PfM Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt U.S.Treasury Bond I Note US TREASURY NOTES 9128286GO 8,000,000.00 RBS 105.81 8,465,000.00 (135,312.50) (17,076.41) 2.67 0.25 DTD 02/28/2019 2.375%02/29/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828X70 3,615,000.00 MORGAN_ 104.97 3,794,620.31 (42,363.28) (6,064.08) 2.85 0.29 DTD 05/01/2017 2.000%04/30/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828Y87 5,670,000.00 WELLS_F 104.47 5,923,378.13 (71,760.93) (16,442.94) 3.09 0.33 DTD 07/31/2019 1.750%07/31/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YE4 6,000,000.00 BNP_PAR 102.86 6,171,562.80 (44,765.33) (24,005.74) 3.19 0.36 DTD 08/31/2019 1.250%08/31/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 9128282Y5 6,000,000.00 CITIGRP 105.77 6,345,937.20 (112,031.55) (35,025.18) 3.24 0.38 DTD 10/02/2017 2.125%09/30/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YM6 2,500,000.00 CITIGRP 103.69 2,592,187.50 (24,609.38) (8,826.02) 3.35 0.41 DTD 10/31/2019 1.500%10/31/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YV6 5,000,000.00 NOMURA 103.72 5,185,937.50 (53,906.25) (23,006.13) 3.41 0.43 DTD 11/30/2019 1.500%11/30/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 9128283Z1 6,000,000.00 MERRILL 108.42 6,505,312.80 (158,437.20) (57,270.84) 3.58 0.48 DTD 02/28/2018 2.750%02/28/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZFO 2,750,000.00 MORGAN_ 99.97 2,749,140.63 (20,195.31) (17,851.19) 3.81 0.51 DTD 03/31/2020 0.500%03/31/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAB7 4,500,000.00 BNP_PAR 98.56 4,435,312.50 (43,417.97) (45,045.15) 4.15 0.60 DTD 07/31/2020 0.250%07/31/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAB7 7,000,000.00 JPM_CHA 98.56 6,899,375.00 (56,875.00) (60,658.78) 4.15 0.60 DTD 07/31/2020 0.250%07/31/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CBC4 3,900,000.00 HSBC 98.48 3,840,890.82 3,808.79 2,882.98 4.55 0.71 DTD 12/31/2020 0.375%12/31/2025 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CB03 2,650,000.00 CITIGRP 98.84 2,619,359.38 (4,451.17) (5,744.12) 4.70 0.75 DTD 02/28/2021 0.500%02/28/2026 US TREASURY N/B NOTES 91282CBT7 3,000,000.00 NOMURA 99.91 2,997,187.50 23,554.69 22,743.39 4.76 0.77 DTD 03/31/2021 0.750%03/31/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 156,880,000.00 160,458,615.58 (1,290,034.24) (248,406.84) 2.42 0.27 Supra-National Agency Bond I Note PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 13 Page 41 0 Pfm Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt Supra-National Agency Bond I Note INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND 459058FY4 4,500,000.00 NEW ACC 101.23 4,555,525.50 44,995.50 53,995.61 0.66 0.12 DEV NOTE DTD 01/26/2017 2.000%01/26/2022 INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE 459058JV6 1,745,000.00 TD 99.91 1,743,502.79 2,114.94 1,907.12 1.89 0.18 DTD 04/20/2021 0.125%04/20/2023 INTL BK RECON&DEVELOP NOTES 459058JM6 1,410,000.00 TD 99.97 1,409,629.17 2,660.67 2,137.42 2.48 0.26 DTD 11/24/2020 0.250%11/24/2023 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 4581XODK1 1,500,000.00 MORGAN_ 104.41 1,566,085.50 (10,864.50) (5,769.16) 3.68 0.57 NOTES DTD 01/16/2020 1.750%03/14/2025 Security Type Sub-Total 9,155,000.00 9,274,742.96 38,906.61 52,270.99 1.68 0.23 Municipal Bond I Note SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST,CA TXBL 799055004 475,000.00 NEW ACC 100.16 475,769.50 (427.50) 603.17 0.18 0.11 GO BO DTD 05/19/2020 1.062%08/01/2021 SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST,CA TXBL 799055OR2 500,000.00 NEW ACC 101.14 505,700.00 3,400.00 4,481.34 1.17 0.19 GO BO DTD 05/19/2020 1.162%08/01/2022 SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST,CA TXBL 7990550SO 500,000.00 NEW ACC 102.14 510,705.00 7,320.00 8,414.55 2.14 0.28 GO BO DTD 05/19/2020 1.266%08/01/2023 Security Type Sub-Total 1,475,000.00 1,492,174.50 10,292.50 13,499.06 1.18 0.20 Federal Agency Bond I Note FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133EG5D3 1,500,000.00 NEW ACC 101.29 1,519,354.50 19,354.50 19,354.50 0.66 0.07 DTD 01/27/2017 2.030%01/27/2022 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133EHHH9 4.000,000.00 NEW ACC 101.69 4,067,700.00 75,700.00 69,167.69 0.92 0.08 DTD 05/02/2017 1.920%05/02/2022 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3134GBVA7 3.000,000.00 NEW ACC 101.99 3,059,679.00 59,679.00 59,679.00 1.07 0.08 DTD 06/29/2017 1.925%06/29/2022 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 14 Page 42 0 PfM Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt Federal Agency Bond I Note FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO5G4 4,260,000.00 MORGAN_ 100.18 4,267,838.40 6,645.60 6,934.69 2.11 0.16 DTD 07/10/2020 0.250%07/10/2023 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3137EAEW5 4,800,000.00 KEYBANC 100.15 4,807,329.60 4,401.60 5,071.64 2.27 0.18 DTD 09/04/2020 0.250%09/08/2023 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3137EAEZ8 1,700,000.00 CITIGRP 100.09 1,701,543.60 3,073.60 2,783.24 2.43 0.21 DTD 11/05/2020 0.250%11/06/2023 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135G06H1 4,400,000.00 NOMURA 100.09 4,404,092.00 9,108.00 8,248.38 2.49 0.21 DTD 11/25/2020 0.250%11/27/2023 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GOX24 4,325,000.00 RBS 104.11 4,502,705.60 (54,417.15) (17,860.05) 3.50 0.47 DTD 01/10/2020 1.625%01/07/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO4Z3 4,000,000.00 NEW ACC 99.67 3,986,824.00 (22,576.00) (20,923.66) 4.01 0.58 DTD 06/19/2020 0.500%06/17/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO4Z3 5,000,000.00 HSBC 99.67 4,983,530.00 (34,270.00) (31,728.62) 4.01 0.58 DTD 06/19/2020 0.500%06/17/2025 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133ELR71 3,000,000.00 NEW ACC 99.43 2,982,948.00 (24,162.00) (22,922.57) 4.05 0.64 DTD 07/02/2020 0.500%07/02/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3136G4ZJ5 2,500,000.00 NEW ACC 99.60 2,490,015.00 (8,985.00) (9,157.51) 4.09 0.72 DTD 07/21/2020 0.625%07/21/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO5X7 2,000,000.00 NOMURA 98.85 1,976,976.00 (11,524.00) (12,887.74) 4.21 0.65 DTD 08/27/2020 0.375%08/25/2025 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3137EAEX3 2,300,000.00 CITIGRP 98.70 2,270,134.50 (22,942.50) (23,887.58) 4.29 0.68 DTD 09/25/2020 0.375%09/23/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO6G3 1,390,000.00 BMO 99.12 1,377,816.65 (9,903.75) (10,154.26) 4.40 0.70 DTD 11/12/2020 0.500%11/07/2025 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135GO6G3 4,500,000.00 JEFFERI 99.12 4,460,557.50 (33,907.50) (34,458.23) 4.40 0.70 DTD 11/12/2020 0.500%11/07/2025 Security Type Sub-Total 52,675,000.00 52,859,044.35 (44,725.60) (12,741.08) 3.04 0.41 Corporate MICROSOFT CORP(CALLABLE)NOTE 594918BW3 455,000.00 NEW ACC 01/06/22 101.32 460,994.63 5,994.63 5,994.63 0.60 0.47 DTD 02/06/2017 2.400%02/06/2022 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 15 Page 43 0 Pfm Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt Corporate WAL-MART STORES INC CORP(CALLABLE) 931142DU4 3,000,000.00 NEW ACC 11/15/22 103.10 3,093,009.00 179,169.00 122,570.61 1.43 0.33 NOTE DTD 10/20/2017 2.350%12/15/2022 APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES 037833AK6 3,390,000.00 NEW ACC 104.08 3,528,400.14 179,825.94 158,317.48 1.90 0.27 DTD 05/03/2013 2.400%05/03/2023 APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES 037833DV9 1,440,000.00 NEW ACC 101.10 1,455,893.28 11,155.68 12,825.74 1.94 0.18 DTD 05/11/2020 0.750%05/11/2023 APPLE INC(CALLABLE)BONDS 037833CG3 3,000,000.00 NEW ACC 12/09/23 106.66 3,199,848.00 180,708.00 189,843.49 2.44 0.50 DTD 02/09/2017 3.000%02/09/2024 CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES 808513BN4 660,000.00 CSFB 02/18/24 100.78 665,174.40 5,504.40 5,481.82 2.70 0.47 (CALLABLE) DTD 03/18/2021 0.750%03/18/2024 AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES 023135BW5 1,455,000.00 JPM_CHA 100.17 1,457,531.70 4,656.00 4,617.24 2.94 0.39 DTD 05/12/2021 0.450%05/12/2024 US BANK NA CINCINNATI(CALLABLE) 90331HPL1 2,500,000.00 US_BANC 104.50 2,612,485.00 (27,965.00) (8,970.46) 3.51 0.79 CORPORA DTD 01/21/2020 2.050%01/21/2025 NOVARTIS CAPITAL CORP 66989HAP3 3,000,000.00 US_BANC 01/14/25 103.65 3,109,482.00 (35,268.00) (12,572.97) 3.52 0.75 DTD 02/14/2020 1.750%02/14/2025 ]PMORGAN CHASE&CO CORP NOTES 46647PBY1 610,000.00 JPM_CHA 02/16/24 99.48 606,815.80 (3,184.20) (3,184.20) 2.70 0.71 (CALLABLE DTD 02/16/2021 0.563%02/16/2025 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP NOTES 539830BE8 1,600,000.00 MERRILL 12/01/24 107.71 1,723,344.00 8,480.00 15,558.93 3.35 0.81 (CALLABLE) DTD 02/20/2015 2.900%03/01/2025 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP 369550BG2 1,600,000.00 SUSQ 109.92 1,758,640.00 1,344.00 9,991.16 3.74 0.94 DTD 05/11/2018 3.500%05/15/2025 BANK OF NY MELLON CORP(CALLABLE) 06406RAOO 1,685,000.00 MITSU 12/28/25 99.11 1,670,027.09 (13,978.76) (14,044.24) 4.50 0.95 CORPOR DTD 01/28/2021 0.750%01/28/2026 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORPORATE 38141GXS8 1,900,000.00 MERRILL 99.59 1,892,196.70 (11,679.30) (11,457.94) 4.61 0.94 NOTES DTD 02/12/2021 0.855%02/12/2026 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 16 Page 44 0 Pfm Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt Security Type Sub-Total 26,295,000.00 27,233,841.74 484,762.39 474,971.29 2.88 0.59 DepositCertificate of WELLS FARGO BANK NA 949763S64 245,000.00 NEW ACC 102.84 251,965.35 6,965.35 6,965.35 1.65 0.19 DTD 01/29/2020 1.900%01/30/2023 MORGAN STANLEY PVT BANK 6176OA607 245,000.00 NEW ACC 102.76 251,765.19 6,765.19 6,765.19 1.65 0.19 DTD 01/30/2020 1.850%01/30/2023 ENERBANK USA 29278TOD5 245,000.00 NEW ACC 100.16 245,389.80 389.80 389.80 3.13 0.40 DTD 07/24/2020 0.450%07/24/2024 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK 169894AT9 245,000.00 NEW ACC 99.84 244,617.80 (382.20) (382.20) 4.13 0.54 DTD 07/29/2020 0.500%07/29/2025 MEDALLION BANK UTAH 58404DHO7 245,000.00 NEW ACC 100.05 245,117.11 117.11 117.11 4.12 0.54 DTD 07/30/2020 0.550%07/30/2025 Security Type Sub-Total 1,225,000.00 1,238,855.25 13,855.25 13,855.25 2.92 0.37 Asset-Backed Security MBALT 2021-A A3 58770GAC4 180,000.00 MITSU 100.04 180,063.67 81.87 79.77 1.40 0.24 DTD 01/27/2021 0.250%01/16/2024 HALST 2021-A A4 44891TAD8 280,000.00 SOCGEN 100.21 280,597.44 620.74 618.58 1.95 0.36 DTD 01/20/2021 0.420%12/16/2024 GMALT 2021-1 A4 36261RADO 515,000.00 RBC 100.11 515,551.00 628.76 623.58 1.98 0.30 DTD 02/24/2021 0.330%02/20/2025 HAROT 2021-1 A3 43813GAC5 530,000.00 3PM_CHA 99.92 529,557.19 (433.11) (433.73) 1.95 0.29 DTD 02/24/2021 0.270%04/21/2025 HART 2021-A A3 44933LAC7 540,000.00 BARCLAY 100.02 540,105.41 162.22 161.01 2.20 0.38 DTD 04/28/2021 0.380%09/15/2025 GMCAR 2021-1 A3 36261LAC5 375,000.00 DEUTSCH 100.20 375,767.74 827.44 822.88 2.01 0.30 DTD 01/20/2021 0.350%10/16/2025 CARMX 2021-1 A3 14316NAC3 120,000.00 MITSU 100.01 120,009.60 33.31 31.65 2.19 0.34 DTD 01/27/2021 0.340%12/15/2025 CARMX 2021-2 A3 143140AC8 810,000.00 MERRILL 100.00 809,970.11 144.66 140.60 2.46 0.52 DTD 04/21/2021 0.520%02/17/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 3,350,000.00 3,351,622.16 2,065.89 2,044.34 2.10 0.37 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 17 Page 45 0 PfM Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt Managed Account Sub-Total 251,055,000.00 255,908,896.54 (784,877.20) 295,493.01 2.56 0.33 Securities Sub-Total $251,055,000.00 $255,908,896.54 ($784,877.20) $295,493.01 2.56 0.33% Accrued Interest $674,818.85 Total Investments $256,583,715.39 FFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 18 Page 46 0 Pfm Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Transaction Type Principal Accrued Realized GIL Realized GIL Sale Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds Interest Total Cost Amort Cost Method 05/06/21 05/07/21 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CBC4 3,900,000.00 (3,837,082.03) (5,130.87) (3,842,212.90) DTD 12/31/2020 0.375%12/31/2025 05/10/21 05/12/21 AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES 023135BW5 1,455,000.00 (1,452,875.70) 0.00 (1,452,875.70) DTD 05/12/2021 0.450%05/12/2024 Transaction Type Sub-Total 5,355,000.00 (5,289,957.73) (5,130.87) (5,295,088.60) 05/02/21 05/02/21 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133EHHH9 4,000,000.00 0.00 38,400.00 38,400.00 DTD 05/02/2017 1.920%05/02/2022 05/03/21 05/03/21 APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES 037833AK6 3,390,000.00 0.00 40,680.00 40,680.00 DTD 05/03/2013 2.400%05/03/2023 05/04/21 05/04/21 MONEY MARKET FUND MONEY0002 0.00 0.00 5.11 5.11 05/06/21 05/06/21 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3137EAEZ8 1,700,000.00 0.00 2,136.81 2,136.81 DTD 11/05/2020 0.250%11/06/2023 05/07/21 05/07/21 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135G06G3 5,890,000.00 0.00 14,315.97 14,315.97 DTD 11/12/2020 0.500%11/07/2025 05/11/21 05/11/21 APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES 037833DV9 1,440,000.00 0.00 5,400.00 5,400.00 DTD 05/11/2020 0.750%05/11/2023 05/15/21 05/15/21 HART 2021-A A3 44933LAC7 540,000.00 0.00 96.90 96.90 DTD 04/28/2021 0.380%09/15/2025 05/15/21 05/15/21 HALST 2021-A A4 44891TAD8 280,000.00 0.00 98.00 98.00 DTD 01/20/2021 0.420%12/16/2024 05/15/21 05/15/21 MBALT 2021-A A3 58770GAC4 180,000.00 0.00 37.50 37.50 DTD 01/27/2021 0.250%01/16/2024 05/15/21 05/15/21 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP 369550BG2 1,600,000.00 0.00 28,000.00 28,000.00 DTD 05/11/2018 3.500%05/15/2025 05/15/21 05/15/21 CARMX 2021-2 A3 143140AC8 810,000.00 0.00 280.80 280.80 DTD 04/21/2021 0.520%02/17/2026 05/15/21 05/15/21 CARMX 2021-1 A3 14316NAC3 120,000.00 0.00 34.00 34.00 DTD 01/27/2021 0.340%12/15/2025 05/15/21 05/15/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828TY6 5,750,000.00 0.00 46,718.75 46,718.75 DTD 11/15/2012 1.625%11/15/2022 05/16/21 05/16/21 GMCAR 2021-1 A3 36261LAC5 375,000.00 0.00 109.38 109.38 DTD 01/20/2021 0.350%10/16/2025 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 19 Page 47 0 PfM Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Transaction Type Principal Accrued Realized GIL Realized GIL Sale Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds Interest Total Cost Amort Cost Method 05/20/21 05/20/21 GMALT 2021-1 A4 36261RADO 515,000.00 0.00 141.63 141.63 DTD 02/24/2021 0.330%02/20/2025 05/21/21 05/21/21 HAROT 2021-1 A3 43813GAC5 530,000.00 0.00 119.25 119.25 DTD 02/24/2021 0.270%04/21/2025 05/24/21 05/24/21 INTL BK RECON&DEVELOP NOTES 459058JM6 1,410,000.00 0.00 1,762.50 1,762.50 DTD 11/24/2020 0.250%11/24/2023 05/24/21 05/24/21 ENERBANK USA 29278TOD5 245,000.00 0.00 90.62 90.62 DTD 07/24/2020 0.450%07/24/2024 05/27/21 05/27/21 FANNIE MAE NOTES 3135G06H1 4,400,000.00 0.00 5,561.11 5,561.11 DTD 11/25/2020 0.250%11/27/2023 05/29/21 05/29/21 WELLS FARGO BANK NA 949763S64 245,000.00 0.00 382.60 382.60 DTD 01/29/2020 1.900%01/30/2023 05/29/21 05/29/21 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK 169894AT9 245,000.00 0.00 100.68 100.68 DTD 07/29/2020 0.500%07/29/2025 05/30/21 05/30/21 MEDALLION BANK UTAH 58404DHO7 245,000.00 0.00 110.75 110.75 DTD 07/30/2020 0.550%07/30/2025 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828M80 8,400,000.00 0.00 84,000.00 84,000.00 DTD 11/30/2015 2.000%11/30/2022 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YV6 5,000,000.00 0.00 37,500.00 37,500.00 DTD 11/30/2019 1.500%11/30/2024 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828XD7 3,000,000.00 0.00 28,125.00 28,125.00 DTD 06/01/2015 1.875%05/31/2022 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828R69 3,500,000.00 0.00 28,437.50 28,437.50 DTD 05/31/2016 1.625%05/31/2023 Transaction Type Sub-Total 53,810,000.00 0.00 362,644.86 362,644.86 05/28/21 05/28/21 THIRD FED SAV&LN CLEVLND 884130BZO 245,000.00 245,000.00 1,493.49 246,493.49 0.00 0.00 DTD 02/28/2018 2.500%05/28/2021 Transaction Type Sub-Total 245,000.00 245,000.00 1,493.49 246,493.49 0.00 0.00 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 20 Page 48 0 Pfm Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000 Transaction Type Principal Accrued Realized GIL Realized GIL Sale Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds Interest Total Cost Amort Cost Method 05/06/21 05/07/21 US TREASURY NOTES 9128286H8 2,910,000.00 2,967,745.31 9,953.70 2,977,699.01 (37,398.05) 2,051.64 FIFO DTD 03/15/2019 2.375%03/15/2022 05/10/21 05/12/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828X70 1,385,000.00 1,454,628.71 903.26 1,455,531.97 (15,418.95) (2,849.01) FIFO DTD 05/01/2017 2.000%04/30/2024 Transaction Type Sub-Total 4,295,000.00 4,422,374.02 10,856.96 4,433,230.98 (52,817.00) (797.37) Managed Account Sub-Total (622,583.71) 369,864.44 (252,719.27) (52,817.00) (797.37) Total Security Transactions ($622,583.71) $369,864.44 ($252,719.27) ($52,817.00) ($797.37) PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340000 Page 21 Page 49 City of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal Agents For the Month Ended 5/31/2021 Trustee and/or Purchase Maturity Cost Bond Issue/Description Paying Agent Account Name Trust Account# Fund Investment Date Date' Yield Value Assessment District No 93-1 Wells Fargo Improvement Fund 16913302 101 Money Market Fund 8/4/1997 N/A 0.01% $ 301,275.17 Masi Plaza Reserve Fund 16913301 841 Money Market Fund 8/4/1997 N/A 0.01% 242,500.00 Redemp.Fund 16913300 841 Money Market Fund 8/4/1997 N/A 0.01% 32.26 $ 543,807.43 CFD 2003-01 Improvement Area 1(2013) Wells Fargo Reserve Fund 46571801 865 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% $ 1,417,034.56 Agency Project 46571807 614 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 77,809.44 Cultural Center Fund 46571808 615 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 191,838.43 Bond Fund 46571800 864 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 1.39 Developer Project 46571806 614 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 98,089.65 Special Tax 46571805 864 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 77.15 $ 1,784,850.62 CFD 2003-01 Improvement Area 2(2013) Wells Fargo Bond Fund 46659800 866 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% $ 0.23 Reserve Fund 46659801 867 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 132,476.94 Special Tax Fund 46659805 866 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 7.23 $ 132,484.40 CFD No 2004-01 Rancho Etiwanda Series Wells Fargo Admin Expense Fund 48436802 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% $ - Bond Fund 48436800 820 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% 2.66 Reserve Fund 48436801 821 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% 1,187,394.96 Special Tax Fund 48436807 820 Money Market Fund N/A 64.73 Project Fund 48436809 617 Money Market Fund N/A 44,979.60 $ 1,232,441.95 2014 Rancho Summit Wells Fargo Cost of Issuance Fund 48709906 Money Market Fund N/A $ - Bond Fund 48709900 858 Money Market Fund N/A 0.52 Reserve Fund 48709901 859 Money Market Fund N/A 260,760.85 Special Tax Fund 48709907 858 Money Market Fund N/A 14.19 Rebate Fund 48709908 Money Market Fund N/A - Redemption Fund 48709903 Money Market Fund N/A Prepayment Fund 48709904 Money Market Fund N/A - $ 260,775.56 2019 Lease Revenue Bonds Wells Fargo Bond Fund 82631600 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A $ 0.56 Interest 82631601 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 0.84 Principal 82631602 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 1.48 Acquisition and Construciton-Series A 82631605 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 7,771,989.37 Acquisition and Construciton-Series B 82631606 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 2,294,168.35 Cost of Issuance 82631607 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A Page 1 Page 50 City of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal Agents For the Month Ended 5/31/2021 Trustee and/or Purchase Maturity Cost Bond Issue/Description Paying Agent Account Name Trust Account# Fund Investment Date Date' Yield Value $ 10,066,160.60 Escrow Acct-Day Creek Villas Sr.Affordable Housing Chase Bank City of Rancho Cucamonga 389918209 396 Money Market Fund 4/24/2019 N/A $ 3,522,992.14 $ 3,522,992.14 CFD No.2000-01 South Etiwanda Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2000-1 AGY 6712140200 7/30/2015 N/A $ - Special Tax Fund 6712140201 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A Bond Fund 6712140202 852 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A Prepayment Fund 6712140203 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140204 853 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 22,752.17 $ 22,752.17 CFD No.2000-02 Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2000-2 AGY 6712140300 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A $ - Special Tax Fund 6712140301 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A $ 0.02 Bond Fund 6712140302 856 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A $ 0.34 Prepayment Fund 6712140303 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A $ - Reserve Fund 6712140304 857 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 208,915.66 $ 208,916.02 CFD No.2001-01 IA 1&2,Series A Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2001-1 AGY 6712140400 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A $ - Special Tax Fund 6712140401 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.07 Bond Fund 6712140402 860 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 1.19 Prepayment Fund 6712140403 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140404 861 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 303,561.59 $ 303,562.85 CFD No.2001-01 IA3,Series B Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2001-1 AGY 6712140500 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A $ - Special Tax Fund 6712140501 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.01 Bond Fund 6712140502 862 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.23 Prepayment Fund 6712140503 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140504 863 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 29,472.86 $ 29,473.10 CFD No.2006-01 Vintner's Grove Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2006-1 AGY 6712140600 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A $ - Special Tax Fund 6712140601 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.04 Bond Fund 6712140602 869 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.68 Prepayment Fund 6712140603 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140604 870 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 130,768.70 $ 130,769.42 Page 2 Page 51 City of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal Agents For the Month Ended 5/31/2021 Trustee and/or Purchase Maturity Cost Bond Issue/Description Paying Agent Account Name Trust Account# Fund Investment Date Date* Yield Value CFD No.2006-02 Amador on Rt.66 Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2006-2 AGY 6712140700 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A $ Special Tax Fund 6712140701 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.02 Bond Fund 6712140702 871 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.51 Prepayment Fund 6712140703 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140704 872 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 79,470.77 $ 79,471.30 18,318,457.56 TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS WITH FISCAL AGENTS $ 18,318,457.56 Note: These investments are money market accounts which have no stated maturity date as they may be liquidated upon demand. Page 3 Page 52 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Portfolio Summary RANCHO May 31, 2021 CUCAMONGA Cash Dividends Closing Portfolio Holdings and Income Market Value PFM Managed Account $ 15,616.96 $ 24,871,269.29 PFM Cash Balance - 128,779.32 State Pool - 57,315,564.55 Passbook/Checking Accounts - 1,346,810.77 Total $ 15,616.96 $ 83,662,423.93 I certify that this report accurately reflects all District pooled investments and is in conformity with the investment policy adopted November 18, 2020. A copy of the investment policy is available in the Finance Department. The Investment Program herein shown provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six months' estimated expenditures. (k��j � 2-�) 2-1 Lori E. Sassoon, Treasurer Date ATTVAMMENT 2 0 PfM Managed Account Summary Statement For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Transaction Summary- Managed Account Cash Transactions Summary-Managed Account Opening Market Value $5,014,903.72 Maturities/Calls 2,015,500.00 Maturities/Calls (2,000,000.00) Sale Proceeds 0.00 Principal Dispositions 0.00 Coupon/Interest/Dividend Income 96,051.37 Principal Acquisitions 21,877,237.64 Principal Payments 0.00 Unsettled Trades 0.00 Security Purchases (21,973,172.05) Change in Current Value (20,872.07) Net Cash Contribution 19,990,400.00 Reconciling Transactions 0.00 Closing Market Value $24,871,269.29 Earnings Reconciliation(Cash Basis)-Managed Account Cash Balance Interest/Dividends/Coupons Received 111,551.37 Closing Cash Balance $128,779.32 Less Purchased Interest Related to Interest/Coupons (95,934.41) Plus Net Realized Gains/Losses 0.00 Total Cash Basis Earninas $15,616.96 Earnings Reconciliation(Accrual Basis) Total Ending Amortized Value of Securities 24,864,482.02 Ending Accrued Interest 22,135.47 Plus Proceeds from Sales 0.00 Plus Proceeds of Maturities/Calls/Principal Payments 2,015,500.00 Plus Coupons/Dividends Received 96,051.37 Less Cost of New Purchases (21,973,172.05) Less Beginning Amortized Value of Securities (4,989,599.12) Less Beginning Accrued Interest (28,257.61) Total Accrual Basis Earnings $7,140.08 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page i Page 54 0 PfM Portfolio Summary and Statistics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Account Summary Sector Allocation Description Par Value Market Value Percent U.S.Treasury Bond/ Note 15,265,000.00 15,587,662.51 62.68 Cert of Deposit- FDIC Supra-National Agency Bond/Note 2,445,000.00 2,406,051.15 9.67 1.97% Federal Agency Bond/ Note 2,500,000.00 2,520,199.50 10.13 Commercial Paper Corporate Note 1,380,000.00 1,484,372.54 5.97 9.58% Commercial Paper 2,385,000.00 2,382,476.68 9.58 Corporate Note 5.97/o Certificate of Deposit-FDIC Insured 490,000.00 490,506.91 1.97 Fed Agy Bond/ Managed Account Sub-Total 24,465,000.00 24,871,269.29 100.00% Note Accrued Interest 22,135.47 10.13% Total Portfolio 24,465,000.00 24,893,404.76 Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00 Supra-National Agency Bond/Note US TSY Bond/Note 9.67% 62.68% Maturity Distribution Characteristics 30.47% Yield to Maturity at Cost 0.55% Yield to Maturity at Market 0.40% 19.52% 19.53% Weighted Average Days to Maturity 997 13.67% 10.77% 6.04% 1 1 1 [ I 1 0.00% 0-6 Months 6-12 Months 1-2 Years 2-3 Years 3-4 Years 4-5 Years Over 5 Years PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 2 Page 55 0 pfm Managed Account Issuer Summary For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Issuer Summary Credit Quality(S&P Ratings) Market Value Issuer of Holdings Percent A- AMAZON.COM INC 374,759.25 1.51 NR 2.23% BANK OF AMERICA CO 182,257.68 0.73 1.97% A-1 CITIGROUP INC 186,601.35 0.75 BBB+ 9.58% 23% ENERBANK USA 245,389.80 0.99 2.AAA FANNIE MAE 1,503,274.50 6.04 9.67% FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS 1,016,925.00 4.09 AA- GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC 183,292.73 0.74 1.51% INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV 2,406,051.15 9.67 JP MORGAN CHASE&CO 372,586.62 1.50 LMA AMERICAS LLC 794,077.80 3.19 MEDALLION BANK UTAH 245,117.11 0.99 MITSUBISHI UFJ FINANCIAL GROUP INC 794,118.35 3.19 MORGAN STANLEY 184,874.91 0.74 AA+ RABOBANK NEDERLAND 794,280.53 3.19 72.81% UNITED STATES TREASURY 15,587,662.51 62.68 Total $24,871,269.29 100.000/0 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 3 Page 56 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value U.S.Treasury Bond / Note US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAX9 2,440,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/25/21 05/26/21 2,440,476.56 0.11 8.33 2,440,471.39 2,440,762.50 DTD 11/30/2020 0.125%11/30/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 9128284S6 2,295,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/25/21 05/26/21 2,414,591.02 0.16 172.44 2,413,614.77 2,414,053.13 DTD 05/31/2018 2.750%05/31/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 9128285P1 2,260,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/25/21 05/26/21 2,410,342.97 0.22 177.53 2,409,360.34 2,410,431.25 DTD 11/30/2018 2.875%11/30/2023 US TREASURY N/B NOTES 91282CCC3 2,450,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/25/21 05/26/21 2,445,310.55 0.31 282.95 2,445,336.48 2,446,937.50 DTD 05/15/2021 0.250%05/15/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YV6 2,345,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/25/21 05/26/21 2,431,563.48 0.44 96.11 2,431,158.98 2,432,204.69 DTD 11/30/2019 1.500%11/30/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZTO 2,475,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/25/21 05/26/21 2,443,579.10 0.57 16.91 2,443,707.70 2,444,835.94 DTD 05/31/2020 0.250%05/31/2025 US TREASURY N/B NOTES 91282CBWO 1,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/25/21 05/27/21 998,085.94 0.79 652.17 998,091.26 998,437.50 DTD 04/30/2021 0.750%04/30/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 15,265,000.00 15,583,949.62 0.33 1,406.44 15,581,740.92 15,587,662.51 Supra-National Agency Bond Note INTL BK RECON&DEVELOP NOTES 459058JS3 2,445,000.00 AAA Aaa 05/25/21 05/26/21 2,422,970.55 0.85 4,900.19 2,423,047.35 2,406,051.15 (CALLABLE) DTD 02/10/2021 0.650%02/10/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 2,445,000.00 2,422,970.55 0.85 4,900.19 2,423,047.35 2,406,051.15 Federal Agency Bond / Note FANNIE MAE NOTES 3136G3H65 1,500,000.00 AA+ Aaa 07/28/16 07/28/16 1,500,000.00 1.40 7,175.00 1,500,000.00 1,503,274.50 DTD 07/28/2016 1.400%07/28/2021 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133EHHH9 1,000,000.00 AA+ Aaa 05/02/17 05/02/17 998,000.00 1.96 1,546.67 999,633.08 1,016,925.00 DTD 05/02/2017 1.920%05/02/2022 Security Type Sub-Total 2,500,000.00 2,498,000.00 1.63 8,721.67 2,499,633.08 2,520,199.50 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 4 Page 57 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Corporate MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES 61746BDZ6 165,000.00 BBB+ Al 05/25/21 05/27/21 185,034.30 1.19 2,202.29 184,975.58 184,874.91 DTD 01/27/2016 3.875%01/27/2026 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP NOTES 38143U8H7 165,000.00 BBB+ A2 05/25/21 05/27/21 183,570.75 1.30 1,650.00 183,514.24 183,292.73 (CALL DTD 02/25/2016 3.750%02/25/2026 JP MORGAN CORP(CALLABLE)NOTES 46625HOW3 340,000.00 A- A2 05/25/21 05/27/21 373,585.20 1.20 1,870.00 373,485.24 372,586.62 DTD 03/23/2016 3.300%04/01/2026 BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES 06051GFX2 165,000.00 A- A2 05/25/21 05/27/21 182,902.50 1.21 673.75 182,852.44 182,257.68 DTD 04/19/2016 3.500%04/19/2026 CITIGROUP CORP NOTES 172967KNO 170,000.00 BBB+ A3 05/25/21 05/27/21 187,113.90 1.29 481.67 187,066.36 186,601.35 DTD 05/02/2016 3.400%05/01/2026 AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES 023135BX3 375,000.00 AA- Al 05/25/21 05/27/21 375,356.25 0.98 197.92 375,355.27 374,759.25 DTD 05/12/2021 1.000%05/12/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 1,380,000.00 1,487,562.90 1.17 7,075.63 1,487,249.13 1,484,372.54 Commercial Paper COOPERATIEVE RABOBANK UA COMM 21687AYV9 795,000.00 A-1 P-1 05/25/21 05/26/21 794,504.45 0.12 0.00 794,520.35 794,280.53 PAPER DTD 04/28/2021 0.000%11/29/2021 LMA AMERICAS LLC COMM PAPER 53944RAR9 795,000.00 A-1 P-1 05/25/21 05/26/21 794,137.87 0.16 0.00 794,159.07 794,077.80 DTD 05/25/2021 0.000%01/25/2022 MUFG BANK LTD/NY COMM PAPER 62479MB31 795,000.00 A-1 P-1 05/25/21 05/26/21 794,112.25 0.15 0.00 794,132.12 794,118.35 DTD 05/25/2021 0.000%02/18/2022 Security Type Sub-Total 2,385,000.00 2,382,754.57 0.14 0.00 2,382,811.54 2,382,476.68 DepositCertificate of ENERBANK USA 29278TOD5 245,000.00 NR NR 07/24/20 07/24/20 245,000.00 0.45 24.16 245,000.00 245,389.80 DTD 07/24/2020 0.450%07/24/2024 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 5 Page 58 0 PfM Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value DepositCertificate of MEDALLION BANK UTAH 58404DHO7 245,000.00 NR NR 07/30/20 07/30/20 245,000.00 0.55 7.38 245,000.00 245,117.11 DTD 07/30/2020 0.550%07/30/2025 Security Type Sub-Total 490,000.00 490,000.00 0.50 31.54 490,000.00 490,506.91 Managed Account Sub-Total 24,465,000.00 24,865,237.64 0.55 22,135.47 24,864,482.02 24,871,269.29 Securities Sub-Total $24,465,000.00 $24,865,237.64 0.55% $22,135.47 $24,864,482.02 $24,871,269.29 Accrued Interest $22,135.47 Total Investments 24,893,404.76 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 6 Page 59 0 PfM Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt U.S.Treasury Bond / Note US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAX9 2,440,000.00 HSBC 100.03 2,440,762.50 285.94 291.11 1.51 0.10 DTD 11/30/2020 0.125%11/30/2022 US TREASURY NOTES 9128284S6 2,295,000.00 HSBC 105.19 2,414,053.13 (537.89) 438.36 1.94 0.15 DTD 05/31/2018 2.750%05/31/2023 US TREASURY NOTES 9128285P1 2,260,000.00 CITIGRP 106.66 2,410,431.25 88.28 1,070.91 2.41 0.20 DTD 11/30/2018 2.875%11/30/2023 US TREASURY N/B NOTES 91282CCC3 2,450,000.00 BARCLAY 99.88 2,446,937.50 1,626.95 1,601.02 2.96 0.29 DTD 05/15/2021 0.250%05/15/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YV6 2,345,000.00 GOLDMAN 103.72 2,432,204.69 641.21 1,045.71 3.41 0.43 DTD 11/30/2019 1.500%11/30/2024 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZTO 2,475,000.00 WELLS_F 98.78 2,444,835.94 1,256.84 1,128.24 3.99 0.56 DTD 05/31/2020 0.250%05/31/2025 US TREASURY N/B NOTES 91282CBWO 1,000,000.00 BNP_PAR 99.84 998,437.50 351.56 346.24 4.84 0.78 DTD 04/30/2021 0.750%04/30/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 15,265,000.00 15,587,662.51 3,712.89 5,921.59 2.84 0.32 Supra-NationalBond Note INTL BK RECON&DEVELOP NOTES 459058JS3 2,445,000.00 KEYBANC 08/10/21 98.41 2,406,051.15 (16,919.40) (16,996.20) 0.21 1.00 (CALLABLE) DTD 02/10/2021 0.650%02/10/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 2,445,000.00 2,406,051.15 (16,919.40) (16,996.20) 0.21 1.00 Federal Agency Bond / Note FANNIE MAE NOTES 3136G3H65 1,500,000.00 NEW ACC 100.22 1,503,274.50 3,274.50 3,274.50 0.17 0.04 DTD 07/28/2016 1.400%07/28/2021 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133EHHH9 1,000,000.00 NEW ACC 101.69 1,016,925.00 18,925.00 17,291.92 0.92 0.08 DTD 05/02/2017 1.920%05/02/2022 Security Type Sub-Total 2,500,000.00 2,520,199.50 22,199.50 20,566.42 0.47 0.06 Corporate PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 7 Page 60 0 PfM Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt Corporate MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES 61746BDZ6 165,000.00 BNP_PAR 112.05 184,874.91 (159.39) (100.67) 4.29 1.21 DTD 01/27/2016 3.875%01/27/2026 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP NOTES 38143U8H7 165,000.00 JPM_CHA 11/25/25 111.09 183,292.73 (278.02) (221.51) 4.16 1.33 (CALL DTD 02/25/2016 3.750%02/25/2026 JP MORGAN CORP(CALLABLE)NOTES 46625HOW3 340,000.00 JSEB 01/01/26 109.58 372,586.62 (998.58) (898.62) 4.29 1.25 DTD 03/23/2016 3.300%04/01/2026 BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES 06051GFX2 165,000.00 FIFTH_3 110.46 182,257.68 (644.82) (594.76) 4.54 1.28 DTD 04/19/2016 3.500%04/19/2026 CITIGROUP CORP NOTES 172967KNO 170,000.00 JPM_CHA 109.77 186,601.35 (512.55) (465.01) 4.58 1.34 DTD 05/02/2016 3.400%05/01/2026 AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES 023135BX3 375,000.00 UBS 99.94 374,759.25 (597.00) (596.02) 4.84 1.01 DTD 05/12/2021 1.000%05/12/2026 Security Type Sub-Total 1,380,000.00 1,484,372.54 (3,190.36) (2,876.59) 4.48 1.21 Commercial Paper COOPERATIEVE RABOBANK UA COMM 21687AYV9 795,000.00 RBC 99.91 794,280.53 (223.92) (239.82) 0.51 0.18 PAPER DTD 04/28/2021 0.000%11/29/2021 LMA AMERICAS LLC COMM PAPER 53944RAR9 795,000.00 JPM_CHA 99.88 794,077.80 (60.07) (81.27) 0.67 0.17 DTD 05/25/2021 0.000%01/25/2022 MUFG BANK LTD/NY COMM PAPER 62479MBJ1 795,000.00 MITSU 99.89 794,118.35 6.10 (13.77) 0.74 0.15 DTD 05/25/2021 0.000%02/18/2022 Security Type Sub-Total 2,385,000.00 2,382,476.68 (277.89) (334.86) 0.64 0.17 Certificate of Deposit-FDIC Insured ENERBANK USA 29278TOD5 245,000.00 NEW ACC 100.16 245,389.80 389.80 389.80 3.13 0.40 DTD 07/24/2020 0.450%07/24/2024 MEDALLION BANK UTAH 58404DHO7 245,000.00 NEW ACC 100.05 245,117.11 117.11 117.11 4.12 0.54 DTD 07/30/2020 0.550%07/30/2025 Security Type Sub-Total 490,000.00 490,506.91 506.91 506.91 3.63 0.47 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 8 Page 61 0 PfM Managed Account Fair Market Value &Analytics For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost Duration at Mkt Managed Account Sub-Total 24,465,000.00 24,871,269.29 6,031.65 6,787.27 2.25 0.40 Securities Sub-Total $24,465,000.00 $24,871,269.29 $6,031.65 $6,787.27 2.25 0.40% Accrued Interest $22,135.47 Total Investments $24,893,404.76 PFIV Asset Management LE_C Account 73340100 Page 9 Page 62 0 PfM Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Transaction Type Principal Accrued Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds Interest Total Cost Amort Cost Method 05/25/21 05/26/21 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAX9 2,440,000.00 (2,440,476.56) (1,483.10) (2,441,959.66) DTD 11/30/2020 0.125%11/30/2022 05/25/21 05/26/21 COOPERATIEVE RABOBANK UA COMM 21687AYV9 795,000.00 (794,504.45) 0.00 (794,504.45) PAPER DTD 04/28/2021 0.000%11/29/2021 05/25/21 05/26/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YV6 2,345,000.00 (2,431,563.48) (17,104.33) (2,448,667.81) DTD 11/30/2019 1.500%11/30/2024 05/25/21 05/26/21 US TREASURY NOTES 9128284S6 2,295,000.00 (2,414,591.02) (30,689.32) (2,445,280.34) DTD 05/31/2018 2.750%05/31/2023 05/25/21 05/26/21 US TREASURY NOTES 9128285PI 2,260,000.00 (2,410,342.97) (31,594.99) (2,441,937.96) DTD 11/30/2018 2.875%11/30/2023 05/25/21 05/26/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES 91282CCC3 2,450,000.00 (2,445,310.55) (183.08) (2,445,493.63) DTD 05/15/2021 0.250%05/15/2024 05/25/21 05/26/21 MUFG BANK LTD/NY COMM PAPER 62479MBJ1 795,000.00 (794,112.25) 0.00 (794,112.25) DTD 05/25/2021 0.000%02/18/2022 05/25/21 05/26/21 LMA AMERICAS LLC COMM PAPER 53944RAR9 795,000.00 (794,137.87) 0.00 (794,137.87) DTD 05/25/2021 0.000%01/25/2022 05/25/21 05/26/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZTO 2,475,000.00 (2,443,579.10) (3,008.76) (2,446,587.86) DTD 05/31/2020 0.250%05/31/2025 05/25/21 05/26/21 INTL BK RECON&DEVELOP NOTES 459058JS3 2,445,000.00 (2,422,970.55) (4,679.46) (2,427,650.01) (CALLABLE) DTD 02/10/2021 0.650%02/10/2026 05/25/21 05/27/21 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP 38143U8H7 165,000.00 (183,570.75) (1,581.25) (185,152.00) NOTES(CALL DTD 02/25/2016 3.750%02/25/2026 05/25/21 05/27/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES 91282CBWO 1,000,000.00 (998,085.94) (550.27) (998,636.21) DTD 04/30/2021 0.750%04/30/2026 05/25/21 05/27/21 JP MORGAN CORP(CALLABLE)NOTES 46625HOW3 340,000.00 (373,585.20) (1,745.33) (375,330.53) DTD 03/23/2016 3.300%04/01/2026 05/25/21 05/27/21 MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES 61746BDZ6 165,000.00 (185,034.30) (2,131.25) (187,165.55) DTD 01/27/2016 3.875%01/27/2026 05/25/21 05/27/21 AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES 023135BX3 375,000.00 (375,356.25) (156.25) (375,512.50) DTD 05/12/2021 1.000%05/12/2026 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 10 Page 63 0 PfM Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Transaction Type Principal Accrued Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds Interest Total Cost Amort Cost Method 05/25/21 05/27/21 BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES 06051GFX2 165,000.00 (182,902.50) (609.58) (183,512.08) DTD 04/19/2016 3.500%04/19/2026 05/25/21 05/27/21 CITIGROUP CORP NOTES 172967KNO 170,000.00 (187,113.90) (417.44) (187,531.34) DTD 05/02/2016 3.400%05/01/2026 Transaction Type Sub-Total 21,475,000.00 (21,877,237.64) (95,934.41) (21,973,172.05) 05/02/21 05/02/21 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES 3133EHHH9 1,000,000.00 0.00 9,600.00 9,600.00 DTD 05/02/2017 1.920%05/02/2022 05/24/21 05/24/21 ENERBANK USA 29278TOD5 245,000.00 0.00 90.62 90.62 DTD 07/24/2020 0.450%07/24/2024 05/30/21 05/30/21 MEDALLION BANK UTAH 58404DHO7 245,000.00 0.00 110.75 110.75 DTD 07/30/2020 0.550%07/30/2025 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 9128285PI 2,260,000.00 0.00 32,487.50 32,487.50 DTD 11/30/2018 2.875%11/30/2023 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828ZTO 2,475,000.00 0.00 3,093.75 3,093.75 DTD 05/31/2020 0.250%05/31/2025 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 912828YV6 2,345,000.00 0.00 17,587.50 17,587.50 DTD 11/30/2019 1.500%11/30/2024 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 91282CAX9 2,440,000.00 0.00 1,525.00 1,525.00 DTD 11/30/2020 0.125%11/30/2022 05/31/21 05/31/21 US TREASURY NOTES 9128284S6 2,295,000.00 0.00 31,556.25 31,556.25 DTD 05/31/2018 2.750%05/31/2023 Transaction Type Sub-Total 13,305,000.00 0.00 96,051.37 96,051.37 05/27/21 05/27/21 FREDDIE MAC NOTES 3134G9PV3 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 15,500.00 2,015,500.00 0.00 0.00 DTD 05/27/2016 1.550%05/27/2021 Transaction Type Sub-Total 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 15,500.00 2,015,500.00 0.00 0.00 Managed Account Sub-Total (19,877,237.64) 15,616.96 (19,861,620.68) 0.00 0.00 PFM Asset Management LLC Account 73340100 Page 11 Page 64 0 pfm Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending May 31, 2021 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100 Total Security Transactions ($19,877,237.64) $15,616.96 ($19,861,620.68) $0.00 $0.00 PFM Asset Management LLO Account 73340100 Page 12 Page 65 ti HONOR a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA m DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council President and Members of the Boards of Directors FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: John R. Gillison, City Manager SUBJECT: Consideration of an Amended and Restated Professional Services Agreement with Richards, Watson & Gershon, a Professional Corporation, for Legal Services. (CITY/FIRE/ PUBLIC FINANCE) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Board of Directors, approve the Amended and Restated Professional Services Agreement, dated July 1, 2021, with Richards, Watson & Gershon, a Professional Corporation, for ongoing legal services. BACKGROUND: The City of Rancho Cucamonga has contracted for legal services with our current City Attorney, James Markman and his affiliate legal firms, since the mid 1980's. Each of the City's three entities, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and Rancho Cucamonga Successor Agency, have individual agreements with Mr. Markman's current firm, namely Richards, Watson & Gershon. These agreements outline hourly rate structures, legal retainers, litigation rates and specialized legal services. Amendments were executed in 2006 and then again in 2017 as it related to billing rates. The current amendment addresses the following areas: 1)Appointment of City Attorney; 2) Scope of Work— Regular; 3) Scope of Work—Special; 4) Coordination and Organization; 5) billing rates. With respect to the Regular Scope of Work and Special Services (Sections 2 and 3), the agreement is substantially the same as the existing agreements and includes support of City Council, Planning Commission, special meetings, advising all elected and appointed individuals, and other related matters pertaining to City business. The principal changes are in Sections 1, 4 and 5. Mr. Markman will transition to Senior Counsel as of January 1, 2022 but remain available to the City as needed. On that same date, Mr. Nicholas Ghirelli will assume the title and duties of City Attorney. In the latter capacity, Mr. Ghirelli will process, direct and coordinate all necessary legal services for the City. The City may, upon request, replace Mr. Ghirelli with another attorney at Richards, Watson & Gershon if so needed. Finally, the amended agreement includes the following billing rate changes: 1. City Attorney/Senior Counsel $237/hr ($7/hr increase) 2. Shareholders/Senior Attorneys $227/hr($7/hr increase) Page 66 3. Associates $207/hr ($7/hr increase) 4. Paralegals $172/hr($7/hr increase) 5. Law Clerks $132/hr ($7/hr increase) Other specialized and lesser used services such as electrical utility work, public finance work and litigation services are called out in the attached contract amendment. ANALYSIS: If approved, the amendments would become effective January 1, 2022. The cost impact has been incorporated into the Preliminary Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget. Continuing with the current City Attorney as Senior Counsel, and remaining with Richards, Watson & Gershon contributes to improved organizational stability. Mr. Ghirelli, in his role as the current Planning Commission Attorney, has shown his commitment to ensuring and advancing the quality of life for all through inclusive decision making, including actively seeking and respectfully considering all public input and working together cooperatively and respectfully with staff, Council and all stakeholders. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact to the City is minimal. A modest$7/hr increase over the last 4 years is less than a 5% total increase. The cost impact has been incorporated into the next budget cycle for both the Fire District and the City of Rancho Cucamonga COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Ensuring organizational stability helps build on our success as a world class community while ensuring continuous improvement, and inclusive decision making, that advance the quality of life for all. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Amended and Restated Agreement For Legal Services City Attachment 2 - Amended and Restated Agreement for Legal Services Redevelopment Agency Attachment 3 - Eighth Amendment to Agreement for Legal Services RCFD Page 2 Page 67 AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES CITY ATTORNEY THIS AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 111 day of July, 2021, by and between RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON, A Professional Corporation, with a place of business at 1 Civic Center Circle, Brea, California, hereinafter referred to as "Attorneys," and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "City." WHEREAS, the City desires to continue to contract with Attorneys to provide legal services to City; and WHEREAS, Attorneys herein selected are in the general practice of law with extensive municipal experience, including that of City's legal counsel for thirty-six years and are fully able to carry out the duties involved herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed as follows: 1. Appointment of City Attorney. JAMES L. MARKMAN shall continue to serve as City Attorney of City through and including December 31, 2021. Commencing on January 1, 2022, NICHOLAS R. GHIRELLI shall serve as City Attorney of City and JAMES L. MARKMAN shall serve as Senior Counsel to City and hold himself available to consult with City's Council, City's staff and the City Attorney and provide advice sought upon request. The City Attorney, the Senior Attorney and all other attorneys providing services hereunder shall, at all times hereunder and at their sole cost and expense, be fully qualified and licensed to practice law in the State of California and before all appropriate Federal courts and other bodies and tribunals. At any time during the term hereof, at the request of the City Council, and upon reasonable notice, Attorneys shall replace any person who serves as City Attorney with another shareholder of Attorneys' law firm acceptable to the City Council. 11231.0001\2521772v.2 1 Page 68 2. Scope of Work. Attorneys agree to perform all necessary legal services ordinarily performed by the City Attorney, including, but not limited to, the following legal services which shall be designated "Basic Services" hereunder, and shall include provision of such other personnel as shall be necessary to perform all services under this Agreement, as follows: A. Attend all regularly scheduled City Council meetings and Planning Commission meetings. B. Attend occasional meetings at City Hall as required by the City Council, Mayor or City. C. Manager and be available for staff meetings at City Hall during afternoons prior to City Council meetings. D. Advise City Council, appointed Commissions and Boards, City staff, and other City officials on all legal matters pertaining to City business. E. Prepare, review and approve as to form, contracts, agreements, resolutions, ordinances and all other standard City documents. F. Prepare such written and oral legal opinions as shall, from time to time, be requested by the City. G. Perform such other routine legal services as are required from time to time by the City Council, Mayor, or City Manager. 3. Scope of Work- Special Services. In addition to the Basic Services set forth in paragraph 2, the City Attorney shall provide legal services under this paragraph 3 characterized as Special Services. These services shall be comprised of such special legal matters, not included in paragraph 2, that are of a more than routine and of a time-consuming nature relating to, among other things, administrative hearings, preparation and handling of lawsuits, court appearances, code enforcement, public finance services, and special legal projects. It is understood and agreed that no substantial time for Special Projects shall be undertaken by City Attorney without prior approval of the City Manager. 11231.0001\2521772v.2 2 Page 69 4. Coordination and Organization. JAMES L. MARKMAN shall be City Attorney and shareholder-in-charge under this Agreement through and including December 31, 2021 and, thereafter, NICHOLAS R. GHIRELLI shall be shareholder-in-charge. The shareholder-in-charge will process, coordinate and direct as necessary all legal services hereunder in order to maximize the timeliness and usefulness of the delivery of such services. The shareholder-in-charge shall be available, at all reasonable times, to the Mayor and City Council, the City Manager and persons designated by him, in relationship to all legal services to be furnished by City Attorney hereunder. The shareholder- in-charge shall also direct and coordinate all internal activities that output from the City Attorney to City in a competent and timely manner. 5. Payment. The following fee schedule shall apply to services rendered by Attorneys from July 1, 2021 through and including June 30, 2022. From July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B hereto shall apply to services rendered by Attorneys. From July 1, 2023, the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit C hereto shall apply to services rendered by Attorneys until such time as the fee schedule is further amended. A. The first sixty (60) hours of work of Basic Services performed hereunder, regardless of which firm attorney performs those services, shall be compensated at the rate of $212.00 per hour. The first sixty (60) hours each month shall be calculated by adding together all time expended by attorneys in providing Basic Services to City, on a chronological basis. B. Attorneys shall be compensated for all other work, including all Special Services as follows: (i) At the rate of$237.00 per hour for work performed by JAMES L. MARKMAN and NICHOLAS GHIRELLI (in his capacity as City Attorney from January 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022); (ii) At the rate of$227.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior attorneys through June, 2022; (iii) At the rate of$207.00 per hour for other firm associates through June, 2022; 11231.0001\2521772v.2 3 Page 70 (iv) At the rate of$172.00 per hour for firm paralegals; (v) At the rate of$132.00 per hour for firm clerks; (vi) For electrical utility work $267.00 per hour for firm shareholders and senior associates and $207.00 per hour for other firm associates; (vii) For public finance work, Attorneys shall be compensated on the basis indicated in Exhibit A hereto; (viii) Litigation services, other than tort defense or eminent domain, will be charged at a discount of 20%from Attorneys' then current posted hourly rates subject to approval of the City Manager on a case-by-case basis; (ix) Attorneys shall be compensated at their current posted hourly rates for any work for which City is entitled to reimbursement from a third party such as an applicant to City for a land use entitlement or a party who has contracted with City to reimburse City's legal fees; and, C. Attorneys shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incident to services performed in addition to other payments for herein, such out-of-pocket expenses to include long-distance telephone charges, extraordinary reproduction costs and non-automobile travel expenses in the event Attorneys are required to travel other than in the Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino County areas on behalf of City. 6. Monthly Statements. It is understood that City Attorney shall submit fully itemized statements of all payments due hereunder on a monthly basis. 7. Termination. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, the City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement upon ninety (90) days' written notice from City Council to the City Attorney and all further obligations to pay Attorneys for services rendered hereunder shall thereupon cease, except that City shall be obliged to pay for all fees, costs and expenditures lawfully incurred by Attorneys prior to the effective date of such termination. It is further agreed that Attorneys reserve the right to terminate this Agreement by giving ninety (90) days' written notice to City. In the event of termination of this Agreement by either party, Attorneys 11231.0001\2521772v.2 4 Page 71 will cooperate with the City in transferring the files and assignments to the City Clerk for file, in the interim of hiring another City Attorney and will be compensated at the hourly rates set forth in paragraph 5 of this Agreement, should he be called upon to perform any services after the effective date of termination, including the transfer of files and assignments. 8. Assignment of Agreement. Attorneys shall not, under any circumstances, assign or transfer their interest, duties, responsibilities or obligations under this Agreement without the consent of City's City Council and, if any such transfer or assignment is made or attempted, all liability and responsibility of City hereunder shall cease. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be duly executed with all the formalities required by law on the respective dates set forth opposite their signatures. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California Dated: By: Mayor RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON, A Professional Corporation of the State of California Dated: By: James L. Markman ATTEST: City Clerk 11231.0001\2521772v.2 5 Page 72 EXHIBIT A CHARGES FOR PUBLIC FINANCE SERVICES Bond Issuance Services will be defined as bond counsel, disclosure counsel and/or issuer counsel services in connection with the issuance of bonds or other obligations by the City, or any entity created, formed or controlled by the City. Bond Issuance Services will be billed to, and compensated by, the City as follows: 1. Attorneys shall charge a composite hourly rate for all attorneys of$395 per hour for any of these services. The maximum total fee charged for an issuance shall not exceed an amount that the City Manager deems fair and reasonable. 2. Attorneys' costs and expenses shall be paid in accordance with this Exhibit. 3. In the event the proceedings for issuance of the bonds are terminated before closing, Attorneys would expect to be paid for its services to the date of abandonment at the hourly rate set forth above, not to exceed an amount that the City Manager deems fair and reasonable. 4. If providing Bond Issuance Services involves the formation of a joint powers authority or another entity controlled by the City, Attorneys shall provide such Bond Issuance Services (including formation of the entity) on the same compensation terms as specified in this Exhibit. 5. Supplemental bond counsel fees for unanticipated circumstances: a. As to lease revenue bonds, in some instances it may be necessary to call upon the real estate expertise at our firm to resolve unanticipated issues that arise over questions of title, encumbrances, or other matters relating to the leased assets. In those instances, Attorneys will bill additional time devoted to such unanticipated issues at a composite rate of$295 per hour. Attorneys will notify the City at the earliest point possible if we believe that the work rises to the level of additional time subject to this paragraph. The total fee for this additional work will not exceed an amount which the City Manager deems fair and reasonable and would be supplemental to the fee amounts due under subsection 1 above. b. As to the refunding of existing tax-exempt bonds, in some instances our review of the timing or purposes of expenditures of proceeds of the refunded bonds, or the use of property financed or refinanced with proceeds of the refunded bonds, could require unanticipated supplemental analysis. In those instances, Attorneys will bill additional time at a composite rate of$295 per hour. Attorneys will notify the City at the earliest point possible if we believe that the work rises to the level 11231.0001\2521772v.2 6 Page 73 of supplemental analysis subject to this paragraph. The total fee for this supplemental analysis will not exceed an amount which the City Manager deems fair and reasonable and would be supplemental to the fee amounts due under subsection 1 above. 11231.0001\2521772v.2 7 Page 74 EXHIBIT B FEE SCHEDULE -JULY 1, 2022 -JUNE 30, 2023 The following fee schedule shall apply to services rendered by Attorneys from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. From July 1, 2023, the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit C hereto shall apply to services rendered by Attorneys. A. The first sixty (60) hours of work of Basic Services performed hereunder, regardless of which firm attorney performs those services, shall be compensated at the rate of $219.00 per hour. The first sixty (60) hours each month shall be calculated by adding together all time expended by attorneys in providing Basic Services to City, on a chronological basis. B. Attorneys shall be compensated for all other work, including all Special Services, as follows: (i) At the rate of$244.00 per hour for work performed by JAMES L. MARKMAN and NICHOLAS GHIRELLI; (ii) At the rate of$234.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior attorneys; (iii) At the rate of$221.00 per hour for other firm associates; (iv) At the rate of$179.00 per hour for firm paralegals; (v) At the rate of$139.00 per hour for firm clerks; (vi) For electrical utility work $274.00 per hour for firm shareholders and senior associates and $214.00 per hour for other firm associates; (vii) For public finance work, Attorneys shall be compensated on the basis indicated in Exhibit A hereto; (viii) Litigation services, other than tort defense or eminent domain, will be charged at a discount of 20%from Attorneys' then current posted hourly rates subject to approval of the City Manager on a case-by-case basis; (ix) Attorneys shall be compensated at their current posted hourly rates for any work for which City is entitled to reimbursement from a third party such as an applicant to City for a land use entitlement or a party who has contracted with City to reimburse City's legal fees; and, 11231.0001\2521772v.2 g Page 75 C. Attorneys shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incident to services performed in addition to other payments for herein, such out-of-pocket expenses to include long-distance telephone charges, extraordinary reproduction costs and non-automobile travel expenses in the event Attorneys are required to travel other than in the Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino County areas on behalf of City. 11231.0001\2521772v.2 9 Page 76 EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE COMMENCING ON JULY 1, 2023 The following fee schedule shall apply to services rendered by Attorneys commencing on July 1, 2023 until otherwise amended. A. The first sixty (60) hours of work of basic services performed hereunder, regardless of which firm attorney performs those services, shall be compensated at the rate of $226.00 per hour. The first sixty (60) hours each month shall be calculated by adding together all time expended by attorneys in providing basic services to City, on a chronological basis. B. Attorneys shall be compensated for all other work as follows: (i) At the rate of$251.00 per hour for work performed by JAMES L. MARKMAN and NICHOLAS GHIRELLI; (ii) At the rate of$241.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior attorneys; (iii) At the rate of$228.00 per hour for other firm associates; (iv) At the rate of$186.00 per hour for firm paralegals; (v) At the rate of$146.00 per hour for firm clerks; (vi) For electrical utility work $281.00 per hour for firm shareholders and senior associates and $221.00 per hour for other firm associates; (vii) For public finance work, Attorneys shall be compensated on the basis indicated in Exhibit A hereto; (viii) Litigation services, other than tort defense or eminent domain, will be charged at a discount of 20% from Attorneys' then current posted hourly rates subject to approval of the City Manager on a case-by-case basis; (ix) Attorneys shall be compensated at their current posted hourly rates for any work for which City is entitled to reimbursement from a third party such as an applicant to City for a land use entitlement or a party who has contracted with City to reimburse City's legal fees; and, 11231.0001\2521772v.2 10 Page 77 C. Attorneys shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incident to services performed in addition to other payments for herein, such out-of-pocket expenses to include long-distance telephone charges, extraordinary reproduction costs and non-automobile travel expenses in the event Attorneys are required to travel other than in the Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino County areas on behalf of City. 11231.0001\2521772v.2 11 Page 78 AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES THIS AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("Agency' hereinafter) and RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON, A Professional Corporation ("Attorneys" hereinafter). It is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. Term. The operative date of this Amended and Restated Agreement shall be July 1, 2021, and the Agreement shall continue in effect unless and until terminated as provided herein. 2. Attorneys' Services. Attorneys shall furnish to Agency basic services as counsel to the Agency and Agency's staff, including attendance at Agency meetings and services related to specific projects, such as the review, negotiation and preparation of redevelopment plans and plan amendments, owner participation agreements and disposition and development agreements and litigation. Excluded from services to be provided hereunder are bond work requiring services of bond counsel, other services where Agency decides it appropriate to retain special counsel and services wherein Attorneys have, in their judgment or that of Agency, a conflict of interest. Attorneys are independent contractors and not employees of Agency. James L. Markman shall continue to be designated as "General Counsel" to Agency and shall have responsibility for providing services hereunder through December 31, 2021. NICHOLAS R. GHIRELLI shall be designated General Counsel from January 1, 2022 forward and JAMES L. MARKMAN shall then be designated Senior Counsel and shall hold himself available to consult with and advise Agency officials and General Counsel upon request. Attorneys may designate such employed lawyers as deemed necessary as "Deputy General Counsel." 3. Fees and Expenses. A. For services rendered through June 30, 2022 Attorneys shall be compensated for all work performed as follows: 11244.0001\2521819v.1 1 Page 79 (i) At the rate of$242.00 per hour for work performed by James L. Markman and for work performed by Nicholas R. Ghirelli from January 1, 2022; (ii) At the rate of$232.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior associates and contract attorneys; (iii) At the rate of$212.00 per hour for work performed by other firm associates; (iv) At the rate of$172.00 per hour for work performed by firm paralegals; (v) At the rate of$132.00 per hour for work performed by firm clerks; (vi) For public finance work, at rates specified in Exhibit A hereto; and (vii) Litigation services, other than tort defense or eminent domain, will be charged at a discount of 20%from Attorneys' then currently posted hourly rates subject to approval by Agency's Executive Director on a case-by-case basis. B. Attorneys shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incident to services performed in addition to other payments provided for herein, such out-of- pocket expenses to include long-distance telephone charges, extraordinary reproduction costs and non-automobile travel expenses in the event Attorneys are required to travel other than in the San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles and Orange County areas on behalf of Agency. C. From July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B hereto shall apply to services rendered by Attorneys. From July 1, 2023, the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit C hereto shall apply to services rendered by Attorneys until such time as the fee schedule is further amended. 11244.0001\2521819v.1 2 Page 80 4. Statements and Payments. Attorneys shall present a statement for services rendered and expenses incurred on a monthly basis and Agency shall pay the amount on said statement upon presentation or within a reasonable time. Each such statement shall indicate the amount chargeable to each project area and item of litigation and time allocated thereto. 5. Assignment of Agreement. Attorneys shall not, under any circumstances, assign or transfer their interest, duties, responsibilities or obligations under this Agreement without the consent of Agency's Board of Directors and, if any such transfer or assignment is made or attempted, all liability and responsibility of Agency hereunder shall cease. 6. Termination. This Agreement, and attorney services hereunder, may be terminated upon ninety (90) days' written notice provided by either party to the other party hereto. Upon any such termination, Attorneys will supply orderly transition services at the prevailing hourly rates for office personnel. WHEREFORE, the parties have executed this Amended and Restated Agreement as of the dates set forth below opposite the name of each such party. Dated: RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY By: Chairman By: Executive Director Dated: RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON, A Professional Corporation 11244.0001\2521819v.1 3 Page 81 By: James L. Markman 11244.0001\2521819v.1 4 Page 82 EXHIBIT A CHARGES FOR PUBLIC FINANCE SERVICES Bond Issuance Services will be defined as bond counsel, disclosure counsel and/or issuer counsel services in connection with the issuance of bonds or other obligations by the City, or any entity created, formed or controlled by the City. Bond Issuance Services will be billed to, and compensated by, the City as follows: 1. Attorneys shall charge a composite hourly rate for all attorneys of$395 per hour for any of these services. The maximum total fee charged for an issuance shall not exceed an amount that the City Manager deems fair and reasonable. 2. Attorneys' costs and expenses shall be paid in accordance with this Exhibit. 3. In the event the proceedings for issuance of the bonds are terminated before closing, Attorneys would expect to be paid for its services to the date of abandonment at the hourly rate set forth above, not to exceed an amount that the City Manager deems fair and reasonable. 4. If providing Bond Issuance Services involves the formation of a joint powers authority or another entity controlled by the City, Attorneys shall provide such Bond Issuance Services (including formation of the entity) on the same compensation terms as specified in this Exhibit. 5. Supplemental bond counsel fees for unanticipated circumstances: a. As to lease revenue bonds, in some instances it may be necessary to call upon the real estate expertise at our firm to resolve unanticipated issues that arise over questions of title, encumbrances, or other matters relating to the leased assets. In those instances, Attorneys will bill additional time devoted to such unanticipated issues at a composite rate of$295 per hour. Attorneys will notify the City at the earliest point possible if we believe that the work rises to the level of additional time subject to this paragraph. The total fee for this additional work will not exceed an amount which the City Manager deems fair and reasonable and would be supplemental to the fee amounts due under subsection 1 above. b. As to the refunding of existing tax-exempt bonds, in some instances our review of the timing or purposes of expenditures of proceeds of the refunded bonds, or the use of property financed 11244.0001\2521819v.1 S Page 83 or refinanced with proceeds of the refunded bonds, could require unanticipated supplemental analysis. In those instances, Attorneys will bill additional time at a composite rate of$295 per hour. Attorneys will notify the City at the earliest point possible if we believe that the work rises to the level of supplemental analysis subject to this paragraph. The total fee for this supplemental analysis will not exceed an amount which the City Manager deems fair and reasonable and would be supplemental to the fee amounts due under subsection 1 above. 11244.0001\2521819v.1 6 Page 84 EXHIBIT B FEE SCHEDULE -JULY 1, 2022 -JUNE 30, 2023 A. For services rendered from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023 Attorneys shall be compensated for all work performed as follows: (i) At the rate of$249.00 per hour for work performed by James L. Markman and for work performed by Nicholas R. Ghirelli; (ii) At the rate of$239.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior associates and contract attorneys; (iii) At the rate of$219.00 per hour for work performed by other firm associates; (iv) At the rate of$179.00 per hour for work performed by firm paralegals; (v) At the rate of$139.00 per hour for work performed by firm clerks; (vi) For public finance work, at rates specified in Exhibit A hereto; and (vii) Litigation services, other than tort defense or eminent domain, will be charged at a discount of 20%from Attorneys' then currently posted hourly rates subject to approval by Agency's Executive Director on a case-by-case basis. B. Attorneys shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incident to services performed in addition to other payments provided for herein, such out-of- pocket expenses to include long-distance telephone charges, extraordinary reproduction costs and non-automobile travel expenses in the event Attorneys are required to travel other than in the San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles and Orange County areas on behalf of Agency. 11244.0001\2521819v.1 7 Page 85 EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE COMMENCING ON JULY 1, 2023 A. For services commencing on July 1, 2023 Attorneys shall be compensated for all work performed as follows: (i) At the rate of$256.00 per hour for work performed by James L. Markman and for work performed by Nicholas R. Ghirelli; (ii) At the rate of$246.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior associates and contract attorneys; (iii) At the rate of$226.00 per hour for work performed by other firm associates; (iv) At the rate of$186.00 per hour for work performed by firm paralegals; (v) At the rate of$146.00 per hour for work performed by firm clerks; (vi) For public finance work, at rates specified in Exhibit A hereto; and (vii) Litigation services, other than tort defense or eminent domain, will be charged at a discount of 20%from Attorneys' then currently posted hourly rates subject to approval by Agency's Executive Director on a case-by-case basis. B. Attorneys shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incident to services performed in addition to other payments provided for herein, such out-of- pocket expenses to include long-distance telephone charges, extraordinary reproduction costs and non-automobile travel expenses in the event Attorneys are required to travel other than in the San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles and Orange County areas on behalf of Agency. 11244.0001\2521819v.1 g Page 86 EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES This Eighth Amendment is made and entered into by and between the RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT("District" hereinafter) and RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON, A Professional Corporation ("Attorneys" hereinafter). Recitals (i) During 2017 the District and Attorneys entered into a Seventh Amendment to an Agreement entitled "Agreement for Professional Legal Services" ("the Agreement" hereinafter). (ii) It is the purpose of this Eighth Amendment to modify rates for services charged by Attorneys to District during specified time periods and to designate certain firm attorneys as General Counsel and Senior Counsel to District. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The third sentence of Paragraph 1 of the Agreement hereby is modified to read as follows: "JAMES L. MARKMAN shall continue to be designated as "General Counsel" and shall have primary responsibility for providing services hereunder through December 31, 2021 and from January 1, 2022, NICHOLAS R. GHIRELLI shall be designated as "General Counsel" and JAMES L. MARKMAN shall be designated as "Senior Counsel" and shall make himself available to consult with District officials and its General Counsel as requested." 2. Paragraph B of Section 3 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: "B. Attorneys shall be compensated for all work performed from July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022 in accordance with the following rates: "(i) At the rate of$237.00 per hour for work performed by James L. Markman and by Nicholas R. Ghirelli from January 1, 2022; "(ii) At the rate of$227.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior associates and contract attorneys; "(iii) At the rate of$207.00 per hour for work performed by other firm associates; 11231-0001\2522130v1.doc 1 Page 87 "(iv) At the rate of$172.00 per hour for work performed by firm paralegals; "(v) At the rate of$132.00 per hour for work performed by firm clerks; "(vi) For services rendered on Litigation, other than tort defense or eminent domain, at Attorneys' then current hourly rates discounted by 20%, subject to the approval of the Fire Chief on a case-by-case basis. The rates for services rendered from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023 are stated on Exhibit A hereto and the rates for services commencing on July 1, 2023 and continuing until later amended by a written amendment hereto are stated on Exhibit B hereto." 3. Other than is expressly amended hereby, the Agreement in each and every term and provision stated therein shall remain in full force and effect. WHEREFORE, the parties have executed this Eighth Amendment as of the dates set forth below opposite the name of each such party. RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON DISTRICT A Professional Corporation By: By: Chairman Dated: Dated: ATTEST: By: Secretary 11231-0001\2522130v1.doc 2 Page 88 EXHIBIT A FEE SCHEDULE -JULY 1, 2022 -JUNE 30, 2023 Attorneys shall be compensated for all work performed from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023 in accordance with the following rates: (i) At the rate of$244.00 per hour for work performed by James L. Markman and by Nicholas R. Ghirelli; (ii) At the rate of$234.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior associates and contract attorneys; (iii) At the rate of$214.00 per hour for work performed by other firm associates; (iv) At the rate of$179.00 per hour for work performed by firm paralegals; (v) At the rate of$139.00 per hour for work performed by firm clerks; (vi) For services rendered on Litigation, other than tort defense or eminent domain, at Attorneys' then current hourly rates discounted by 20%, subject to the approval of the Fire Chief on a case-by-case basis. 11231-0001\2522130v1.doc 3 Page 89 EXHIBIT B FEE SCHEDULE COMMENCING ON JULY 1, 2023 Attorneys shall be compensated for all work performed commencing on July 1, 2023 in accordance with the following rates: (i) At the rate of$251.00 per hour for work performed by James L. Markman and by Nicholas R. Ghirelli; (ii) At the rate of$241.00 per hour for work performed by other shareholders and senior associates and contract attorneys; (iii) At the rate of$221.00 per hour for work performed by other firm associates; (iv) At the rate of$186.00 per hour for work performed by firm paralegals; (v) At the rate of$146.00 per hour for work performed by firm clerks; (vi) For services rendered on Litigation, other than tort defense or eminent domain, at Attorneys' then current hourly rates discounted by 20%, subject to the approval of the Fire Chief on a case-by-case basis. 11231-0001\2522130v1.doc 4 Page 90 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRIC a �i DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Ivan Rojer, Fire Chief Robert Ball, Fire Marshal Darci Vogel, Business Manager Michelle Cowles, Management Analyst II SUBJECT: Consideration of Amendment No. 004 to the Professional Services Agreement with Inland Empire Property Services, Incorporated for Weed and Fire Hazard Abatement Services in the Amount of $10,000 and Authorize Appropriations in the Amount of $10,000 in both the Revenue and Expenditure Accounts. (FIRE) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Fire Board: 1. Approve Inland Empire Property Services, Inc. (FD18-017), Amendment No. 004 for $10,000 for Weed and Fire Hazard Abatement services; 2. Authorize an appropriation in the amount of$10,000 in the Fire Fund revenue account; and 3. Authorize an appropriation in the amount of$10,000 in the Fire Fund expenditure account. BACKGROUND: A City ordinance and Fire District resolution, both approved August 4, 2010, empowered the Fire District to manage weed and fire hazard abatement for the City and assess various fees related to the Weed and Fire Hazard Abatement administration Program. Among the provisions in the ordinance is the ability of the District to contract with companies that provide weed and fire hazard abatement services. These contract services are needed when property owners do not respond to the District's notices to abate weed and fire hazards. When a property owner does not complete the required abatement, the Fire District engages the services of an approved contractor to provide the necessary abatement. The contractor bills the Fire District for the work that is completed. Upon satisfactory evidence that the work has been completed per the ordinance, the Fire District pays the contractor according to the terms of the Professional Services Agreement. The Fire District then bills the property owner for the cost of the abatement services plus an administrative fee that covers the cost of staff time necessary to arrange the abatement and handle the documentation necessary to verify the work and generate the billing. In the event the property owner does not pay the Fire District for costs incurred, the Fire District places the costs on the tax roll for payment with the next property tax assessment. Page 91 Administering the Weed and Fire Hazard Abatement Program is cost-neutral because the payments made by the Fire District to the contractor are recovered in full either by the property owner paying the invoice prepared by the Fire District or having the invoice paid as a tax assessment. The staff time required to administer the Weed and Fire Hazard Abatement Program is fully recovered by the assessment of administrative fees approved by the Fire Board. The Fire Board recently adjusted these fees in December 2020 to align with the actual administrative costs of the program as determined by a fee study conducted by an independent third-party consultant. ANALYSIS: An increasing number of vacant and undeveloped parcels have required the services of the District's weed and fire hazard abatement contractor. On April 21, 2021, the District increased the Agreement with Inland Empire Property Services, Inc. by an additional $30,000 due to the estimated number of parcels that would require weed abatement services. However, the actual number of parcels that received service was higher than projected. As a result, it has become necessary to increase funding for weed and fire hazard abatement services in order to pay the contractor for the additional work. FISCAL IMPACT: Amendment No. 004 to Inland Empire Property Services Contract No. FD18-017 increases the total contract amount from $120,000 to $130,000. Funding for weed and fire hazard abatement is budgeted at $120,000 in the FY 2020-21 budget in Fire Fund account 3281506-5300 (Fire Prevention /Contract Services). Based on the magnitude of work, an appropriation of $10,000 is needed for the amendment. Due to the cost recovery structure of the Weed and Fire Hazard Abatement Program, the expended funds will be fully recovered from the owners of the properties on which abatement services are completed. Therefore, the District also requests an appropriation of$10,000 in Fire Fund revenue account 3281000-4316 (Fire Fund /Weed Abatement). COUNCIL MISSION /VISION /GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item brings together portions of the Council's vision and core values by providing and nurturing a high quality of life, as well as promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all.A robust weed and fire hazard abatement program improves the overall look of the City as weeds, and seasonal grasses are properly and regularely maintained. Quality of life, safety, and health are improved as well-maintained undeveloped parcels are less likely to catch fire and threaten nearby homes or extend into the wildland wilderness areas of the City. Fewer grass and brush fires mean less smoke in the air, which improves the health of the entire community ATTACHMENTS: n/a Page 2 Page 92 NONgq I � RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRIC DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Robert Neiuber, Human Resources Director Lucy Alvarez-Nunez, Management Analyst I SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Salary Schedules for Fiscal Year 2021-22. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021-012) (FIRE) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District adopt the attached resolution approving the salary schedules for job classifications employed by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, including a part-time employee benefit summary for fiscal year 2021-22. BACKGROUND: The Fire Board traditionally adopts salary resolutions for those classifications employed by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. These resolutions are updated twice a year to reflect changes in salaries, additions and deletions of classifications, changes in job titles, and other terms of employment. Updates to the salary schedules include terms negotiated and agreed upon in the current Memorandum of Understanding. ANALYSIS: The attached resolution adopts changes previously approved in the Memorandum of Understanding for Fire Union and Fire Management Employees Group. The updated salary schedules include a 3% equity adjustment effective July 10, 2021. All other Fire salary schedules, classifications, job titles, and other terms of employment remain the same. Staff recommends the Fire Board approve the resolution updating the Fire District's salary schedules for fiscal year 2021-22 to include the aforementioned changes. FISCAL IMPACT: Adjustments to the salary schedules were accounted for in the draft FY 2021-22 budget. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City's vision to build on our success as a world class community, create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant City, rich in opportunity for all to thrive. Page 93 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 — Resolution No. FD 2021-012 Attachment 2 — Fire Management Employee Group Salary Schedule Attachment 3— Fire Union Salary Schedule Attachment 4 — Fire Support Services Association Salary Schedule Attachment 5— Fire District Part-time Hourly Positions Salary Schedule Page 2 Page 94 RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021-XXX A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SALARY SCHEDULES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-22. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District has determined that it is necessary for the efficient operation and management of the District that policies be established prescribing salary ranges, benefits and holidays and other policies for employees of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District has previously adopted salary resolutions that established salary ranges, benefits and other terms of employment for employees of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District recognizes that it is necessary from time to time to amend the salary resolution to accommodate changes in position titles, classifications salary ranges, benefits and other terms of employment, including an outline of State and Federally required benefits afforded to part-time employees; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Rancho Cucamonga, California to approve the attached salary schedules for the Fire District positions (Attachments 2 - 5) effective July 10, 2021. PASSED, APROVED AND ADOPTED this 161" day of June 2021. Page 95 Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX FIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JULY 10, 2021 A B C D E F FIRE CHIEF 92.21 96.82 101.66 106.73 112.07 117.68 Hourly 7,376.45 7,745.60 8,132.88 8,538.29 8,965.94 9,414.20 Bi-Weekly 15,982.30 16,782.13 17,621.24 18,499.62 19,426.21 20,397.43 Monthly FIRE DEPUTY CHIEF 75.65 79.43 83.40 87.58 91.95 96.55 Hourly 6,052.28 6,354.69 6,671.93 7,006.47 7,355.85 7,724.18 Bi-Weekly 13,113.27 13,768.49 14,455.84 15,180.69 15,937.67 16,735.71 Monthly FIRE BATTALION CHIEF 47.10 49.45 51.92 54.52 57.24 Hourly (56 Hour Workweek) 5,274.87 5,538.71 5,814.98 6,106.34 6,411.04 Bi-Weekly 11,428.89 12,000.53 12,599.12 13,230.41 13,890.58 Monthly FIRE BATTALION CHIEF 65.94 69.23 72.69 76.33 80.14 Hourly (40 Hour Workweek) 5,274.87 5,538.71 5,814.98 6,106.34 6,411.04 Bi-Weekly 11,428.89 12,000.53 12,599.11 13,230.41 13,890.58 Monthly FIRE MARSHAL 70.72 74.25 77.97 81.87 85.95 Hourly 5,657.58 5,940.22 6,237.68 6,549.98 6,876.28 Bi-Weekly 12,258.10 12,870.47 13,514.97 14,191.61 14,898.61 Monthly BC TRAINING OFFICER STIPEND (7.26% of 40 hr BC Current Step) 40 Hour Workweek 4.79 5.03 5.28 5.54 5.82 Hourly 56 Hour Workweek 3.42 3.59 3.77 3.96 4.16 Hourly 382.96 402.11 422.17 443.32 465.44 Bi-Weekly 829.74 871.24 914.70 960.53 1,008.46 Monthly AT1PA"ENT 2 Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX FIRE UNION ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES July 10, 2021 A B C D E FIRE CAPTAIN 34.53 36.26 38.06 39.96 41.96 Hourly 3,866.87 4,060.67 4,262.55 4,475.97 4,699.77 Bi-Weekly 8,378.21 8,798.12 9,235.53 9,697.93 10,182.83 Monthly FIRE CAPTAIN 34.53 36.26 38.06 39.96 41.96 Hourly SPECIALIST 3,866.87 4,060.67 4,262.55 4,475.97 4,699.77 Bi-Weekly 8,378.21 8,798.12 9,235.53 9,697.93 10,182.83 Monthly FIRE ENGINEER 29.43 30.89 32.45 34.06 35.77 Hourly 3,295.84 3,459.65 3,633.84 3,814.96 4,006.45 Bi-Weekly 7,140.98 7,495.90 7,873.32 8,265.74 8,680.65 Monthly FIREFIGHTER 25.72 27.01 28.36 29.78 31.26 Hourly 2,880.54 3,024.74 3,175.86 3,335.06 3,501.18 Bi-Weekly 6,241.17 6,553.60 6,881.03 7,225.96 7,585.88 Monthly FIELD TRAINING OFFICER 48.33 50.75 53.28 55.95 58.74 Hourly (40 hour Workweek) 3,866.21 4,059.85 4,262.55 4,475.97 4,699.27 Bi-Weekly 8,376.78 8,796.34 9,235.53 9,697.93 10,181.76 Monthly HAZARDOUS MATERIAL STIPEND(5%of Fire Enqr.Step E) (40 Hour Workweek) 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Hourly (56 Hour Workweek) 1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 Hourly 200.32 200.32 200.32 200.32 200.32 Bi-Weekly 434.03 434.03 434.03 434.03 434.03 Monthly PARAMEDIC STIPEND(13.92%of Fire Enqr.Step E) (40 Hour Workweek) 6.97 6.97 6.97 6.97 6.97 Hourly (56 Hour Workweek) 4.98 4.98 4.98 4.98 4.98 Hourly 557.70 557.70 557.70 557.70 557.70 Bi-Weekly 1,208.35 1,208.35 1,208.35 1,208.35 1,208.35 Monthly FIELD TRAINING OFFICER STIPEND(9.3%of Fire Capt.Step E) (40 Hour Workweek) 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 Hourly (56 Hour Workweek) 3.90 3.90 3.90 3.90 3.90 Hourly 437.08 437.08 437.08 437.08 437.08 Bi-Weekly 947.00 947.00 947.00 947.00 947.00 Monthly TECHNICAL RESCUE STIPEND(5%of Fire Enqr.Step E) (40 Hour Workweek) 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Hourly (56 Hour Workweek) 1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 Hourly 200.32 200.32 200.32 200.32 200.32 Bi-Weekly 434.03 434.03 434.03 434.03 434.03 Monthly TERRORISM LIAISON OFFICER STIPEND(2.5%of Fire Enqr.Step E) (40 Hour Workweek) 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 Hourly (56 Hour Workweek) 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly 100.16 100.16 100.16 100.16 100.16 Bi-Weekly 217.02 217.02 217.02 217.02 217.02 Monthly BA,BS,or Fire Officer Certification (40 Hour Workweek) 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 Hourly (56 Hour Workweek) 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 Hourly 146.31 146.31 146.31 146.31 146.31 Bi-Weekly 317.00 317.00 317.00 317.00 317.00 Monthly MA,MS or Chief Officer Certification (40 Hour Workweek) 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 Hourly (56 Hour Workweek) 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 Hourly 219.23 219.23 219.23 219.23 219.23 Bi-Weekly 475.00 475.00 475.00 475.00 475.00 Monthly PagATKHMENT 3 Resolution No. FD 2021- FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF J U LY 10, 2021 A B C D E F COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN 25.37 26.64 27.97 29.37 30.83 32.38 Hourly 2,029.39 2,130.86 2,237.40 2,349.27 2,466.74 2,590.07 Bi-Weekly 4,397.01 4,616.86 4,847.70 5,090.09 5,344.59 5,611.82 Monthly COMMUNITY AFFAIRS SENIOR 30.46 31.98 33.58 35.26 37.02 38.88 Hourly COORDINATOR 2,436.77 2,558.61 2,686.54 2,820.86 2,961.91 3,110.00 Bi-Weekly 5,279.66 5,543.65 5,820.83 6,111.87 6,417.46 6,738.34 Monthly EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 38.00 39.90 41.89 43.99 46.19 48.50 Hourly COORDINATOR 3,039.81 3,191.80 3,351.39 3,518.96 3,694.91 3,879.65 Bi-Weekly 6,586.25 6,915.56 7,261.34 7,624.41 8,005.63 8,405.91 Monthly EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE 49.38 51.85 54.44 57.16 60.02 63.02 Hourly ADMINISTRATOR 3,950.49 4,148.01 4,355.41 4,573.18 4,801.84 5,041.93 Bi-Weekly 8,559.39 8,987.36 9,436.73 9,908.56 10,403.99 10,924.19 Monthly FIRE BUSINESS MANAGER 43.05 45.20 47.46 49.83 52.33 54.94 Hourly 3,443.90 3,616.09 3,796.90 3,986.74 4,186.08 4,395.38 Bi-Weekly 7,461.78 7,834.87 8,226.61 8,637.94 9,069.84 9,523.33 Monthly FIRE EQUIPMENT APPRENTICE 19.79 20.78 21.82 22.91 24.06 25.26 Hourly MECHANIC 1,583.51 1,662.69 1,745.82 1,833.11 1,924.77 2,021.01 Bi-Weekly 3,430.95 3,602.49 3,782.62 3,971.75 4,170.34 4,378.85 Monthly FIRE EQUIPMENT LEAD 27.28 28.64 30.08 31.58 33.16 34.82 Hourly MECHANIC 2,182.35 2,291.47 2,406.04 2,526.34 2,652.66 2,785.29 Bi-Weekly 4,728.42 4,964.84 5,213.09 5,473.74 5,747.43 6,034.80 Monthly FIRE EQUIPMENT MECHANIC 24.74 25.98 27.28 28.64 30.07 31.58 Hourly 1,979.19 2,078.15 2,182.05 2,291.16 2,405.71 2,526.00 Bi-Weekly 4,288.24 4,502.65 4,727.78 4,964.17 5,212.38 5,473.00 Monthly FIRE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 24.07 25.27 26.54 27.87 29.26 30.72 Hourly TECHNICIAN 1,925.70 2,021.99 2,123.08 2,229.24 2,340.70 2,457.74 Bi-Weekly 4,172.35 4,380.97 4,600.02 4,830.02 5,071.52 5,325.09 Monthly FIRE PREVENTION SPECIALIST 27.16 28.52 29.95 31.44 33.02 34.67 Hourly INSPECTION 1 2,172.93 2,281.58 2,395.66 2,515.44 2,641.22 2,773.28 Bi-Weekly 4,708.02 4,943.43 5,190.60 5,450.13 5,722.63 6,008.76 Monthly ATTXCA�TENT 4 Resolution No. FD 2021- FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JULY 1, 2021 A B C D E F FIRE PREVENTION SPECIALIST 29.94 31.44 33.01 34.66 36.40 38.22 Hourly INSPECTION II 2,395.52 2,515.29 2,641.06 2,773.11 2,911.76 3,057.35 Bi-Weekly 5,190.28 5,449.80 5,722.29 6,008.40 6,308.82 6,624.26 Monthly FIRE PREVENTION SUPERVISOR 34.07 35.77 37.56 39.44 41.41 43.48 Hourly 2,725.55 2,861.83 3,004.92 3,155.16 3,312.92 3,478.57 Bi-Weekly 5,905.36 6,200.62 6,510.65 6,836.19 7,178.00 7,536.90 Monthly FIRE SHOP SUPERVISOR 32.73 34.36 36.08 37.89 39.78 41.77 Hourly 2,618.16 2,749.07 2,886.52 3,030.85 3,182.39 3,341.51 Bi-Weekly 5,672.69 5,956.32 6,254.14 6,566.84 6,895.19 7,239.95 Monthly MAINTENANCE OFFICER 36.33 38.15 40.05 42.06 44.16 46.37 Hourly 2,906.43 3,051.75 3,204.34 3,364.56 3,532.79 3,709.43 Bi-Weekly 6,297.27 6,612.13 6,942.74 7,289.88 7,654.37 8,037.09 Monthly MANAGEMENT AIDE 24.99 26.24 27.56 28.93 30.38 31.90 Hourly 1,999.49 2,099.47 2,204.44 2,314.66 2,430.39 2,551.91 Bi-Weekly 4,332.23 4,548.84 4,776.28 5,015.10 5,265.85 5,529.15 Monthly MANAGEMENT ANALYST 1 29.01 30.46 31.98 33.58 35.26 37.02 Hourly 2,320.73 2,436.77 2,558.61 2,686.54 2,820.86 2,961.91 Bi-Weekly 5,028.25 5,279.66 5,543.65 5,820.83 6,111.87 6,417.46 Monthly MANAGEMENT ANALYST II 33.34 35.00 36.75 38.59 40.52 42.55 Hourly 2,666.98 2,800.33 2,940.34 3,087.36 3,241.73 3,403.81 Bi-Weekly 5,778.45 6,067.37 6,370.74 6,689.28 7,023.74 7,374.93 Monthly MANAGEMENT ANALYST III 36.31 38.12 40.03 42.03 44.13 46.34 Hourly 2,904.64 3,049.87 3,202.36 3,362.48 3,530.60 3,707.13 Bi-Weekly 6,293.38 6,608.05 6,938.45 7,285.37 7,649.64 8,032.12 Monthly PLANS EXAMINER-FIRE 33.37 35.04 36.79 38.63 40.57 42.59 Hourly 2,669.90 2,803.39 2,943.56 3,090.74 3,245.28 3,407.54 Bi-Weekly 5,784.78 6,074.02 6,377.72 6,696.61 7,031.44 7,383.01 Monthly PUBLIC EDUCATION 28.09 29.50 30.97 32.52 34.15 35.85 Hourly SPECIALIST 2,247.45 2,359.82 2,477.82 2,601.71 2,731.79 2,868.38 Bi-Weekly 4,869.48 5,112.95 5,368.60 5,637.03 5,918.88 6,214.83 Monthly ATTKCftENT 4 Resolution No. FD 2021- FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JULY 1, 2021 A B C D E F ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 17.85 18.79 19.78 20.82 21.92 23.07 Hourly 1,428.16 1,503.33 1,582.45 1,665.74 1,753.41 1,845.69 Bi-Weekly 3,094.35 3,257.21 3,428.64 3,609.10 3,799.05 3,999.00 Monthly EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 22.31 23.48 24.72 26.02 28.83 30.35 Hourly 1,784.58 1,878.50 1,977.37 2,081.44 2,306.38 2,427.69 Bi-Weekly 3,866.58 4,070.08 4,284.30 4,509.79 4,997.15 5,260.00 Monthly EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT II 25.95 27.31 28.75 30.26 31.85 33.53 Hourly 2,075.64 2,184.88 2,299.87 2,420.92 2,548.34 2,682.46 Bi-Weekly 4,497.21 4,733.91 4,983.06 5,245.33 5,521.40 5,812.00 Monthly AffARC RENT 4 Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX FIRE DISTRICT PART-TIME HOURLY SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JULY 10, 2021 A B C D E F COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN 24.38 25.60 26.88 28.23 29.64 31.12 Hourly EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES 41.14 43.20 45.36 47.62 50.01 52.51 Hourly QUALITY IMPROVEMENT NURSE FIRE CLERK (one step) 14.04 Hourly FIRE EQUIPMENT MECHANIC 23.22 24.38 25.60 26.88 28.23 29.64 Hourly FIRE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 23.14 24.29 25.51 26.78 28.12 29.53 Hourly TECHNICIAN FIRE PREVENTION ASSISTANT (one step) 14.04 Hourly TEMPORARY/PART-TIME FIRE PREVENTION SPECIALIST 24.49 25.72 27.00 28.35 29.77 31.26 Hourly INSPECTION I MANAGEMENT AIDE 24.01 25.24 26.53 27.88 29.16 30.62 Hourly MANAGEMENT ANALYST 1 27.88 29.31 30.81 32.39 33.87 35.56 Hourly OFFICE SERVICES CLERK 16.85 17.71 18.62 19.57 20.47 21.49 Hourly OFFICE SPECIALIST 1 15.25 16.03 16.85 17.71 18.52 19.45 Hourly OFFICE SPECIALIST II 16.85 17.71 18.62 19.57 20.47 21.49 Hourly PLANS EXAMINER - FIRE 32.08 33.68 35.37 37.13 38.99 40.94 Hourly QUALITY IMPROVEMENT 27.79 29.18 30.64 32.17 33.78 35.47 Hourly SPECIALIST AffARCJA VIENT 5 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jennifer Hunt Gracia, Director of Community Services Ruth Cain, Procurement Manager Jennifer Brown, Management Analyst I SUBJECT: Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with CR&A, Inc. for the fabrication, personalization, installation, and removal of armed forces banners in the amount of$22,000 annually; not to exceed $154,000 over a seven-year period. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a Professional Services Agreement with CR&A, Inc. for the fabrication, personalization, installation, and removal of armed forces banners in an amount not to exceed $154,000 over seven years. BACKGROUND: The armed forces banner program was implemented in November 2005 to honor and recognize the contributions of military personnel who reside in the City, or whose immediate family members reside in the City. Through the first few years of the program, families, sometimes supported by private donations, purchased the banners and the City funded the costs associated with program oversight, such as marketing and coordinating with applicants, staff and vendors. In 2008, families were no longer required to pay a portion of the cost of the banners, as the City received an offer to sponsor these costs. When that sponsorship ended, the program was supported by funds from the Redevelopment Agency (RDA). Since the dissolution of the RDA in 2012, the program has continued to be supported by the City and applicant donations. Since the program's inception, Dekra-Lite Industries has supplied and serviced the City's banners. Their most recent contract ended in September 2020. Specifications were provided to the Procurement Division, which prepared and posted a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) #20/21- 015 for Fabrication, Personalization, Installation and Removal of Armed Forces Banners to the City's automated procurement system. There were four hundred fifty-nine (459) notified vendors, thirty-one (31) prospective bidders downloaded or viewed the solicitation package, and two (2) viable responses were received. ANALYSIS: An Evaluation Committee conducted a thorough analysis of the RFP responses, scored and ranked each responsive proposal. CR&A, Inc. was determined to be the most responsive vendor providing the best value while meeting the scope of services and required specifications. Therefore, staff recommends City Council award a contract to CR&A, Inc., effective from the date Page 102 of mutual execution for a seven (7) year term. All applicable solicitation documentation is on file in Planet Bids and can be accessed through the City's website at www.CityofRC.us. FISCAL IMPACT: The General Fund budgets $22,000 annually in the Community Services Contract Services account 1001401-5300 to maintain the armed forces banner program. On average, program costs are offset by $3,600 due to application donations. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The armed forces banner program honors the contributions of military personnel who reside in the City, or whose immediate family members reside in the City and promotes the core value of building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere. ATTACHMENTS: None. Page 2 Page103 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Annette Cano-Soza, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: Consideration to Accept Public Improvements on the East Side of East Avenue and North of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) per the Improvement Agreement, Related to Case No. SUBTT18122, as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve and accept the public improvements and their design, required for the development of Tract 18122 and authorize the City Engineer to file the appropriate Notice of Completion; 2. Release Faithful Performance Bond No. 1047934 and accept Maintenance Bond No. 1047934-M for the associated public improvements; 3. Release the Labor and Material Bond No. 72BSBGQ0480 six months after Council approval; and 4. Authorize the City Engineer to approve the release of the Maintenance Bond one year following the filing of the Notice of Completion if the improvements remain free from defects in material and workmanship. BACKGROUND: Case No. SUBTT18122 was approved by the Planning Commission on November 9, 2011 for a residential subdivision of 76 single family lots on 53 acres of land located within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan on the east side of East Avenue and north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210). An improvement agreement and securities were approved by the City Council on April 16, 2014, to ensure construction of the required public improvements. On September 7, 2016, the City Council approved a reduction of the faithful performance bond and released the previously submitted faithful performance bond. ANALYSIS: All public improvements required of this development have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The public improvements will be re-inspected in approximately nine months to ensure they remain in good order prior to release of the maintenance bond. Prior to construction of the public improvements the developer, KB Home Coastal, Inc., submitted the following securities to ensure satisfactory completion of the improvements: Page 104 Faithful Performance Bond $203,900 Bond #1047934 Labor and Materials Bond $3,376,700 Bond #72BSBGQ0480 With completion of the improvements these bonds are no longer required, and the developer has submitted Maintenance Bond #1047934-M to secure maintenance of the improvements through the one-year warranty period. FISCAL IMPACT: None. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City Council's vision for the City by ensuring the maintenance of high- quality public improvements that promote a world class community. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Page 2 Page105 ATTACHMENT 1 Vicinity Map SU BTT18122 NOT TO SCALE Project Site R � GYx�cxx�.L-�1 RD2mH Xv .210 mix G j P f j 1-1 ftEfiff GW N Page 106 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Darren Chin, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Related to Tract No. 20080 as Complete, Located on the Northwest Corner of Hermosa Avenue and Victoria Street, Submitted by Hermosa, LLC, a Limited Liability Company. File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council 1. Approve and accept the public improvements and their design, required for the development of Tract No. 20080 and authorize the City Engineer to file the appropriate Notice of Completion; 2. Release Faithful Performance Bond No. PB00618100060 and accept Maintenance Bond No. PB00618100060-M for the associated public improvements; and 3. Authorize the City Engineer to approve the release of the Maintenance Bond one year following the filing of the Notice of Completion if the improvements remain free from defects in material and workmanship. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract Map No. 20080 was approved by the Planning Commission on November 8, 2017, for the residential subdivision of 20 single family lots on 5.43 acres of land, located on the north side of Victoria Street and west side of Hermosa Avenue. An improvement agreement and securities were approved by the City Council on August 15, 2018 in order to ensure construction of the required public improvements. ANALYSIS: All public improvements required of this development have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The public improvements will be re-inspected in approximately nine months to ensure they remain in good order prior to release of the maintenance bond. Prior to construction of the public improvements the developer, Hermosa, LLC., submitted Faithful Performance Bond No. PB00618100060 in the amount of $178,200 to ensure satisfactory completion of the improvements. With the completion of the improvements this bond is no longer required, and the developer has submitted Maintenance Bond No. PB00618100060-M in the amount of $17,820 to secure maintenance of the improvements through the one-year warranty period. Page 107 FISCAL IMPACT: None. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Enhancing Premier Community Status through the construction of high quality public improvements. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Page 2 Page 108 ATTACHMENT 1 TRACT NO. 20080 Vicinity Map NOT TO SCALE Project Site Page 109 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director Neil Plummer, Facilities Superintendent Kenneth Fung, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: Consideration of a Contract with Bligh Pacific for the Animal Care & Adoption Center - Roof Maintenance & Repair Project in the Amount of $185,780. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the specifications, accept the bid received, award and authorize the execution of a contract in the amount of$185,780 (Base Bid plus Additive Bids No 1 and No 2) for the "Animal Care &Adoption Center— Roof Maintenance & Repair Project" to the lowest responsive bidder, Bligh Pacific, of Santa Fe Springs; authorize the expenditure of a contingency in the amount of$64,220 to be funded from account number 1025001-5602 (General Fund) as approved in the FY 2020-2021 budget. BACKGROUND: Six years ago, the roofing specialist firm of Independent Roofing Consultants (IRC) was contracted to evaluate the condition of the existing roofs at several City facilities and prepare a report providing recommendations for repair/maintenance work for these various sites. At that time, the IRC report called for various maintenance and repair items on the Animal Care and Adoption Center facility roof. Since the preparation of the report, the roof has experienced more deterioration requiring repair. During the on-site pre-bid meeting inspection with potential bidders and City staff, additional damage was discovered. This resulted in Additive Bid items No 1 and No 2 being added to the bid documents which consist of restoring concrete block and stucco-surfaced interior walls, and the repair of an additional roof leak occurring at the southeast corner of the building. ANALYSIS: Three (3) bids for this project were opened at 2:00 pm on Tuesday, May 4, 2021 (see attached Bid Summary). Two (2) bids were withdrawn when bidders discovered significant clerical errors in the bids. Staff has completed the required background investigation and finds that the lowest responsive bidder, Bligh Pacific of Santa Fe Springs, has met the requirements of the bid documents. The project is scheduled to be completed within fifteen (15) working days. Staff is requesting a contingency of$64,220 in the event additional roof damage is discovered. A copy of the agreement is available in the City Clerk's Office. Page 110 FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds were included in the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 adopted budget for this project in account number 1025001-5602 (General Fund). COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: By performing this project, this will meet the Council's core values of continuous improvement and the preservation of a the family-oriented atmosphere created at the Animal Care & Adoption Center. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Bid Summary Page 2 Page 111 Evaluation Only. Created with Aspose.Cells for .NET.Copyright 2003-2021 Aspose Pty Ltd. MAY 4,2021 BID OPENING SUMMARY ANIMAL CARE&ADOPTION CENTER-ROOF MAINTENANCE&REPAIR PROJECT Bligh Roof Co.jdbaBligh San Marino Roof Co.Inc. Best Contracting Services, BASE BID Pac (2) Inc.(2) item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost 1 Roof Maintenance&Repair Work 1 LS $157,810.00 .00 $9,875.00 $9,875.00 $63,000.00 $63,000.00 BASE BID TOTAL= .00 $9,875.001 $63,000.00 Bligh Roof Co.dba Bligh San Marino Roof Co.Inc. Best Contracting Services, ADDITIVE BIDS Pacific (2) Inc.(2) item Description Qty Unit Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost 2 Additive Bid No 1 Work(1) 1 LS $17,620.00 $17,620.00 No Bid $14,500.00 $14,500.00 3 Additive Bid No 2 Work(1) 1 LS $10,350.00 $10,350.00 No Bid $11,600.00 $11,600.00 ADDITIVE BIDS TOTAL= $27,970.00 $26,100.00 Base Bid+Additive Bid No 1+Additive Bid No 2= $185,780.00 $89,100.00 (1)See bid documents for description of work (2)Withdrew bid because of clerical errors ATTACHMENT 1 Page112 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Trina Valdez, Utilities Operations Supervisor SUBJECT: Consideration of Amendment No. 01 to Professional Services Agreement with Siemens Mobility, Inc. (CO19-111) for Streetlight Knockdown Services for Fiscal Year 2021/22. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve and authorize Amendment No. 01 for the renewal of Professional Services Agreement (CO19-111) with Siemens Mobility, Inc. in the amount of $200,000 for Fiscal Year 2021/22. BACKGROUND: In 2019, the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Siemens Mobility, Inc. entered into a Professional Services Agreement(CO19-111)to provide clean-up services when a streetlight is knocked down and installation of the replacement pole for all City-owned streetlights. ANALYSIS: On average, forty (40) streetlight knockdowns occur each year in the City and Siemens Mobility, Inc. has been providing on-call clean-up and pole installation services for the past two years. This includes arriving to the location, assist with cutting the power to the pole and then hauling the debris and pole away. After the pole has been removed, Siemens Mobility then schedules to have the new pole,foundation, wiring, and fixture installed in a timely manner. Given Siemens Mobility's knowledge of the City and installation standards, along with their qualifications and expertise in the field, it is recommended that the City continue utilizing their services for clean-up and installation of streetlight poles in the City. A copy of Amendment No. 01 is available in the City Clerk's Office. Siemens AG, the parent company of Siemens Mobility, Inc., announced on November 12, 2020 that it would be transferring Siemens Mobility, Inc. into a separately managed entity, Yunex LLC. This transfer will allow Siemens Mobility, Inc. to further pursue its growth strategy and continue to offer innovative and comprehensive mobility solutions for roads and cities. The transfer of Siemens Mobility, Inc. to Yunex LLC includes the transfer of all existing contracts pertaining to Siemens Mobility, Inc. as of July 1, 2021 and all contract appendices as well as all rights and obligations. The services and staff currently being provided by Siemens Mobility, Inc. will continue under the new name Yunex Traffic. Page 113 FISCAL IMPACT: Funds from the General City Streetlights Fund (Fund 150) in the amount of$200,000 is included in Account 1150202-5300 of the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City Council's goal of enhancing public safety by ensuring well- maintained high quality public infrastructure that promote a world class community. ATTACHMENTS: None. Page 2 Page114 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Trina Valdez, Utilities Operations Supervisor SUBJECT: Consideration of Amendment No. 01 to Professional Services Agreement with Siemens Mobility, Inc. (CO19-112) for Annual Streetlight Maintenance Services for Fiscal Year 2021/22. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve and authorize Amendment No. 01 for the renewal of Professional Services Agreement (CO19-112) with Siemens Mobility, Inc. in the amount of $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2021/22. BACKGROUND: In 2019, the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Siemens Mobility, Inc. entered into a Professional Services Agreement (CO19-112) to provide routine maintenance services and quarterly night audits for the City-owned streetlights to ensure reliable street lighting throughout the City. The City owns approximately 15,700 standard concrete streetlight poles and 95 decorative concrete streetlight poles. ANALYSIS: Over the past two years, Siemens Mobility, Inc. has been providing diagnosis and maintenance repairs of street light fixtures that has included but is not limited to the replacement of failed lamp fixtures or fuses, repair of loose wires, identification of the cause of street light outages which may include incorrect voltage issues and installation of house side shields. Quarterly night audits consist of Siemens' staff performing in-field review of street lights after dark to identify street lights that require repair but have not been reported by members of the community. Given Siemens Mobility's extensive knowledge and expertise of streetlights and their ability to identify and fix issues in a timely manner, it is recommended that the City continue utilizing their services for routine streetlight maintenance services and quarterly night audits. A copy of Amendment No. 01 is available in the City Clerk's Office. Siemens AG, the parent company of Siemens Mobility, Inc., announced on November 12, 2020 that it would be transferring Siemens Mobility, Inc. into a separately managed entity, Yunex LLC. This transfer will allow Siemens Mobility, Inc. to further pursue its growth strategy and continue to offer innovative and comprehensive mobility solutions for roads and cities. The transfer of Siemens Mobility, Inc. to Yunex LLC includes the transfer of all existing contracts pertaining to Siemens Mobility, Inc. as of July 1, 2021 and all contract appendices as well as all rights and obligations. The services and staff currently being provided by Siemens Mobility, Inc. will continue under the new name Yunex Traffic. Page 115 FISCAL IMPACT: Funds from the General City Street Lights Fund (Fund 150) in the amount of$50,000 have been included in Account 1150202-5300 of the proposed Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City Council's Core Value of promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all by ensuring that public infrastructure is well-maintained. ATTACHMENTS: None. Page 2 Page 116 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Annette Cano-Soza, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of 61h Street and Charles Smith Avenue, Related to Case No. DRC2006-01012, as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve and accept the public improvements and their design, required for the development of Case No. DRC2006-01012 and authorize the City Engineer to file the appropriate Notice of Completion; 2. Release the Labor and Material Bond No. 4401573 six months after Council approval; and 3. Authorize the City Engineer to approve the release of the Faithful Performance Bond No. 4401573 one year following the filing of the Notice of Completion if the improvements remain free from defects in material and workmanship. BACKGROUND: Case No. DRC2006-01012 was approved by the Planning Commission on August 13, 2008 for the construction of a 28,860 square foot warehouse/office building and associated parking on approximately 1.39 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13), located at the northeast corner of 6th Street and Charles Smith Avenue. An improvement agreement and securities were approved by the City Council on November 4, 2015 to ensure construction of the required public improvements. ANALYSIS: All public improvements required of this development have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A maintenance bond was not submitted for this project; therefore, the faithful performance bond will remain on file for the duration of the satisfactory period. The public improvements will be re-inspected in approximately nine months to ensure they remain in good order prior to release of the faithful performance bond. Prior to construction of the public improvements the developer, Chase Back Bay, LLC submitted the following securities to ensure satisfactory completion of the improvements: Faithful Performance Bond $206,300 Bond #4401573 Labor and Materials Bond $206,300 Bond #4401573 Page 117 With completion of the improvements the labor and material bond is no longer required. FISCAL IMPACT: None COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City Council's vision for the City by ensuring the maintenance of high- quality public improvements that promote a world class community. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Page 2 Page 118 ATTACHMENT 1 Vicinity Map D RC2006-01012 NOT TO SCALE rs � > P oject Sit aam eo MOO a �4 LI I N Page 119 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director Ernest Ruiz, Streets, Storm Drains and Fleet Superintendent SUBJECT: Consideration of an Agreement with the County of San Bernardino for the 800 MHz Radio Communications System Access/Paging and Equipment Maintenance Services, in an amount not to exceed $184,675 in FY 2021- 22 and an Estimated Total Contract Amount of$923,375 over Five Years. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve and authorize the execution of an agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the County of San Bernardino for 800 MHz Radio Communications Systems Access/Paging and Equipment Maintenance Services, in an amount not to exceed $184,675 in FY 2021-22 and an estimated total contract amount of$923,375 over five (5) years. BACKGROUND: The West End Communications Authority (WECA)was a joint powers agency established in 1991 to implement and administer a public safety trunked radio system used by the West End cities of Chino, Montclair, Ontario, Upland, and Rancho Cucamonga; as well as the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District and the Cucamonga Valley Water District. In 2005, WECA approached the County for a proposal to provide a technology upgrade, ongoing maintenance, and support and administration of their 800 MHz radio system. Through a collaborative process, The County's Innovation and Technology Department (ITD) and WECA's executive board developed an operational model wherein WECA would provide the County with funds to purchase and install simulcast radio equipment and accessories for the WECA facilities upgrade. This Agreement, formalized in 2007, required WECA to transfer all their technological assets to the County. ITD was needed to operate and maintain the WECA system independently of the County's 800 MHz radio system for the duration of the five (5) year Agreement. Once the Agreement terminated, the two independent systems would be integrated into one County system. In 2013, at the end of the five-year term, WECA had the option to end services with the County and purchase back their portion of the 800 MHz radio system. If WECA decided to renew services, the cost of services would be provided to it at the current Board approved rate; if WECA declined, each member agency agreed to enter into separate five-year subscriber agreements at the current Board approved rate. Page 120 In December 2019, the City and San Bernardino County executed Contract No. CO 19-186 for a 19-month term with an expiration date of June 30, 2021. It is necessary to enter into a new agreement with the County to continue these services. ANALYSIS: The ITD operates and maintains the County's Public Safety Radio Communications System that provides the means by which dispatch centers, public safety locations, and mobile/portable radios communicate via voice transmission. This system is primarily for local government agency use and subsequently for additional governmental and related nongovernmental users to facilitate public safety. The County's Public Safety Radio Communications System is considered a vital piece of infrastructure used daily by City personnel during emergency and nonemergency situations. Communications must always remain operable to maintain personnel safety and to relay information effectively. The 800 MHz radio system is used by the following City Departments: Administrative Services, Animal Services, Building and Safety, Community Improvement, Community Services, Engineering, Planning, and Public Works. Staff recommends approval of the Agreement with the County, effective July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2026, contingent upon the approval the FY 2021/22 budget and future budgets. FISCAL IMPACT: The annual contract amount of $184,675 (283 radios per 12 months). This is a decrease of $11,640 from the existing FY 2020-21 contract of$196,317 (275 radios per 12 months). There is a decrease and adjustment in the annual amount because of the County's reduction in the monthly unit charge. In anticipation of this Agreement, the City budgeted the funds for FY 2021-22 in account 1001001-5300 General Fund. The City also considers the possibility to rate changes for radio maintenance and service cost as stated in the Agreement and budgets accordingly. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This Agreement encompasses the City Council's core values of promoting a safe and healthy community for all, as well as working together cooperatively and respectfully with each other, staff, and all stakeholders. Maintaining effective communications between City personnel, surrounding agencies, and dispatch centers ensures our responders have the resources necessary during any emergency or disaster. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment I — Contract Agreement Page 2 Page 121 FOR COUNTY USE ONLY EL New FAS Vendor Code Dept. Contract Number Change SC A ITD-21000 El Cancel SAN BERNARDINO ePro Vendor Number ePro Contract Number COUNTY County Department Dept. Orgn. Contractor's License No. Innovation and Technology Department ITD County Department Contract Representative Telephone Total Contract Amount FAS Adrian Danczyk (909)388-0534 STANDARD CONTRACT Contract Type Revenue Encumbered Unencumbered Other: If not encumbered or revenue contract type, provide reason: Commodity Code Contract Start Date Contract End Date Original Amount Amendment Amount 7/1/2021 6/30/2026 $923,372.40 Fund Dept. Organization Appr. Obj/Rev Source GRC/PROJ/JOB No Amount 4020 120 040 75 9800 RADACCMAINT $923,372.40 Fund Dept. Organization Appr. Obj/Rev Source GRC/PROJ/JOB No. Amount Fund Dept. Organization Appr. Obj/Rev Source GRC/PROJ/JOB No. Amount Project Name Estimated Payment Total by Fiscal Year Radio Access& Maintenance FY Amount I/D FY Amount I/D 2021-22 $184,674.48 2024-25 $184,674.48 _ 2022-23 $184,674.48 2025-26 $184,674.48 _ Customer No. 6000-OOEC 2023-24 $184,674.48 THIS CONTRACT is entered into in the State of California by and between the County of San Bernardino, hereinafter called the County, and Name City of Rancho Cucamonga Address 8794 Lion Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telephone Federal ID No.or Social Security No. (909)477-2700 hereinafter called Customer. IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: (Use space below and additional bond sheets. Set forth service to be rendered, amount to be paid, manner of payment, time for performance or completion, determination of satisfactory performance and cause for termination, other terms and conditions,and attach plans,specifications, and addenda, if any.) I. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 800 MHz RADIO COMMUNICATION SYSTEM ACCESS The 800 MHz Radio Communications System, hereinafter called System, is composed of two components known as the Backbone and Field Equipment. The Backbone is defined as that portion of the System that provides the means by which dispatch centers, public safety locations, mobile radios, and portable radios communicate with each other via voice transmission. It is composed primarily of fixed relay equipment and associated centralized dispatch and control equipment, including Mobile Data Access Modems owned and maintained by the County. Field Equipment is defined as that portion of the System that uses the Backbone for communications and consists primarily of local dispatch equipment, mobile radios, and portable radios. Specific charges for the services provided under this Agreement are set forth in Exhibit A, 800 MHz Radio Communications System Access/Paging Services and Payment Terms, as attached hereto and herein incorporated. Page 122 page 1 of 12 ATTACHMENT 1 A. System Purpose and Objective The primary purpose of the System is to serve the County and accommodate participation by public safety and local governmental agencies in the County of San Bernardino. Secondarily, other governmental and safety related non-governmental users may be allowed access to the System as conditions warrant and as provided for by this Agreement. During a disaster, public safety users will receive priority in all areas, based entirely on emergency response responsibilities and access to the System by non-public safety users may be limited or suspended. B. Backbone Operational Policies Public safety and local governmental users shall have operational priority over all other users. In the case of a disaster, public safety users affected by the disaster shall have operational priority over all other public safety users, with County public safety users afforded the highest priority. 1) County has the final authority, at all times, to exercise discretionary control over the Backbone, and to otherwise manage Backbone traffic to ensure the ability of immediate-need public safety agencies to effectively communicate and for the overall benefit of all Backbone users. EXCEPT FOR GROSSLY NEGLIENT ACTS OR OMISSIONS IN EXERCIZING ITS AUTHORITY UNDER THIS SECTION, THE COUNTY WILL HAVE NO LIABILITY WHATSOEVER FOR SYSTEM ALLOCATION DECISIONS. C. Backbone Modification (Post Backbone Implementation) 1) The County may determine that Backbone modification is needed from time to time to meet the changing needs of County and/or users. 2) Costs for Backbone modifications made after the execution of this Agreement shall be assessed as follows: (i) If the modification benefits all users, each user will bear the pro rata cost of the modification based on the user's derived benefit. Derived benefit shall be determined as a percentage based on the number of units that are in service by each end user divided by the total units being serviced by the Backbone infrastructure at the time the modification is made. (ii) If the modification improves service only for users in a definable local area, all users in such definable local area, and participating in and receiving direct benefit from the modification, shall share the costs for its implementation, operation, and maintenance equally. (iii) If the modification only applies to a specific subset of users, the subset of users that caused the modification shall share the costs of the modification its implementation, operation, and maintenance equally. (iv) if the modification is requested by, and benefits only Customer, Customer shall bear the entire cost of the modification, its implementation, operation, and maintenance. 3) Customer acknowledges and agrees that the County is the sole decision-maker in determining the allocation of costs for all Backbone modifications. Page 123 page 2 of 12 D. Field Equipment 1) Customer shall, at Customer's expense and future financial liability, purchase and maintain its own Field Equipment. 2) Customer shall, at Customer's expense, expand or modify existing Customer structures, facilities, or dispatch centers as required to support the installation of Customer's Field Equipment. 3) Customer is solely responsible for ensuring that the Field Equipment is compatible with the System. E. Related Non-Governmental Users 1) At times, Customer's non-governmental users may have a need to communicate with public safety/local government services during emergencies, or in their daily support of public safety/local government services. Where it is not in conflict with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Regulations or other laws, and subject to approval by County, Customer's non-governmental users may be allowed Backbone access. However, Customer's non-governmental use of the Backbone for day-to-day operations shall be on a non-interfering, prioritized basis, and subject to channel loading limits, as determined by County. 2) County shall be responsible for coordinating Backbone access and implementing terms and conditions of such use, including one-time and recurring costs to be paid by new users. 3) County shall monitor non-governmental users of the Backbone. If the needs of public safety/local government expand to the point of competition with non-governmental use of the Backbone, Customer's non-governmental users may be required by the County to terminate their use of the Backbone. 4) Customer's non-governmental users will be removed in reverse order of their entry into the System, i.e., the last user to enter the System will be the first user to be removed unless any other Customer's non-governmental user voluntarily relinquishes access. 5) County will provide Customer ninety (90) days prior written notice of termination of access to allow Customer's non-governmental users to remove their equipment or transfer their operations to another communications system. At the expiration of the notice period, the Customer's non- governmental users will be denied access to the System. F. Backbone Ownership It is understood that County has ownership of the Backbone, and upon any termination of this Agreement by County or by Customer, any and all rights, title, and interest in the Backbone shall remain with the County. II. MEGAHERTZ RADIO AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SERVICES The County of San Bernardino Department of Innovation and Technology (ITD) offers a number of 800 MHz radio and equipment maintenance services to public safety and local governmental agencies in the County of San Bernardino, as well as other governmental and safety-related non-governmental users. Services provided under this Agreement consist of 800 MHz Backbone radio equipment maintenance, 800 MHz mobile/portable radio equipment maintenance, Mobile Data Access Modems maintenance, 800 MHz radio dispatch equipment maintenance, and 800 MHz radio battery replacement. Specific charges for these services are set forth and attached hereto as Exhibit A, 800 MHz Radio Communications System Access/Paging Services and Payment Terms. Page 124 page 3 of 12 A. County Responsibilities in Providing Maintenance Services If providing maintenance services to Customer, ITD: 1) Will maintain sufficient spare mobile radios to temporarily replace equipment that is removed from service for maintenance reasons; 2) Will remove, reinstall and maintain Customer-owned radios or other covered equipment that has become defective from normal wear and usage, as solely determined by ITD, and perform repairs at ITD or elsewhere as determined by ITD; 3) Will provide a two-hour response time from notification for problems with radio dispatch equipment and Backbone radio equipment, and reasonable response time during normal County work hours on normal County business days for maintenance of Mobile Data Access Modems, and mobile/portable radios with after-hours service available at premium rates; 4) Reserves the right to subcontract for all or part of services; 5) Assumes no liability for equipment failure in the field, or for any adverse consequences caused by such failed equipment; 6) Assumes no liability for failure to provide or delay in providing services, under this Agreement. B. County Services Provided on a Time and Materials Basis 1) Service required due to Customer abuse or abnormal wear; 2) Service to correct attempts by Customer or unauthorized third parties to repair or modify equipment; 3) Facility electrical problems at Customer location(s)or vehicle electrical problems; 4) Services in addition to those identified above, to the extent feasible and cost-effective, as determined by ITD; 5) Program or re-program radios at Customer's request or in response to abnormal wear and usage, except for County-originated systems reconfigurations; 6) Replacement of accessories and consumable items, including batteries, antennas, and microphone cords; 7) Radio reactivations are processed within 5 business days after the request is received, and are billed for each serial number reactivated at one-half of the Board-approved hourly rate in effect at the time reactivation is ordered. C. Customer Responsibilities 1) Customer shall procure its own Field Equipment and shall: (i) Provide ITD with model and serial numbers of all equipment to be covered under this Agreement. (ii) Designate an individual as the single point of contact for maintenance coordination. (iii) Coordinate and schedule service requirements with ITD in advance whenever possible. (iv)Advise ITD of all radio relocations or reassignments within their fleet, within 24-hours of relocation or reassignment. Page 125 page 4 of 12 2) It is Customer's sole responsibility to maintain a current inventory of its Field Equipment using the System and to approve and validate billing of that inventory. If Customer identifies discrepancies between billing and its inventory, a dispute notice should be sent by e-mail to isdfinance@isd.sbcounty.gov along with a justification and related documentation. If ITD determines that a charge was billed incorrectly, ITD will issue the applicable credit on the next monthly billing cycle. III. EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERMINATION This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2021, hereinafter Effective Date. This Agreement shall remain in effect for five (5) years from the Effective Date, unless the County or the Customer, terminates the Agreement by giving sixty (60) days prior written notice to the other. County may, at its sole discretion, opt not to terminate its services until replacement services are identified and in place; however, in no event shall County's services be continued beyond 120 days of the original written notice. Any such termination date shall coincide with the end of a calendar month. Neither party shall incur any liability to the other by reason of such termination. IV. RATES AND PAYMENT TERMS Payment rates and conditions are set forth on Exhibit A, 800 MHz Radio Communications System Access/Paging Services and Payment Terms attached hereto. Services are provided and invoiced on a monthly basis starting on the Effective Date of the Agreement, or starting on the installation date, if applicable. Monthly payment shall be due upon receipt of invoice. If a change in service level is requested or required, County will provide to Customer a revised Exhibit A, incorporating such changes, which shall be signed by Customer and returned to County. Customer's subsequent invoice shall be adjusted in accordance with the changes, on a prorated basis, as necessary. Exhibit A reflects the rates in effect at the execution of this Agreement. Any subsequent rate change shall become effective on July 1 of the County fiscal year (July 1 through June 30). County shall provide notice to Customer of rate change(s). Customer's subsequent invoice shall be adjusted in accordance with the rate change(s). Checks shall be made payable to the County of San Bernardino. Payment address is: Innovation and Technology Department 670 E. Gilbert Street, First Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0915 Attn: Administration Services V. AGREEMENT AUTHORIZATION Customer warrants and represents that the individual signing this Agreement is a properly authorized representative of the Customer and has the full power and authority to enter into this agreement on the Customer's behalf. VI. ASSIGNMENT The Customer may not assign this Agreement nor any rights, licenses or obligations hereunder, and any such assignment shall be void and without effect unless the County approves the assignment in writing. Page 126 page 5 of 12 VII. DEFAULT If the Customer does not make timely payment of amounts due under this Agreement or breaches any term or condition of this Agreement, County may declare immediately due and payable the entire unpaid amount, plus all other amounts due hereunder, less any unearned charges. County may also exercise all rights and remedies of a secure party under the Uniform Commercial Code (or other similar law) of the State of California and pursue any other remedies existing in law or in equity. VIII. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE A. Indemnification The County agrees to defend and indemnify the Customer and its authorized officers, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all claims, actions, losses, damages, and/or liability arising solely out of the acts, errors or omissions of County in the performance of this Agreement, except where such indemnification is prohibited by law. At its sole discretion, Customer may participate at its own expense in the defense of any claim, action or proceeding, but such participation shall not relieve County of any obligation imposed by this Agreement. Customer shall notify County promptly of any claim, action or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense. The Customer hereby agrees to defend and indemnify the County, its agents, officers and employees (hereafter collectively referred to in this paragraph as 'County') from any claim, action or proceeding against County, arising solely out of the acts or omissions of Customer in the performance of this Agreement. At its sole discretion, County may participate at its own expense in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding, but such participation shall not relieve Customer of any obligation imposed by this Agreement. County shall notify Customer promptly of any claim, action or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense. In the event that County and/or Customer are determined to be comparatively at fault for any claim, action, loss or damage that results from their respective obligations under this Agreement, County and/or Customer shall indemnify the other to the extent of its comparative fault. B. Insurance Customer agrees to provide insurance set forth in accordance with the requirements herein. If Customer uses existing coverage to comply with these requirements and that coverage does not meet the specified requirements, Customer agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. 1) Additional Insured — All policies, except for the Workers' Compensation, Errors and Omissions and Professional Liability policies, shall contain endorsements naming the County and its officers, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insured with respect to liabilities arising out of the performance of services hereunder. 2) Waiver of Subrogation Rights — Customer shall require the carriers of required coverages to waive all rights of subrogation against the County, its officers, employees, agents, volunteers, contractors and subcontractors. All general or auto liability insurance coverage provided shall not prohibit Customer and Customer's employees or agents from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss or claim. Customer hereby waives all rights of subrogation against the County. 3) Policies Primary and Non-Contributory — All policies required herein are to be primary and non- contributory with any insurance or self-insurance programs carried or administered by the County. 4) Severability of Interests — Customer agrees to ensure that coverage provided to meet these requirements is applicable separately to each insured and there will be no cross liability exclusions that preclude coverage for suits between Customer and the County or between the County and any other insured or additional insured under the policy. Page 127 page 6 of 12 5) Proof of Coverage — Customer shall furnish Certificates of Insurance to ITD evidencing the insurance coverage, including endorsements, as required, prior to the commencement of performance of services hereunder, which certificates shall provide that such insurance shall not be terminated or expire without thirty (30) days written notice to ITD, and Customer shall maintain such insurance for three (3) years after termination of the Agreement. Within fifteen (15) days of the commencement of this contract, Customer shall furnish a copy of the Declaration page for all applicable policies and will provide complete certified copies of the policies and endorsements immediately upon request. 6) Acceptability of Insurance Carrier — Unless otherwise approved by Risk Management, insurance shall be written by insurers authorized to do business in the State of California and with a minimum Best Insurance Guide rating of A- VII. 7) Deductibles and Self-Insured Retention - Any and all deductibles or self-insured retentions in excess of$10,000 shall be declared to and approved by Risk Management. 8) Failure to Procure Coverage — In the event that any policy of insurance required under this contract does not comply with the requirements, is not procured, or is canceled and not replaced, the County has the right but not the obligation or duty to cancel the contract or obtain insurance if it deems necessary and any premiums paid by the County will be promptly reimbursed by Customer. 9) Insurance Review — Insurance requirements are subject to periodic review by the County. The Director of Risk Management or designee is authorized, but not required, to reduce, waive or suspend any insurance requirements whenever Risk Management determines that any of the required insurance is not available, is unreasonably priced, or is not needed to protect the interests of the County. In addition, if the Department of Risk Management determines that heretofore unreasonably priced or unavailable types of insurance coverage or coverage limits become reasonably priced or available, the Director of Risk Management or designee is authorized, but not required, to change the above insurance requirements to require additional types of insurance coverage or higher coverage limits, provided that any such change is reasonable in light of past claims against the County, inflation, or any other item reasonably related to the County's risk. 10)Any change requiring additional types of insurance coverage or higher coverage limits must be made by amendment to this contract. Customer agrees to execute any such amendment within thirty (30) days of receipt. 11)Any failure, actual or alleged, on the part of the County to monitor or enforce compliance with any of the insurance and indemnification requirements will not be deemed as a waiver of any rights on the part of the County. 12)Without in anyway affecting the indemnity herein provided and in addition thereto, the Customer shall secure and maintain throughout the contract term the following types of insurance with limits as shown: (i) Workers' Compensation/Employers Liability — A program of Workers' Compensation insurance or a state-approved, self-insurance program in an amount and form to meet all applicable requirements of the Labor Code of the State of California, including Employer's Liability with $250,000 limits covering all persons including volunteers providing services on behalf of Customer and all risks to such persons under this contract. (ii) Commercial/General Liability Insurance —Customer shall carry General Liability Insurance covering all operations performed by or on behalf of Customer providing coverage for bodily injury and property damage with a combined single limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000), per occurrence. The policy coverage shall include: a. Premises operations and mobile equipment b. Products and completed operations c. Broad form property damage (including completed operations) Page 128 page 7 of 12 e. Explosion, collapse and underground hazards f. Personal injury g. Contractual liability h. $2,000,000 general aggregate limit (iii) Automobile Liability Insurance — Primary insurance coverage shall be written on ISO Business Auto coverage form for all owned, hired and non-owned automobiles or symbol 1 (any auto). The policy shall have a combined single limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for bodily injury and property damage, per occurrence. If Customer is transporting one or more non-employee passengers in performance of contract services, the automobile liability policy shall have a combined single limit of two million dollars ($2,000,000) for bodily injury and property damage per occurrence. If Customer owns no autos, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (iv) Umbrella Liability Insurance — An umbrella (over primary) or excess policy may be used to comply with limits or other primary coverage requirements. When used, the umbrella policy shall apply to bodily injury/property damage, personal injury/advertising injury and shall include a dropdown provision providing primary coverage for any liability not covered by the primary policy. The coverage shall also apply to automobile liability. IX. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF SERVICES A. Immediate Suspension, Uncured Termination The County may, in its sole discretion and without prior notice, immediately suspend all or part of the Services for breach of any of the conditions identified below. The County will provide Customer a written notice of breach and allow the Customer 30 days to correct the condition giving rise to such breach. If the Customer fails to remedy the breach within the 30-day cure period, the County may immediately terminate the Services with no further notice required. 1) Customer shall ensure that it has all necessary licenses and permits required by the laws of the United States, State of California, County of San Bernardino and all other appropriate governmental agencies, and agrees to maintain these licenses and permits in effect for the duration of the Agreement. Customer shall notify County immediately of loss or suspension of any such licenses and permits. Customer shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, administrative orders, rules or regulations relating to its duties, obligations and performance under the terms of the Agreement. 2) Customer shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, administrative orders, rules or regulations relating to its duties, obligations and performance under the terms of the Agreement. 3) Customer represents and warrants to County that (i) the information Customer provides in connection with registration for the Services is accurate and complete; (ii) Customer's use of the System is not illegal, defamatory, malicious, harmful, or discriminatory based on race, sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, or age; (iii) Customer's use of the Services complies with all applicable laws, rules and regulations; (iv) Customer has obtained all consents and licenses required to legally access and use the System; (v) the execution and delivery of this Agreement will not conflict with, or violate any provision of, Customer's charter, by-laws or other governing documents; and (vi) Customer has otherwise taken all necessary steps to legally execute this Agreement. 4) Customer agrees to abide by all existing and future security practices, policies and protocols established by the County, which the County has established to ensure the integrity of the System. Page 129 page 8 of 12 Customer understands that the County closely monitors the System and may perform periodic security audits. 5) Customer agrees to implement measures that are reasonable for Customer's use of the System to prevent interference with the operation of the System. NEITHER COUNTY NOR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, REPRESENTATIVES, SERVICE SUPPLIERS OR LICENSORS WILL BE LIABLE FOR UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO, MISUSE OF, CUSTOMER'S INABILITY TO ACCESS, OR DAMAGE TO THE SYSTEM OR CUSTOMER'S FIELD EQUIPMENT, UNLESS AND ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS DISCLAIMER IS PROHIBITED BY APPLICABLE LAW. B. Immediate Termination The County may, in its sole discretion and without prior notice, immediately suspend or terminate all or part of the Services for any of the conditions identified below. The County will promptly provide Customer a written notice of termination or suspension of Services to Customer. 1) County discovers that Customer provided false registration information, or that Customer lacked the capacity to enter into this Agreement at the time of its consummation; 2) County determines, in its sole discretion, that Customer's use of the Services poses a threat to the security or performance of the System or to any of County's other users or suppliers; 3) County determines, in its sole discretion, that Customer's use of the Services is illegal; 4) County reasonably believes that Customer's use of the Services has or will subject County to civil or criminal liability; 5) Customer fails to make any payment when due; or 6) Customer breaches any of the other material terms and conditions in this Agreement. X. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. Permits - Customer is responsible for obtaining and paying any costs of all permits, licenses or approvals by any regulatory bodies having jurisdiction over the uses authorized herein, as appropriate. B. Attorneys' Fees. If any legal action is instituted to enforce any party's rights hereunder, each party agrees to bear its own attorneys' fees and costs regardless of who is the prevailing party. This paragraph shall not apply to those costs and attorney fees directly arising from a third-party legal action against a party hereto and payable under Section VIII(A)(a) Indemnification. C. Waiver - No waiver of a breach of any provision of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of any other breach, or of such provision. Failure of County to enforce at any time, or from time to time, any provision of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver thereof. The remedies herein reserved shall be cumulative and additional to any other remedies in law or equity. D. Validity - The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision. E. Caption and Paragraph Headings - Captions and paragraph headings used herein are for convenience only and are not a part of this agreement and shall not be used in construing it. Page 130 Page 9 of 12 F. Exhibits - All Exhibits attached hereto, if any, are an integral part of this Agreement and are incorporated herein by reference. G. Entire Agreement - This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California and constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, discussions, and preliminary understanding. This Agreement may be amended as County and the Customer mutually agree in writing. Any such amendment must be in a physical writing and manually signed by authorized representatives of the County and Customer. H. Notifications - All notices or demands required or permitted to be given or made hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly given: (a) Upon actual delivery, if given in person; (b) upon receipt, as evidenced by transmission confirmation, if sent by facsimile; (c) within three (3) days after deposit if sent via United States First Class mail, postage prepaid; or (d) upon receipt as evidenced by proof of delivery if sent by commercial overnight courier. Each such notice is to be sent to the respective party at the address indicated below or to any other address or person that the respective parties may designate by written notice delivered pursuant hereto: Customer: City of Rancho Cucamonga Public Works Department 8794 Lion Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91370 (909) 774-4108 Attention: Mr. Ernest Ruiz County: County of San Bernardino Innovation and Technology Department 670 E. Gilbert Street, First Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0915 (909) 388-5555 Attn: Administration Services XI. INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZATION The County's Innovation and Technology Department, through the Chief Executive Officer or its Chief Information Officer or designee, is authorized to discharge all functions ascribed to County in this Agreement, except those specifically reserved by law to the Board of Supervisors. XII.FORCE MAJEURE County shall not be held liable for any delay or failure in performance of any part of this Agreement from any cause beyond its control and without its fault or negligence, such as acts of God, acts of civil or military authority, government regulations, strikes, labor disputes, embargoes, epidemics, war, terrorist acts, riots, insurrections, fire, explosions, earthquakes, nuclear accidents, floods, power blackouts, brownouts, or surges, volcanic action, other major environmental disturbances, unusually severe weather conditions, inability to secure product or services of other persons or transportation facilities, or acts or omissions of transportation common carriers. Page 131 page 10 of 12 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below their respective signatures. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO CUSTOMER Larry Ainsworth, Chief Information Officer (State if corporation, company, etc.) Dated By ► (Authorized Signature) Dated Title Address Approved as to Legal Form Reviewed by Contract Compliance Ob- Bonnie Uphold, Deputy County Counsel Date Date Page 132 page 11 of 12 EXHIBIT A 800 MHz RADIO COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM ACCESS/PAGING SERVICES AND PAYMENT TERMS PAYMENT SCHEDULE Monthly Invoicing: County will invoice Customer monthly for services rendered. Payments are due upon receipt of invoice and payable within sixty (60) days of invoice date. CHARGES FOR SERVICES Service(s) No of Units Monthly Unit Charge Monthly Charge Radio Access & Maintenance 283 $54.38 $15,389.54 Total Estimated Yearly Cost $184,674.48 Page 133 Page 12 of 12 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Robert Neiuber, Human Resources Director Lucy Alvarez-Nunez, Management Analyst I SUBJECT: Consideration to Adopt a Resolution, Approving the Salary Schedules for Fiscal Year 2021-22 for Job Classifications Employed by the City Including a Part-time Employee Benefit Summary. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-047) (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt the attached resolution approving the salary schedules for Fiscal Year 2021-22 for job classifications employed by the City, including a part-time employee benefit summary. BACKGROUND: The City Council traditionally adopts salary resolutions biannually for classifications employed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. These resolutions are updated to reflect changes in salaries, additions and deletions of classifications, changes in job titles, and other terms of employment. Updates to the salary schedules include terms negotiated and agreed upon in the current Memorandum of Understanding. ANALYSIS: The attached resolution adopts changes previously approved in the Memorandum of Understanding for the Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association (RCCEA). The updated RCCEA salary schedule includes a 12% increase to the Animal Center Supervisor salary range, a 4.5% increase to the Human Resources Technician salary range, and elimination of the bottom 10% salary range of the Administrative Assistant position. In addition, updates to the RCCEA salary schedule include a change in classification to the Senior Information Technology Specialist position from General Employee to Supervisory Professional. This change is a result of a position study showing the duties and responsibilities of the position fall within a Supervisory Professional classification. Additional changes to the RCCEA salary schedule include the addition of Community Development Technician I and Community Development Technician 11 with the salary range set at the same range as the Public Services Technician I and Public Services Technician II. The attached resolution also includes updates previously approved in the Memorandum of Understanding for Rancho Cucamonga Management Association (RCMA). The updated RCMA salary schedule includes the removal of the boot allowance provision. Page134 All other salary schedules, classifications, job titles, and other terms of employment remain the same. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution updating the salary schedules for job classifications employed by the City, including a part-time employee benefit summary for fiscal year 2021-22. FISCAL IMPACT: Adjustments to the RCCEA salary schedule and their fiscal impacts were accounted for in the draft FY 2021-22 budget. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City's Vision to build on our success as a world class community, create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant City, rich in opportunity for all to thrive. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 — Resolution No. 2021-047 Attachment 2 — Executive Management Group Salary Schedule Attachment 3— Rancho Cucamonga Management Association Salary Schedule Attachment 4 —Teamsters Local 1932 Salary Schedule Attachment 5— Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association Salary Schedule Attachment 6— Part-Time City Positions Salary Schedule Attachment 7— Part-Time Employee Benefit Summary Page 2 Page 135 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SALARY SCHEDULES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-22, INCLUDING A PART-TIME EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SUMMARY. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that it is necessary for the efficient operation and management of the City that policies be established prescribing salary ranges, benefits and holidays and other policies for employees of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has previously adopted salary resolutions establishing salary ranges, benefits and other terms of employment for employees of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga recognizes that it is necessary from time to time to amend the salary resolution to accommodate changes in position titles, classifications salary ranges, benefits and other terms of employment including an outline of State and Federally required benefits afforded to part-time employees; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California to approve the attached salary schedules for the Executive Management Group, Rancho Cucamonga Management Association, Teamsters Local 1932, Rancho Cucamonga City Employees Association, and Part-Time City Positions, including a Part-Time Employee Benefit Summary (Attachments 2-7) effective July 5, 2021. PASSED, APROVED AND ADOPTED this 16t" day of June 2021. Page 136 Resolution No.2021- EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT GROUP ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Monthly Pay Ranges effective July 1, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Class Title Step Amount Step Amount Step Amount Animal Services Director 1604 $9,478 1644 $11,570 1674 $13,427 Assistant City Manager 1672 $13,305 1712 $17,282 1742 $18,863 Building and Safety Services Director 1609 $9,716 1649 $11,863 1679 $13,777 City Clerk Services Director 1594 $9,016 1632 $10,897 1675 $13,505 City Manager 1756 $20,226 1796 $24,693 1826 1 $28,678 Community Services Director 1627 $10,629 1667 $12,977 1697 $15,070 Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services 1647 �11,744 1687 $14,338 1717 $16,652 Deputy City Manager/Civic& Cultural Services 1647 �11,744 1687 $14,338 1717 $16,652 Deputy City Manager/ Econ. &Comm. Dev. 1647 $11,744 1687 1 $14,338 1717 $16,652 Eng Svs Director/City Engineer 1628 $10,682 1668 $13,041 1698 $15,145 Finance Director 1629 $10,736 1669 $13,106 1699 $15,222 Human Resources Director 1621 $10,316 1661 $12,593 1691 $14,627 Innovation and Technology Director 1637 $11,174 1677 $13,640 1697 $15,070 Library Director 1615 $10,012 1655 $12,222 1685 $14,195 Planning Director 1621 $10,316 1661 $12,593 1691 $14,627 Public Works Services Director 1609 $9,716 1649 $11,863 1679 $13,777 Fire Chief* I A $15,892 F $20,397 Included for informational purposes only-This is a Fire District Management Employee Group position not a City position ATTACHMENT 2 Page 137 Resolution No. 2021- RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Monthly Pay Ranges Effective July 1, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Class Title Step Amount Step Amount Step Amount Accounting Manager 2525 $6,454 2565 $7,878 2585 $8,705 Animal Center Manager 2506 $5,872 2546 $7,168 2566 $7,918 Assistant to the City Manager 2548 $7,239 2588 $8,836 2608 $9,763 Building and Safety Manager 2533 $6,718 2573 $8,199 2593 $9,060 City Planner/Planning Manager 2583 $8,619 2623 $10,520 2643 $11,625 Community Affairs Manager 2565 $7,878 2605 $9,619 2625 $10,626 Community Improvement Manager 2533 $6,718 2573 $8,199 2593 $9,060 Community Services Manager 2506 $5,872 2546 $7,168 2566 $7,918 Community Services Superintendent 2536 $6,819 2576 $8,323 2596 $9,196 Cultural Center Manager 2536 $6,819 2576 $8,323 2596 $9,196 Deputy Director of City Clerk Services 2535 $6,785 2575 $8,281 2595 $9,150 Deputy Director of Community Services 2590 $8,925 2630 $10,895 2650 $12,039 Deputy Dir. Engineering/Deputy City Eng. 2590 $8,925 2630 $10,895 2650 $12,039 Deputy Dir. Engineering/Utility Manager 2590 $8,925 2630 $10,895 2650 $12,039 Deputy Director of Engineering 2584 $8,662 2624 $10,574 2644 $11,684 Deputy Director of Finance 2590 $8,925 2630 $10,895 2650 $12,039 Deputy Director of Human Resources 2590 $8,925 2630 $10,895 2650 $12,039 Deputy Dir. of Innovation and Technology 2558 $7,608 2598 $9,287 2618 $10,263 Deputy Director of Library Services 2572 $8,158 2612 $9,959 2632 $11,004 Deputy Director of Public Works 2590 $8,925 2630 $10,895 2650 $12,039 Environmental Programs Manager 2539 $6,922 2579 $8,449 2599 $9,335 Facilities Superintendent 2536 $6,819 2576 $8,323 2596 $9,196 Finance Manager 2559 $7,646 2599 $9,335 2619 $10,315 Library Services Manager 2506 $5,872 2546 $7,168 2566 $7,918 Park/Landscape Maintenance Supt 2536 $6,819 2576 $8,323 2596 $9,196 Plan Check & Inspection Manager 2533 $6,718 2573 $8,199 2595 $9,150 Principal Accountant 2532 $6,684 2572 $8,158 2592 $9,014 Principal Engineer 2567 $7,958 2607 $9,713 2627 $10,732 Principal Librarian 2495 $5,558 2535 $6,785 2555 $7,495 Principal Management Analyst 2543 $7,061 2583 $8,619 2603 $9,523 Principal Planner 2537 $6,853 2577 $8,365 2597 $9,241 Procurement Manager 2530 $6,618 2570 $8,078 2590 $8,925 Public Works Maintenance Manager 2566 $7,918 2606 $9,666 2626 $10,679 Revenue Manager 2532 $6,684 2572 $8,158 2592 $9,014 Senior Civil Engineer 2547 $7,203 2587 $8,792 2607 $9,713 Senior Executive Assistant 2460 $4,668 2500 $5,698 2520 $6,296 WA LAMENT 3 Resolution No. 2021- RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Monthly Pay Ranges Effective July 1, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Senior Planner 2517 $6,203 2557 $7,570 2577 $8,365 Street/Storm Drain Maintenance Supt 2536 $6,819 2576 $8,323 2596 $9,196 Traffic Engineer 2569 $8,038 2609 $9,811 2629 $10,842 Utilities Operations Manager 2524 $6,422 2564 $7,840 2584 $8,662 Veterinarian 2579 $8,449 2619 1 $10,315 2639 1 $11,395 WA - MENT 3 Resolution No. 2021- PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEES Represented By THE TEAMSTERS LOCAL 1932 ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Monthly Pay Ranges Effective January 1, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Class Title Step Amoun• Step Amount Step Amount Electrician 5457 $4,690 5497 $5,726 5517 $6,328 Equipment Operator 5425 $3,999 5465 $4,882 5485 $5,394 Inventory Specialist Equipment/Mat 5389 $3,342 5429 $4,079 5449 $4,507 Lead Maintenance Worker 5429 $4,079 5469 $4,980 5489 $5,502 Lead Mechanic 5440 $4,310 5480 $5,260 5500 $5,812 Maintenance Coordinator 5452 $4,575 5492 $5,584 5512 $6,171 Maintenance Worker 5391 $3,375 5431 $4,119 5451 $4,550 Mechanic 5430 $4,100 5470 $5,005 5490 $5,530 Senior Maintenance Worker 5401 $3,546 5441 $4,330 5461 $4,785 Signal & Lighting Coordinator 5479 $5,235 5519 $6,390 5539 $7,061 Signal & Lighting Technician 5452 $4,575 5492 $5,584 5512 $6,171 ATTACHMENT 4 Page 140 Resolution No. 2021- RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Monthly Pay Ranges Effective July 5, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Class Title Step Amount Step Amount Step Amount Account Clerk 4375 $3,055 4415 $3,730 4435 $4,121 Account Technician 4423 $3,881 4463 $4,737 4483 $5,235 Accountant# 3465 $4,786 3505 $5,842 3525 $6,454 Accounts Payable Supervisor# 3470 $4,906 3510 $5,989 3530 $6,618 Administrative Assistant 4369 $2,965 4409 $3,619 4429 $3,999 Administrative Technician 4437 $4,163 4477 $5,081 4497 $5,613 Animal Behavior Specialist 4388 $3,259 4428 $3,979 4448 $4,397 Animal Care Attendant 4349 $2,684 4389 $3,276 4409 $3,619 Animal Care Supervisor# 3440 $4,225 3480 $5,156 3500 $5,698 Animal Caretaker 4378 $3,102 4418 $3,785 4438 $4,182 Animal Rescue Specialist 4388 $3,259 4428 $3,979 4448 $4,397 Animal Services Dispatcher 4369 $2,965 4409 $3,619 4429 $3,999 Animal Services Officer 1 4421 $3,843 4461 $4,691 4481 $5,183 Animal Services Officer II 4441 $4,245 4481 $5,183 4501 $5,727 Artistic Producer- Mainstreet Theatre 4450 $4,441 4490 $5,421 4510 $5,989 Assistant Engineer# 3488 $5,366 3528 $6,551 3548 $7,239 Assistant Planner# 3468 $4,858 3508 $5,930 3528 $6,551 Associate Engineer# 3518 $6,233 3558 $7,608 3578 $8,407 Associate Planner# 3487 $5,340 3527 $6,520 3547 $7,203 Box Office Coordinator 4450 $4,441 4490 $5,421 4510 $5,989 Budget Analyst# 3515 $6,140 3555 $7,495 3575 $8,281 Building Inspection Su ervisor#2 3504 $5,812 3544 $7,096 3564 $7,840 Building Inspector 12 4444 $4,308 4484 $5,260 4504 $5,812 Buildinq Inspector 112 4464 $4,761 4504 $5,812 4524 $6,422 Building and Safety Manager* 2533 $6,718 2573 $8,199 2593 $9,060 Business License Clerk 4378 $3,102 4418 $3,785 4438 $4,182 Business License Inspector 4418 $3,785 4458 $4,621 4478 $5,106 Business License Program Coordinator# 3432 $4,060 3472 $4,954 3492 $5,474 Business License Program Supervisor# 3470 $4,906 3510 $5,989 3530 $6,618 Business License Technician 4408 $3,602 4448 $4,397 4468 $4,858 City Clerk Records Management Analyst# 3470 $4,906 3510 $5,989 3530 $6,618 Community Affairs Coordinator 4450 $4,441 4490 $5,421 4510 $5,989 Community Affairs Officer# 3515 $6,140 3555 $7,495 3575 $8,281 Community Affairs Senior Coordinator# 3480 $5,156 3520 $6,296 3540 $6,956 Community Affairs Specialist 4350 $2,696 4390 $3,292 4410 $3,637 WAN MENT 5 Resolution No. 2021- RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Monthly Pay Ranges Effective July 5, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Community Affairs Technician 4437 $4,163 4477 $5,081 4497 $5,613 Community Development Technician 1 4413 $3,691 4453 $4,507 4473 $4,980 Community Development Technician 11 4423 $3,881 4463 $4,737 4483 $5,235 Community Improvement Su ervisor#2 3504 $5,812 3544 $7,096 3564 $7,840 Community Improvement Officer 1 4421 $3,843 4461 $4,691 4481 $5,183 Community Improvement Officer 11 4441 $4,245 4481 $5,183 4501 $5,727 Community Programs Coordinator 4450 $4,441 4490 $5,421 4510 $5,989 Community Programs Specialist 4437 $4,163 4477 $5,081 4497 $5,613 Community Services Coordinator 4450 $4,441 4490 $5,421 4510 $5,989 Community Services Project Coordinator# 3500 $5,698 3540 $6,956 3560 $7,684 Community Services Specialist 4350 $2,696 4390 $3,292 4410 $3,637 Community Services Supervisor# 3480 $5,156 3520 $6,296 3540 $6,956 Community Services Technician 4437 $4,163 4477 $5,081 4497 $5,613 Community Theater Producer 4450 $4,441 4490 $5,421 4510 $5,989 Customer Care Assistant 4349 $2,684 4409 $3,619 4429 $3,999 Customer Service Representative 4378 $3,102 4418 $3,785 4438 $4,182 Deputy City Clerk# 3430 $4,019 3470 $4,906 3490 $5,421 Engineering Aide 4421 $3,843 4461 $4,691 4481 $5,183 Engineering Technician 4441 $4,245 4481 $5,183 4501 $5,727 Environmental Programs Coordinator# 3503 $5,783 3543 $7,061 3563 $7,801 Environmental Programs Inspector 2 4464 $4,761 4504 $5,812 4524 $6,422 Event & Rental Services Coordinator 4450 $4,441 4490 $5,421 4510 $5,989 Executive Assistant ll# 3444 $4,308 3484 $5,260 3504 $5,812 Executive Assistant' 4394 $3,359 4464 $4,761 4484 $5,260 Fleet Su ervisor#2 3488 $5,366 3528 $6,551 3548 $7,239 Front of House Coordinator 4450 $4,441 4490 $5,421 4510 $5,989 Fund Development Coordinator# 3470 $4,906 3510 $5,989 3530 $6,618 GIS Analyst# 3505 $5,842 3545 $7,132 3565 $7,878 GIS Specialist 4456 $4,576 4496 $5,585 4516 $6,171 GIS Supervisor# 3535 $6,785 3575 $8,281 3595 $9,150 GIS Technician 4436 $4,140 4476 $5,054 4496 $5,585 Human Resources Clerk 4389 $3,276 4429 $3,999 4449 $4,418 Human Resources Technician 4408 $3,602 4448 $4,397 4468 $4,858 Information Technology Analyst I# 3505 $5,842 3545 $7,132 3565 $7,878 Information Technology Analyst ll# 3520 $6,296 3560 $7,684 3580 $8,489 Information Technology Specialist 1 4456 $4,576 4496 $5,585 4516 $6,171 WAbgMENT 5 Resolution No. 2021- RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Monthly Pay Ranges Effective July 5, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Information Technology Specialist II 4471 $4,931 4511 $6,019 4531 $6,650 Information Technology Technician 4411 $3,655 4451 $4,461 4471 $4,931 Librarian 1# 3435 $4,121 3475 $5,031 3495 $5,558 Librarian 11# 3457 $4,598 3497 $5,613 3517 $6,203 Library Assistant 1# 3373 $3,023 3413 $3,691 3433 $4,079 Library Assistant 11# 3414 $3,711 3454 $4,530 3474 $5,005 Library Clerk 4356 $2,778 4396 $3,392 4416 $3,747 Library Technician 4393 $3,341 4433 $4,079 4453 $4,507 Maintenance Su ervisor#2 3488 $5,366 3528 $6,551 3548 $7,239 Management Aide 4440 $4,225 4480 $5,156 4500 $5,698 Management Analyst 1# 3470 $4,906 3510 $5,989 3530 $6,618 Management Analyst 11# 3498 $5,641 3538 $6,888 3558 $7,608 Management Analyst III# 3515 $6,140 3555 $7,495 3575 $8,281 Office Services Clerk 4369 $2,965 4409 $3,619 4429 $3,999 Patron & Events Supervisor# 3480 $5,156 3520 $6,296 3540 $6,956 Payroll Supervisor# 3470 $4,906 3510 $5,989 3530 $6,618 Planning Specialist 4443 $4,287 4483 $5,235 4503 $5,783 Planning Technician 4423 $3,881 4463 $4,737 4483 $5,235 Plans Examiner 1 4474 $5,005 4514 $6,110 4534 $6,751 Plans Examiner 11# 3488 $5,366 3528 $6,551 3548 $7,239 Procurement & Contracts Analyst# 3433 $4,079 3473 $4,980 3493 $5,503 Procurement Clerk 4374 $3,040 4414 $3,711 4434 $4,100 Procurement Technician 4411 $3,655 4451 $4,461 4471 $4,931 Public Services Technician 1 4413 $3,691 4453 $4,507 4473 $4,980 Public Services Technician II 4423 $3,881 4463 $4,737 4483 $5,235 Public Services Technician III 4443 $4,287 4483 $5,235 4503 $5,783 Public Works Inspector 12 4444 $4,308 4484 $5,260 4504 $5,812 Public Works Inspector 112 4464 $4,761 4504 $5,812 4524 $6,422 Public Works Safety Coordinator#2 3468 $4,858 3508 $5,930 3528 $6,551 Records Clerk 4358 $2,806 4398 $3,426 4418 $3,785 Records Coordinator 4386 $3,226 4426 $3,940 4446 $4,352 Risk Analyst# 3433 $4,079 3473 $4,980 3493 $5,503 Risk Management Coordinator# 3470 $4,906 3510 $5,989 3530 $6,618 Senior Account Clerk 4395 $3,375 4435 $4,121 4455 $4,552 Senior Account Technician 4446 $4,352 4486 $5,314 4506 $5,872 Senior Accountant# 3498 $5,641 3538 $6,888 3558 $7,608 W214MENT 5 Resolution No. 2021- RCCEA COVERED EMPLOYEES IN THE SUPERVISORY/PROFESSIONAL AND GENERAL EMPLOYEES GROUPS ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Monthly Pay Ranges Effective July 5, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Senior Animal Services Officer# 3461 $4,691 3501 $5,727 3521 $6,327 Senior Building Ins ector#2 3484 $5,260 3524 $6,422 3544 $7,096 Senior Business License Clerk 4398 $3,426 4438 $4,182 4458 $4,621 Senior Community Improvement Officer# 3461 $4,691 3501 $5,727 3521 $6,327 Senior Electrician # 3485 $5,288 3525 $6,454 3545 $7,132 Senior GIS Analyst # 3520 $6,296 3560 $7,684 3580 $8,489 Senior Information Technology Analyst# 3535 $6,785 3575 $8,281 3595 $9,150 Senior Information Technology Specialist# 4493 $5,503 4533 $6,718 4553 $7,422 Senior Librarian# 3468 $4,858 3508 $5,930 3528 $6,551 Senior Park Planner# 3500 $5,698 3540 $6,956 3560 $7,684 Senior Plans Examiner# 3503 $5,783 3543 $7,061 3563 $7,801 Senior Procurement Technician# 3463 $4,737 3503 $5,783 3523 $6,390 Senior Risk Management Analyst# 3515 $6,140 3555 $7,495 3575 $8,281 Senior Veterinary Technician# 3461 $4,691 3501 $5,727 3521 $6,327 Special Districts Analyst# 3498 $5,641 3538 $6,888 3558 $7,608 Supervisinq Public Works Ins ector#2 3494 $5,529 3534 $6,751 3554 $7,458 Theater Production Coordinator 4460 $4,668 4500 $5,698 4520 $6,296 Theater Production Supervisor# 3480 $5,156 3520 $6,296 3540 $6,956 Theatre Technician III 4423 $3,881 4463 $4,737 4483 $5,235 Utilities Operation Supervisor# 3515 $6,140 3555 $7,495 3575 $8,281 Veterinary Assistant 4407 $3,583 4447 $4,375 4467 $4,833 Veterinary Technician 4437 $4,163 4477 $5,081 4497 $5,613 1. When acting as Clerk to Commissions $50 paid per night or weekend day meeting. Compensatory time off 2. Refer to MOU for provision of boot # Denotes Supervisory/Professional Class WAb MENT 5 Resolution No. 2021- PART-TIME CITY POSITIONS ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Hourly Pay Ranges Effective July 1, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Part Time Positions Step Amount Step Amoun, Step Amount Account Clerk 6368 $15.87 6408 $19.37 6449 $23.77 Account Technician 6423 $20.88 6463 $25.49 6497 $30.20 Accountant 6465 $25.74 6505 $31.43 6539 $37.23 Administrative Assistant 6343 $14.01 6372 $16.19 6443 $23.07 Administrative Intern 6343 $14.01 6360 $15.25 6370 $16.02 Animal Behavior Specialist 6388 $17.54 6428 $21.41 6462 $25.36 Animal Care Attendant 6349 $14.43 6389 $17.62 6422 $20.77 Animal Caretaker 6378 $16.69 6418 $20.36 6452 $24.12 Animal Rescue Specialist 6388 $17.54 6428 $21.41 6462 $25.36 Animal Services Dispatcher 6369 $15.95 6409 $19.47 6443 $23.07 Animal Services Officer 6441 $22.84 6481 $27.88 6495 $29.90 Assistant Engineer 6488 $28.88 6528 $35.25 6562 $41.76 Assistant Planner 6468 $26.13 6508 $31.90 6541 $37.61 Associate Engineer 6518 $33.53 6558 $40.94 6592 $48.50 Associate Planner 6487 $28.73 6527 $35.07 6561 $41.55 Box Office Assistant* 6350 $14.50 Box Office Specialist 6343 $14.01 6351 $14.58 6361 $15.33 Budget Analyst 6498 $30.35 6538 $37.05 6588 $47.54 Building Inspector 6464 $25.61 6504 $31.27 6523 $34.38 Business License Clerk 6378 $16.69 6418 $20.36 6452 $24.12 Business License Technician 6408 $19.37 6448 $23.65 6482 $28.02 Community Improvement Officer 1 6421 $20.67 6461 $25.23 6495 $29.90 Community Improvement Officer II 6441 $22.84 6481 $27.88 6515 $33.03 Community Programs Coordinator 6450 $23.89 6490 $29.16 6524 $34.55 Community Programs Specialist 6437 $22.39 6477 $27.33 6511 $32.38 Community Services Coordinator 6450 $23.89 6490 $29.16 6529 $35.42 Community Services Specialist 6350 $14.50 6390 $17.71 6424 $20.98 Community Services Supervisor 6480 $27.75 6520 $33.87 6554 $40.13 Community Services Technician 6437 $22.39 6477 $27.33 6511 $32.38 Customer Care Assistant 6343 $14.01 6372 $16.19 6443 $23.07 Day Custodian 6391 $17.79 Department Director 6562 $41.76 6604 $51.50 6707 $86.07 Department Manager 6525 $34.73 6566 $42.60 6634 $59.81 Deputy City Clerk 6430 $21.62 6470 $26.40 6504 $31.27 Division Supervisor 6416 $20.16 6457 $24.74 6554 $40.13 Electrician 6457 $24.74 6497 $30.20 6535 $36.50 ATTACHMENT 6 Page145 Resolution No. 2021- PART-TIME CITY POSITIONS ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Hourly Pay Ranges Effective July 1, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Part Time Positions Step Amount Step Amount Step Amount Energy Efficiency Coordinator 6372 $16.19 6412 $19.77 6422 $20.78 Engineering Aide 6421 $20.67 6461 $25.24 6495 $29.90 Engineering Intern 6343 $14.01 6360 $15.24 6370 $16.03 Engineering Technician 6441 $22.84 6481 $27.88 6515 $33.03 Environmental Resources Intern* 6343 $14.01 Equipment Operator 6425 $21.09 6465 $25.75 6503 $31.11 Executive Assistant 6394 $18.07 6434 $22.06 6497 $30.20 GIS Intern 6343 $14.01 6360 $15.24 6370 $16.03 GIS Programmer/Analyst 6456 $24.61 6496 $30.05 6506 $31.58 GIS Technician 6436 $22.28 6476 $27.20 6510 $32.22 Healthy Cities Coordinator 6372 $16.19 6412 $19.77 6422 $20.78 Human Resources Clerk 6389 $17.62 6429 $21.51 6462 $25.36 Human Resources Technician 6399 $18.52 6439 $22.61 6465 $25.74 Lead Mechanic 6440 $22.73 6480 $27.75 6518 $33.53 Librarian 1 6433 $21.95 6473 $26.79 6509 $32.06 Library Aide* 6343 $14.01 Library Assistant 1 6362 $15.41 6402 $18.81 6447 $23.53 Library Assistant II 6404 $18.99 6444 $23.18 6488 $28.87 Library Clerk 6346 $14.22 6386 $17.37 6429 $21.51 Library Director/SIF Trainer 6600 $50.48 6640 $61.63 6650 $64.78 Library Page* 6343 $14.01 Library Technician 6393 $17.98 6433 $21.95 6467 $26.00 Maintenance Technician* 6343 $14.01 Management Aide 6440 $22.73 6480 $27.75 6514 $32.87 Management Analyst 1 6470 $26.40 6510 $32.22 6544 $38.17 Management Analyst II 6498 $30.35 6538 $37.05 6571 $43.68 Management Analyst 111 6529 $35.42 6569 $43.24 6588 $47.54 Mechanic 6430 $21.62 6470 $26.40 6508 $31.90 Meter Technician 6487 $28.73 6527 $35.07 6537 $36.86 Office Services Clerk 6369 $15.95 6409 $19.47 6443 $23.07 Office Specialist 1 6343 $14.01 6372 $16.19 6382 $17.02 Office Specialist II 6352 $14.65 6392 $17.89 6402 $18.80 Outreach Technician 6343 $14.01 6351 $14.58 6361 $15.33 Park Ranger* 6389 $17.62 Planning Aide 6343 $14.01 6360 $15.24 6370 $16.03 Planning Manager 6583 $46.37 6623 $56.62 6656 $66.74 ATTACHMENT 6 Page 146 Resolution No. 2021- PART-TIME CITY POSITIONS ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES Hourly Pay Ranges Effective July 1, 2021 Minimum Control Point Maximum Part Time Positions Step Amount Step Amount Step Amount Plans Examiner 1 6474 $26.92 6514 $32.87 6548 $38.94 PlayschoolInstructor* 6373 $16.27 Principal Engineer 6567 $42.82 6607 $52.27 6640 $61.62 Program Specialist 6343 $14.01 6351 $14.58 6361 $15.33 Public Services Technician 1 6413 $19.86 6453 $24.25 6487 $28.73 Public Services Technician II 6423 $20.88 6463 $25.49 6497 $30.20 Public Services Technician III 6443 $23.07 6483 $28.16 6517 $33.36 Public Works Inspector 1 6444 $23.19 6484 $28.31 6518 $33.53 Public Works Inspector II 6464 $25.62 6504 $31.27 6538 $37.05 Purchasing Clerk 6368 $15.87 6408 $19.37 6418 $20.37 Receptionist 6343 $14.01 6382 $17.02 6392 $17.89 Records Clerk 6344 $14.08 6384 $17.19 6432 $21.83 Records Coordinator 6372 $16.19 6412 $19.77 6459 $24.98 Recreation Leader 1* 6343 $14.01 Recreation Leader ll* 6350 $14.50 Secretary 6394 $18.07 6434 $22.06 6444 $23.18 Senior Accountant 6498 $30.35 6538 $37.05 6571 $43.68 Senior Civil Engineer 6543 $37.99 6583 $46.37 6620 $55.77 Signal and Lighting Technician 6452 $24.12 6492 $29.46 6530 $35.60 Sports Official 6343 $14.01 6351 $14.58 6361 $15.33 Theatre Technician 1* 6350 $14.50 Theatre Technician II* 6407 $19.27 Veterinarian 6579 $45.46 6619 $55.50 6652 $65.42 Veterinary Assistant 6407 $19.27 6447 $23.52 6481 $27.88 Veterinary Technician 6437 $22.40 6477 $27.33 6511 $32.38 * Single Step ATTACHMENT 6 Page 147 PART-TIME EMPLOYEE BENEFITS The following benefits are approved via resolution by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga effective the first full pay period in July 2020. All part-time employees are employed "at-will" and serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. As such, their services can be discontinued without cause or right of appeal. Each Department determines the number of part-time employees required in order to meet their needs depending on their approved budget for part-time employees and the approval of the City Manager In general, part-time employees are only eligible for mandated State and Federal benefits except for specifically designated Work Life Balance Part-time employees as outlined below under the "Work-life Balance Section." Definition—PART-TIME EMPLOYEE:A person serving in a budgeted position of less than forty (40) hours per week, and typically less than 1,040 hours per year as further defined under City of Rancho Cucamonga Personnel Rules and Regulations Rule XIV (Part-Time, Seasonal and Temporary Employees). Part-time employees are at-will and may be terminated without cause or right of appeal. Retirement Benefits — The City either provides access to retirement benefits through the Accumulation Program for Part-Time Limited-service Employees (APPLE) or the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) as outlined below. APPLE—Part-time employees who work less than 1,000 hours in a fiscal year,are not a current CalPERS Member or who otherwise do not qualify for CalPERS retirement benefits under State law or CalPERS regulations must contribute 7.5% of base pay to APPLE — a required alternative retirement system. CalPERS — Part-time employees who work 1,000 hours or more in a fiscal year, are hired to work more than 20 hours per week on average, are current CalPERS Members or who otherwise would qualify for CalPERS retirement benefits under State law or CalPERS regulations must contribute the full employee member contribution towards their CalPERS retirement benefits and"New Members"as defined by CalPERS must pay half the normal rate. The CalPERS retirement benefits available for qualifying part-time employees depend on the date the employee qualified for CalPERS benefits. Tier 1 Part-time Employees who qualified for CalPERS benefits Before July 3, 2011 § 21354.4 2.5% at 55 Full Formula § 21574 4th Level 1959 Survivor § 20042 1 Year Final Compensation Tier 2 Part-time Employees who qualified for CalPERS benefits On or After July 4, 2011 and before January 1, 2013 § 21354 2% @ 55 Full Formula § 21574 4th Level 1959 Survivor § 20037 3 Year Final Compensation Page 148 Tier 3 Part-time Employees not considered"New Members"by CalPERS who qualified for CalPERS benefits on or After January 1, 2013 § 21354 2% @ 55 Full Formula § 21574 4th Level 1959 Survivor § 20037 3 Year Final Compensation Tier 4 Part-time Employees meeting the CalPERS definition of"New Members" who qualified for CalPERS benefits on or After January 1, 2013 § 7522.20 2% @ 62 Full Formula § 7522.32 36 Consecutive Months § 7522.10 Based on Pensionable Compensation Unit members hired on and after January 1, 2013, deemed to be a"new member"as defined in Government Code § 7522.04, shall individually pay an initial Member CALPERS contribution rate of 50% of the normal cost rate for the Defined Benefit Plan in which said "new member" is enrolled, rounded to the nearest quarter of 1%, or the current contribution rate of similarly situated employees, whichever is greater. This rate can increase based on CalPERS regulations. The City does not participate in Social Security except for the mandatory Medicare Program. Medical Insurance Benefits — The City provides access to medical insurance for part-time employees who qualify for the Affordable Care Act (ACA)under the City's policy. In general, employees who work 30 or more hours per week on average per year would qualify, but the City's policy and the federal law determine who specifically qualifies for these benefits. For those part- time employees who qualify for this benefit, the City contributes the cost of the lowest cost self only coverage minus 9.78% of the Federal Poverty Line towards the cost of medical insurance. For example: In 2020, the FPL was $1040.83 per month, and 9.78% of that is $101.79/month. In 2020, the lowest cost self-only coverage cost was Kaiser Dual Coverage costing $439.89.00 per month. Following the policy, the City would pay $338.10 towards any health care plan the ACA eligible part-time employee chooses and the employee would pay the difference,which for the lowest cost self-only coverage would be $101.79. Page 149 WORK-LIFE BALANCE PART-TIME EMPLOYEES BENEFITS FOR SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED POSITION Specifically designated Part-time employees in specific management, supervisory, professional and/or confidential positions, as designated by the City Manager, who are scheduled to work 32 hours per week on a year-round basis, are referred to as work-life balance part-time employees. The City Manager will review and if appropriate amend the list of designated positions at least once per year as part of his/her budget review process. Work-life balance part-time employees participate in the State and Federally required benefits as enumerated above and shall receive the following additional benefits: Medical Insurance: In accordance with the City's ACA policy, work-life balance part-time employees are eligible to participate in the City's medical plan. The City will pay the higher of the ACA policy contribution or 80%of the cost the City would pay for a full-time employee in the same position towards medical insurance premium costs. In 2020, the maximum the City would pay for medical insurance would be $1100 for a full-time employee, so following this policy a work-life balance part-time employee would receive $880 towards the cost of the medical coverage that they choose. Dental Insurance: City paid Vision: City Paid Life Insurance: City Paid$30,000 base coverage Vacation: Work-life balance part-time employees accrue vacation hours at 80%of the rate of full- time employees in the same position. Work-life balance part-time employees can accumulate vacation hours up to two times their annual accrual rate. Once they reach their maximum accrual rate they stop earning vacation hours until they bring their vacation hours below the maximum accrual rate. Work-life balance employees may only cash out vacation hours upon separation from the City. Work-life balance part-time employees transitioning from a full-time position with the City of Rancho Cucamonga may either cash out their vacation per their MOU or carry over their accrued vacation balance to their work-life balance part-time position. Sick Leave: Work-life balance part-time employees accrue 8 hours of sick leave per month. No cash out or buyback of sick leave is provided to work-life balance part-time employees. Work- life balance part-time employees transitioning from a full-time position with the City of Rancho Cucamonga may either cash out their sick leave per their MOU or carry over their accrued sick leave balance to their work-life balance part-time position. Holidays: Work-life balance part-time employees will be compensated for normally scheduled working hours, which fall on official City holidays. The City observes 11 holidays per year: Independence Day, Labor Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day and the day following, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day,New Year's Day, Martin Luther King's Birthday,President's Day and Memorial Day. Deferred Compensation Plans: Work-life balance part-time employees are eligible to participate in the City's deferred compensation plans. The City does not contribute. Page 150 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING ALL PART-TIME POSITIONS All Part-Time employees are employed "at-will" and serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. As such, their services can be discontinued without cause or right of appeal. Social Security: The City does not participate in Social Security except for the mandatory Medicare Program. Medicare: Employees hired after 1/1/86, are required to contribute 1.45% of their earnings. All Part-Time employees are subject to specific provisions of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Personnel Rules and Regulations (Rule XIV) and specific provisions of the Policy and Procedures Manual (Policy 200-01) that apply to them. Page 151 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS RULE I SECTION 7 DEFINITIONS 33. PART-TIME EMPLOYEE: A person serving in a budgeted position of less than forty (40) hours per week, and typically less than 1,040 hours per year as further defined under Rule XIV (Part-Time, Seasonal and Temporary Employees). Part-time employees are at-will and may be terminated without cause or right of appeal. RULE XIV PART-TIME, SEASONAL AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES SECTION 1 Compensation Part-time Employees: Part-time employees hold a budgeted position, and work less than forty(40) hours per week and typically less than 1,040 hours per year. Part time employees shall be paid the hourly rate established by the salary resolution. Seasonal Employees: Seasonal employees shall be paid the hourly rate established by the salary resolution and are employed part-time throughout various seasons. Seasonal employee shall not work more than 1,040 hours per year. Temporary Employees: Temporary employees shall be paid the hourly rate established by the salary resolution and are hired to perform duties for a period of time not to exceed six (6)months of continuous full-time employment. Temporary employees shall not work more than 1,040 hours per year. SECTION 2 Participation in Benefit Programs No part-time, seasonal or temporary employee shall be eligible for participation in any benefit program established by the City, except as required by State and/or Federal law or as may be specifically approved by the City Manager and/or City Council. SECTION 3 Schedules, Position Control, Wage Rates Part-time, seasonal and temporary employees shall work on a prearranged schedule beneficial to both the employee and the City. Part-time, seasonal and temporary positions may be abolished and/or replaced with full-time positions by the City Council. Wage rates for part-time, seasonal and temporary employees shall be established by the City Council. SECTION 4 Merit Increases Part-time, seasonal and temporary employees are eligible for merit increases as provided in Policy Number 200-01 of the Policy and Procedures Manual. SECTION 5 Performance Evaluation No part-time, seasonal or temporary employee shall be eligible for a salary adjustment except as approved by the Personnel Officer upon the recommendation of the department head contained in a Performance Evaluation Report, or such other form as may be required by the Personnel Officer. Said Performance Evaluation Report shall be completed in accordance with the procedures for the completion of Performance Evaluation Reports for full-time employees. Page 152 POLICY NUMBER 200-01 OF THE POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL MERIT INCREASES—PART TIME EMPLOYEES POLICY PURPOSE: This policy is designed to provide general guidance for the provisions of merit increases for part time employees. Consistency and uniformity in its application are the responsibility of the Human Resources Director. Part time employees are defined in the Personnel Rules and Regulations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Rule XIV, Part Time, Seasonal and Temporary Employees. This policy pertains to all three designations of part time employees. Pursuant to Section 5, Performance Evaluation the following is enacted. Merit Pay Criteria: Effective January 1, 2016, all newly hired part-time employees will be eligible to receive a performance review and a merit increase of up to five percent in any twelve-month period from the date of hire. Thereafter, they will be eligible for a performance evaluation and merit increase on their anniversary date until they reach the top end of their salary scale. If a part-time employee promotes to a higher classification, his/her promotional date will become the new anniversary date. These employees will be eligible to receive a performance review and a merit increase of up to five percent in a twelve-month period from the date of promotion. Thereafter, they will be eligible for a performance evaluation and merit increase on their anniversary date until they reach the top end of their salary scale. If a current part-time employee has received a performance evaluation and/or merit increase in calendar year 2015, the date of the most recent merit increase shall be used as their anniversary date. They will be eligible for a performance evaluation and merit increase on their anniversary date until they reach the top end of their salary scale. If a current part-time employee did not reach 1,000 hours in any given fiscal year and therefore did not receive a performance review or merit increase in calendar year 2015, then their performance evaluation and merit increase shall be due on their original hire date or date of promotion, whichever is applicable. Thereafter,they will be eligible for a performance evaluation and merit increase on their anniversary date until they reach the top end of their salary scale. All merit adjustments shall be discretionary on the part of the Department Head and could result in no increase. Each adjustment shall be accompanied by an employee evaluation which justifies any increase in pay. Effective July 6, 2020, all part-time merit increases will be reviewed annually in March of each year. Anyone employed and with hours between the first full pay-period of the current fiscal year and the end of March of the same fiscal year would be eligible for a 3% merit increase if they are not at the top step of their hourly salary range. Page153 This increase would become effective the first full pay period in July of the subsequent fiscal year and would require a part-time employee evaluation. All merit adjustments shall be discretionary on the part of the Department Head and could result in no increase. Any employees hired after March 31 of the current fiscal year would not be eligible for a merit increase until the following fiscal year in conformance with this policy. Employees in positions with one pay range, would not be eligible for merit increases as there is only one hourly pay range for their positions.These positions could be adjusted by the City through the adoption of the budget and hourly salary ranges. When these ranges are adopted these employees would automatically receive the new hourly salary range. If a position with an hourly salary range is changed to a single hourly salary range,those employees with hourly salary ranges below the new hourly rate would move up to the new hourly rate and those employees above the new single hourly rate would be y-rated at their current hourly rate. If a position with a current single hourly salary range has the rate lowered, as a result of an action by the City Council, then all employees in that position would have their hourly rate lowered. RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS SECTION I DEFINITION OF TERMS 11 (c) Part-time — Any employee working a fraction of the normal workday or week whose hours may be regular or irregular. No employee benefits will accrue to part-time employees Page 154 POLICY NUMBER 200-24 OF THE POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL PART TIME, SEASONAL & TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES PAID SICK LEAVE POLICY PURPOSE: To establish a policy for Part-Time, Seasonal and Temporary (PST) City employees regarding accrual of and use of paid sick leave in accordance with the Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014 that provides up to three (3) days of paid sick leave per year for eligible employees beginning July 1, 2015. I. PAID SICK TIME A. Accrual of Paid Sick Time: Sick time is accrued at the rate of one (1) hour of sick time for every thirty(30) hours worked. 1. PST employees become eligible to accrue sick leave on July 1, 2015, or on the first day of employment if hired after July 1, 2015. 2. PST employees qualify for paid sick leave by working at least thirty (30) days within one year on or after January 1, 2015. 3. PST employees may begin to use their accrued sick time after completing 90 days of employment. PST employees who work less than 90 days are not entitled to take any paid sick leave. 4. The PST employee's paystub will display the number of paid sick hours the employee has accrued. 5. The City will not"lend" sick leave to a PST employee before it has been accrued. 6. Paid sick leave will not be considered hours worked for purposes of overtime calculation. 7. Paid sick leave will not be considered hours worked for purposes of earning paid sick leave. B. Annual Sick Time Use and Accrual limits: PST employees may use up to a maximum of 30 hours (3 days) of accrued leave during a fiscal year and may accrue up to a cap of 60 hours (6 days) of sick time during a fiscal year (e.g., July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016). 1. This Policy shall be amended beginning March 16, 2020, to allow for PST employees to use all of their accrued hours,up to the cap of 60 hours in a fiscal year in order to address any family related COVID-19 issues such as school closures, or to care for an immediate family member(child (includes any age or dependency status, or for whom the employee is a legal ward or stands in loco parentis), parent (includes person who stood in loco parentis of the employee as a child), parent-in-law, spouse, registered domestic partner, grandparent, grandparent-in-law, great-grandparent, great-grandparent-in-law, grandchild, greatgrandchild, or sibling) for any COVID-19 related issues. This temporary amendment will end December 31, 2020. C. Sick Time Rate of Pay: PST employees shall be compensated for sick time at their regular rate of pay. Page155 D. Accrued Sick Time Carry-Over: Unused sick time may be carried over from fiscal year to fiscal year. The maximum number of hours that may be carried over into the following fiscal year is 30 hours. E. Minimum Sick Time Use: The minimum amount of sick leave time a PST employee may use is at least in one-hour increments. F. Use of Sick Time: Upon the verbal or written request of a PST employee, the City shall permit the employee to utilize up to a maximum of 30 hours of paid sick leave each fiscal year(i.e., July 1 to June 30) for the following purposes: 1. Diagnosis, care, or treatment of an existing health condition of, or preventative care for, an employee or an employee's eligible family member including: o Child (including a biological, adopted, or foster child, stepchild, legal ward, or a child to whom the employee stands in loco parentis) o Spouse or Registered Domestic Partner o Parent (including biological, adoptive, or foster parent, stepparent, or legal guardian of an employee or the employee's spouse or registered domestic partner, or a person who stood in loco parentis when the employee was a minor child.) o Grandparent, Grandparent-in-law, Great-Grandparent, and Great-Grandparent-in- law o Grandchild and great-grandchild o Sibling. 2. For PST employees who are victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking, for the purposes described in subdivision(c) of Section 230 and subdivision(a) of Section 230.1 including: o A temporary restraining order or restraining order. o Other injunctive relief to help ensure the health, safety or welfare of themselves or their children. o To seek medical attention for injuries caused by domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. o To obtain services from a domestic violence shelter,program, or rape crisis center as a result of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. o To obtain psychological counseling related to an experience of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. o To participate in safety planning and take other actions to increase safety from future domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking, including temporary or permanent relocation. G. PST Employee Responsibility: 1. PST employees are not responsible for finding other employees to cover shifts due to their use of sick time. 2. PST employees are required to contact their immediate supervisor as soon as practicable when they are unexpectedly unable to work for purposes described in this policy. Page 156 3. Whenever feasible, PST employees shall provide 5 days advance notice of pre- scheduled medical examinations for which they will require sick time. 4. PST employees who used or are planning to use paid sick time will complete a leave request form as soon as practicable as required by their Department. H. Inappropriate use of Sick Time: Inability to work due to intemperance is not an authorized reason for the usage of sick leave. I. Unused Sick Time: No PST employee shall be compensated for,or allowed to exhaust any accrued sick leave upon resignation,including retirement,termination,layoff,or death. J. Sick Leave Accrual Upon Termination of Employment: Unused accrued sick leave at termination shall be reinstated upon return to active status occurring within no more than 12 months of termination. K. Sick Leave Accrual Upon Promotion to Regular Benefited Status: Sick leave accrued while in PST status shall remain intact upon promotion to a regular position, and will thereafter be subject to all rules and policies governing sick leave for regular employees L. Rehire within one Year: If an employee separates from Agency employment and is re-hired by the Agency within one year of the date of separation, previously accrued and unused paid sick leave hours shall be reinstated to the extent required by law. However, if a rehired employee had not yet worked the requisite 90 days of employment to use paid sick leave at the time of separation, the employee must still satisfy the 90 days of employment requirement collectively over the periods of employment with the Agency before any paid sick leave can be used. Leave under this policy may run concurrently with leave taken under other applicable policies as well as under local, state or federal law, including leave taken pursuant to the California Family Rights Act(CFRA)or the Family and Medical Leave Act(FMLA) if the employee and the reason for the absence is eligible for these regulations. Page 157 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director Ernest Ruiz, Streets, Storm Drains and Fleet Superintendent Kenneth Fung, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: Consideration of a Contract with Gentry General Engineering, Inc., in an Amount of $252,796 plus a Contingency of $57,367 for the Citywide Concrete Repair- FY 2020/2021 Project. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Citywide Concrete Repair — FY 2020/2021 Project; 2. Accept the bids received for the Project: 3. Award and authorize the execution of a contract for the Base Bid plus Additive Bids 1, 12, and 13 in the amount of $252,796; to the lowest responsive bidder Gentry General Engineering, Inc.; 4. Authorize the expenditure of a contingency in the amount of$57,367; 5. Approve Amendment 2 to contract CO 19-187 with West Coast Arborists, Inc. increasing the contract amount $50,000 to provide tree removal and replant services in support of the project; and 6. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $30,000 to Aufbau Corporation contract CO 19-142 for on-call construction inspection services. BACKGROUND: The "Citywide Concrete Repair — FY 2020/2021 Project" will repair concrete sidewalks, curb/gutters, and drive approaches with lifts or gaps in the public right-of-way and City maintained landscapes, including City parks and paseos. The locations requiring repair have been identified by our in-house sidewalk inspection program and/or citizen requests. Once Public Works Services staff identifies a concrete issue, a crew is scheduled to ramp or grind the lifts or gaps as a temporary solution. These locations are then scheduled for permanent repairs as funds become available. In many cases, the damage to the sidewalks is caused by tree roots. It is the City's intention to protect and preserve the urban forest whenever possible, while still facilitating the necessary sidewalk repairs. However, on some occasions, the tree must be removed to complete the sidewalk repair. This project includes sidewalk, drive approaches, and curb/gutter repairs in the Mandarin Ave area west of Beryl St, Orange St area east of Beryl St, and other concrete repairs in various parks Page 158 and paseos located in Landscape Maintenance Districts (LMDs) 2 and 4R. See Attachment 2 — Project Maps for exact locations. ANALYSIS: Seven (7) bids for this project were received and opened at 2:00 p.m. on May 18, 2021, see Attachment 1 - Bid Summary. Staff has completed the review of the bids from qualifying firms and has identified the lowest responsive bidder to be Gentry General Engineering, Inc. of Rancho Cucamonga, California. In addition, Gentry General Engineering, Inc. meets all the requirements of the bid documents. The project is scheduled to be completed within thirty-three (33) working days from the date of the notice to proceed. During construction of the project, there will be minimal impact to operations and the public. FISCAL IMPACT: This project was requested by the Public Works Services Department and approved in the FY 2020/2021 budget. Anticipated construction costs are estimated to be as follows: Expenditure Category Amount Construction Contract $252,796 Construction Contract Contingency $57,367 Tree Removal and Replant Services $50,000 Construction Inspection Services $30,000 Estimated Construction Costs $390,163 Account No. Funding Source Description Amount 1001318-5650 Street Maintenance Citywide Concrete Repair $200,000 1177303-5650 Measure I Citywide Concrete Repair $100,000 1131303-5300 LMD 2 Concrete Repairs Parks and $76,000 Paseos 1134303-5300 LMD 4R Concrete Repairs Parks and $14,163 Paseos Total Project Funding $390,163 COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City Council's core values by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Bid Summary Attachment 2 - Project Maps Page 2 Page 159 ■■ice■i - ■ ■■l■ ■ gym.— _.— — — — — — _ © . MI MIN - :• • � .� gym.—�_.—�—�—�—�—�—�_ — -. o . onnorrmn e �ei��■ice ��������O ■ e . . . : Lei®�■i���■���������■ ■■�■■■�■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■ .. . ... .. . :.. ■IM mil ■■■■■■■■■■■■ I....... .............. Mom= cobblestone Work In LMD 95pbtotal= 1 i i $11,636.00 $18,D50.00 $24,DDD.Oo $9,600.00 $16,320.00 $21,6w.00 ADDITIVE BID 42:Cobblestone-Lantlzwpe Site 30-](LMD 30) (] additlonal-1,1.9 da z) stall River Washed Granite Cobblestoneper City--d Plan 542 $86.25 $58,995.W $21.W $14,364.W $35.W $23,940.W $50.0i) $34,200.w $20.W $13,680.w $34.W $23,256.W $45.W $30,780.00 $41.61 ew 6"%6"Concrete rveaderp.,C,WStandard Plan53a 11 140.00 $o.w $o.W $o.w $o.w So.w $o.w $o.w $Som $o.w $46.w So.w $24o.w SO- Additive Bid 425ubtotaI= $58,995.00 $14,364.00 $231940.00 $34,2W.00 $13,6W.00 $23,256,00 $30,780.00 ADDITIVE BID 43:Co - b1(LMD 10) (3 bbatltlitional work ng tlays)1 Install River Wasbed Granite Cobblestone per City Stantlartl Plan 1 No 5a2 255 SF $85.6a 521,838.20 $-w $5163o.w 535.w $5,925.W $50.w $11,750.w $10.w $S,30o.w 534.W $.,B70.w $45.w $11,475.w $41.66 2 Heatler p,City65t -dl Plant534 0 SF $40.w $D.w So- $0.00 So- $0.00 So- $O.w $50.w $O.w $46w $om $24om So- 553.]3 Additive Bid 435ubmwl= $21,838.20 55,630.00 $8,925.00 512,]50.00 55,1W.00 58,670.00 511,475.00 ADDITIVE BID 44.Cobblestone-Landscape Site 30-3(LMD 10) (2 atltlitional working Lays) Install River CI Granite Cobblestone p.,per City Standard Plan No 542 130 SF $88.38 $11,489.40 $24.03 53,120.w $40.w $5,200.W $SO.W $6,S00.w 520.03 52,600.w $34.W 54p20.W 14- $5,850.w $43.05 Heaate�p_ci,St.eaCd Plant534 01 SF 11 $40.03 $0.w SO- $0.-I Som So.- Som SO.w sSo.-I SO.w $46.03 Som $240.w so.. $s3.n Additive Bid 44 Subtotal= $11,489.40 $3,120.00 $S,2W.00 $6,sw.00 $2,-0 $4,420.00 $5,850.00 ADDITIVE BID 45:Cobblestone--d-pe Site ID-6(LMD 10) (2 additional-km da s Install River Wa-d Granite Cobblestone per City Sfantlartl Plan '427S SF 590.10 $6,]5].SO $40.W $3,000.W $45.W $3,37s.W $50.W $3,750.W $zo.W $1,Soo.W $34.W $2,S5o.W $45.W $3,375.W El ct New 6"%6"ConcreteHeader er tandard Plan 534 $33.10 $39].20 $50.W $600.W $]S.W $900.W $32.W $384.W $50.W $600.W $46.W $552.W $240.W $2,880.W tl 45 Subtotal= $7,154.70 $316w.00 $4,275.00 $4,134.00 $2,1w.00 $3,102.00 $6,255,00 ADDITIVE BID 46:Cobblestone-tantlswpe Sitel 5(1MD 30) (3 add�nonal-lkI,,9 da z) stall River Washed Gra n lce Cobblestone per City Si c-cl Plan 1N. Saz 175 .1 SF $900 $15,]6].50 28.$ W $4,90o.w .a0$40.w $],o00 $50.0o $8,750M SM. $3,SOOv. $34.W $S,95O.W $45m $],a]s.W P,47- 2 Heatler per4City St-d-Plan 534 0 SF S4o.w $o.W $O.w $o.w $O.w $o.w $O.w $o.w $So.w $o.w 546.w $O.w $2w.w $O.w Additive Bid 465ubtota1= $15,]6].50 $4,-00 $7,OW.00 $B,750.00 $311w.00 $5,950.00 $7,875.00 Cobblestone Work in LMD to Subtotal= $115,244.80 $31,594.00 $49,340.00 $66,334.00 $26,9110.00 $45,398.00 $62,235.00 DDITIVEBID47:Cobblestone-Central Park Entrance(GF) (10 atltlitional working tlays) Install River Wasbetl Grantee Cobblestone per City Standard Plan No 542 1105 SF $85.86 $94,8]5.30 $21.w 523,205.w $35.w $3E,675m $50.w 555,250.w 520.w $22,10DW $34.W S3],5]O.w S45.w 549,]25.w $41.55 Heaate�pNCity stand.d Plant53a $40.W $Dm SD.W SD.W $Dm SD.W SDm $O.w Ssom $D.oO $46.W $ D.W $zaD.w SO.W $s3.n Additive Bid4 Subtotal= 594,wsso 523,2Ds.00 536,6]5.00 Sss,2so.00 $2z,1W.00 53],no.00 5a9,]zs.00 Cobblestone work in GF Subtotal= $94,875.30 1 $23,205.00 $38,671.Oo $55,250.00 $23,1w.00 $3],5]0.00 $49,]25.00 Page163 Base Bid — Location 1 — Mandarin Area Banyan SC @eRyan 5# Project Area a Regency Way a _ 4 w w _ E = e o m v tfiancJarin Ave Mandarin Ave h�andarin Ave n m rh m LA r Alta Lomb C } 0 Junlo-r High a 5ci10a1 7 4 � � W 0 O m � < z rx Lemon Ave Page 164 ATTACHMENT 2 Base Bid Location 2| Landscape Site VG-7 Kenyoil Way Or ��� & a� V1a 49ki3Wn of 2 \ k I® r3Cl VG7 § �' � �. � � a m k � $ & C6r f a ® § / 601h any Cr � a � � - � � � � % �w��■� Dr 2 CIL 0 Car o £ � � 0 ... �, _.. -q kml� ' c lorla GAL' k 300f ESM Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, Count of San Bernardino, BuHd|ngFoO printUSA, ESM, HERE, Garm|n, Saf Gr ph, INCREM ENT P M ETI NASA, USGS, Bur au Of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA «ps:/� _ps.arcg&mwk_/we Ua R#Nw m an s an s# Page 165 2/24/2021 Base Bid Location 3: Vintage Park Sidewalk Inspections Sidewalk Inspections 46 r LN a r� f Sidewalk inspections performed by Public Works in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 40ft City of Rancho Cucamonga, Maxar, Microsoft I Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, BuildingFootprintUSA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDFpage 166 https://regis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.htmI 1/1 Base Bid Location 4: LMD 4R Paseos 3T �f AaOraai rL J w Dr non ser lev ��1 � hool Weyrbridge Dr e. v7 - T 3 � _i ca u rltryrvke'Y Dr da 1} West Gre emu'• 1 � eFs � m � 4 fa 4 L A 300ft Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, BuildingFootprintUSA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA https://regis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.html 1/1 Page167 5/27/2021 Base Bid Location 5: Coyote Canyon Park Coyote Canyon Park Sidewalk Inspections 0�lst�PKWY Contractor Work Contractor Work Completed Grind 15132 Grind Completed 15131 r Other Other Completed PCC R&R P3!K PCC Completed PCC Wind Damage PCC Wind Damage Completed Ramp MI Ramn Completed 100ft Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, BuildingFootprintUSA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA https:Hregis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.htmi 1/1 Page168 5/27/2021 Base Bid Location 5: Milliken Park Milliken Park Sidewalk Inspections ,,1.,P- Contractor Work Contractor Work Completed Grind ja Grind Completed _- iF n r Other Milllken Park Other Completed PCC R&R � PCC Completed 15129 PCC Wind Damage * PCC Wind Damage # Completed Ramp 15125 MI Ramn Completed 200ft Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, BuildingFootprintUSA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA https:Hregis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.htmi 1/1 Page169 Additive Bid 1 — Orange Street Area Leman Ave Q VadIla Cl VaCMa CC Lo 4 Q O e Q6 Vi Grange St ❑ Ora � 5 k � 0 PFo eet Area �r IM c 0 Page 170 2/24/2021 Additive Bid Locations 12 & 13: Ellena Park Sidewalk Inspections Sidewalk Inspections * M� ■ � 4 I i i • 1 . 27 Sidewalk inspections performed by Public Works in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 100ft Maxar, Microsoft I Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, BuildingFootprintUSA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA Page 171 https://regis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.html 1/1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Trina Valdez, Utilities Operations Supervisor SUBJECT: Consideration of an Appropriation in the Amount of$6,000 from the Fiber Optic Network Fund (Fund 711) for the Purchase of Fiber Optic Equipment from Power & Telephone. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize an appropriation in the amount of$6,000 from the Fiber Optic Network Fund (Fund 711)for the purchase of fiber optic wall boxes and connectors from Power & Telephone. BACKGROUND: In May 2017, the City Council approved the City's Fiber Optic Broadband Master Plan in which a business plan was devised to incorporate the City's existing utility, information technology and traffic fiber conduits to provide high speed broadband service to Rancho Cucamonga residents and businesses. As the Rancho Fiber network continues to expand, having the appropriate inventory of access equipment available on-hand is necessary to deploy and deliver fiber broadband services to new customers without delay. The access equipment is installed on the premise of the residence or business location and is needed for the final point of demarcation connection. ANALYSIS: Based on the City's current fiber optic access equipment inventory and the remaining residential and businesses pending final building releases, staff has determined that an additional seventy (70) Clearfield 2-Pak Connectors and eighty (80) Clearfield Wall Boxes are needed to complete the remaining installations. It is important to keep the Rancho Fiber access field equipment uniform, therefore, staff obtained a quote from Power & Telephone, a local Southern California Clearfield distributor and deemed the quote to be reasonable. FISCAL IMPACT: An appropriation in the amount of $6,000 from the Fiber Optic Network Fund (Fund 711) to Account No. 1711303-5209 (O&M/Electric Utility) is required to fully fund the purchase. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City Council's vision for the City by ensuring the construction and maintenance of high-quality public improvements that promote a world class community. This is accomplished by guaranteeing the City has the proper new equipment available to install. Page 172 ATTACHMENTS: None. Page 2 Page173 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director Jeff Benson, Parks and Landscape Superintendent Kenneth Fung, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: Consideration of a Contract with Pacific Contractors Group, Inc. for the Parks Painting Project FY 20-21 in the Amount of$75,340. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the specifications, accept the bids received, award and authorize the execution of a contract in the amount of$75,340 for the "Parks Painting Project FY 20-21" to the lowest responsive bidder, Pacific Contractors Group, Inc, of Northridge; authorize the expenditure of a contingency in the amount of $27,465 to be funded from account numbers 1131303-5300 (LMD-2), 1134303-5300 (LMD-4R) and 1136303-5300 (LMD-6) BACKGROUND: Restrooms, picnic tables, shade shelters, benches, paseo lights, and other structures located at City parks and along paseos are continuously being exposed to weather and the environment. The amenities at Victoria Groves Park located in Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) 2, the paseo lights at seventeen landscape sites in LMD-2, ten landscape sites in LMD-4R, plus the walls, fencing, and paseo lights at eight landscape sites in LMD-6 require painting as the paint has gradually deteriorated over the years. Applying a fresh coat of primer and paint, along with some preventative maintenance work, will refresh the appearance and extend the service life of these amenities and paseo lights for another 7 to 9 years. ANALYSIS: Five (5) bids for this project were opened at 2:00 pm on Tuesday, May 18, 2021 (see attached Bid Summary). Staff has completed the required background review and finds that the lowest responsive bidder, Pacific Contractors Group, Inc. of Northridge, has met the requirements of the bid documents. The award of LMD-2 includes the Base Bid of Victoria Groves Park amenities at a cost of$11,184. Additionally, this award includes Additive Bids 13 through 24, 27, 29, 30, 31, and 33 consisting of various paseo lights throughout this LMD at a cost of $29,000. The award of LMD-4R includes Additive Bids 34 through 43 also consisting of various paseo lights throughout the LMD at a cost of $29,200. Lastly, the award of LMD-6 includes Additive Bids 44 through 51 consisting of trail lights, walls, and fences at a cost of$5,956. Please refer to Attachment 2 - Project Maps for exact locations. Page 174 The project is scheduled to be completed within eighty-six (86) working days — ten (10) working days for the Base Bid, seventy (70) working days for Additive Bids 13 through 24, 27, 29, 30, 31 and 33 through 43 (total of 291 paseo lights to be painted at 1 working day for every 5 lights) and six (6) working days for Additive Bids 44 through 51. A copy of this agreement is available at the City Clerk's Office. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds were included in the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 adopted budget for this project in account numbers 1131303-5300 (LMD-2), 1134303-5300 (LMD-4R)and 1136303-5300 (LMD-6). COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: By performing this project, this will meet the Council's Core Values of continuous improvement and the preservation of the family-oriented atmosphere within these City parks and paseos. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Bid Summary Attachment 2 - Project Maps Page 2 Page175 MAY IS.2021 BID OPENING SUMMARY PARKS PAINTING PROJECT FY 20.22 BASE BID:Victoria Groves Parks(LMD-2) Pacific Contractors Group, CTG Construction,lnc.dba Spectra Painting Company, Harbor Coating& Ion rov eats to pain[ Inc.flow bidder) M Fistes Corporation C.T.Geor)ou Pamlin Co. Inc. Restoration Average of item D.. Honem City Unit Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price I Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Pnce in Unit Price Cost ost in Ind Unit Prices ft-al c roposal 1 Rest- I EA $2,20000 $2,200.00 54,500.00 $4,500.00 $4,000.00 4,000.00 53.500.00 $3.500.00 $4,000.00 54,000.00 3,640.00 2 Shad,Shelter 1 EA S220000 2.200.Do SI,900-00 SI,900-00 $2,500OO $2500.00 5250000 S2SOO.G0 $3,000.00 $3,00000 $2,420.00 3 Trash Enclosure 1 EA 5600.00 $600.00 5650.G0 565G.GG SSO0.00 5500.00 $1,000.00 51000.00 $1,Goo .00 S1,000.00 $750.00 4 Ligh[Polls 8 EA $250.00 2000.00 5150.00 $1,200.00 $3013DO 2,400.00 5145.00 1160.00 $300.00 $2,400.00 5229.00 5 BicyHe Rack 1 EA $60.00 $60.00 $150. $15000 $200.00 $200.00 S... I... $200.00 SIDI.00 11.2.00 6 Hand Railina 46 (F) LF $6.00 $288. S6.o0 $288.00 510.00 $480.00 $15.00 $720.00 $5.00 $24000 $8.40 7 Wafls 122 (F) LF $3.00 5366.00 $19.00 52,318.00 $10.00 $1.220.00 $7.00 854-W $3.00 $366.00 SF26.00 8.40 8 Benches 4 EA $200.00 5800.00 S65-001 5260.00 $100.00 $400.00 $250.00 SIO00O0 $300.00 $1,200.00 $193.00 9 Plcnie Table 6 EA $200.00 $1200.00 S120.G0 $720.00 $100.00 5600.00 560.00 5360.00 $400.DO $2.400.00 176.00 10 Trash Can 12 EA 560.00 $720.00 45.00 S540.0O $50.00 $600.00 $SO.00 600.00 $50.00 $600.00 SI.DO 11 Batketba ll Pole 1 EA $150.00 SI50.o0 $BO.o0 $80.00 $200.00 20000 $300.00 $300.00 $200.00 200.00 186.00 12 Monument Lettering I LS $600.00 $600.00 121.00 5200.00 S300wOO $300.00 $2 600.00 $2 600.00 500.00 SS00.00 $840.00 BASE BID TOTAL- $11184.0c $12,806.00 $13400.00 S14894.00 536.306.00 516,166.00 Pacific Contractors Gr'P. CTG Construction,lnc.dba Spectra Painting Company, Harbor Coating S Average of ADDITIVE BID ITEMS(in LMD-2 Inc-law bidder Al Fistes Cor oration C.T.Geor iou Paintin Co. Inc. Restoration Urdt Prices item Description Qty Uni[ Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unit Price Cost Unrt Pnce in Unit Price Cost Proposal 13 Li hts in Paseo 2-1 24 EA $200.00 $4,800.00 175.00 $0 200.00 5300.00 $J,200-00 $145.00 $3.480.00 300.00 $J,200.00 $224.00 14 Li hIs in Paseo 2-2 3 EA 5200OO saco 30 $175.00 5525.00 $300.00 5900.00 5145.00 5435.00 $400.00 $1 200.00 $244.60 15 Li h[s in Paseo 2-3 8 EA 5200.00 $1600.00 $175.00 S1r400.00 5300.00 $2,400.03 $145.00 51,160.00 $350.G0 $2.900_GO 5234.00 16 Li h[s in Paseo 2-6 3 EA $200.00 S6o0.00 175.00 $525.00 $300.00 $900.00 $14500 $435.00 $400.00 53,200. 5244.00 17 li ht3 in Paseo 2-7A 3 EA 5200.01 S6o0O0 5175.00 5525.G0 S3000D $900.00 $145.00 5435.00 400.00 $1,200.00 $244.00 IB Li hts in Pateo 2-7B 3 EA $200.00 S6o0.00 $175.00 5525.00 5300.00 $900.00 1145.1 $435.00 $40000 $1 200.00 $244.00 19 Lights in Paseo 2-BA 3 EA S20D00 $600.00 $175.00 $525.00 S300mO0 $9G0.00 $145.00 $435.00 $400.00 $1,20D.00 5244 00 20 Lights in Paseo 2.88 3 EA $200.00 S60o.o0 5175OG 5525.00 $300.00 $900.00 $145.00 5435.00 00.00 $1.200.00 5244.00 21 Lights in Paseo VW-2A 18 EA $200.00 53,600.Do $175.00 3 150.00 $300.00 $5,400.00 $145.00 $2,630.00 $300.00 SS 400.00 $224.00 22 Lights in Paseo VW-2. 3 EA 5203.01 $60000 $175.00 5525.00 $300.00 $900.00 $145.00 $435.G0 5400.00 $1,200. 5244.00 23 Lights in Paseo VG.15 17 EA $200.00 $3,400.00 $I50.00 $2.550.00 S300wOO SS,100.00 5145.00 $2.465.00 300.00 55,100.00 $219.00 24 Li his in Paseo VG-5 9 EA $200.00 $1900.00 5200.00 $1800.00 $300.00 $2,700.00 $145.00 $1305.00 400.00 $3600.00 $249.00 2S Ugh[s in Paseo VG-6 17 EA $200.00 3 400.00 150.00 2,550.00 53o0.G0 $S,3o0.00 $145 00 52.465.00 $300.0 I 55.300.00 $219.00 26 Li hts in Paseo VG-7 14 EA $200.00 $2,800.00 $125-00 $1,750.00 $300.00 $4,200.00 5745.00 52 030.00 $300.00 $4,2DIX $214.00 27 Lights in Paseo VG-13 30 EA $200.00 S2 000.00 $125.00 Sl 250.00 $300.00 $3,000.00 $145.00 51 450.00 400.00 S4,000.00 5234.00 28 Ughsin Paseo VG-17 20 EA S200.00 54.000.00 S12S.00 2500.00 $300.00 $6,00001) $145.00 $2.9G0.00 S300dDO 6000.00 $214.00 29 Li hts in Paseo VG-19 8 EA $200.00 $1.600.00 3150.00 51,200.00 300.00 52,400.00 5145.00 $1,160.DO $400.00 53.200.00 5239.00 30 Li hts in Paseo VG-23 7 EA SIMGO $1p0000 $175.00 $1.225.G0 $300.00 $2,100.00 Sias Do $1015. 5400.00 $2,800.00 $244.00 31 U hts in Paseo VG- 15 EA S200FOO $3.000.00 5125.00 $1,875.013 S301100 $4 00.00 S245.00 $2 175.00 $300.00 $4,50DW 5214.00 32 U hts n Paseo VG 26 4 EA $200.00 $800.00 $200.00 $800.00 5300.00 1 00.00 $145 00 580.00 $4DO.00 $1,600.00 249.00 33 Lghtsn Paseo VG-39 8 EA $20000 $1.600. $150.00 $1,200.00 5300.00 $2400.013 $145.00 $1,160.00 5400.00 3200.00 239.00 LMD-2 ADDrf1VE BIDS TOTAL= S40,000.00 S3112S OD $60,000.00 529,000.00 67 10000 ADDITIVE BID ITEMS(In LMD-41 34 LI hU in Paseo N-11 5 EA 5200.00 $1,000.00 S2S0.00 Sl 250.00 $30DOD $1,500.00 $145.00 5725.00 SSW= $2 500. $279.00 35 jhtsn Pasch TV-14 13 EA $2G000 $2.600.00 $150.00 $1,950.00 300.00 53,900O0 $145.GG 51,885O0 530000 3900.00 $219.00 36 Ughtz in Paseo TV-26 14 EA 20000 52,800.00 $175.0( 52ASO.00 300.00 $4200.00 S14500 $2,030.00 5500.00 $7,000.00 264-00 37 Lights in Paseo N-29 22 EA $200.00 54A00.00 5350.00 $3.300.00 $3G0.00 $6600.00 $145.00 $3,190.00 5300.00 $6600.01) $219.00 38 Lights in Paseo N-31 14 EA 200.00 $2,800.00 $150.00 $2,100.00 $300.00 $4,200.00 5145.00 $2,030.00 $300.Do $4,200.00 $219.00 39 Lghts in Paseo N-35 15 EA 20D.00 $3,000.00 $175.00 $2,625.00 300.00 $4,5O0.00 $145.00 52,175.00 $300.DO $4,500.00 $224.00 40 Ughts in Paseo N-36 8 EA $200.00 53.600.00 $15000 51200.00 $300.00 $2 00.00 $145.GG $1260.00 400.00 $3,200.00 $239.00 41 Lights�n Paseo TV-3J 11 EA $200.00 S,2200. $175.00 $1.925.00 $300.00 S3 .00 $14500 $1,595.00 $300.00 53,300.00 5224.00 42 Lghts in Paseo N-41 22 EA 5200.00 54,400.00 $150.00 $3,3r10.00 5300.00 $6,600.00 $14500 $3,190.00 $300.00 56,600.00 $21900 43 W.M.�n Paseo N-47 22 EA $200.00 $4,400.00 ISO.GO $3,300.00 $300.00 $6,600.00 $145.00 $3.190.00 $300.00 $6,600.00 $219.00 LMD-4 ADDITIVE BIDS TOTAL• -539.200. $23.400.00 543,800.00 $21,170.00 $48,400.00 ADDITIVE BID fiEMS Gn LMD-6 Site CC-1:6248 Milkken Ave.Aproa ost In 44 3 S ft High St-Wall 130 (F) LF $5.00 $650.00 57.00 $910.00 511.50 $1495.00 $11.00 $1,430.00 $4,00 $520.00 Proposal $J.70 Sde CC 1:N/S of Vintage CM Silverwood Approa.2f ft I Stucco 45 Wall 122 F) LF $4.00 S499.00 53.80 $463.60 $11.50 53,403.00 $5.00 $630.00 $4.00 S498.DD $480.00 $5.66 S,te CC-3 6196 Mormng App-.4 ft 46 High Stucco Wall 391 IF LF Saw $2.346.00 $10.00 53,910.00 511.50 S4.496.501 $7.20 $2,815.20 $4OO $1564.00 $7.74 Site CC-4.6148 Morning Approa 6 ft 47 HI hMetal Square Tube Fence 16 IF IF 57.G0 5112. $16.00 5256.00 520.00 320.00 5225.00 $3,600.00 slow $160.00 $55.60 Sde CC-4�6148 Morning Trad Ughts 48 (Beta Cree Brand) 2 EA $250.00 $500.00 $500.00 51.000.00 $250.00 55G0.o0 5250.G0 SSW.00 $50MOD 51,000.00 S3S0.G0 Sde CC-5:11209 Sllv..-Approa 6 Cost n 49 ft HSh Metal Square Tube Fence 78 F LF $6.00 468.00 530.00 $78000 $20.00 $1560.00 31.00 $2.418.00 54.00 312-M Proposal 534.20 Sde CC-S-11109 Silverson Approa 6 50 It High Stucco Wall 107 (F) LF Sam 5642.00 $12.00 $1,284-00 $12.00 51,284.00 S32.00 $1,284.00 $4.00 542&W 5642.00 59.20 Site CC S. 111095dversun Troll Sl his(Cree Brand) 3 EA 5250.00 5750.00 5550Oo $1,650.00 5250.00 5750.00 250.00 $750.00 $500.00 51.500.00 $360.00 LM66 ADDITIVE BIOS M THRU 51= $5.%6.00 510 253.60 S71 08 50 r$2.4W�W $5,972.00 Site CC-6:11800 Neitherlands 52 Be Wall 1 LS 52000.00 $2.000.00 $16,000.OD $16,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 5900.00 $5000.00 SS,000.00 $5.180.00 Site CC-8: 11532 Mt Hood Retaining 53 Wall 1 IS 52000.G0 $2,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 52,000.00 52,000.f10 5350.00 SS,OX 00 SS.".00 $5,070.00 Site CC-10:11419 Terrace View Loop Approa 6 ft High Metal Square Tube 54 Fence 80 (F) LF 56. 480.00 $31.25 52,500.00 S15.00 $1.200.00 530.00 S18.o0 $1.440.00 $20.OS SiteCC-12:11641SantiagoPeak Un t Pncein 55 Court Trail L hts Beta Cree Brand] 3 EA 5250.00 $750.00 $600.00 $1,Room 5250.00 5750.00 5250.00 5500.00 $I.500.00 Proposa S370.00 Site CC-12:11609 Mt.Salwin Court S6 Wood Fence 80 IF) LF $12.00 S960.00 131.25 52,500.00 515.00 $1.200.00 112.50 $1,000.00 $I8.00 $1,440.00 51,60G.00 117)5 Site CC-13:11414 Vintage(N/S Vinate.W/O Hillview)Approa.3 ft S7 I. , ,,,a Stucco Wall 41 IF) LF 58.00 $328-00 520.00 $820.00 $12.00 5492.00 slow $41000 S9.00 $369.00 _ $118 Site CC-23:Vintage(W/O SNool but not along frontage of school property)A9proa.3 ft Man Stucco 58 Wall 61 (F) LF $4.00 $244.00 520.00 51,220.00 S12.001 $732.00 $I1.00 $67300 59.00 5549.G0 $11.20 Site CC-14:Sierra crest view Loop (W/S of Sierra Crest View Loop) 59 Aproa 4It Hi h Stucco Wall ]O IF) LF $4.00 $280.00 $2000 $1,400.00 512.00 $840.00 12.25 $857 50 512.00 $840.00 $12.0S Ste CC-16:6299Sierra Crest Monument Lettering of"Vintage W Highlands" 1 LS $600.00 5600.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 53S0-DO 5350.00 $350.00 $35000 IS.OD S..00 $1,160.00 Site CC-17:6101 Milliken Ave Monument Lettering of"Vintage 61 Highlands" 1 l5 $600.00 $600.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $350.00 $350.00 $350.00 5350.00 $500.00 $5O0.00 $1,160.00 Site CC-18:11380 Vintage INNS of Vintage East and W/S of HilMew Loop)Appro..0.5 ft High Stucoo Cap 62 1&Roek Wall 90 F) IF $4.00 5360.0G $25.W $2,250.00 $10.00 S900.001 54.50 5405.00 535000 $300 S270.00 59.30 Site CC-22:Vintage(SEC of Vintage and HiIhAew East)Stucco on Tap of 63 Rock Wall 1 LS $2.000.00 $2.000.00 54,000.00 54.000O0 $800.00 $800.00 5350.00 $350.00 $5,000.00 55,000.00 52,430.00 Site CC-22:Vlntage(Wall Around 64 Back of Drain) 1 IS S2,0OD.00 $2000.00 54,000.00 $4,000.00 $800.00 $800.00 5350.00 $350.00 S5000.00 $5,000.W 52,430.00 Site CC-28:11319 Milliken Square 6S nee Fencing incwdin Gales 60(F) LF $12.00 $720.00 $15.00 $90D.00 $1500 $900.00 $3J.00 52220.00 $1000 S,600.00 $1J.80 I.M.-6 ADDTIVE BIDS TOTAL $25,234.00 $81,89].20 $36931.00 381]7 SO $39,952.G0 Page176 ATTACHMENT 1 5/27/2021 Victoria Arbors Parks Trails And Paseos Safety Lights Parks Trails And Paseos euffalo Whigs Safety Lights Y S Rings 1inorWIneri a fReglnalFllip#I} Base Line Rd Good �+ x Q Poor/ Failing o Sprouts m n Colonnade Dr Missing/ Removed o Farmeirs k w5ngty tlrMairk �. Proposed 24 M 'm yz Mosaic Gr Elegance L. 4 Madrigal Dr a A n �4•f m a r t y rYYTI Golan Leaf dr r SS.S.L/ � w �9yA� rus Dr virtoria Arbon .7 CTMI!leLd C[ Park m � r O O weed Dr a m Lo-ng Meadow f�ah4 Afeadow Dir Chimney Rack Or x Spring Moun[eln Dr `m I'••s;k Jr � 4 °WP{F O off OIL office a 5 0 Vfv or f5en[nn f5r sr Way u_i zn r Cr Church St f Cultural Center Dr Cultural c e Ater f B I a ne ]lb9 fr LLbrdry Pgillce Bass Pro Shops Substadon Ti Ily's i In N Mainstreet N WatnstreVt ,� 2 � r � rAFJnFM Allows city staff in the Public Works Department to view and update data related to safety lights for trails, parks, and 600ft paseos in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Maintained by Public Works. Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA I Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, BuildingFootprintUSA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA https:Hregis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.htmi ATTACHMENT 2 1/1 Page177 5/27/2021 Victoria Groves Parks Trails and Paseos Safety Lights Parks Trails And Paseos Safety Lights a 0 Good Q Poor/ Failing 21 Foothill Fgpy Missing/ Removed 0 Proposed � d � � 4 Parks Ma v - I-k1 Sonora Ave C, ¢ Sz n ��rk Dr � Patin;t „ � w City Boundary Sphere Of Gala Awe of% a Rancho t Catch harEest .5 Basin Influence Outline Vint ,. Cuumonga F9gh Sthaol Rancho Cucamonga v City Boundary4,. fa;' 'land Sphere of Influence a` o VI[[oria Pa '• ;a m m a 4 �R �'7 w 4 IfAll � Parifi t aectri r Trail jame9 BruiU! i Senior ' renterjroldy £}�tna V Q t ommunl[y tenter �+ Base Line Rd G Base Line r w �tairfieJ�OF w c ` x-'-' , SPYgiass Or 4 n a Allows city staff in the Landscape and Water Field Operations in the Public Works Department to view and update data 0.3mi related to water and landscape operations in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Maintained by Public Works. Copyright nearmap 2015 1 Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA I Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA https:Hregis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.htmi 1/1 Page178 5/27/2021 Victoria Windrows Parks Trails And Paseos Safety Lights Parks Trails And Paseos Hlghlan[I Ave 210 Safety Lights o x r. * Nervia Dr 0 Good Q Poor/ Failing Missing/ Removed a d Ptst+ihe St o S 4 C � i♦ Proposed S"Ver be rry sr Carnesi Dr 03 trim � a r' ac q R F w u 4 Ictana Par% � F G �dfl Y G O ti Saddlendge St Ific Electric Etlwanda Trail Fire Station Depot No.3 fhaffey-Gar[ia e 4 Base line Rd HlStont c Winery It {iisglnalFllippll Base Line Rd # COcinnade Dr ❑` a o w MOSdkC Dr &ONdl a ° i u 4� u 4 Victoria Arbors o•� rlay Ca acc a PaA �y t # n iv ... �C. Allows city staff in the Public Works Department to view and update data related to safety lights for trails, parks, and 0.3mi paseos in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Maintained by Public Works. Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA I Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA hfps:Hregis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.htmi 1/1 Page179 5/27/2021 LMD 4R Locations Parks Trails And Paseos Safety Lights r,Ii.l-L Irllr�i. Parks Trails And Paseos Trail Trail y Pa[Ifir T Safety Lights n Good James Brulte Senlor r.{ ? ;r Q Poor/ Failing CenterJGoady Lewis Missing/ Removed ro Community Center 3 I♦ Proposed Base Line Rd W ��Irflera br 5PY9iass 4r m A%04. of�� ¢x b r rt�itayy5ia x1`f Terra vista y Elementary q� � Schaal Ruth 1Ji�ser — o m4ddle Sch, f ¢ �t]• Q,s,�s�rT^1y West Greenway xn6 F1 V Park W, aq - r•� 4 y Ralpl}M.LeMs Park Terra VJFW p town[enter ' K U m best western � Allows city staff in the Public Works Department to view and update data related to safety lights for trails, parks, and 0.3mi paseos in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Maintained by Public Works. Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA I Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA https:Hregis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.htmi 1/1 Page180 LMD 6 Locations m Keen - a y Las Osas High c Schaal n Fire Statlan 9arryan banyan 5[ Elementary ,�yerra cri stvj School g f s c c 0 -'ter Ave � ss m Y C e O # ti : r I 00, _ Foothill Fury Highland Avr s � � a n rtl 7 � 4e c S L c U C 0 qn PAS s t SOnOra Ave 4 u P8L151C x I _&4 or � v 4 Rancho [area e Charier Victorra a cucarnonga 805+n � -r4 f a HI gh 5chool �o 5, 0 G Grape fand 0.3mi Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA hftps:Hregis.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.htmi 1/1 Page 181 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Justine Garcia, Deputy Director of Engineering Services SUBJECT: Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Allocating Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation (RMRA) Program Funds for Fiscal Year 2021/22. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-049) (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution to allocate RMRA Program funds for Fiscal Year 2021/22 for the completion of the projects listed in the FY2021/22 Capital Improvement Program. BACKGROUND: On April 28, 2017, the Governor signed Senate Bill SB1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 creating the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program in order to address deferred maintenance on the State highway and local street and road systems. Funds made available by the program are required to be utilized for basic road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, and on critical safety projects. Prior to receiving an apportionment of funds under the program in a fiscal year the City must submit a list of proposed projects to the California Transportation Commission (CTC), and the funding must be allocated by resolution. ANALYSIS: The guidelines and regulations for obtaining funds from the program have been previously amended by the CTC requiring local agencies to adopt their project list by resolution; submission of a project list adopted through city budget is no longer acceptable. The CTC has announced the deadline of July 1, 2021 for local agencies to submit their adopted project list by resolution for the upcoming fiscal year. On that basis, staff recommends the following projects which are planned for consideration in the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Capital Improvement Program for funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (Fund 179): 1. Foothill Boulevard Pavement Rehabilitation — 15 Freeway to Eastern City Limit (JL 2055) and 2. Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation — Base Line Road to Highland Avenue (JL 1935). Page182 FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue for the RMRA is currently estimated to be$3,506,560 in the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget. Staff will continue to monitor revenue estimates and receipts to ensure adequate funding will be available to cover budgeted project costs and will adjust the planned improvements listed above accordingly. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item addresses the City Council's vision for the City by ensuring the completion of projects that continue to improve our roads which helps us maintain our success as a world class community. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 — Resolution No. 2021-049 Page 2 Page 183 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE PROJECTS FOR THE ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION ACCOUNT (RMRA) FUNDS WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1 (SB1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statues of 2017) was passed by the Legislature and Signed into law by the Governor in April 2017 to address the significant multi-modal transportation funding shortfalls statewide; WHEREAS, SB1 includes accountability and transparency provisions that will ensure the residents of our City are aware of the projects proposed for funding in our community and which projects have been completed each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City must adopt by resolution a list of projects proposed to receive fiscal year funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), created by SB1, which must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project's completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement; and WHEREAS, the City, will receive an estimated $3,506,560 in RMRA funding in Fiscal Year 2021/22 from SB1; and WHEREAS, this is the fifth year in which the City is receiving SB1 funding and will enable the City to continue essential road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, safety improvements, repairing and replacing aging bridges, and increasing access and mobility options for the traveling public that would not have otherwise been possible without SB1; and WHEREAS, the City used a Pavement Management System to develop the SB1 project list to ensure revenues are being used on the most high-priority and cost-effective projects that also meet the community's priorities for transportation investment; and WHEREAS, the funding from SB1 will help the City maintain and rehabilitate two (2) major arterial roadways in the City this year and similar projects into the future; and WHEREAS, the 2018 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment found that the City's streets and roads are in good condition and this revenue will help us increase the overall quality of our road system and over the next decade will maintain our streets and roads in a good condition; and WHEREAS, the SB1 project list and overall investment in our local streets and roads infrastructure with a focus on basic maintenance and safety, investing in complete streets infrastructure, and using cutting-edge technology, materials and practices, will have significant positive co-benefits statewide. Resolution No. 2020-018 — Page 1 of 2 Page 184 NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, ORDERED AND FOUND by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct. 2. The following list of proposed projects will be funded in-part or solely with Fiscal Year 2021/22 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues: Project 1: Foothill Boulevard Pavement Rehabilitation— 15 Freeway to Eastern City Limit(JL 2055): This project includes cold planing, localized asphalt removal and replacement, crack sealing, asphalt rubber hot mix overlay, ADA ramp upgrades, traffic signal video detection, thermoplastic green bike lane, utility adjustments and pavement striping for approximately 1.2 miles of roadway. The estimated useful life of this roadway is 20 years and construction is anticipated to start in September 2021. Project 2: Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation — Base Line Road to Highland Avenue (JL 1935): This project includes cold planing, localized asphalt removal and replacement, crack sealing, asphalt rubber hot mix overlay, ADA ramp upgrades, traffic signal video detection, thermoplastic green bike lane, utility adjustments and pavement striping for approximately 1.49 miles of roadway. The estimated useful life of this roadway is 20 years and construction is anticipated to start in September 2021. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June 2021. Resolution No. 2020-018— Page 2 of 2 Page 185 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director Mena Abdul-Ahad, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Consideration of Public Convenience or Necessity DRC2021-00027- Grocery Outlet -A Request for a Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) Determination for Alcoholic Beverage Sales for Off-Site Consumption (Type-21 Off-Sale Beer, Wine, and Distilled Spirits) For a Grocery Store (Grocery Outlet) Located in the Community Commercial (CC) District at 9040 Foothill Boulevard —APN: 0208-101-20. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021- 046) (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council deny the determination of Public Convenience or Necessity DRC2021-00027 for Grocery Outlet located at 9040 Foothill Boulevard through the adoption of the attached Resolution of denial and forward a copy to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). BACKGROUND: On February 2, 2021, Compass Commercial Group submitted a Public Convenience or Necessity application to the Planning Department for review: DRC2021-00027. The application involves a proposal to operate a grocery store with a Type-21 alcohol license to sell beer, wine, and distilled spirits. ABC permits up to two alcohol licenses within Census Tract (20.16), within which the subject project is located. According to ABC, the proposed alcohol license constitutes a third licenses which would cause Census Tract 20.16 to become overconcentrated. Thus, a determination of Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) is required before ABC can issue the related alcohol license. ANALYSIS: General: The proposed grocery store comprises a tenant space totaling approximately 20,000 square feet in size which proposes operate from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., 7 days a week. The applicant has provided a project description elaborating on the request for a PCN which has been included with this staff report as Exhibit G. Recently, the City has received numerous requests for off-sale alcohol licenses within overconcentrated census tracts. In response to these various requests, and after consulting with the City Police Department regarding increased calls for service, the City Manager has updated the City's policy regarding PCN determinations. This revised policy, included with this report as Page 186 Exhibit G, establishes that PCN determinations will not be recommended by staff for businesses in areas where the number of off-site alcoholic beverage retail licenses are over-concentrated. Certain exceptions may be granted for businesses which meet the following criteria: 1. The surrounding census tracts are not over-concentrated; 2. The census tract does not have a higher rate of DUI arrests or criminal activity than the City average when taken as a whole for the preceding 3 years; 3. There are no sensitive receptors such as schools, churches, preschools, daycare centers, parks community centers or other businesses where children are known to congregate within 2 blocks in any direction of the subject business; 4. The business would not operate 24-hours a day; 5. The business will provide for crime prevention through environmental design measures as recommended by the Police Department and approved by the Planning Department; 6. A business that wants to obtain an off-site alcohol beverage license located within an over- concentrated census tract may also be recommended for approval if: • The business provides a unique product offering not generally or readily found within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Some examples, not intended to be exhaustive, of a unique product offering would include a distillery/brewery/winery that had both on-sale and off-sale licenses or a specialty retailer that carried a substantial offering of unique imported products not otherwise readily available; or • The business is a grocery store which is 20,000 square feet or larger and where the sale of alcohol does not constitute more than 10% of the product display floor area, and which is not located within '/2 mile of other grocery stores that exist within City boundaries. Upon reviewing the request for a PCN against the aforementioned policy staff recommends that the City Council deny the applicant's request. The proposed use fails to meet certain policy criteria, specifically: 1) 4 of the 5 surrounding census tracts are overconcentrated with active off- sale retail licenses; and 2)the proposed grocery store is less than 20,000 square feet in size and within '/2-mile of another grocery store (Albertson's at 8850 Foothill Boulevard)which also has an active off-sale retail license. At this point in time, the City has no precedent for approving a PCN for a grocery use that is so close in size and proximity to the limits specified in the policy and, as such, is reading the policy language as literal direction to recommend denial of this PCN. Regarding the overconcentration of surrounding census tracts, staff has created the following table for the Council's consideration which details the number of active off-sale licenses in surrounding census tracts. A corresponding map which shows the location of the various alcohol establishments is provided as Exhibit C. Page 2 Page 187 Active Off-Sale Retail Licenses with Surrounding Census Tracts Census Tract Number of Licenses Permitted Number of Active Licenses 8.12 2 8 21.03 3 3 20.27 3 6 20.15 3 5 21.05 3 7 PCN Findings: As previously mentioned, the proposed grocery store would constitute the third off-sale alcohol license within the census tract which would overconcentrate the census tract. Pursuant to Business and Professions Code Section 23958.4 an "undue concentration"of off-sale retail license applications exists under either the following two scenarios: 1. "The applicant premises are located in a crime reporting district that has a 20 percent greater number of reported crimes . . . than the average number of reported crimes as determined from all crime reporting districts within the jurisdiction of the local law enforcement agency;" or 2. "the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the county in which the applicant premises are located."According to ABC's online database, Census Tract 20.16 currently has two existing off-sale licenses. This means an undue concentration of off-sale retail licenses exists within the census tract if another off-sale license is issued. Finding: The Development Code provides no findings for PCNs. Rather, ABC regulates the distribution of alcohol licenses by setting limits on the various types of licenses in each census tract pursuant to Sections 23958 and 23958.4 of the California Business and Professions Code. The limits are calculated based on the ratio of alcohol licenses to the population within a specific census tract. In cases where a census tract exceeds the allowable limit of certain alcohol licenses (i.e., creates an "undue concentration"), findings in support of a PCN are required to be made by the local governing body. For Rancho Cucamonga, the local governing body is the City Council. The Business and Professions Code does not define the phrase "public convenience or necessity."According to the courts, this means that"the discretion to make that decision includes the discretion to determine the relevant factors on a case-by-case basis." (Nick v. City of Lake Forest, 232 Cal.AppAth 871 (2014)). Decision makers are afforded considerable discretion in making this determination. Fact: Issuing the ABC license to the applicant does not serve the public convenience or necessity because: 1)there will be an undue concentration of off-sale alcohol licenses in the subject census tract; 2) there are existing active off-sale retail licenses within the proximity of the proposed location that already serve the community within the proposed project site. Environmental Assessment: The decision is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(4) as a project that is disapproved by the City. Page 3 Page 188 FISCAL IMPACT: None. CONCLUSION: Based on the above analysis, staff finds that the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Off- Sale beer, wine, and distilled spirits license (Type 21) at the site will have negative impacts to the surrounding uses creating an undue concentration of issued off-sale licenses within the census tract. COUNCIL GOALS ADDRESSED: For reasons discussed in this report, particularly as it relates to the project causing census tract 20.16 to become overconcentrated, staff notes that the project will not achieve the City Council's Core Value to "promote and enhance a safe and healthy community." ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 —Aerial Photo Attachment 2 — Project Plans Attachment 3 — Existing Off-Sale Licenses outside Census Tract 20.16 Attachment 4 —ABC List of Existing Off-Sale Licenses for Census Tract 20.16 Attachment 5 —ABC Application Work Sheet Attachment 6 —Applicant Letter Requesting PCN Attachment 7 — PCN Determination Policy Attachment 8 — Draft Resolution No. 2021-046 of Denial Page 4 Page 189 SAN B RNARDINO RD. �r. IAa i ! I lKi wIPV1� LU rjl 7 - a, � �• � M� -� ICI. .. �. 4 w - � �`I.�.. u. . : .w.. .., �« _.._. '�.• � FOOTHILL BLVD.� ENrxY SAN BERNARDINO ROAD 1 �tEIXxo9ExnuxE 1 I �IEXxLaEXn NNE 1 I u �IDP➢ING OOLX � I I 1 I 1 O 9L2 1� 1 CHuZE F I T N E S S I I 1 (E)RETAIL BUILDING (E)SHOPS BUILDING , r1 I = --------------------- & 1 Ell IE)CMIO%UdD0E1J 0 w I 4 --- 1 � I e I o� EIGWL%tHOE� 1 p g I I 0 1 (E)HOPS (E)SHOPS I AwALExT ! I BUILDING , ,a a Ix 1a Ia ,a 12 1 11 1 6 e 17 , n n 17 n 16 to la BUILDING I coxet:xcNu i I I I i i 1 I a a l O TE j I I I I I� I I 0 1 ----------- I � � � � � �� L ------a---- j ATTACHMENT 2 I E 1 I`--------- I I19 9 B 8 B B i I O I j (E)SHOPS (E)SHOPS j BUILDING I i (E)RESTAURANT BUILDING _ 1 '1 (DRNE THRU) 0 0 8 S 5 9 I E 1 PARKING SUMMARY I I ' E I STANDARD: 2 STALLS I ��cvaoXrVxLxEt i TOTAL PARKING COUNT:1 76STALLS E,XmvEXnuxE a o ---------1-----1------------- --Q- -------------------- O 4 ----L-----J NLE: IEIXxOPFixYUNE EMRY ENNn ENIgY iH6690E 9LYl ISFORl9WXIILxfPPE9ENTATQVLNLY. RIB XOaIMFN°E°ttIBE LBEL A9AVAL iA 9J64EY E.FOOTHILL BOULEVARD NORTH GATE: g 6WLE: EXISTING SITE PLAN " 12.06.2008 AS NOTED SP1 SCALE:1"=4 " �a Ra 1961L: (YA JCR I GZ 76.01.01.00 RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CA FINAL FIXTURE PLAN-09/10/20 VERSION 8 BUILDING AREAS(GROSS): SALES= 14,727 SF B.O.H.= 4,931 SF SHELL= 19,658 SF MERCH(NET)= 13,093 SF STOCK(NET) = 3,956 SF ,< LEGEND SYMBOL DESCRIPTION ® aa�u.TcxacxsT�a,) ss"xo�,ssP°xaTsssRM�T ® aw�aos)s—p—) 1 2 (3 4 4.1 5 OMx",ova).PEa�x,ax",�xsR xRou<aR�rvx"."T�",wE�) \ BUMP o� ""xm�x,Ea°)a�xa�oxaEc,wx, 0 cuxmw,sw,)sssoscRss) � n>U GENERAL MERCH HBC PERIMETER or ,ar ssssosacsxr sascoscxsu =z Eoµ oa o . axa�,a �0 R"max ","a O u as"x E�Ea "xa as" R"acE a"W MST a x� rc„ of o 0 O SEASONAL CANDY L Z PERIMETER oox °IJs II41 0 PE.,'T a auox o- g Ir 1 as�c cow. �� INT.SIGNAGE oWINE E LJ o a r k k k xs®,<o PERIMETER R e Bg ,y �J e3 1 1 � � r� _, ffi ffi< k ffi ffi ffi <ffi ffi a aacxcowa ffi a i l ffi k ffi ffi r� � xsw x""T�osR r� % ffi ffi k ffi 's ffi ffi ffi REFRIGERATION HOLDING BOXES g ffi a ffi 's ffi �. i MANUFACTURER ®a�\ aT95Oox e r g ffi ° ffi ffi 8 ffi ffi ffi xusswrvxnrv"xnn uaw. za,sr ,o x�w g❑ ❑ 33 33 _ o , o b DER L—IF 1 E c"xxk a aaa°xaxa aa�.x a ❑ Roc"� rt ❑ FIXTURE PLAN v of Page 192 R.a A5 FIXTURE PLAN FX1.0 filI r .fix ,$y t.� %:' � =i� ' a Lemon Av'e• Al *. J •r :.[ ' x _ _ -ya - - + C a.�r�fnnon.v dT_ �-_r y+ ■ �- �a � �• `�'r 'L+_ 'y as a _ _ -•a��"`^^! .T,� '� - �. ._ .�i{r. �, s .- .i� �: �•�m _;�-�- :; -, - - _. �`�' - _tea-:��? �. -id's�-� r-561hill Fwy --. k w� • !9 ti� �•. ��";!{�-'f�_���' �'�L'�..pia ��. r••ft�� • i i_is siy 'rr.lY `•_ {,a. rtr.�[ # •' „� - I - y.' - "s - •.- - -- _ - - _ -w �. ems; S� ti�:�..�� ¢r.- - Y` - atii _,.- a ; ��� ' q R,t ,• - `.•�•,� r -� :i r � + _ ee '� .. .I '� �.rr`e �• -'�-•' �. J ... �" ',_.�". _ Base - ----- g +-.�t.�'a � �..� =, � ���..: i�� -L•ine Rd' .�"��_,� ,-...-... k'...xx � 'Ba52'•Llne'Rd �, �_ �• r_ ia� r��. -t� - ��. 1"'I� ���� F�F .�r ti;n,; � 1a�' `�'F *�� •� �y _ �4� - ...F.:7.. -��^•/�� _ [-� �. �'�r a7a r� + •� - `dF*1 f � f - JM!L - - I +_ `C' .. � _-X ti - - YI Y r- r- - •Ii' r- - f � c�rf� �''-5, i� .-``'r-'•`�. - _ C -�►+�, :J[ .}tTS:''rir-- �Y► � • .• 14P. 1. rt• . . � 1& . jr s - �..• 'm Wit. ` +,.. `} i}, ,.F` god s '� � �� � - - - - -.%'.'•`•ate. - -- mm op y - 4 •C '�S � �Ii a�- ail — �■Ya�il�� L. t: �7. i o ^x »• +;�# Sri ww ■-*+ ! R —� + �`�s i ` E.8th Si dth'SZ t titn 31 • E`tfur - •f > or 4 P. IL Tit— ♦�' �.1� r ¢ �qr__ .a' rr�:._ � .a.r lt..;-i 5� i��.�w',,•,.•-,�t� '_ �a �... • '�QCI rf 'v y = Z --' _•.....YL 6th St _ ,'s' .}- � _ .yr � ~� _ :.#. [�•+..•>. �_.lam - 1 ��r-._.;.� f� �.. { .; �.y_��,�, ■r; It.''Y+ - +�I•••••..+_'--. �� •'� I {b 11 1 ' 1. .• -1`.. +{I� �G 04 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF Alco ho1i c Beve ra ge Contro l Having trouble viewing the report? Results for: Active Off-Sale Retail License County: SAN BERNARDINO County Census Tract: 20.16 Report Date: Wednesday, March 03, 2021 Search Results will be filtered os you type 0 Results License Number: 608757 Status:ACTIVE License Type:21 Orig. Iss. Date:12/28/2020 Expir. Date:11/30/2021 9255 BASELINE RD, STE R, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730-1298 Primary Owner:JOU BY, ZIAD Premises Addr.:Census Tract: 0020.16 Business Name: DAY& NIGHT LIQUOR Geo Code:3615 License Number: 570725 Status:ACTIVE License Type:21 Orig. Iss. Date:08/01/2016 Expir. Date:05/31/2021 Primary Owner:GARFIELD BEACH CVS LLC PremisesAddr.: ATTAC H M E NT 4 8956 FOOTHILL BLVD, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730-3447 Census Tract: 0020.16 Business Name: CVS PHARMACY 10914 Geo Code:3615 Page195 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS,CONSUMER SERVICES,AND HOUSING AGENCY Gavin Newsom,G yjemor DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL RIVERSIDE DISTRICT OFFICE 3737 MAIN ST,STE 900 RIVERSIDE,CA 92501 (951)782-4400 December 17, 2020 GROCERY OUTLET INC 5650 HOLLIS ST EMERYVILLE, CA 94608-2597 Location: 9040 FOOTHILL BLVD RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 CMD: November 24, 2020 File No: 21-622330 Dear Applicant(s): The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control is committed to providing the best customer service possible for its stakeholders. We are aware that the COVID-19 pandemic has had an immediate impact on businesses, communities, and local government agencies that we serve and work with. We understand that we need to be as flexible as possible during this very difficult time. I want to assure you that the department is still actively working on your license application. To that end,below is a list of the information and documents that is still needed in order to complete your license application: 1. ABC-203, Acknowledgment of ABC Laws,please sign and date. 2. ABC-226, Signed verification of deposit. (Due upon final deposit into escrow). 3. Section 23958.4 B&P Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity from Governing Body of the city in which premises is located I understand that it may be difficult to obtain some of these documents under the current circumstances. Please send me any documents and information you can obtain, and I will add them to your file, so your application can be completed in a timely manner. I will make every effort to stay in touch with you and provide periodic updates on the information I need in order to complete your application. If you have any questions regarding the above, please feel free to contact me at(951) 782-4397 or by email at angela.reveles@abc.ca.gov Sincerely, a.,.& Angela Reveles Licensing Representative ATTACHMENT 5 Page 196 GR'fCERYOUTLET Mar6,f ar�alvi Project Description and Justification for Public Convenience or Necessity 9040 Foothill Blvd, Rancho Cucamonga, CA Grocery Outlet Background Grocery Outlet offers fantastic bargains and deals on a variety of products including grocery, frozen foods, deli items, vitamins, health and beauty items, housewares, gift items and much, much more. Brand names for less is the name of the game and smart shoppers get incredible savings over regular store prices every day when they shop Grocery Outlet. Grocery Outlet gets products by searching the nation's major manufacturers for amazing one-time buys resulting from excess production, packaging/design changes, and special promotions. Grocery Outlet's assortment of product changes frequently because of the nature of the one-time buys. Grocery Outlet owns over 300 stores in California with off sale (type 20 and 21) alcohol licenses. Operators and their employees of all locations are careful to make sure the store is always clean, neat and free from debris. Grocery Outlet has had no significant issues raised by local law enforcement agencies with respect to alcoholic products or public disturbances. Grocery Outlet operates in a conscientious and thoughtful way with sensitivity to any possible detriment to adjacent residents and businesses. Grocery Outlet is fully aware of the unique responsibilities of operating a store associated with alcoholic beverage sales. The store will be open no earlier than 6:OOAM and no later than 11:OOPM 7 days a week. Grocery Outlet expects the store will be staffed with approximately 35-40 employees and will be managed/operated by a member of the local community. Training The store will be operated in strict compliance with the state's Alcoholic Beverage Control Act together with any conditions of the license that may be issued by ABC. Operator's managers, supervisors and employees that are engaged in the sale or supervision of the sale of alcoholic beverages shall complete training programs in accordance with ABC rules and regulations. ATTACHMENT 6 Page 197 Operator's register clerks will be trained in proper alcoholic beverage sales rules. All of the clerks will have read and signed the Alcoholic Beverage Control's Clerk's Affidavit. These affidavits will be kept on file by the store operator. Securi Grocery Outlet will install a minimum 16 camera system which has a view of all parts of the store, including the alcoholic beverage display area and sales check stands. The video system will have a 30-day retrieval function which can track previous days' activity. Monitors are kept in a locked room at the store and available to managers, key personnel and law enforcement if necessary. Operational Procedures The store operator will monitor the parking areas and sidewalks to keep these areas free from litter and debris. Trash receptacles will be provided near the store entrance and will be emptied daily. Graffiti to the exterior building shall be removed expeditiously. Signs will be posted at the store and in the parking lot as required by ABC and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Findings for Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity Grocery Outlet stores are "destination stores" offering a full complement of name-brand items at bargain prices. The beer, wine and distilled spirits sales are an incidental part of the total grocery store business. Customers desire the convenience of being able to purchase alcoholic beverages together with the full assortment of Grocery Outlet's unique, value priced items. This convenience is imperative to Grocery Outlet's ability to serve and attract customers. Grocery Outlet has applied for an off-sale type 21 general license with the Dept of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The type-21 will allow the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption off the premises. The Grocery Outlet store is located in census tract 20.16 of San Bernardino County. Based on the current population, two off-sale licenses are allowed in the census tract. Two off-sale licenses have been issued. Because Grocery Outlet will be the third license issued in the census tract, the Dept of ABC requires a finding of Public Convenience or Necessity from the City of Rancho Cucamonga before the license may be issued. This new Grocery Outlet store is located in a densely populated area of Ranch Cucamonga. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of single-family and multi-family residents who live within walking distance of the store. As a major supermarket with high quality, value-priced items, the residents will greatly benefit from the proximity of the Grocery Outlet and the full selection of products sold at the store. The residents and visitors of Rancho Cucamonga will appreciate the opportunity to shop at the Orchard Plaza shopping center which will enjoy renewed activity with a grocery store anchor tenant. Page 198 1. The use is essential and desirable to the public convenience and public welfare. The proposed availability of alcoholic beverages together with everyday products such as fruits, vegetables, milk, juice, eggs, bread, cereal, coffee, soup and pasta as well as consumer products such as pet food, toothpaste, detergent and paper towels allows customers to have readily available products in one location where they would otherwise be obliged to travel to several locations to purchase these items. It is typical for grocery stores to sell alcoholic beverages as an integral and ancillary part of the total product offering. The percentage of the sales floor dedicated to the display of alcoholic beverages is approximately 6%. The percentage of the leased premises dedicated to alcohol display is even lower, approximately 5%. The low percentage of floor area for alcohol provides evidence of the ancillary nature of the alcoholic beverage sales to the primary grocery store use. See attached floor plan for specific square footage and location of the alcohol display area. 2. The store will close no later than llpm seven days a week. Because alcoholic beverages are sold for consumption off-site and the store closes by llpm each day, the store is unlikely to be a nuisance to other tenants within the shopping center and residents in close proximity. 3. The use conforms to good zoning practices and development standards. The store is located on a major thoroughfare and is easily accessible to the residents and visitors of Rancho Cucamonga. The Grocery Outlet offers a convenient alternative for grocery items, including beer, wine and distilled spirits, that is consistent with good community development practices and standards. Great care is taken by the local operator to ensure that the environment is safe for customers and employees. 4. Grocery stores are a vital part of every community. Store clerks will be trained in proper sales of alcoholic beverages. Clerks will be supervised by a manager on duty. The security system,which includes cameras on the check stands and the alcohol display area, will deter theft and improper sales of alcoholic beverage products. Store personnel will monitor the parking area and sidewalks to keep the area free from litter and debris. Page 199 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA J 'W` MEMORANDUM DATE: May 5, 2021 (Planning Department) TO: Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager Anne McIntosh, Planning Director FROM: John R. Gillison, City Mana SUBJECT: PUBLIC CONVENIENCE O WCSITY(PCN) DETERMINATIONS POLICY PURPOSE: To establish a policy for making Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) determinations in situations where the existing census tract is or may become over-concentrated. BACKGROUND: The Planning Department previously established a policy in 2016 that encouraged the issuance of additional PCN's for off-site alcohol sales in over-concentrated census tracts where the sale of alcoholic beverages was in a business with more than 12,000 square feet and the alcohol was less than 10% of the total floor area of the business. The result inadvertently contributes to continuing over concentration and does not adequately account for unique circumstances, but rather takes a one size fits all approach. Due to continuing over concentration concerns, and after consulting with the City Police Department regarding increased calls for service, the City now desires to take a more nuanced approach to this matter and a policy change is therefore in order. POLICY: PCN determinations will not be recommended by staff for businesses in areas where the number of off-site alcoholic beverage retail licenses are over-concentrated. This includes not supporting the purchase of an existing license as the goal is to bring the census tract below the over- concentrated level. An exception may be granted, for businesses which meet the following criteria: 1. The surrounding census tracts are not over concentrated. 2. The census tract does not have a higher rate of DUI arrests or criminal activity than the City average when taken as a whole for the preceding 3 years. 3. There are no sensitive receptors such as schools, churches, preschools, daycare centers, parks, community centers or other businesses where children are known to congregate within 2 blocks in any direction of the subject business. 4. The business would not operate 24 hours a day. 5. The business will provide for crime prevention through environmental design measures as recommended by the Police Department and approved by the Planning Department. 6. A business that wants to obtain an off-site alcoholic beverage license located within an over-concentrated census tract may also be recommended for approval if. • The business provides a unique product offering not generally or readily found within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Some examples, not intended to be exhaustive, of a unique product offering would include a distillery/brewery/winery that had both on-sale and off-sale licenses or a specialty retailer that carried a substantial offering of unique imported products not otherwise readily available; or ATTAC H M E NT27 PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY (PCN) DETERMINATIONS POLICY MAY 5, 2021 PAGE 2 • The business is a grocery store which is 20,000 square feet or larger, and where the sale of alcohol does not constitute more than 10% of the product display floor area, and which is not located within '/z mile of other grocery stores that exist within City boundaries. This PCN Policy will not affect on-site alcoholic beverage sales, such as restaurants serving beer and wine, or off-site alcoholic beverage retail sales in areas where ABC licenses are not over- concentrated. Additionally, PCN determinations do not automatically grant approvalof the use proposed for the site. A Conditional Use Permit may be required in addition to the PCN determination depending on the nature and location of the proposed use. The City Council makes final determinations on all PCN requests and may consider the above criteria or other alternative criteria in reaching its decision. cc Michael Smith, Principal Planner Sean McPherson, Senior Planner David Eoff, Senior Planner Page 201 RESOLUTION NO. 21-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY (DRC2021-00027) FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES FOR OFF-SITE CONSUMPTION (TYPE-21 OFF-SALE BEER, WINE, AND DISTILLED SPIRITS) FOR A GROCERY STORE (GROCERY OUTLET) LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) DISTRICT AND THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD OVERLAY DISTRICT OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AT 9040 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0208-101-20. A. Recitals. WHEREAS, Compass Commercial Group, on behalf of Grocery Outlet, filed an application for a Public Convenience or Necessity determination DRC2021-00027 as described in the title of this Resolution, for a Type-21 (off-sale beer, wine, and distilled spirits), license from the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Public Convenience or Necessity request is referred to as "the application." WHEREAS, Section 23958 of the Business and Professional Code requires the City of Rancho Cucamonga to make a determination on whether the issuance of the said license will service the public convenience or necessity. WHEREAS, On the 16t" day of June 2021, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga reviewed said application prior to the adoption of this Resolution. WHEREAS, All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing on June 16, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The site is located with Census Tract 20.16 on property addressed 9040 Foothill Boulevard, on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Vineyard Avenue and Lion Street; and b. The California Department of Alcoholic Beverages Control permits up to two active off-sale retail licenses to exist within Census Tract 20.16 and two licenses currently exist in the census tract at 8956 Foothill Blvd. and 9255 Baseline Rd.; and ATTAC H 11 -NT 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-XX PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY DRC2021-00027—GROCERY OUTLET June 16, 2021 Page 2 c. The request for a third off-sale retail license will overconcentrate the census tract. Pursuant to Business and Professions Code Section 23958.4 an "undue concentration"of off-sale retail license applications exists under either the following two scenarios: (1) "The applicant premises are located in a crime reporting district that has a 20 percent greater number of reported crimes . . . than the average number of reported crimes as determined from all crime reporting districts within the jurisdiction of the local law enforcement agency;" or (2) "the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the county in which the applicant premises are located." According to ABC's online database, Census Tract 20.16 has two existing off-sale licenses. This means an undue concentration of off-sale licenses exists within the census tract if another off-sale license is issued; and d. The request for a PCN determination fails to meet certain City policy, specifically: 1) the surrounding census tracts (8.12, 20.27, 20.15 and 21.05) have been found pursuant to ABC to be overconcentrated with active off-sale retail licenses; and 2) the proposed grocery store is located within a '/2 mile of another grocery store, Albertson's Grocery Store, at 8850 Foothill Boulevard, which also has an active off-sale retail license for alcohol sales; and 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, and 2 above, this City Council herby determines that the issuance of an off-sale liquor license for Grocery Outlet will not service the Public Convenience or Necessity. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this City Council hereby deny the request for a Public Convenience or Necessity determination. 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 16T" DAY OF JUNE 2021. Page 203 �Q� 2021-06-16 - REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - ITEM Fl. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL RECEIVED FROM APPLICANT, PAT BARBER I i II ' GROCERY 11 . P � O Introduction OUTLET to Grocery Outlet Corporate Culture GOI is a company driven by family values which are reflected throughout the organization Fawdy �F*e#PW"x* • Every operator, employee and supplier is treated with the While GOI encourages a collegial environment, it also utmost respect embraces an entrepreneurial and competitive spirit • Management believes that the operators and employees are • The entrepreneurial spirit and thinking make the first priority, and that Management and shareholders are Company successful rewarded after those groups are adequately compensated • The best operators are those that have an entrepreneurial focus and can capitalize on • The Company believes in empowering those that are closest opportunities to the customer to deliver superior value on a daily basis • GOI fosters the highest level of performance by encouraging • As a company that is tied to the communities in which it competition operates, GOI requires that its operators be model citizens in 0 Throughout the year, the Company holds several those communities — showing a commitment to growth and competitions amongst the stores prosperity • Victories are celebrated in a very visible manner with winners announced throughout the organization h �Growth ,, Extreme�Value Reta *11er • with • Business Model • Grocery Outlet ("GOI" or the "Company") is a leading extreme value retailer of food, beverages and general merchandise sold through a network of 400 store locations Business 9 Offers customers 40-70% savings versus conventional grocers and • 15-30% savings versus discounters . Typical store carries an average of 5,000 SKUs across grocery, deli, Pennsylvania frozen, produce, fresh meat, seafood, general merchandise, health & beauty care, and beer & wine Small, flexible format: 10,000 — 15,000 selling sq. ft. • Opportunistic sourcing: majority of GOI's product mix consists of excess inventory sourced from branded CPG companies at a deep Business discount to conventionally purchased product; preferred CPG _ Model partner in fragmented market • Independent store operator model: aligns the interests of the Company with those of the store operator while optimizing customer experience, merchandise mix and value locally Store count as of6/24/2021 GOI Offers to Customers MethodsDue to its Differentiated Opportunistic Sourcing Model Two Primary Opportunistic Everyday Core Staples • Opportunistic purchases When staples, such as milk represent CPG excess or sugar, cannot be sourced inventory: close-dated opportunistically, GO buys from products, production suppliers overruns and other package / product variation 19 Provides customer convenience via a more complete • Go is a preferred CPC a —50% of Purchases product assortment partner fora non-disruptive, brand- 41 Captures sales of high protected sales channel demand items • Allows Go to pass along + Products priced at or Click significant savings to below conventional short video about - • watch . customers while making a supermarkets, and discount our businessmodel. healthy margin F competitors everyday prices Dramatic Discounts on Select Products Opportunistic sourcing leads to "WOWs" and a treasure hunt shopping experience that excites customers and keeps them coming back Grocery Outlet refers to its best opportunistic buys as "WOWs", both internally and in the store Most "WOWS" are priced at a 50-75% discount to prices in conventional grocery stores Examples of "WOWs" this year include: Zico Coconut Water (1Q, Chex Mix (2, Best Foods Mayonnaise (22 oz.) Ball Park Meat Franks (15 oz.) GOI Retail: $1.99 h GOI Retail: $2.99 ja GOI Retail: $1.99 GOI Retail: $1.99 • Value: 3.99 $ . . Value: $4.99 r � Value: $7.19 IAz $ Value: 4.99 Savings: 60% Savings: 58% Savings: 50% Savings: 60% loopw -MR Z.) Strawberries (1 1b.) - - . Sea Chardonnayi D. GOI Retail: $1.99 % a GOI Retail: $0.99 GOI Retail: $3.99 GOI Retail: $7.99 Value: $9.99 Value: $2.99 Value: $20.995 °'' Value: $15.99 . fit - Savings: 80% Savings: 67% Savings: 81% Savings: 50% NOSH GrowthDreiven by CustomerDemand Assortment Merchandising & Operations Growth Categories: • Added top organic industry personnel • Healthy Snacks • Allocated more space to fresh products and NOSH • Coffees • Customers education on NOSH benefits • Breads • Recipes & NOSH product education • Oils (Olive, Coconut, Grape Seed, Sesame, etc.) • Produce • Milk dw • Deli Focus on everyday items that are underpenetrated: • Bread- bread wall re-sets • Organic coffee shelf space - Ghee, Truffle Oil, Branded & Organic K cups. • Continue Fresh & New! July 30 NBC News San Diego Story About Affordable Options Organics — Click here 6 Un *ique Independent Operator Model Grocery Outlet's partnership with Independent Operators provides customers deep value on localized assortments and delivers excellent customer service and a differentiated shopping experience • Source all product and set prices centrally • Select, order and merchandise products according to local market • Manage all vendor relationships and agreements preferences • • • Own all inventory from purchase through sales at POS • Modify pricing as necessary according to local competition while Pricing • Merchandise new stores for grand openings keeping within strategy guidelines • Manage store inventory through order quantities, sales tracking, markdowns, throwaways and shrink • Recruit, train and place Independent Operators into stores • Perform duties as operators of store, a separate legal entity • Coach, develop and support stores to broaden operational best • Hire, train and pay all employees (set wages, benefits and insurance) Store practices • Manage labor structure and scheduling Operations • Audit stores for adherence to Company policies • Own and manage operating assets (e.g., POS equipment,forklifts) • Own company branding and multi-regional marketing efforts (print, • Own all local marketing efforts Marketing radio,TV) • Maintain deep involvement in local communities • Support Operators in local marketing efforts • Move product from vendor to warehouse to store • Work with vendors for specific direct-to-store distribution needs Logistics • Set direct-to-store multi-region logistics agreements • Select store sites, design and build-out stores • Pay for site operating expenses such as utilities Real Estate • Invest all store capex and pay store rent • Invest in remodels of existing stores Technology Develop systems and tools for use in the stores 0 Use of systems for store operations Grocery Outlet � Market Basket Study - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i DOLLAR CAMSM0 SAFEWAI� _ 1Nalmart amazon`: GENERAL • GO % Savings � vs.: 39% 189' � 30% 26% 49' 1 OMG WE PROVIDE ACROSS A WITH NO ON LEADING IN AN EASY-TO- WITH NO MEMBERSHIP EXTREME - FULL GROCERY NATIONAL VALUE! SHOP STORE! DELIVERY FEE! ASSORTMENT! FEE OR BULK BRANDS! SIZES! FURTHER DIFFERENTIATED BY FRIENDLY, HIGH-TOUCH SERVICE AND TREASURE HUNT EXPERIENCE! 8 Consistent Reinvestment in ExistingStoreBase GroceryOutlet has . n extremely well-maintained store • Over 95% of the existing store base has been opened, relocated or renovated since 2009 • Grocery Outlet has invested $37 million in remodeling and upgrading stores over the last 5 years • On average, Grocery Outlet spends $40-50 thousand per store per year on store maintenance and upgrades BEERSWINE 4E.WE LOCAL? _ . . U.fiyet "=�'i,: kt-11.14 tl Ill lllll' + R _a. WYA~RE4 0��1 ill I,II ✓f lrlllll _ _���n.jla . . III `__ � — Y�����'t 11 .ul _ lrini lfll� `_ ,J•.. �i.fir `I _ ' A r _ �II!L;:.I�h IF, l,I A� ,:1. Kve•`4�"`�,r�ci.:i��,_ � ALl '1FA� N�� 1.. � f I {' +`/�� E5'} _ . Our Customers love a • recommend us The Independent Operator model drives customer loyalty and satisfaction LeadingPS Reflects Differentiation(') 60% 56% 55% 54% PP 42% 35% 32% 23% 21% o 20/o 17% 10% 9% 8% 8% 3% 2% 0/o • TRA➢ERJOE'S 'IUeO��1Li/kS ��, ���'I •„ �aee S § (2%)�Q61�CEk �fJ®� ✓ Fred a OnY ® BEeklR NC (5%) w111�:0 �»+� F00 sroses p�I� Walmart*' FOODS �' ` v�� O S06 HILL TARGET SAFEWAYO. AhAffim*mns Weis`' JSC�W,/1'tiltl'Y. Source: Survey ofgniceryconsumers within 20 minutes of Grocery Outleet stores(2018);n=758 core customers. Note: Research✓Vowfleldsasurveyweeklyofpeoplewholiveinzipcodeswithin20minutesofGroceryOutietstores.Surveyresultspresentedareofpeoplewhohaveshapped Grocery Ou tlet in the past 90 days an d spen d 25%-t sh are of wallet with Grocery Outlet. 10 (1) The Net PromoterScore,orNPS,isanindexrangingfrom-100to100thatmegsures the Willingness ofcustomersto recommend acompany's products orservicestoothers. Competition � ! .�: -3cax..:o-rFa.'t:V. r--:-_.. •i :.. i 1 - �+r;._ , F Foothill -5=_ .- � .trti,,...*,•_•,a„�„ ,� - ` fi4 #hell Hwy E o th tfTl��. * Hi•�hla-rd rive ' G3 Fl?4thill F-oothill F.wy E �' : �' � , f '.i' r1�Y IS 1th # 1 ti St t r w:rN.g• ' :° - }art ; rii� r4 Lri '4cta:ia 5t .0 e3 r - .3 i - IL - a� tiN it -. :. �. ,� = E16rh St x : ;:-.. ,4 `;- Bast+l�■5e Rd _ _ di ! - '. y .'6:L= Cable '. c f� 1fIC�TRIA ' "U 13tM Sty ' E 13th St irport L s G AK69 N S r .' 41 _ y —Op ill Blvd Foothill IRI'. F Fckoth+ll 131vdEl ;:::•• = L, � i V VVAfrowRic- �� a, � me av iEs TIWNS —'x -- 9Ph° 1 1'=$ - •� -;I— I ,, f�,w'•n ■a.'aM .A- 3` ... T' t -MOM ,k = },� � L " Lu •. . i i3� V`� d rs.� ; WhittrDn' Ikxr•' VJ$k F5th 5t ath-st m -_9thr$t —• '1�4Yam.. � ti•• .�r •5a���� " � r• :� -_ �,,,,�.�5a�ti Bernardino Fw 1N '" . ., - +�; '`.hest Vale ` F YW.� 1' ...E Eth 5r '' ��kh 5t -x'?+I•i rj .. : :. . * R L,?ten.110K4'r5 : -ti o "r.",.vth•5t r `� vr' 5 n r. d r--+ j Fhaifr��+ " :,, � i■' � �G_ � .Br}�a"dina - -s,ffe 5th St } H, h E 5k11 St �.� d , -- i= ' a ,-i r*� C O Srr1OOl ,= ,,'' d ' 1: i*+ rt �i'� '" r+;!ti }, n ` 1'1 h t ''' a wry. ■`, _ -J__' �? r am' �L1f.� OLu rnmen 0. ' b ?. rr.�t+p f ! � roman aellvi�w T. r USA dcL trtment Itz' < ,.' Pw'iemolial ra �' - F � W 4 Park Ord G St O C{i St L� ,.,..f�= ..' }. ., ;cads a✓E c.van I Ilsl I I�1� #m± ; •�. -� Bernar' i17 16 Sari 80atdino FA-Y vv . L - ..k —� ,J■� '- �a i ' lam i Thank You . G R CERYO UTLET How � ��. _ ` -. - _ ar�iw .• ML. _ _ low City Council June 16, 2021 Consideration of Public Convenience or Necessity DRC2021 -00027 PROJECT OVERVIEW Project: A request for a Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) Determination for Alcoholic Beverage Sales for Off-Site Consumption (Type-21 Off-Sale Beer, Wine, and Distilled Spirits) for a Grocery Store (Grocery Outlet). Entitlements: DRC2021-00027 Zoning Designation: Community Commercial District, Foothill Boulevard Overlay, and Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan General Plan Designation: General Commercial ' ,SAN BERNARDINO RO. ^"""-- ZZ a Er..1-77 ' - - - FOOTHILL BLVD. y� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r r �� © O Off® O x ER IN InHilo . _ �le c — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r r �� DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL LIMITATIONS (ABC) • ABC permits up to two (2) alcohol licenses within Census Tract (20.16), within which the subject project is located. • Two licenses already exist—CVS and Day and Night Liquor as illustrated on the map. • According to ABC, the proposed alcohol license constitutes a third licenses which would cause Census Tract 20.16 to become overconcentrated. IT 7 L } Rua ,a,t � 11.• Rw Al L rti C 1ti'w�' --f ^"CFIf J .. - Church 3l "�, � _ � - •i d 's 1 gyp. � I1. .r i, a..�� ,va{il ry �y nr.: l • ? �d v'.�ti.'� 7� , ��• r.!.` �. ,�. �,, ++ �net� >U ��� sY �` �Z�e- ,I �ro0nll i�oivu _ _ •_ �- �` r■3■. I �111[ NEW PCN POLICY 1 . City has recently received numerous requests for off-sale alcohol licenses; 2. Related impacts associated with issuance of alcohol sales could impact public health, safety and welfare; 3. These concerns could include increases in DUls, proximity to incompatible uses (parks, schools, etc.), availability of alcohol to minors, etc. 4. After consulting with Police Department, the City Manager updated policy in effort to address these concerns SURROUNDING CENSUS TRACTS �r ua era* Active Off-Sale Retail Licenses with o O IMF - ' " Surrounding Census Tracts O Census #Of Licenses #Of Active Tract Permitted Licenses zo.1s 8.12 2 8 00 .0 21.03 3 3 . 0 O O 20.27 3 6 4k. A `.. 20.15 3 5 20.16 21.05 3 7 t K21 O ca ~� O O O POD .0 O �O O o z1.o6 LEGEND *jProject Site tr - Gas Stations •Supermarkets/Convenience Stores r r` .;�Es O Liquor Stores C RECOMMENDATION •Staff recommends that the City Council deny the determination of Public Convenience or Necessity DRC2021 -00027 for Grocery Outlet through the adoption of resolution of denial and forward a copy to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Matt Burris, AICP, Deputy City Manager Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Consideration of Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 982, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further Reading, Amending Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Modify Administrative Procedures within the Development Code and Establish New Zoning Districts, Amend Land Uses and Definitions and Create New Development Standards for Industrial Development within the City. This Item is Exempt from the Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and the City's CEQA Guidelines under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) (DRC2021-00170). (ORDINANCE NO. 982) (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission and Staff recommend that the Council introduce Ordinance No. 982 entitled "An Ordinance Of The City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code To Modify Administrative Procedures within the Development Code And Establish New Zoning Districts, Amend Land Uses And Definitions And Create New Development Standards For Industrial Development Within The City, Making Findings In Support Thereof, And Making A Determination That The Ordinance Is Exempt From The California Environmental Quality Act", waive full reading and read by title only. BACKGROUND: On November 4, 2020, the City Council adopted Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 976 establishing a moratorium on new industrial building development on properties in all industrial zones within the "Southeast Industrial Quadrant" (SEIQ) of the City and within 500 feet of the public right-of- way of a segment of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Milliken Avenue. On December 16, 2020, the City Council extended the Interim Urgency Ordinance to June 30, 2021. At the time of extension, the City Council, with a lot of strong input from industrial community, specifically limited the moratorium to an expiration date at the end of June 2021. The Council determined that a strategic pause on industrial development in the SEIQ and along Foothill Boulevard was appropriate given the age of the current code, rapidly changing market conditions, and concerns that were arising as legacy industrial sites were purchased, developed on spec, and converted to significantly different uses than previous. The moratorium provided staff time to review our development standards, consider work being done on the General Plan, Page 204 as well as engage the industrial development community to understand their needs and find common ground. The purpose of this extensive public input was to ensure a robust, diverse industrial sector which can provide employment and services for local residents and as well generate significant positive economic outcomes for the City. It is important to note that although the moratorium is in the SEIQ area of Rancho Cucamonga and parts of Foothill Boulevard, the proposed updates will apply uniformly to all industrial zones throughout the City, not just the areas impacted by the moratorium. Since the approval of the interim urgency ordinance, literally starting the next day, staff has worked diligently with our code consultant, Lisa Wise Consulting, to evaluate all aspects of industrial building development. The work effort, which included thousands of hours of collective review, research and drafting, included determining the relevant topics and trends related to industrial building development, determining what standards needed updating, reviewing and providing feedback on proposed solutions that meet the City's need for an economically diverse industrial sector that provides value to the City and all the while carefully considering the impacts of industrial uses on Rancho Cucamonga residents. The latter consideration is encapsulated in the review and compatibility process with the goals and policies of the current General Plan and the key community values of the General Plan Update: Health, Equity and Stewardship. Staff has also extensively engaged the industrial development community to gather feedback and understanding of the industrial development sector. Staff has conducted outreach with the City's industrial development and brokerage community through our monthly zoom meetings beginning in December 2020 to discuss feasible land use regulations that mitigate impacts caused by industrial development. We have also engaged with interested stakeholders on an individual level for more nuanced conversations on a weekly basis.. A list of all formal engagements with the industrial stakeholders is provided as Attachment 1 to this report. Please note that there were many more informal engagements that also occurred. On April 28, 2021, staff presented the public draft of the proposed industrial standards to the Planning Commission for review. The Commission asked questions and provided supportive feedback to staff on the draft code changes. They also encouraged continued collaboration with the industrial stakeholders to further refine the code changes based on their areas of concern. After the release of the public draft code changes, staff continued to have conversations with industrial stakeholders who provided feedback on specific parts the proposed amendments. Staff evaluated the comments received and made refinements as deemed appropriate. On May 26, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a formal public hearing to consider the proposed industrial code amendments. A copy of the staff report outlining the proposed amendments in more detail and areas of concern from the industrial stakeholder group is included as Attachment 2. A copy of the Planning Commission meeting minutes is included as Attachment 3. Comments from the public included the following concerns: • Truck queuing requirements are too high; • Solar roof coverage is too high; • Conditionally permitted industrial uses places a high burden for small businesses; • Landscaping requirements for parking lots is infeasible; and • Moratorium should be extended The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the amendment to the City Council but asked staff to continue taking input from stakeholders with respect to truck queuing, Page 2 Page 205 rooftop solar coverage, and permitted uses within industrial zones. Immediately following the Planning Commission hearing, staff has conducted several small group sessions with stakeholders, dozens of telephone calls with individual industrial developers and brokers and gathered additional information and data related to these topics to determine if additional code refinements were needed. That input, including up through the end of last week, is incorporated in the final document. ANALYSIS: This section will focus on the main areas of concern noted at the Planning Commission review, staff responses and the final refinements proposed herein. Issue 1 —Truck Queuing Requirements Concerns were raised by the stakeholders that the need for a 1:1 ratio between dock doors and truck queuing was excessively high. Examples were provided of other industrial tenants who required far less on-site queuing, but the stakeholder groups were initially unable to provide a different truck queuing standard or any methodology for staff to consider. During the Planning Commission hearing, staff expressed again our concerns that not designing for truck queuing on site creates public safety hazards without site design to manage incoming trucks. Fire Marshall Rob Ball explained that without accommodating for incoming truck traffic, large trucks sometimes stage in on site fire lanes or in roadway medians, impeding the ability for fire apparatus to quickly get on site in an emergency. The Planning Commission asked staff to continue to have conversations with the stakeholders to find a solution. After the Planning Commission hearing, the stakeholder group proposed a standard of 1 queuing space for every 15 dock doors. That later was revised to a different proposal as it relates to Master Plan sites and buildings of different sizes. Further, staff received separate input from specific industrial developers who advocated for a ratio of dock doors to square footage. Staff reviewed all the proposals and recommends a new queuing standard of 1 queuing space for every 10 dock doors because this standard balances the need for enhanced queuing in light of Mr. Ball's comments against the stakeholders' comments. Industrial buildings constructed with less than 10 dock doors will need to provide 1 queuing space. In addition, there is anew requirement that the entry gate be located a minimum 135 ft. from the street to allow onsite queuing to prevent trucks from backing up on public streets. The proposed code amendment would also allow a developer to request a reduction in the queuing standard with the approval of a traffic management plan and a Conditional Use Permit. A Master Plan will also allow a developer to use a different standard, even one based on square footage, if that can be supported. Staff feels that the revised queuing standard, plus the flexibility to amend the standard for specific projects adequately mitigates the potential for excessive queuing while ensuring that the number of parking spaces ultimately reflects site-specific conditions. Issue 2 — Solar Roof Coverage Concerns were raised by the industrial stakeholders about the development standard requiring 75% of the roof to be covered by solar panels. Concerns related to the feeling this was an arbitrary and excessive number. The industry also indicated they could provide a net zero offset for building demand with far less than 75% roof coverage. The purpose and intent of this standard was to ensure that new industrial developments would generate enough solar power for their needs now, as well as anticipated future needs over the life of the building, accounting for solar panel degradation, potential increased energy usage as industrial development is more Page 3 Page 206 automated, enhanced HVAC needs to account for warmer climate conditions and deployment of clean vehicle technologies like electric vehicles and trucks, which will require charging stations available on site. Subsequent industry input indicated a preference for an 80% offset of only building energy demand with no accommodation for clean vehicle technologies or solar panel degradation. After hearing stakeholder feedback and additional analysis, staff has amended the solar requirements as outlined below: • Solar energy systems may be substituted for other forms of on-site renewable energy, provided those systems are recognized by the State of California as a renewable resource under the Renewable Portfolio Standard Program. • Require solar or other renewable energy sources for all new industrial developments in an amount based on the following formula: Annualized VMT Building Generation 10 Years of Required Renewable Demand for Offset for Efficiency Approved Vehicles Loss Power Generation Use and Trucks • Solar power generated shall be metered separately from metered power usage of the building. The proposed standards provide a customized solution for individual developments, avoids a"one size fits all" solution, is specific to each user and provides flexibility for innovation in the future. Further, with a Master Plan, a given user could provide more solar coverage, even up to 75% of the roof surface, if they so desired. Issue 3 — Conditionally Permitted Uses Just prior to, and during the Planning Commission hearing, testimony was given indicating that the land use table, that indicates which land uses are permitted, conditionally permitted or not permitted,was likely to impact many existing and new incoming small businesses looking to locate in our existing industrial areas. The impact was expected to make some existing businesses non- conforming and subject many new small businesses to a discretionary review process that may be economically infeasible to getting a new business off the ground or force them to look elsewhere to start their business. The industry provided extensive feedback and input, both individually and collectively, following the Planning Commission hearing on this matter as well. The intent of the revisions to the land use table was to phase out heavier, less environmentally sustainable industrial uses, or those with significant impacts on the community, and better regulate large scale warehouse uses to lessen impacts to residents, infrastructure and the environment, thereby ensuring conformity with the community values of the General Plan Update: Health, Equity and Stewardship. Using data provided by CoStar, staff evaluated all industrial units currently constructed in the City. The table below shows a breakdown of units by square footage. Page 4 Page 207 Rentable Building Area by Square Footage BuildingRentable of Units 0-9,999 204 10,000 - 19,999 207 20,000 - 29,999 110 30,000 - 39,999 47 40,000 -49,999 34 50,000 - 59,999 24 60,000 - 69,999 21 70,000 - 79,999 11 80,000 - 89,999 13 90,000 - 99,999 8 100,000 + 118 Total 797 Source:Costar The data shows that the majority of the City's existing industrial stock consists of smaller units. 65% of the units (521)are under 30,000 square feet and 75% (602)are under 50,000 square feet. It is not the intent to more heavily regulate these smaller industrial uses, but rather to encourage them to locate and thrive here in Rancho Cucamonga. Fiscally, these smaller industrial uses employ more people per acre, produce more revenue per acre (sales and property tax), and have equal or lower impacts per acre than most of the larger industrial uses. With this data set in mind, we have developed more permissive land uses for small industrial properties (50,000 square feet or less) versus large industrial properties (over 50,000 square feet). Staff is proposing the changes noted below to support smaller industrial businesses as outlined below: Revised Land Use Table for Small and Large Industrial Uses EmploymentIndustrial Neo- Industrial Land Use/Zoning District Park Industrial E-commerce Distribution small P P P E-commerce Distribution (large) N M M Wholesale Storage and Distribution, Light small P P P Wholesale Storage and Distribution, Medium (large) C C P Manufacturing, Light small P P P Manufacturing, Light (large) N M M P=Permitted by Right,C=Conditional Use Permit Required,M=Minor Use Permit, N=Not Permitted Small is defined as units 50,000 square feet or less,Large is defined as units greater than 50,000 square feet These changes were subsequently shared with several small industrial park owners to ensure the changes would meet their needs. Page 5 Page 208 Issue 4 — Landscaping Requirements for Parking Lots At the Planning Commission meeting, an industrial stakeholder shared their concerns about the revised landscaping requirements for parking lots. Specifically, the planter width had increased from 6 feet to 10 feet, but fewer trees (1 tree for every 5 parking stalls)were required. In response to this comment, staff took another look at this standard in light of the Planning Commission's request that staff continue to work with stakeholders to resolve their comments. After further review, staff recommends deleting the revised tree ratio and the increase to the planter width and leaving the existing parking lot tree and planter standards in place. The current standards require 1 tree for every 3 parking stalls and a 6-foot planter width. Other Minor Revisions In addition to these issues, staff identified a few minor inconsistencies and errors in the draft code amendments. A list of all amended provisions to the industrial code standards since the Planning Commission public hearing on May 26 is included as Attachment 4. Also, several final revisions were made to the land use table to address unique concerns related to large legacy uses and to facilitate faster processing of some conditionally permitted uses. Findings of Fact Per Section 17.22.040 of the Development Code, amendments to the code may be approved only when the City Council finds that the Development Code amendment is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs. General Plan Policy LU-3.3 recognizes the need for regional serving land uses, like industrial uses need immediate access to the regional transportation network that is designed to provide maximum access capabilities and permit maximum dispersal of traffic. General Plan Land Use Goal CM-5 and Policy CM-5.2 require new developments to evaluate and when needed provide necessary transportation infrastructure to mitigate for transportation impacts. General Plan Land Use Goal CM-7 supports the maintenance of an efficient and safe network of good and freight movement that supports the needs of the business community. The block networks standards proposed provide guidance to new development with some flexibility with the master plan process to develop a transportation network that will not only support individual development, but provide efficient, safe transportation infrastructure for a variety of industrial uses. Finally, General Plan Land Use Policy LU-3.4 promotes development that is sustainable in its use of land and limits impacts to natural resources, energy, and air and water quality. Solar power generation standards and EV charging stations and infrastructure help encourage clean energy use and help reduce environmental impacts related to industrial development. Environmental Analysis. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. This project qualifies under the general rule that CEQA only applies to project, which have the potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA guidelines Section 15061(13)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject Page 6 Page 209 to CEQA. The consolidation of zoning districts, changes to the entitlement process and the elimination of higher impact industrial uses from the land use table will impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. The implementation of requirements for solar collector systems and other forms of renewable energy sources for new industrial development will provide a renewable electric resource for the development and reduce dependence on non-renewable electric resources. Requiring development electric vehicle charging infrastructure will encourage use of electric vehicles for industrial uses, reducing GHG emissions in future developments. These requirements impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. The parking and circulation standards will also impose greater limitations on new industrial development than what is currently permitted today. Importantly, the new block network parameters will ensure that access to and from new industrial sites will be via shorter distances and thus reduce vehicle miles travelled. Further, the package of standards is intended to reduce traffic congestion in industrial areas, which will necessarily reduce the presence of GHG emissions caused by CO2 hotspots. City staff, together with the City's traffic consultant, have prepared an analysis of current and future traffic impacts within the SEIQ that demonstrates significant traffic impacts unless further improvements to the street grid are made. While the proposed ordinance would not mandate the construction of any new streets or impose a specific grid network, the proposed standards will help improve circulation within congested, truck- intensive areas of the City. Each of these components, individually and cumulatively, does not result in the possibility of creating significant to cumulative effects on the environment. Future development subject to these provisions will be reviewed for CEQA compliance under separate entitlements or actions as proposed by these code updates. During the entitlement process, the applicant will be required to comply with CEQA. In reviewing each project for compliance with CEQA, an applicant may be required to submit environmental studies that analyze potential impacts such as air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise levels, and transportation/traffic caused by the site- specific project. On a case-by-case review of each project, the appropriate environmental document will be prepared to address project-specific impacts. Based on this evidence and all the evidence in the record Planning staff has determined that the Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA. APPLICATION OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS: Staff recommends that this ordinance apply to projects according to Section 17.02.020(F) provides: F. Effect of zoning code changes on projects in process. The enactment of this title, or any amendments thereto, may have the effect of imposing different standards on new land uses, development, and/or structures than those that applied to existing land uses, development, and/or structures. Following the effective date of this title the following provisions shall apply. Successive amendments to this title shall specify their applicability to pending applications Page 7 Page 210 and projects not yet or under construction; in the event an amendment is silent on this matter, the following shall apply. 1. Pending applications.All land use permit applications that are active and that have been determined by the planning director to be complete before the effective date of this title, or any amendments thereto, will be processed according to the regulations in effect when the application was deemed complete. FISCAL IMPACT: Developing a robust industrial sector with well planned developments with a sufficient diversity of uses and appropriate controls will prevent fiscal strains on our tax base and infrastructure costs over the long term. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This code update directly addresses the Council's vision to build on our success as a world class community by implanting new development standards that will enhance the overall quality and performance of our industrial sector. Through the engagement of stakeholders and learning more about industrial development, and using the information provided by our stakeholders to guide our decisions on the code updates, we are guided by the Council's core values of intentionally embracing and anticipating the future, working together cooperatively and respectfully with each other, staff and all stakeholders, and intentionally embracing and anticipating the future. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 — Engagement timeline Attachment 2 — Planning Commission Staff Report, May 26, 2021 Attachment 3— Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, May 26, 2021 Attachment 4 — Planning Commission Resolution 21-37 Attachment 5— Ordinance No. 982 Page 8 Page 211 Development of Industrial Code Update—Schedule and Stakeholder Outreach Staff began Stakeholder engagement beginning in October 2020, prior to the first City Council meeting on the Urgency Ordinance. Individual conversations, small group conversations, and larger planned monthly Industrial Stakeholder Meetings took place from November 2020 to June 2021. The following chart provides the dates of these outreach efforts over the past eight months. DATE(S) ACTIVITY TOPIC COMMENTS 10/29, 30 11/2/20 Initial Outreach to Industrial Notification of City Manager, Deputy Property Owners and Reps upcoming Urgency City Manager and Ordinance at CC Planning Department outreach prior to City Council action on moratorium 11/4/20 City Council adoption of Urgency Ordinance 11/9/20 Industrial Code Update Internal staff Kick-off coordination 11/10/20 One-on-one conversation Impact of proposed Director outreach with individual road network and code stakeholders changes on development site 11/17/20 Internal Weekly SEIQ Planning, Engineering, Internal meetings kept coordination meeting Fire, GIS, Finance staff the project on schedule coordination to meet the moratorium timeline 11/19/20 Industrial Stakeholder PlanRC Land Use and One of a number of General Plan Session Transportation meetings with Presentation targeted community stakeholder to Industrial groups on PlanRC Stakeholders 12/1/20 Bi-weekly conversation with Understanding the Director outreach individual stakeholder industrial market 2021 12/7/20 Industrial Stakeholder Why and How of the Formal engagement Zoom Meeting#1 moratorium. Soliciting begins. NAIOP, input, dialog, industrial property information, owners, developers, cooperation real estate brokers, and development representatives participate ATTACHMENT 1 Page 212 12/15/20 Kick-off Industrial Code Meeting with staff update with LWC project coordinators and consulting team 12/16/20 City Council public hearing to extend moratorium to June 30, 2021 12/23/20 Conversation with Property owner Director outreach property/business owner in seeking to see how the the SEIQ moratorium would affect his business 1/12/21 Meeting with LWC Staff level launch with CFD kick-off discussion consulting team 1/13/21 Planning Commission A decision was made to meeting to continue include the proposed General Plan Amendment Road Network in the for proposed Road PlanRC update rather Network than doing a stand alone GPA 2/16/21 Industrial Stakeholder Seeking input on how Zoom Meeting#2 to improve industrial standards and process of review 3/2, 3/11/21 Meetings with SEIQ Probing the idea of a Director outreach property owners Specific Plan for SEIQ property owners 3/30/21 Industrial Stakeholder Continue to solicit Zoom Meeting#3 4/27/21 Industrial Stakeholder Review draft Industrial Zoom Meeting#4 Ordinance 4/28/21 Planning Commission Study Opportunity for Session on draft Industrial questions and Standards comments on draft standards 5/11/21 Meeting with NAIOP reps Discuss options related to 1) queuing 2) solar 3) master use permit 4) CUP requirement 5/24/21 Industrial Stakeholder Discuss options related Zoom Meeting#5 to 1) queuing 2) solar 3) master use permit 4) CUP requirement Week of 5/24/21 Calls w/ Industrial Discuss options related stakeholders one to one to 1) queuing 2) solar 3) master use permit 4) CUP requirement 5/26/21 Planning Commission Recommendation to hearing on Draft Ordinance forward to Council with Page 213 continuing meetings with Stakeholders to further evaluate 1) queuing 2) solar 3) master use permit 4) CUP requirement 6/2/21 Industrial Stakeholder Discuss options related Zoom Meeting#6 to 1) queuing 2) solar 3) master use permit 4) CUP requirement 6/7/21 Call w/ Industrial Director outreach stakeholders one to one 6/9/21 Industrial Stakeholder Discuss options related Zoom Meeting#7 to 1) queuing 2) solar 3) master use permit 4) CUP requirement 6/16/21 City Council Hearing—First Reading of Ordinance 6/30/21 MORATORIUM EXPIRES Conversations continue regarding infrastructure financing, Page 214 —1A*1 0"O�Na W_ $l W CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: May 26, 2021 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director INITIATED BY: Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II SUBJECT: MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to modify administrative procedures, establish new zoning districts, amend land uses and definitions and create new development standards for industrial development. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action. (DRC2021- 00170) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the draft resolution attached hereto as Exhibit C, recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance to codify the proposed amendment to Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to modify administrative procedures, establish new zoning districts, amend land uses and definitions, and create new development standards for industrial development, as shown in Exhibit D to this staff report. BACKGROUND: On November 4, 2020, the City Council adopted Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 976 establishing a moratorium on new industrial building development on properties in all industrial zones within the "Southeast Industrial Quadrant" (SEIQ) of the City and within 500 feet of the public right-of-way of a segment of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Milliken Avenue. On December 16, 2020, the City Council extended the Interim Urgency Ordinance to June 30, 2021. This interim ordinance was developed as staff observed an increase in the level of development interest in the SEIQ and along Foothill Boulevard. The SEIQ has been dominated by "legacy" uses and tenants such Ameron (now redeveloped with a set of industrial buildings by Goodman), Commercial Metals Company (CMC), and Reliant Energy (NRG/GenOn) on significantly large properties. These uses/tenants have been present since before the City's incorporation in 1977. Similarly, there are multiple smaller properties in the SEIQ developed with, for example, small manufacturing businesses, storage yards, and non-conforming residences. Many of these properties are relatively under-developed, i.e. they are not developed to their maximum potential. Page 1 ATTAC H M EP29 5 2 Overall, there has been limited turnover in the uses/tenants of these properties for new development in the SEIQ. As previously noted, this had been the case until 2019-2020 when interest in developing within the SEIQ began to increase to a level that was not anticipated by the City. This level of interest generally has no parallel elsewhere in the City and planning for it in the SEIQ has been limited. The current Development Code does not adequately address the unique operational impacts, characteristics, and development constraints of modern industrial development. In the case of Foothill Boulevard, the Development Code does not account for industrial development located adjacent to non-industrial development. There are no requirements/regulations that apply to industrial development, in that context, to address, for example, differences in operational characteristics, the type and volume of traffic, performance standards related to noise and glare, and design standards for building size and scale. Along Foothill Boulevard there are three sets of vacant properties that are relatively small, compared to the properties in the SEIQ, with areas ranging between 1.75 and 8.2 acres located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Milliken Avenue. These properties are surrounded by, for example, offices, retail stores, and restaurants. Near one of these properties is a church and a hotel. In light of these concerns, the Council determined that a strategic pause on industrial development in the SEIQ and along Foothill Boulevard was appropriate and would provide staff time to review our development standards, consider work being done on the General Plan as well as engage the industrial development community to understand their needs and find common ground to ensure a robust, diverse industrial sector which can provide employment and services for local residents and generate positive economic outcomes for the City. The proposed updates will apply uniformly to all industrial zones throughout the City, not just the areas impacted by the moratorium. Since the approval of the interim urgency ordinance, staff has worked with our code consultant, Lisa Wise Consulting, to evaluate all aspects of industrial building development. This included determining the relevant topics and trends related to industrial building development, determining what standards needed updating and review and providing feedback on proposed solutions that meet our need for an economically diverse industrial sector that provides value to the City and its residents while meeting the goals and policies of the current General Plan and the key community values of the General Plan Update: Health, Equity and Stewardship. Staff has also engaged the industrial development community to gather feedback and understanding of the industrial development sector. Staff has conducted outreach with the City's industrial development and brokerage community through our monthly zoom meetings beginning in December 2020 to discuss feasible land use regulations that mitigate impacts caused by industrial development. We have also engaged with interested stakeholders on an individual level for more nuanced conversations. On April 28, 2021, staff presented the public draft of the proposed industrial standards to the Planning Commission for review. The commission asked questions and provided supportive feedback for staff on the draft code changes. Since the Planning Commission hearing we have continued to have conversations with industrial stakeholders who have provided feedback on the proposed amendments. A summary of feedback received and the City's response is provided later in the report. ANALYSIS: As part of this code update process, staff analyzed the existing conditions within all industrial zones and the impacts of existing industrial development throughout the City. The purpose of this evaluation was to determine what current regulations were relevant and effective in ensuring that the City's vision, goals, and policies for industrial development are fulfilled. Many, though not all, of the current regulations have been in place since the 1980's. The comprehensive code amendment in 2012 provided a more streamlined land use table for industrial uses, but most industrial development standards remained in place. The intent of the proposed updates was to revise review procedures where needed, update development standards consistent with current industrial development and eliminate any obsolete land use classifications, development standards, and procedures. Page 2 Page 216 These amendments will also ensure that the City's requirements/regulations are consistent with current State laws, Building codes, and Fire codes, and compatible with current and anticipated land uses, economic trends, architectural considerations, environmental sustainability, social equity, etc. The updated code will provide clarity for future development by providing clear, updated standards that will be applied to all industrial projects. Below are some of the key policy revisions included in the public draft code amendment for industrial zoned properties: Entitlement Processing. Currently, the only entitlement required for most types of industrial development is a Design Review application. The purpose of the design review application is to evaluate the site plan, development standards and project design. It does not take into account the proposed uses and activities to ensure land use compatibility and to mitigate potential impacts or conflicts that could otherwise result from the proposed use. The proposed amendments require most new industrial buildings and industrial uses to apply for a Conditional Use Permit to consider the relationship of the use or project to the surrounding area and the community as a whole and evaluate the adequacy of services and facilities for the proposed project or use. Most Conditional Use Permits for industrial projects over 75,000 square feet will be heard by the City Council, with a recommendation from the Planning Commission. All other Conditional Use Permits will be heard by the Planning Commission. Smaller, less intensive uses currently subject to our administrative Conditional Use Permit will now be subject to our new Minor Use Permit process which will continue to be reviewed by the Planning Director. For these non-industrial uses, there is functionally little change to the entitlement process other than the name of the entitlement. ApprovingEntitlement Minor Use Permit (formerly administrative CUP Planning Director Conditional Use Permit Planning Commission Conditional Use Permit Industrial Uses over 75,000 sq.ft. City Council with PC recommendation Larger industrial buildings are in high demand and can be used for a variety of warehousing and distribution uses, each with differing levels of infrastructure needed to support the type of use being targeted for the site. This provides a challenge for planners to develop standards that can be applied uniformly to all industrial development projects. To allow for some flexibility and individualized review of projects, the Master Plan process (Section 17.22.020) allows for flexibility for developments beyond conventional zoning regulations to address special or unique needs or characteristics. All new industrial buildings over 450,000 square feet will be required to submit for a Master Plan to "plan ahead" and solve any circulation, drainage and neighborhood compatibility problems that may arise from the development. The approving authority for the Master Plan process will be the City Council, with a recommendation from the Planning Commission. In addition, staff is proposing the creation of an overlay zone for large warehouses (Large Warehouse Overlay Zone) to ensure that large warehouses are located in areas of the city with adequate public infrastructure and away from sensitive receptors who may be impacted by emissions, noise and other impacts generated by the predominant uses in such buildings. New developments with buildings over 450,000 square feet will be required to apply for inclusion in the Large Warehouse Overlay Zone. This means that an applicant seeking to develop a large warehouse of 450,000 square feet or more would apply for a zoning map amendment to apply the overlay to their project site. Zoning Districts. The amendments include revisions to the current four industrial zoning districts - Industrial Park (IP), General Industrial (GI), Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (MI/HI) and Heavy industrial (HI). Industrial Park will remain,with GI, MI/HI and HI consolidating into two new zones: Neo Industrial (NI)and Industrial Employment (IE), consistent with the draft General Plan. Page 3 Page 217 Current Zoning Designation New Zoning Designation Industrial Park IP Industrial Park IP General Industrial GI Neo Industrial NI Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (MI/HI) Industrial Employment IE Heavy Industrial HI Industrial Employment (IE) The intent is to continue to permit existing light and general industrial uses while shifting away from heavier industrial uses that generate significant noise, air quality and odor impacts due to their need for open air storage and processing of materials to a broad range of similar clean industrial practices and processes that typically take place indoors. Neo-Industrial (NI) supports a complementary mix of uses such as, research and development, light and custom manufacturing, engineering and design services, breweries, and maker spaces, as well as accessory office, retail and limited residential uses to compliment the primary use; supportive amenities and services; and convenient transit access. This zoning district encourages light industrial activities with low environmental impacts and supports the growth of creative industries, incubator businesses, and innovative design and manufacturing. The zoning district is not intended for conventional industrial business such as warehousing, distribution/fulfillment centers, and manufacturing. Industrial Employment (IE) designates areas reserved for manufacturing, warehousing and storage, e- commerce distribution, light industrial research parks, automobile and vehicle services, and a broad range of similar clean industrial practices and processes that typically generate more impacts than would be compatible with office and residential uses. This industrial employment district prohibits non-industrial uses, except for accessory office and commercial uses (such as restaurants or convenience stores) that support the employees of the primary industrial use, and on-site caretaker units. Allowed Land Uses and Definitions. To support the new entitlement procedures and zoning designations, adjustments were needed to the land use table and land use definitions. Less intensive uses that still need review for compatibility with the surrounding uses, such as service-oriented uses in an industrial district will be subject to the Minor Use Permit (Director approval) with other conditionally permitted uses, such as a lumber yard, will be subject to the Conditional Use Permit process (PC or CC approval). Older industrial land uses that are typically generators of noise, air quality or odor impacts, or are not job supporting uses were deleted, new industrial land uses were added, and some industrial land use definitions were updated to reflect changes in the patterns and intensities of industrial development. Development Standards. Minor changes to the existing development standards are proposed to provide additional flexibility in the development envelope to respond to new market trends and help manage impacts of industrial development. In addition, the number of parking lot trees was reduced to provide better truck access with less tree damage. For larger industrial buildings, a larger tree size is now required to better match the scale of the building and provide better screening right away, rather than waiting for smaller trees to grow and mature. Development Standard Current Proposed Floor Area Ratio GI — 50% - 60% Neo Industrial —40% - 60% MI/HI — None Industrial Employment—40% - 60% HI —40% - 50% Industrial Employment—40% - 60% Building Height 75 feet max None* Parking Lot Trees 1 per 3 parking stalls 1 per 5 parking stalls Tree size 1 15 al/25% 24-inch box 24-inch box/25%36-inch box over 200,000 s .ft. *Height limits may apply for parcels within the Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Page 4 Page 218 In addition to these development standards, additional design standards were amended or added to the code. These include building and parking siting to place the most aesthetically pleasing areas of the site nearest to the public right of way, development of pedestrian connections, public street and intersection standards to ensure adequate transportation infrastructure to reduce potential traffic impacts and provide public safety access. Parking. Developing parking standards that apply to all industrial projects is challenging and is unlikely to yield the best results for many projects. Industrial uses can be quite varied and the specific type of industrial use will typically drive the parking needed for a development. Many industrial buildings are developed for a speculative user, rather than built with a tenant or use already committed to the site, creating additional parking uncertainty. Our code consultant researched cities across the country with similar industrial bases to see if there were any consistent parking standards for industrial buildings that we could emulate, but standards vary widely with no common thread between them. To address concerns about truck queuing and to avoid trucks queuing on City streets or within street medians, we have added standards requiring trailer parking in loading bays and space for onsite queuing of trucks at a ratio of 1 queuing space for each dock door. Larger projects will be required to submit a parking management plan which requires new development to plan for future parking onsite based on the use of the building to minimize traffic, manage on-site circulation and effectively allocate parking needs for the site. To provide some flexibility for speculative industrial buildings, a land banking provision has been added to the code that allows land on site to be set aside for future parking that may not be needed until a tenant is selected for the building. Then the set aside land can be developed for parking as needed for the tenant. Sustainability. New industrial buildings will be required to install a solar collector system designed to generate a minimum of 75% of anticipated electricity demand. This can be achieved through roof mounted solar infrastructure, solar canopies in parking lots or a combination of the two. In addition, standards for the installation of electric vehicle parking and charging stations are included for new developments in the Neo-Industrial and Industrial Employment districts to foster the city's commitment to the stewardship of our resources. Stakeholder Feedback. Since the release of the public draft code amendments, we have had several meetings and conversations with stakeholders about the standards. Exhibits A and B contain the written comments received regarding the draft code standards. Overall, the stakeholders appreciated the flexibility provided through the master plan process and provided suggestions for changes based on their experience. They also asked clarifying questions regarding specific language provisions in the code. A summary of the key areas of discussion are listed below. 1. Master Plan Threshold. It was suggested that minimum square footage threshold for the master plan requirement be increased from 400,000 to 450,000 based on typical building sizing levels within the industrial users. That change has been made and incorporated into the revised code amendment. 2. Truck Queuing. Concerns were raised with regard to the need for a 1:1 ratio between dock doors and truck queuing. Developers felt that number was too high. Examples were provided of other industrial tenants who required far less on-site queuing, but the stakeholder groups were unable to provide a different truck queuing standard or any methodology for staff to consider. Staff recommends leaving the standard as proposed. The code (17.64.060.C) however, allows for reductions in required parking with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. If continued conversations with the stakeholder group yield new information that has supports a change to the truck queuing standards, they may be updated prior to the City Council hearing on this item. 3. Block Network Standards. The design standards for additional roadway infrastructure were of particular concern in our conversations with the stakeholders. We have shown through our traffic analysis of the SEIQ that failure to require appropriate infrastructure will prove devastating to the roadways and intersections within that area of the city. However, the master plan process allows some flexibility in the nature and design of the future road networks as long as doing so will not cause a significant impact on public health, safety or welfare. Page 5 Page 219 4. Solar Infrastructure. Clarification was requested on the solar infrastructure requirements. There were concerns about the required roof coverage as well as required solar shade structures. This was an error in writing the code. The code was rewritten to allow the electrical demand supplied by solar be provided on the roof or solar shade structures in the parking lot or a combination of the two. Findings of Fact. Per Section 17.22.040 of the Development Code, amendments to the code may be approved only when the City Council finds that the Development Code amendment is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs. General Plan Policy LU-3.3 recognizes the need for regional serving land uses, like industrial uses need immediate access to the regional transportation network that is designed to provide maximum access capabilities and permit maximum dispersal of traffic. General Plan Land Use Goal CM-5 and Policy CM-5.2 require new developments to evaluate and when needed provide necessary transportation infrastructure to mitigate for transportation impacts. General Plan Land Use Goal CM-7 supports the maintenance of an efficient and safe network of good and freight movement that supports the needs of the business community. The block networks standards proposed provide guidance to new development with some flexibility with the master plan process to develop a transportation network that will not only support individual development, but provide efficient, safe transportation infrastructure for a variety of industrial uses. Finally, General Plan Land Use Policy LU-3.4 promotes development that is sustainable in its use of land and limits impacts to natural resources, energy, and air and water quality. Solar power generation standards and EV charging stations and infrastructure help encourage clean energy use and help reduce environmental impacts related to industrial development. Environmental Analysis. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. This project qualifies under the general rule that CEQA only applies to project, which have the potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA guidelines Section 15061(13)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The consolidation of zoning districts, changes to the entitlement process and the elimination of higher impact industrial uses from the land use table will impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. The implementation of requirements for solar collector systems for new industrial development will provide a renewable electric resource for the development and reduce dependence on non-renewable electric resources. Requiring development electric vehicle charging infrastructure will encourage use of electric vehicles for industrial uses, reducing GHG emissions in future developments. These requirements impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. Each of these components, individually and cumulatively, does not result in the possibility of creating significant to cumulative effects on the environment. Future development subject to these provisions will be reviewed for CEQA compliance under separate entitlements or actions as proposed by these code updates. During the entitlement process, the applicant will be required to comply with CEQA. In reviewing each project for compliance with CEQA, an applicant may be required to submit environmental studies that analyze potential impacts such as air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise levels, and transportation/traffic caused by the site-specific project. On a case-by-case review of each project, the appropriate environmental document will be prepared to address project-specific impacts. Page 6 Page 220 Based on this evidence and all the evidence in the record Planning staff has determined that the Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA. FISCAL IMPACT: Developing a robust industrial sector with well planned developments with a sufficient diversity of uses and appropriate controls will prevent fiscal strains on our tax base and infrastructure costs over the long term. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This code update directly addresses the Council's vision to build on our success as a world class community by implanting new development standards that will enhance the overall quality and performance of our industrial sector. Through the engagement of stakeholders and learning more about industrial development, and using the information provided by our stakeholders to guide our decisions on the code updates, we are guided by the Council's core values of intentionally embracing and anticipating the future, working together cooperatively and respectfully with each other, staff and all stakeholders, and intentionally embracing and anticipating the future. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A— Comment letter from industrial stakeholders received May 10, 2021 Exhibit B — Comment letter from NAIOP received May 10, 2021 Exhibit C — Resolution of Approval 21-37 of Municipal Code Amendment DRC2021-00170 Exhibit D — Draft Industrial Code Amendments, May 2021 Page 7 Page 221 CITY OF ■ . ■ * ■ Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda May 26, 2021 MINUTES Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:00 p.m. The regular meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on May 26, 2021. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 p.m. A. Roll Call Planning Commission present: Chairman Tony Guglielmo, Vice Chair Oaxaca, Commissioner Bryan Dopp, Commissioner Tony Morales and Commissioner Diane Williams. Staff Present: Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney; Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager; Anne McIntosh, Planning Director; Dat Tran, Assistant Planner; David Eoff, Senior Planner; Mike Smith, Principal Planner; Jason Welday, Engineering Director; Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Sean McPherson, Senior Planner; Mena Abdul-Ahad, Assistant Planner; Justine Garcia, Deputy Director Engineering Services; Robert Ball, Fire Marshall. B. Public Communications Chairman Guglielmo opened for public communications and hearing no comment, closed communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Special Study Session Minutes of April 28, 2021. C2. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of April 28, 2021. C3. Consideration to adopt Special Study Session Minutes of May 12, 2021. C4. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of May 12, 2021. C5. FY21/22 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) - Determination of Conformance with the General Plan. C6. LOCATED AT THE EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE — W&W LAND DESIGN CONSULTANTS — Site plan review of a proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of approximately 146,429 square feet (3.36 acres) into five residential (5) lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District that includes a Variance to reduce the required lot depth on two (2) lots and a minor exception for wall height for a project site located in the Etiwanda Specific Plan; Tentative Tract Map, Variance & Minor Exception - APN: 0225-181-73. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts has been prepared for consideration (SUBTT20152, DRC2019-00786, DRC2019-00787). (Planning Commission directed staff to bring back the Resolution of Approval - continued from May 12, 2021 PC Meeting.) ATTACAJMF-NT 3 C7. LOCATED BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND GOLDEN LOCK PLACE APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET SOUTH OF BANYAN STREET — MANNING HOMES - A request to subdivide 10.24 acres of land into 17 lots including the Design Review of 17 single-family residences, a Minor Exception for increased wall heights and a Tree Removal Permit to remove onsite trees for a project site in the Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1 - 2 Dwelling Units per Acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the Equestrian Overlay District. Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Minor Exception & Tree Removal Permit; APNs: 0225-191-09 and - 17. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration (SUBTT20334, DRC2020-00139, DRC2020-00141, DRC2020-00140). (Planning Commission directed staff to bring back the Resolution of Approval - continued from May 12, 2021 PC Meeting.) Motion by Commissioner Morales; second by Commissioner Williams to approve Consent Calendar Items C1 through C7. Motion carried, 5-0. D. Public Hearings D1. LOCATED AT 10839 CARRIAGE DRIVE — MOLINAR DESIGN, INC - A request for a Hillside Design Review to consider the construction of a new 6,871 square foot two-story single-family residence with an attached 4-car garage on a 20,724 square foot lot within the Very Low(VL) Residential District within the Hillside Overlay District and Equestrian Overlay District. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, this project qualifies for a Class 3 Exemption. APN: 1074-531-09 Hillside Design Review (DRC2019-00973). (Continued from May 12, 2021 PC Meeting.) Mena Abdul-Ahad, Assistant Planner, announced that the Applicant has requested to continue this item to a date unspecified. D2. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA—A request to amend Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to modify administrative procedures, establish new zoning districts, amend land uses and definitions and create new development standards for industrial development. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action. (DRC2021-00170) Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and presentation (copy on file). Chairman Guglielmo asked the Commission if there were any comments for staff on this Public Hearing Item. Vice Chair Oaxaca asked about truck queuing standards, there doesn't seem to be other objective standards that could have been considered as alternatives. Is that what staff found. Jennifer Nakamura replied yes and explained we have been unable to land on any other objective standards and open to continue conversations to work with the industrial stakeholders to figure out what the right standard is. HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES— May 26, 2021 Page 2 of 8 Draft Page 223 Vice Chair Oaxaca stated it sounds like spec projects are common in this space. He asked does staff feel we incorporated enough flexibility in these new standards where a user is identified and there is a need to modify the project in some form. He asked, have we built in the ability for that flexibility to accommodate those types of realities. Jennifer Nakamura answered yes. She said the way we provided the option to request exception based on study and data is an important process and it allows the applicants to provide alternatives. Anne McIntosh stated we talked about queuing in terms of traffic impacts but there is another great concern and that is safety on site. Commissioner Morales asked about truck queuing for buildings less than 450,000 sq ft, will Conditional Use Permit process address those potential issues. Jennifer Nakamura answered yes, regardless of size. Commissioner Dopp stated having to plan outside the scope of the project, there have been a lot of conversation on traffic and the impact of neighborhoods and seeing a situation of tying up streets, it's an important note moving forward. Two questions; Question 1) What are the developers putting forward from the movement from 400 to 450,000 sq ft. Question 2) If you have a project with 3 warehouses that are all smaller than 450,000 sq. ft., he asked will they still have to require a master plan or does it just apply to one building. Jennifer Nakamura answered: 1) It's based on the project site and it's the total gross area. 2) Explained that 400,000 sq. ft. level might bring in some of the smaller uses that we may not want to push through that process where at 450,000 you are getting closer to '/2 million size and that is when you are getting into that much larger building. She said we agreed that was an appropriate change to make. Chairman Guglielmo regarding changing of the zoning from industrial to Neo industrial plan looks like it requires a Conditional Use Permit for various businesses. He said there are buildings in the city that are 1000 sq ft. to 50,000 sq ft. they can move in. He asked will a 200,000 sq. ft. business in the Neo industrial require a Conditional Use Permit. Jennifer Nakamura answered yes, as it is currently written. Chairman Guglielmo asked to briefly explain what does a Conditional Use Permit involve. Jennifer Nakamura explained a Conditional Use Permit requires an application to the City, along with a set of plans, listing of the type of business they will run, and we might ask for a business operation statement. She said it will be reviewed by all our City departments to insure it will meet all of our code requirements. Once complete, and modifications are made as necessary, then it will go for a hearing. Chairman Guglielmo asked how long does the process take. Jennifer Nakamura replied it varies a lot and will depend on the applicant. Typically, 60-90 days. She said a way to modify and alleviate some concern would potentially split some of these uses between large and small. Anything over 2500 sq. ft. is reviewed as a Minor Use Permit. Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney, mentioned staff does a quick job turning around applications for CUP's (Conditional Use Permits). Particularly a new building or new structure is not required to house that use. He said what can affect the timing is if the project does require additional Environmental Review under HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES— May 26, 2021 Page 3 of 8 Draft Page 224 CEQA but if an applicant submits a complete applicant as part of its first submittal, he said it actually can be quick. Anne McIntosh mentioned a procedure once Commissioners hear from the public, we encourage that you discuss every comment that comes up tonight by category and make sure you give us any direction on what you would like us to look into in terms of consideration. She said if you do hear ideas from the community during public comments, take note and we will follow-up after tonight's meeting. With no further discussion from Commissioners, Chairman Guglielmo opened public hearing. The following persons commented on the project: Craig Scheu; Michael via phone (949) 887-1736; Drew Torbin, Founder and CEO of Black Bear Energy; Paul Lawrence, Chief Financial Officer, Commercial Medals; Chuck Buquet; Chris Sandford, Black Creek Group Rep.; Jon Shardlow, NAIOP; Paige Gosney, Land Use Counsel; Erik Hernandez, Principal Real Estate Broker Lee and Assoc.; Bill Blankenship, NAIOP. The comments included the following concerns: • Industrial and Neo Zoning. • One (1) truck door per queuing space, ratio does not seem feasible. • 75% of roof needing to have solar requires more study. • CUP process takes 90 — 120 days. 60-90 days is a myth. • Standards being proposed are impractical and unworkable. • Not in support due to significant design questions. • Solar concerns. Impossible to meet energy standards. • Request extension due to inconsistency of solar and street network. • CUP requirement will be a burden on potential businesses. • Issues with the proposed development standard. • Request extension of moratorium. • Re-examine the requirement of CUP for businesses to locate in zoning area. Len Ruppenthal, Tree Island Steel Rep., he is inquiring if Tree Island Steel was ever notified about this meeting. Expressed his support of this general concept. Anne McIntosh mentioned to Commissioners they heard comments that fell into topics, which most had been addressed in the Staff Report. She said it would be a good idea for the Commission to go through those individually with the understanding that we are continuing to try to refine these requirements and continuing to look at examples and suggestions being provided by stakeholders. She said we have confidence that we will be able to go to City Council with the best recommendation we can on June 16tn It's fine for Commission to have recommendation go forward with comments. Listed below are concerns/issues heard tonight: • Truck queuing. • Solar requirements. • Master plan process. Whether or not that will accomplish the flexibility that was desired. • Neo industrial zone. The new uses listed in zoning and permitting requirements, specifically CUP requirement. • Questions about development standards. Shade structures and requirement for the number of trees. HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES— May 26, 2021 Page 4 of 8 Draft Page 225 Jason Welday, Engineering Director, discussed traffic and reminded Commissioners they did receive a copy of the memo of a study done by a traffic engineering firm to look at the traffic and potential impacts of development in this area. It was also released to the Stakeholders a few weeks back. He said regarding solar, looking forward to the idea of expanding to ensure solar is part of the equation as we move forward. Nicholas Ghirelli clarified he was not trying to suggest that CUP's are rapid over the counter entitlements. He said the 60-90 days estimate could be increased if an application is not complete when it's first submitted, or additional environmental review is required. Commissioner Dopp stated regarding solar requirements, things are moving more in a clean energy direction. His question for Staff, has there been alternate ways to establish a requirement for clean energy for some of these projects. He asked like meeting a Net Zero electrical requirement on the back end. Jennifer Nakamura explained the concept of Net Zero produces the amount of power that you need for your site. We are asking for the development community to do is not only produce what you need now, but what you will potentially need for the future. Commissioner Dopp stated he would like to see that continued conversation. Maybe there is an alternate way for people to meet that requirement moving forward. Having set very high standards for environmentalism is really important for industrial areas due to the significant impacts they could have to the community. If that means we are highly encouraging very, very clean requirements moving forward for these projects, is not necessarily a bad thing. He asked is there a way maybe offer an alternate path outside of a set percentage. As he was looking through the conditional use table, he could understand concern about the process. He said it would be worth looking through the list much more in detail on Staff level making sure every single conditional use is what we want to establish for the new industrial part of town and it fits with the idea and vision in the industrial district. He expressed he likes the standards and the attempt we are trying to foster forward a vision for industrial areas within Rancho Cucamonga. He mentioned when this comes up on June 161" the developers, after all the work has been done by Staff and by Planning Commission, if they are still upset, they have every right to request the Council's extension of the moratorium but he believes it's a Council decision. Commissioner Morales asked Robert Ball, Fire Marshall, about truck queuing category. If there was a major incident 450,000 sq. ft. warehouse tragedy, how many fire trucks would have to respond to that site and if there where truck queuing issues flowing into the streets, emergency vehicles, etc. He asked would there be a problem with truck queuing spilling out onto the street. Robert Ball responded yes and explained it would be a significant problem. Commissioner Morales stated it's very important we have the proper ratio. Does not think the 1-15 ratio is acceptable. He said we have the responsibility to our citizens to make sure we do things right. He mentioned it's very important we adopt this draft resolution and recommend the City Council adopt the ordinance. Commissioner Williams stated to hear from the public and stakeholders is very important. She said we want to be ready for the future but be flexible too. She is concerned about the queuing. She has concern of the percentage of solar. Not one size fits all will work here. The subject of CUP especially the smaller ones. Possibly extend the deadline. Requests to be more flexible but she is ready to give to City Council HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES— May 26, 2021 Page 5 of 8 Draft Page 226 with recommendation and let them handle the decision with more discussion. Vice Chair Oaxaca stated he heard small pain points from stakeholders and Planning Commissioners, issues on how to address energy usage and standards for how much electricity these industrial projects are being expected to generate. An initial goal of requiring projects to cover their own usage with solar generation, should be the first step. He agrees with fellow Commissioners on how important it is worth having a discussion on how important it is to manage the traffic around these potential developments and ensure we have safe roadways at all times. He said the decision to whether or not to extend moratorium does not rest with this body. The City Council will decide if they would like to change the current expiration date or not. Chairman Guglielmo mentioned the three major concerns he heard are 1) Truck queuing; 2) Solar Coverage and 3) CUP requirement. He started discussion with the CUP requirements and mentioned he has never seen a CUP done within 60-90 days. He has seen it typically take 4 to 6 months. He said the City should consider, if they do make this requirement, their workload will increase dramatically. Also, what kind of conditions would you put on a 2,000 sq. ft. space. They already have a lot of procedures with regard to fire sprinklers and other requirements. This could discourage businesses from starting in the city and will go somewhere else. He would like to propose there be a threshold on size. Maybe a 75,000 sq ft. user has that capability a lot more than a smaller business. Jennifer Nakamura replied the CUP process generally does require a site plan. She said some industrial tenant property management companies can provide them a basic site plan. We generally do not require them in large-scale plans, depending on size of use. Time frames can vary widely. A lot of it will depend on response time from applicant with regards to questions, making sure they have complete information. Ecommerce, is a brand-new use and has not been included in the code before. We will ask Commission to direct Staff to take a look at and make proposals to City Council and let them make the ultimate determination. Chairman Guglielmo asked what is the different between a Minor and a Conditional Use Permit. Jennifer Nakamura explained the differences. The current conditional use permit will become a minor use permit (approved by the Planning Director). A new conditional use permit will be approved by the Planning Commission. Chairman Guglielmo inquired about solar coverage being required 75% of roof and 2000-amp user only occupy 15% of that coverage. He asked what capability does the City have now to buy that additional storage back if Edison does not want it. Jason Welday responded when the facility is built, it is a matter of entering into the agreement to buy the power back. Chairman Guglielmo asked does this solar requirement tack onto any existing buildings or is it only new construction. Jennifer Nakamura answered the solar requirements is designed for new construction. Chairman Guglielmo stated he hopes Staff, before going to Council, looks into that percentage. His concern, it looks a little too excessive for practical use. Regarding truck queuing, the ratio may need to be looked into further, due to not being practical or feasible. If we can address some of these things, he would feel comfortable moving it forward. HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES— May 26, 2021 Page 6 of 8 Draft Page 227 Commissioner Dopp asked is there an alternate way to deal with issues regarding loading requirement and require the developer to assure there is no overflow onto the streets. Jennifer Nakamura explained one of the issues we run into is we had a discussion with stakeholders to try and come up with an alternate standard. She said we are trying to allow for self-regulation through better design. The group developing the building and then the user using it are generally two different entities. Sometimes one does not know what the other has agreed to or what the other is doing and the City would like to stay out of the position where we are having to monitor and enforce these uses for compliance. Anne McIntosh mentioned we are continuing to look at these various ideas. She said we meet regularly throughout the day. Our stakeholders are sending in ideas and we are continuing to talk about it. Jennifer Nakamura stated this Development Code is a living document. She said it's something that changes and adapts regularly. We bring the Planning Commission and City Council code updates on a regular basis. One of the things to keep in mind as we move forward is the idea that these standards are going forward in place and the Council will ultimately make the final decision and we will keep having conversations between now and the City Council hearing on June 16t" to try and refine these standards. She said we also know over time, if these standards are not working as we expect them to, we are willing to come back to you and present changes as well. Nicholas Ghirelli mentioned it's complicated by the fact often times trucks that are picking up and delivering from a particular warehouse may not necessary be employees from that business and it's difficult for that business to actually control whether the truck is queuing or not queuing on the street. Commissioner Dopp stated before we make a motion, he wanted to know if we have an option to do a recommendation with clarifying points. Anne McIntosh mentioned they have taken detailed notes and could include in the Staff Report to City Council. Commissioner Dopp asked Commissioners how they feel to have staff revisit the CUP matrix and revisit the solar usage. Commissioner Williams added it would be a good idea. Not convinced these are the right numbers. Vice Chair Oaxaca agrees and that some specific language attached to the motion in the record would be good feedback for Council and good guidance for staff. Commissioner Morales stated we should move it forward with our concerns, and Council would be the final deciders on any adjustments. Nicholas Ghirelli explained the resolution before you recommend approval of the proposed ordinance. We could add a sentence at the end of Section 4 of the resolution to say"after the Planning Commission also recommends that City staff provide options and/or recommendations to the City Council to address the Planning Commission's comments regarding the proposed land use table, those uses requiring a conditional use permit, and the standards applicable to rooftop solar panels and truck queuing" Motion by Commissioner Dopp; second by Commissioner Williams. Motion carried 5-0 with amendment to Section #4 in Resolution 21-037. HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES— May 26, 2021 Page 7 of 8 Draft Page 228 Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager, mentioned that all of us, both here at the City as well as private builders of businesses and developers, want to have prosperous developments and want all of these new buildings exist in a high quality, well served area and not have impacts. He said we look forward to working on solving those challenges as we move forward. He appreciates everyone's input in getting this right. E. Director Announcements Anne McIntosh mentioned that PlanRC is now available in draft form on the City's website. Community Outreach has been started. She said we have our schedule from now till mid-July with road shows, pop up zoom meetings, webinars, trying to get the word out. We have a survey to get input from the public. F. Commission Announcements - None G. Adjournment Motion by Vice Chair Oaxaca, second by Commissioner Morales to adjourn the meeting, motion carried 5-0. Meeting was adjourned at 9:46 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Thornhill Executive Assistant, Planning Department Approved: HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES— May 26, 2021 Page 8 of 8 Draft Page 229 RESOLUTION NO. 21-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2021-00170 TO MODIFY ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES, AMEND LAND USES AND DEFINITIONS AND CREATE 'NEW DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND MAKING FINDINGS .IN SUPPORT THEREOF A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared Municipal Code Amendment DRC2021- 00170, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Municipal Code Amendment is referred to as"the Application". 2. On May 26, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A oft this Resolution, are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presentedto the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on May 26., 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony; this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The City Council adopted an Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 976, establishing a moratorium on new industrial building development on properties in all industrial zones within the "Southeast Industrial Quadrant" (SEIQ) of the City and within 500 feet of the public right-of-way of a segment of Foothill Boulevard between Haven Avenue and Milliken Avenue. On December 16, 2020, the City Council extended the Interim Urgency Ordinance to June 30, 2021; b. This interim ordinance was developed as staff observed an increase in the level of development interest in the SEIQ and along Foothill Boulevard. The SEIQ has been dominated by "legacy" uses and tenants on significantly large properties with limited infrastructure. These uses/tenants have been present since before the City's incorporation in 1977. Similarly, there are multiple smaller properties in the SEIQ developed with, for example, small manufacturing businesses, storage yards, and non-conforming residences. Many of these properties are relatively under-developed,i.e. they are not developed to their maximum potential; C. The Council determined that a strategic pause on industrial development in the SEIQ and along Foothill Boulevard was appropriate and would provide staff time to review our development standards, consider workbeing done on the General Plan.as well as engage the Exhibit C ATTACHMENT 4 Page 230 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2021=37 MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2021-00170-CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 26, 2021 Page 2 industrial development community to understand their needs and find common ground to ensure a robust, diverse industrial sector which can provide employment and services for local residents and generate positive economic outcomes for the City; d. The proposed updates will apply uniformly to all industrial zones throughout the City, not just the areas impacted by the moratorium; e. The City prepared a set of amendments (the "Amendments"), which is included as Attachment A to this Resolution and is hereby incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full; f. Development Code Amendment DRC2021-00.170 conforms to and does not conflict with the General Plan, including without limitation, the Land Use Element thereof, and will provide for development in a manner consistent with the General Plan; and 3. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(B)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The consolidation of zoning districts, changes to the entitlement process and the elimination of higher impact industrial uses: from the land use table will impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. The implementation of requirements for solar collector systems for new industrial development will provide a renewable electric resource for the development and reduce dependence on non-renewable electric resources. Requiring development electric vehicle charging infrastructure will encourage use of electric vehicles for industrial uses, reducing GHG emissions in future developments. These requirements impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. Each of these components, individually and cumulatively, does not result in the possibility of creating significant to cumulative effects on the environment. Future development subject to these provisions will be reviewed. for CEQA compliance under separate entitlements or actions as proposed by these code updates. During the entitlement process, the applicant will be required to comply with CEQA. In reviewing each project for compliance with. CEQA, an applicant may 'be required to submit environmental studies that analyze potential impacts such as air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise levels, and transportation/traffic caused by the site-specific project. On a case-by-case review of each project, the appropriate environmental document will be prepared to address project-specific impacts. Based on this evidence and all the evidence in the:record,.the Planning Commission concurs with the Planning Department staffs determination that the Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Municipal Code Amendment DRC2021-00170 as indicated in Attachment A incorporated herein by this reference. The Planning Commission also recommends that City staff provide options and/or recommendations to the City Council to address the Planning Commission's comments regarding the proposed land use table, those uses requiring a conditional use permit, and the standards applicable to rooftop solar panels and truck queuing. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Page 231 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2021-37 MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2021-00170- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 26, 2021 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF MAY 2021. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tonyj6uglialmo, Chairman ATTEST: AVIL Anne McIntosh,AiCP Secr i 1, Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of May 2021, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: GUGLIELMO, OAXACA, DOPP, MORALES, WILLIAMS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Page 232 ORDINANCE XXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ESTABLISH NEW ZONING DISTRICTS, AMEND LAND USES AND DEFINITIONS AND CREATE NEW DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY, MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, AND MAKING A DETERMINATION THAT THE ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Recitals. A. The City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City"), has prepared Municipal Code Amendment DRC2021-00170, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Municipal Code Amendment is referred to as "the amendment". B. The City is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California. C. The City has prepared the amendment related to industrial development and for other purposes described in the staff report in support of this Ordinance, which amendment is identified in Exhibits A through O of this Ordinance. D. On the 26th day of May, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing with respect to the amendment and, following the conclusion thereof, issued Resolution No. 21-37 recommending that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt said amendment upon further consideration given to truck queuing, rooftop solar coverage, and permitted uses within industrial zones. E. On the 16th day of June 2021, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the amendment and concluded said hearing on that date. F. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing, this Council hereby finds and concludes that the changes proposed to Title 17 (Development Code) in the amendment are consistent with the General Plan's goals, policies and implementation programs. General Plan Policy LU-3.3 recognizes the need for regional serving land uses, like industrial uses, and that these uses need immediate access to the regional transportation network that is designed to provide maximum access capabilities and permit maximum dispersal of traffic. General Plan Land Use Goal CM-5 and Policy CM-5.2 require new developments to evaluate and when needed provide necessary transportation infrastructure to mitigate for transportation impacts. General Plan Land Use Goal CM-7 supports the maintenance of an efficient and safe network of good and freight movement that supports the needs of the business community. The block networks standards proposed Ordinance — Page 1 of 99 Page 233 provide guidance to new development with some flexibility with the master plan process to develop a transportation network that will not only support individual development, but provide efficient, safe transportation infrastructure for a variety of industrial uses. Finally, General Plan Land Use Policy LU-3.4 promotes development that is sustainable in its use of land and limits impacts to natural resources, energy, and air and water quality. Solar power generation standards and EV charging stations and infrastructure help encourage clean energy use and help reduce environmental impacts related to industrial development. SECTION 3. CEQA. Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(B)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment,the activity is not subject to CEQA. The consolidation of zoning districts, changes to the entitlement process and the elimination of higher impact industrial uses from the land use table will impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. The implementation of requirements for solar collector systems for new industrial development will provide a renewable electric resource for the development and reduce dependence on non-renewable electric resources. The new standards relating to parking, access, and street circulation avoid impacts relating to queuing and ensure that vehicles can reach arterial streets and freeways in as few miles as possible. Requiring new development to install electric vehicle charging infrastructure will encourage use of electric vehicles for industrial uses, reducing GHG emissions in future developments. These requirements impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. Each of these components, individually and cumulatively, does not result in the possibility of creating significant to cumulative effects on the environment. Future development subject to these provisions will be reviewed for CEQA compliance under separate entitlements or actions as proposed by these code updates. During the entitlement process, the applicant will be required to comply with CEQA. In reviewing each project for compliance with CEQA, an applicant may be required to submit environmental studies that analyze potential impacts such as air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise levels, and transportation/traffic caused by the site-specific project. On a case-by-case review of each project, the appropriate environmental document will be prepared to address project-specific impacts. Based on this evidence and all the evidence in the record the City Council hereby concurs with Planning staff's determination that that the Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby amends and restates in their entirety Sections 17.14.050 (Public Hearing and Public Notice), 17.14.060 (Approving Authority), 17.14.090 (Permit Time Limits, Extensions, and Expiration), and 17.14.100 (Modification)of Chapter 17.14 (General Application Processing Procedures)of Article II (Land Use and Development Procedures) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit A of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 5. The City Council hereby amends and restates in their entirety Sections 17.16.025 (Director Determination Process (with Notice)) and 17.16.110 (Minor Exceptions), and amends, restates, and retitles Section 17.16.120 (Minor Use Permit) of Chapter 17.16 (Planning Director Decisions)of Article II (Land Use and Development Procedures)of Title 17 (Development Ordinance— Page 2 of 99 Page 234 Code)of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit B of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 6. The City Council hereby adds a new Section 17.20.060 entitled "Conditional Use Permit" to, and amends and restates in its entirety Section 17.20.040 (Design Review") of, Chapter 17.20 (Planning Commission Decisions) of Article II (Land Use and Development Procedures) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit C of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 7. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Section 17.22.040 (Master Plan) of Chapter 17.22 (City Council Decisions) of Article II (Land Use and Development Procedures) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit D of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 8. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Section 17.26.020 (Zoning Districts Established) of Chapter 17.26 (Establishment of Zoning Districts) of Article III (Zoning Districts, Allowed Uses, and Development Standards) of Title 17 (Development Code)of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit E of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 9. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Section 17.30.030 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements)of Chapter 17.30 (Allowed Use by Base Zoning District)of Article III (Zoning Districts, Allowed Uses, and Development Standards)of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit F of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 10. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Section 17.32.020 (Allowed Use Descriptions) of Chapter 17.32 (Allowed Use Descriptions) of Article III (Zoning Districts, Allowed Uses, and Development Standards) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit G of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 11. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Section 17.36.040 (Development Standards for Industrial Districts) of Chapter 17.36 (Development Standards by Base Zoning District)of Article III (Zoning Districts, Allowed Uses, and Development Standards) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit H of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 12. The City Council hereby adds a new Section 17.38.080 entitled "Large Warehouse Overlay Zoning District'to Chapter 17.38 (Overlay Zoning Districts and Other Special Planning Areas) of Article III (Zoning Districts, Allowed Uses, and Development Standards) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit I of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 13. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Sections 17.48.040 (Materials and Maintenance) and 17.48.050 (Requirements by Land Use Type) of Chapter 17.48 (Fences, Walls, and Screening) of Article IV (Site Development Provisions)of Title Ordinance— Page 3 of 99 Page 235 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit J of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 14. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Sections 17.56.050 (General Landscape Development Standards) and 17.56.060 (Special Landscape Requirements) of Chapter 17.56 (Landscaping Standards) of Article IV (Site Development Provisions) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit K of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 15. The City Council hereby adds a new Section 17.64.130 entitled "Maintenance"to, and amends, retitles, and restates in their entirety Sections 17.64.050 (Number of Parking Spaces Required), 17.64.060 (Reductions in Parking Requirements), 17.64.070 (Parking Management Plan), 17.64.080 (Parking Requirements for the Disabled), 17.64.090 (Parking and Driveway Design and Development), 17.64.100 (Loading Area Requirements), 17.64.110 (Bicycle Parking Requirements), 17.64.120 (Electric Vehicle Parking Requirements) of Chapter 17.64 (Parking and Loading Standards) of Article IV (Site Development Provisions) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit L of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 16. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Section 17.66.110 (Special Industrial Performance Standards)of Chapter 17.66(Performance Standards) of Article IV (Site Development Provisions) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit M of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 17. The City Council hereby amends and restates in its entirety Chapter 17.76 (Alternative Energy Systems and Facilities) of Article IV (Site Development Provisions) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit N of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 18. The City Council hereby adds a new definition entitled "Parking Study" to be inserted into the appropriate place in Section 17.126.020 (Universal Definitions) of Chapter 17.126 (Universal Definitions) of Article VIII (Glossary) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as shown in Exhibit O of this Ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 19. The official Zoning Map of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby amended to rename the"General Industrial (GI)"zoning district as the"Neo-Industrial (NI)"zoning district and to combine and rename the "Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (MI/HI)" and "Heavy Industrial (HI)" zoning districts as the "Industrial Employment (IE)" zoning district. SECTION 20. Severability. The City Council declares that, should any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Ordinance— Page 4 of 99 Page 236 SECTION 21. Enforcement. Neither the adoption of this Ordinance nor the repeal of any other Ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances, which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof. SECTION 22. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause it to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of , 2021. Dennis Michael Mayor I, JANICE REYNOLDS, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the day of , 2021, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the day of , 2021, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: City Clerk Ordinance — Page 5 of 99 Page 237 EXHIBIT A Amendments to Chapter 17.14 (General Application Processing Procedures) Amended Sections: 17.14.050 Public hearing and public notice. 17.14.060 Approving authority. 17.14.090 Permit time limits, extensions, and expiration. 17.14.100 Modification. 17.14.050 Public hearing and public notice. A. Public hearing required. The following procedures shall govern the notice and public hearing, where required pursuant to this title. The designated approving authority shall hold a public hearing to consider all applications for conditional use permits, variances, major design review, tentative subdivision maps, planned communities, master plans, specific plans, zoning code/map amendments, prezoning, development agreements, and general plan amendments considered by the planning commission or city council. B. Notice of hearing. Pursuant to Government Code §§ 65090 to 65094, not less than ten days before the scheduled date of a hearing, public notice shall be given of such hearing in the manner listed below. The notice shall state the date, time, and place of hearing, identify the hearing body, and provide a general description of the matter to be considered and the real property which is the subject of the hearing. 1. Notice of public hearing shall be published in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the city. 2. Except as otherwise provided herein, notice of the public hearing shall be mailed, postage prepaid, to the owners of property within a radius of 660 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property involved in the application, using for this purpose the last known name and address of such owners as shown upon the current tax assessor's records. The radius may be increased as determined to be necessary and desirable by the planning director based on the nature of the proposed project. If the number of owners exceeds 1,000, the city may, in lieu of mailed notice, provide notice by placing notice of at least one-eighth page in one newspaper of general circulation within the city. Notice of public hearing to authorize uses and activities in the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) industrial zones shall be mailed to persons owning property within 1,500 feet of the property lines of the project site. 3. Notice of the public hearing shall be mailed, postage prepaid, to the owner of the subject real property or the owner's authorized agent and to each local agency expected to provide water, sewerage, streets, roads, schools, or other essential facilities or services to the proposed project. 4. Notice of the public hearing shall be posted on the project site not more than 300 feet apart along the project perimeter fronting on improved public streets. 5. Notice of the public hearing shall be posted at city hall. 6. Notice of the public hearing shall be mailed to any person who has filed a written request for notice. 6 Page 238 7. In addition to the notice required by this section, the city may give notice of the hearing in any other manner it deems necessary or desirable. 17.14.060 Approving authority. A. Designated approving authority. The approving authority as designated in Table 17.14.060-1 (Approving Authority for Land Use Entitlements) shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed land use, development permit or entitlement in accordance with the requirements of this title. Table 17.14.060-1 (Approving Authority for Land Use Entitlements) identifies recommending (R) and final (F) authorities for each permit or entitlement. In acting on a permit, the approving authority shall make all required findings. An action of the approving authority may be appealed pursuant to procedures set forth in section 17.14.070 (Appeals). B. Multiple entitlements. When a proposed project requires more than one permit with more than one approving authority, all project permits shall be processed concurrently and final action shall be taken by the highest-level designated approving authority for all such requested permits. Projects that require legislative approvals (e.g., zoning code/map amendment, general plan Amendment) may go to the city council as stand-alone items with the associated quasi-judicial approvals stopping at planning commission. C. Referral to the planning commission. At any point in the application review process, the planning director may transfer decision making authority to the planning commission at his/her discretion because of policy implications, unique or unusual circumstances, or the magnitude of the project. Decisions referred to the planning commission shall be considered at a noticed public hearing. A referral to another decision-maker is not an appeal and requires no appeal application or fee. 7 Page 239 TABLE 17.14.060-1 APPROVING AUTHORITY FOR LAND USE ENTITLEMENTS Designated Approving Authority `R"_ Type of Permit or Decision "Recommending Body""F"_ "Final Decision-Making Bod " Planning Historic Planning City Director Preservation Commission Council Commission Official code interpretation F Plan check/zoning clearance F Home occupation permit F Sign permit F Temporary use permit F Tree removal permit F Uniform sin program F Similar use determination F Reasonable accommodation F Site development review F Minor exception F Minor use permit F Conditional use permit R F' F' Minor design review F Hillside development review F Large family day care permit F Mills Act R R F Landmark designation R R F Certificate of appropriateness R F Certificate of economic hardship R F Entertainment permit F Design review R F Variance R F2 F2 Adult entertainment permit R F Tentative subdivision ma see title 16 R F Planned community R R F Specific plan R R F Prezoning R R F Development Code/zoning map R R F amendment Development agreement R R F General plan amendment R R F Master plan R R F Conditional use permit approval by the city council is required for all industrial buildings larger than 75,000 square feet in gross floor area,in which case,the planning commission shall be the recommending body. 2 A variance from a development standard in the industrial zoning districts requires approval by the city council, in which case the planning commission shall be the recommending body. 8 Page 240 17.14.090 Permit time limits, extensions and expiration. A. Time limits. Unless a condition of approval or other provision of this title establishes a different time limit, any permit not exercised within two years of approval shall expire and become void, except where an extension of time is approved pursuant to this section. B. Exercising permits. The exercise of a permit occurs when the property owner has performed substantial work as determined by the planning director and the building official and incurred substantial liabilities in good faith reliance upon such permit(s). A permit may be otherwise exercised pursuant to a condition of the permit or corresponding legal agreement that specifies that other substantial efforts or expenditures constitutes exercise of the permit. Unless otherwise provided, permits that have not been exercised prior to a zoning amendment, which would make the permitted use or structure nonconforming, shall automatically be deemed invalid on the effective date of the zoning amendment. C. Permit extensions. The approval of an extension extends the expiration date for two years from the original permit date. After this initial permit extension, a final one-year extension of time may be granted pursuant to the same process as set forth in this section. 1. Process. The same approving authority that granted the original permit may extend the period within which the exercise of a permit must occur. Notice and/or public hearing shall be provided in the same manner as for the original permit. An application for extension shall be filed not less than 30 days prior to the expiration date of the permit, along with appropriate fees and application submittal materials. 2. Conditions. The permit, as extended, may be conditioned to comply with any development standards that may have been enacted since the permit was initially approved. 3. Permit extension findings. The extension may be granted only when the designated approving authority finds that the original permit findings can still be made and there are no changed circumstances or there has been diligent pursuit to exercise the permit that warrants such extension. 4. Expiration. If the time limits are reached with no extension requested, or a requested extension is denied or expires, the permit expires. D. Permit expiration for a closed business. All permits and entitlements shall expire when a business is closed for more than one calendar year. Approval of new permits and entitlements based on current requirements shall be required prior to any business activity on the site. 17.14.100 Modification. A. Any person holding a permit granted under this title may request a modification to that permit. For the purpose of this section, the modification of a permit may include modification of the terms of the permit itself, project or site design, or the waiver or alteration of conditions imposed in the granting of the permit. B. If the planning director determines that a proposed project action is not in substantial conformance with the original approval, the planning director shall notify the property owner of the requirement to submit a permit modification application to the Planning Department. C. The planning director may review and approve the permit modification application provided the proposed modifications will not cause any of the following to occur: 9 Page 241 1. A change in the character, scope, size, and/or intensity of the development and/or use; 2. A significant increase in impacts on infrastructure or traffic on roadways adjacent to or external to the proposed development and/or use; 3. A change in the external impacts on adjacent property; and 4. A reduction in the originally approved setbacks from property lines or increase in building or structure height. D. If the planning director determines that the proposed permit modification does not comply with the provisions of subsection C above, the same approving authority as the original permit shall review the permit modification application. E. A permit modification may be granted only when the approving authority makes all findings required for the original approval. 10 Page 242 EXHIBIT B Amendments to Chapter 17.16 (Planning Director Decisions) Amended Sections: 17.16.025 Director determination process (with notice). 17.16.110 Minor exceptions. 17.16.120 Minor use permit. 17.16.025 Director determination process (with notice). A. Purpose. Certain administrative permits and entitlements decided by the planning director require a notice to neighboring property owners. B. Applicability. Notice for director determination shall be provided for the following applications: 1. Tree removal permit (only if six or more trees). 2. Minor exceptions. 3. Minor use permits. C. Notice of application. Notice of an application for a tree removal permit for six or more trees, minor exceptions, and minor use permits, shall be given in compliance with the requirements of this section. The notice shall specify that the application will be decided by the city following an open public comment period where comment is received on or before a date specified in the notice which shall be ten days after the date of mailing. This notice shall also include an explanation of appeal rights. 1. Notice of the filing of an application for those applications identified in subsection B of this section shall be mailed to persons owning property within 660 feet of the property lines of the project site. 2. Notice of the filing of an application for a minor use permit to authorize uses and activities in the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) industrial zones shall be mailed to persons owning property within 1,500 feet of the property lines of the project site 3. Notice of the filing of an application for tree removal permits or minor exceptions shall be mailed to persons owning property adjacent to the project site. D. Decision. The director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny applications listed in this section. Decisions shall be based on standards and criteria set forth within this Code and shall be accompanied by brief, written findings and a determination. Planning director decisions listed in section 17.16.025.13 (Applicability) above may be appealed to the planning commission. 17.16.110 Minor exceptions. A. Purpose. Exceptions may be needed to certain provisions to allow creative design solutions and to accommodate unique site conditions. B. Applicability. A minor exception may be granted to modify certain requirements of this Code, as listed in Table 17.16.110-1 (Standards Subject to Exception). Exceptions do not apply to land use and are not intended to waive a specific prohibition or procedural requirement. Additionally, a minor exception may be granted for exemptions from development standards for 11 Page 243 the repurposing or reuse of industrial warehouse and other large footprint buildings for alternative uses not envisioned when the structure was originally built, provided the use satisfies any allowed use and permit requirements provided in section 17.30.030 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements). TABLE 17.16.110-1 STANDARDS SUBJECT TO EXCEPTION Standard Maximum Reduction or Increase Maximum fence/wall height 2-foot increase Minimum amount of parking or loading spaces 25% reduction* Setbacks 10% reduction Maximum lot coverage 10% increase Maximum height 10% increase *A proposed reduction in excess of 10%for industrial uses requires the completion of a parking study prepared by the City and paid for by the applicant to ensure the reduction will not cause a significant impact on nearby streets or other properties. C. Review process. An application for a minor exception shall be filed with the planning department in a manner prescribed by the planning director with the required fee as established by city council resolution. D. Public notice. The planning director shall, not less than ten days before rendering a decision, provide for public comment through notice to adjacent property owners of the pending application. E. Findings. The planning director shall approve, or approve with conditions, an application for an exception after finding all of the following. 1. The minor exception is consistent with the general plan or any applicable specific plan or development agreement. 2. The proposed development is compatible with existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or accommodate unique site conditions. 4. The granting of the minor exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. If the planning director does not make all of these findings, then the director shall deny the minor exception. F. Conditions. In approving a minor exception, the director may impose any reasonable conditions to ensure that the approval will comply with the findings required, as well as any performance criteria and development standards contained within this Code. 12 Page 244 17.16.120 Minor use permit. A. Purpose. The minor use permit provides a process for director review and determination of requests for uses and activities whose effects on adjacent sites and surroundings must be evaluated. These uses and activities generally meet the purposes of the applicable zoning district but require special consideration in their design or operation to ensure compatibility with surrounding or potential future uses. It is anticipated that uses qualifying for a minor use permit only have an impact on immediately adjacent properties and can be modified and/or conditioned to ensure compatibility. B. Applicability. This section applies to land use requiring a minor use permit as designated with an W" on the allowed use table (Table 17.30.030-1). C. Review process. An application for a minor use permit shall be filed with the planning department in a manner prescribed by the planning director with the required fee as established by city council resolution. The planning director is the approving authority for minor use permits. However, the planning director may also refer a minor use permit to the planning commission for review and approval pursuant to section 17.14.060.0 (Referral to the Planning Commission). D. Findings. The director shall approve, or approve with conditions, an application for a minor use permit after finding all of the following. 1. The subject site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development proposed, and the proposed location, size, and design of the use are compatible with adjacent uses or with natural resources; 2. The operating characteristics of the proposed use, including traffic, noise, light, and other characteristics, will be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood and other adjacent uses or uses in the vicinity; 3. The proposed improvements of the site, including building design, height and bulk of buildings, setbacks, fencing, landscaping, signage size and location, are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood or area; 4. That the proposed use shall not result in conditions that would be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the community; 5. Adequate public facilities and services are available to serve the proposed use or will be made available concurrent with the proposed development; 6. Allowing the proposed use at the proposed location would be consistent with and help achieve the goals, objectives, and policies of the general plan and the development code; and 7. The project would not result in a negative effect to the City's land use inventory available for residential and economic development, consistent with the intent of the general plan land use element. If the director does not make all of these findings, then the director shall deny the minor use permit. 13 Page 245 E. Conditions. In approving a minor use permit, the director may impose any reasonable conditions to ensure that the approval will comply with the findings required, as well as any performance criteria and development standards contained within this Code. 14 Page 246 EXHIBIT C Amendments to Chapter 17.20 (Planning Commission Decisions) Amended Section: 17.20.040 Design review. New Section: 17.20.060 Conditional use permit 17.20.040 Design review. A. Purpose. This section establishes the review procedures for residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional development proposals to facilitate project review by local responsible agencies and the development/design review committees in a timely and efficient manner; to ensure that development projects comply with all applicable local design guidelines, standards, and ordinances; to minimize adverse effects on surrounding properties and the environment; and to maintain consistency with the general plan, which promotes high aesthetic and functional standards to complement and add to the physical, economic, and social character of the city. In addition, the city finds that a design review process will support the implementation of the general plan, as it stresses quality community design standards. The city further finds that the quality of certain residential, institutional, commercial, and industrial uses has a substantial impact upon the visual appeal, environmental soundness, economic stability, and property values of the city. This section is not intended to restrict imagination, innovation, or variety, but rather to focus on community design principles which can result in creative imaginative solutions for the project and a quality design for the city. It is the purpose of this section to: 1. Recognize the interdependence of land values and aesthetics and provide a method by which the city may implement this interdependence to its benefit. 2. Encourage the orderly and harmonious appearance of structures and property within the city along with associated facilities, such as signs, landscaping, parking areas, and streets. 3. Maintain the public health, safety and general welfare, and property throughout the city. 4. Assist private and public developments to be more cognizant of public concerns for the aesthetics of development. 5. Reasonably ensure that new developments, including residential, institutional, commercial, and industrial developments, do not have an adverse aesthetic, health, safety, or architecturally related impact upon existing adjoining properties, or the city in general. 6. Implement those sections of the city's general plan that specifically refer to the preservation and enhancement of the particular character and unique assets of this city and its harmonious development. 7. Minimize the effects of grading by discouraging mass grading and excessive slopes to ensure that the natural character of terrain is retained. 15 Page 247 8. Preserve significant topographic features, including rock outcroppings, native plant materials, and natural hydrology, while also encouraging improved drainage from lots directly to a street, storm drain, or through a public or privately maintained easement. 9. Limit the impact of slopes on adjacent developed properties and limit construction on identified seismic or geologic hazard areas. 10. Encourage the use of a variety of housing styles, split-level grading techniques, varied lot sizes, site design densities, maintenance of views, and arrangement and spacing to accomplish grading policies. 11. Help ensure that adequate levels of public services are provided for existing and future development in the city. 12. Encourage orderly development of residences within areas more readily served by public services. 13. Encourage the development of master planned projects that provide the service needs of the residents of these projects. 14. Encourage the use of energy conservation techniques in all new residential, mixed use, institutional commercial, and industrial development. B. Applicability. An application for design review is required for commercial, industrial, institutional, and residential projects involving the issuance of a building permit for construction or reconstruction of a structure which meets the following criteria. 1. New construction of residential projects with five or more dwelling units 2. New single or multiple building construction, on a vacant property or parcel/lot, with an overall (or, if multiple buildings, combined)floor area of 10,001 square feet or greater. 3. Structural additions to an existing building where the addition has a floor area that is 50 percent or more of the floor area of the existing building. 4. New building construction, on a developed property or parcel/lot, with an overall (or, if multiple buildings, combined) floor area of 10,001 square feet or greater. 5. Reconstruction projects which are greater than 50 percent of the floor area of an existing building (or, if multiple buildings, 50 percent of their combined floor area) or with a floor area of 10,001 square feet or greater. 6. Any project being proposed along a special boulevard as defined by the general plan, except for structures within projects with an approved master plan. 7. All projects which are master planned. Once the master plan, including architectural guidelines, has been approved by the city council, individual structures may be approved by the planning director. 8. All shopping centers over 10,000 square feet in size, except individual structures may be approved by the planning director where a master plan, including architectural guidelines, has been approved by the planning commission. 9. Certain projects within a hillside area are subject to review pursuant to section 17.52 (Hillside Development). 10. All projects within Mixed Use Zoning Districts. 16 Page 248 Projects of a limited size and scope that do not meet these criteria may require an application for minor design review as defined in section 17.16.130 (Minor Design Review). C. Review process. The design review procedure is outlined below. 1. Scheduling for committee review. Upon acceptance of a complete application for design review approval, a project shall be scheduled for committee review. The applicant and any persons requesting notice will be notified at least ten days prior to the committee meeting. 2. All development proposals submitted pursuant to this section are reviewed by the design review committee, which will make a recommendation on the project to the planning commission. Review and analysis by the design review committee will consider design elements, such as, but not limited to, compatibility of the project to surrounding properties, relationship of the design and layout of the project to the site, architectural design, and use of materials, grading, landscaping, screening and buffering techniques of adjacent properties, signs, and open space. The design review committee will determine if the project adequately meets city design guidelines and standards and will transmit an appropriate recommendation to the planning commission. The design review committee shall review the project design submittals and make recommendations to the planning commission based on: i. Design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the applicable elements of the city's general plan, design guidelines of the appropriate district, and any adopted architectural criteria for specialized area, such as designated historic districts, theme areas, specific plans, community plan, boulevards, or planned developments. ii. The design and layout of the proposed development will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing, or future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. iii. The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will maintain the harmonious, orderly, and attractive development contemplated by this section and the general plan of the city. iv. The design of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants and the visiting public as well as its neighbors through good aesthetic use of materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing and will retain a reasonably adequate level of maintenance. 3. Proposals submitted pursuant to this section may also require review by other necessary committees as applicable (e.g., trails). D. Findings. The planning commission shall make the following findings before approving a design review application: 1. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan; 2. The proposed project is in accord with the objective of this Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; 17 Page 249 3. The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of this Development Code; and 4. The proposed project, together with any applicable conditions, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. E. Planning commission decision and conditions. The planning commission is authorized to approve or deny applications and to impose reasonable conditions upon such approval, as the commission may deem necessary to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses, to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare, and to enable the commission to make the findings required by section 17.20.040.D (Findings). 17.20.060 Conditional use permit A. Purpose. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide a public review process for the discretionary review of proposed uses and activities that require special consideration to ensure that their effects are compatible with locational, use, structural, traffic, and/or the characteristics of neighboring properties and the community. This discretionary review process is intended to ensure land use compatibility and to mitigate potential impacts or conflicts that could otherwise result from the proposed use. More specifically, a conditional use permit is intended to: 1. To consider the relationship of the use or project to the surrounding area, neighborhood, and community as a whole; 2. To determine if the project's use and location is compatible with the types of uses that are normally permitted in the surrounding area; 3. To consider the compatibility of the proposed use with the site's characteristics; 4. To evaluate the adequacy of services and facilities for the proposed use; 5. To provide an opportunity for public review and comment on the proposed use; and 6. To identify conditions and requirements necessary to comply with the basic purposes of this Code, the General Plan, and any applicable plans or regulations B. Applicability. This section applies to any land use requiring a conditional use permit as designated with a "C" on the allowed use table (Table 17.30.030-1). Any development subject to approval of a conditional use permit must comply with all applicable requirements of this Section. C. Application requirements. An application for a conditional use permit shall be filed with the planning department in a manner prescribed by the planning director with the required fee as established by city council resolution. D. Approving authority. The planning commission is the approving authority for conditional use permits, except that the approving authority for all industrial buildings with a gross floor area of 75,000 square feet or greater is the city council. The planning commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny a conditional use permit application. In instances when an application for a conditional use permit is processed concurrently with other land use entitlements requiring action by the city council, the planning commission shall make a recommendation on the conditional use permit application to the city council. 18 Page 250 E. Findings. The approving authority shall make the following findings before approving a conditional use permit application: 1. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan 2. The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the development code and the purposes of the applicable zoning district as well as any applicable specific plans or city regulations/standards. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of the use being proposed, including access, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints that would make conduct of the use undesirable. 4. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use would be compatible with the existing and other permitted uses in the vicinity including transportation and service facilities. 5. Granting the permit would not constitute a nuisance or be injurious to detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or materially injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. The factors to be considered in making this finding include: a. Property damage or nuisance arising from noise, smoke, odor, dust, vibration or illumination caused by the use; b. Hazard to persons or property from possible explosion, contamination, fire or flood caused by the use; and, C. Significantly increase the volume of traffic or negatively alter the pattern of traffic. 6. The proposed use will not pose an undue burden on city services, including police, fire, streets, and other public utilities, such that the city is unable to maintain its current level of service due to the use; and 7. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). F. Conditions of approval. The approving authority may impose reasonable conditions of approval to enable it to make the above findings and to ensure that the use will meet all applicable performance criteria, regulations, and standards and is compatible with surrounding uses, and to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. G. Approval applies to land. Any conditional use permit approval shall run with the land and shall continue to be valid for the time period specified, whether or not there is a change of ownership of the site or structure to which it applies. Conditional use permit approval cannot be transferred to another site. 19 Page 251 EXHIBIT D Amendments to Chapter 17.22 (City Council Decisions) Amended Section: 17.22.040 Master plan. 17.22.020 Master plan. A. Purpose. The purpose of a master plan is to allow for the coordinated comprehensive planning of a subarea of the city in order to accomplish any of the following objectives: 1. Protect a unique environmental, historical, architectural, or other significant site feature that cannot be adequately protected by adoption of another land use zone. 2. Allow the development of an exceptional project design that cannot be built under an existing zoning district or due to constraints of existing development standards. 3. Further the implementation of specific goals and policies of the city as provided in the general plan. 4. "Plan ahead"and look beyond the limits of a particular property to solve circulation, drainage, and neighborhood compatibility problems. 5. Provide flexibility for developments beyond conventional zoning regulations to address special or unique needs or characteristics. B. Review process. 1. A master plan may be initiated by motion of the planning commission or the city council, by application of property owner(s) of parcel(s) to be affected by the master plan, or by recommendation of the planning director for any reason beneficial to the city. 2. The designated approving authority for a master plan is the city council,which shall hold a public hearing on the planning commission recommendation prior to taking action. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing and then shall provide a recommendation, which recommendation shall include the reasons for the recommendation and the relationship of the proposal to the general plan. The city council approves or denies the master plan by resolution in accordance with the requirements of this title. C. Master plan requirements. 1. A master plan shall include all of the following components: i. Physical characteristics of the site. ii. Location of structures and other significant improvements. iii. Significant natural features of the site. iv. Available public facilities. V. Capacity of existing and planned circulation systems. vi. Existing and planned uses within 1,000 feet. vii. Land within 1,000 feet of the site that is designated as state responsibility area (SRA) or wildland-urban interface fire area. 20 Page 252 viii. A boundary map of the property and a calculation of the gross land area within the proposed district. A tentative subdivision map may be substituted if the applicant proposes to subdivide the property. ix. A discussion of specific objectives and limits for development of the property which recognize and respond to identified opportunities and constraints of the master plan. X. Proposed land use and a description of how the land uses implement the general plan. A Proposed density ranges for proposal that include housing and how the density ranges correspond to the general plan. xii. Land use plan including, but not limited to, the acreage of each land use type and number of housing units by type. The distribution of land uses shall be expressed in terms of acreage and the total number of residential units and/or square footage of nonresidential buildings allowed. xiii. A circulation plan showing existing and proposed public and private streets, pedestrian ways, trails, and related transportation access or circulation features required to serve the proposed development. 2. The master plan may include specific regulations applicable to, and a procedure for review of proposed development, within the master plan area, such as: i. Performance and development standard requirements related to setbacks, lot area, intensity of development on each lot, parking requirements, landscaping, and signs. ii. Design standards and guidelines as appropriate for the specific site and development. iii. Open space plan including protection measures for significant natural features, parks, and other site amenities. iv. A site specific wildfire protection plan. V. Types of projects that require review. vi. Documents required from developers. vii. Regulations relating to nonconforming lots, uses, structures, and signs. viii. Time phasing and sequence of development projects. 3. Pursuant to section 17.14.060 and other provisions of this title, a master plan is required for large industrial buildings of 450,000 square feet or more. i. The purpose of the master plan for such industrial buildings is to ensure that the development does not impose significant burdens on City services and nearby businesses and residents, as well as to ensure that the development has adequate public services and infrastructure to accommodate the expected uses. In addition,the master planning process is expected to ensure that the proposed industrial development provides community benefits that may not otherwise be provided through strict application of the provisions of this title. 21 Page 253 ii. Upon recommendation by the city engineer and fire marshal, a master plan may vary or waive the traffic standards identified in section 17.36.040 if the city council determines that doing so would not frustrate the underlying purpose of the subject standard(s) or cause a significant impact on public health, safety, or welfare. D. Findings. A master plan shall not be adopted unless the following findings are made: 1. The proposed master plan is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the general plan. 2. The proposed master plan meets the applicable requirements set forth in this title. 22 Page 254 EXHIBIT E Amendments to Chapter 17.26 (Establishment of Zoning Districts) Amended Section: 17.26.020 Zoning districts established 17.26.020 Zoning districts established. A. Zoning district purpose. Zoning districts are established in order to classify, regulate, designate, and distribute the uses of land and buildings; to regulate and restrict the height, setbacks and bulk of buildings; to regulate the area of yards and other open spaces around buildings; and to regulate the density of population. The city is divided into zoning districts that are grouped into two categories: (a)base zoning districts and (b)overlay zoning districts. These districts are listed and described in Table 17.26.020-1 (Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Districts), along with the general plan land use designation that they implement. B. Base zoning districts. The base zoning district is the primary zoning district that applies to a property. Every parcel throughout the city has a base zoning district that establishes the primary land use type, density, intensity, and site development regulations. Base districts are grouped into six categories as follows: 1. Residential Zoning Districts. 2. Mixed Use Zoning Districts. 3. Commercial and Office Zoning Districts. 4. Industrial Zoning Districts. 5. Open Space Zoning Districts. 6. Special Purpose Zoning Districts. C. Overlay zoning districts. The Overlay Zoning Districts supplement base zoning districts for one or more of the following purposes: 1. To allow more flexibility from the standard provisions of the underlying base zone. 2. To protect unique site features or implement location-specific regulations. 3. To specify a particular standard or guideline for an area. D. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of the base zoning district and the Overlay Zoning District, the provisions of the Overlay Zoning District shall apply. 23 Page 255 TABLE 17.26.020-1 RANCHO CUCAMONGA ZONING DISTRICTS Zoning District Zoning District Name/Description Symbol Residential Zoning Districts Very Low Residential. Designates areas for very low density residential use, with a VL minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet and a maximum residential density of up to 2 units per gross acre. Low Residential. Designates areas for single-family residential use, with a minimum L lot size of 7,200 square feet and a maximum residential density of 4 units per gross acre. Low Medium Residential. Designates areas for low medium density single-family or LM multiple-family use with site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby single-family detached neighborhoods. Residential densities range from 4 to 8 units per gross acre maximum. Medium Residential. Designates areas for medium density multiple-family use, with M site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development. Residential densities range from 8 to 14 units per gross acre maximum. Medium High Residential. Designates areas for medium high density multiple-family MH use, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development. Residential densities range from 14 to 24 units per gross acre maximum. High Residential. Designates areas for high density multiple-family use, with site H development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development. Residential densities range from 24 to 30 units per gross acre. Mixed Use Zoning District Mixed Use. Designates areas for a mix of residential and nonresidential uses, with MU site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development, as well as internal compatibility among the varying uses. Commercial and Office Zoning Districts Office/Professional. Designates areas primarily for the development of OP professional/administrative offices and personal services rather than commodities. Site development regulations and performance standards are designed to make such uses relatively compatible with residential uses. Neighborhood Commercial. Designates areas for immediate day-to-day convenience shopping and services for the residents of the immediate NC neighborhood. Site development regulations and performance standards are intended to make such uses compatible to and harmonious with the character of surrounding residential or less intense land use area. 24 Page 256 Zoning District Zoning District Name/Description Symbol General Commercial. Designates areas for general commercial activities and services of a more intensive nature, including but not limited to major shopping GC facilities, major service-oriented uses, major financial, and corporate headquarters that are designed to serve the city or the region as a whole and are typically located primarily along major transportation routes. Community Commercial. Designates areas for commercial activities and services on CC a larger scale. Businesses are typically auto oriented and located along major commercial corridors. Specialty Commercial. Designates areas designed to enhance the character around historic resources or sites which promote a special landmark quality or create a special ambience. Examples include specialty theme-oriented uses located adjacent SC to the Thomas Brothers Winery, which complement the existing winery structure and provide a unifying theme or the establishment of tourist-oriented specialty uses in other areas, which cater to visitors. A limited number of office uses have been included into the specialty commercial category in order to facilitate an interactive office/commercial environment. Regional Related Commercial. Designates areas for large-scale commercial RRC development that serves both local and regional needs. Sites are easily accessible from freeways and may contain a variety of goods and services, such as large-format retail, department stores, eating and drinking establishments, hotels, and motels. Commercial Office. Designates areas for activities that cater to business support and CO personal services. Uses typically include medical and health care clinics, travel agencies, insurance agencies, copy centers, and other similar land uses. Industrial Zoning Districts Industrial Park. Designates areas for industrial firms seeking an attractive and pleasant working environment and a location which has prestige value. The district IP allows light industrial uses, office and administration facilities, research and development laboratories, and limited types of warehousing, as well as support businesses and commercial service uses. Neo-Industrial. Designates areas to support a complementary mix of uses such as, research and development, light and custom manufacturing, engineering and design services, breweries, and maker spaces, as well as accessory office, retail and limited residential uses to compliment the primary use; supportive amenities and services; NI and convenient transit access. This zoning district encourages light industrial activities with low environmental impacts and supports the growth of creative industries, incubator businesses, and innovative design and manufacturing. The zoning district can allow for small scale, context sensitive warehousing, distribution and manufacturing to support small business development. Industrial Employment. Designates areas reserved for manufacturing, processing, construction and heavy equipment yards, warehousing and storage, e-commerce IE distribution, light industrial research parks, automobile and vehicle services, and a broad range of similar clean industrial practices and processes that typically generate more truck traffic, noise, and environmental impacts than would be 25 Page 257 Zoning District Zoning District Name/Description Symbol compatible with office and residential uses. This zoning district prohibits non- industrial uses, except for accessory office and commercial uses (such as restaurants or convenience stores) that support the employees of the primary industrial use, and on-site caretaker units. Open Space Zoning Districts Open Space. Designates areas primarily to protect environmentally sensitive land. OS The use regulations, development standards, and criteria provide low intensity development and encourage recreational activities and preservation of natural resources. Hillside Residential. Designates areas for maintaining natural open space character through protection of natural landforms; minimizing erosion; providing for public HR safety; protecting water, flora, and fauna resources; and establishing design standards to provide for limited development in harmony with the environment. Allowed density is a maximum of 2 units per net buildable acre as determined through the Hillside Development Review process. FC Flood Control. Designates areas necessary for flood control facilities for protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. Utility Corridor. Designates areas within utility corridors in which land uses UC compatible to both the utility function and surrounding, existing, or proposed land uses are allowed. Special Purpose Zoning Districts Specific Plan. Designates areas for master planning through the adoption of a SP specific plan with unique land use and development standards for a particular project areas with a minimum of 300 acres. Planned Community. Designates areas master planning through the adoption of a PC Planned Community, which can establish unique land use and development standards for a particular project area. Planned Communities typically include less detail than specific plans and have no minimum project size requirement. Overlay Zoning Districts Senior Housing. Designates areas available for affordable rental housing units to serve the city's senior citizens. District provisions ensure high quality project design SH and establish incentives for ongoing affordability for this target group. This district can be combined with any residential base zoning district that meets the overlay district qualifications. Equestrian. Designates areas for the keeping of equine, bovine, and cleft-hoofed E animals. Further, this district protects the ability to maintain such animals, promotes a "rural/farm" character in an urban setting, and recognizes and encourages the educational and recreational values derived from raising and maintaining such 26 Page 258 Zoning District Zoning District Name/Description Symbol animals. This district may be combined with any residential base zoning district that meets the overlay district qualifications. Foothill Boulevard. Designates areas along Foothill Boulevard for special use and development regulations to implement the goals and objectives in the general plan FB for this important corridor that covers most of the length of Historic Route 66 through the city. Special regulations encourage a mix of uses, concentrate neighborhood, community, and regional-serving uses as appropriate, and accommodate future transit. Hillside. Designates sloped areas subject to special hillside development H regulations. Generally, this district applies to areas with a slope greater than or equal to 8%. This district may be combined with any residential base zoning district that meets the overlay district qualifications. HA Haven Avenue. Designates an area along Haven Avenue with unique allowed use regulations and development standards focused on high quality office opportunities. Industrial Commercial. Designates areas with an Industrial Park Base Zoning District IC to encourage and support the integration of traditional general commercial uses and special development review requirements focused on retail opportunities. LW Large Warehouse. Designates area where large industrial buildings with a gross floor area over 450,000 square feet are permitted. 27 Page 259 EXHIBIT F Amendments to Chapter 17.26 (Establishment of Zoning Districts) Amended Section: 17.30.030 Allowed land uses and permit requirements. 1730.030 Allowed land uses and permit requirements A. Allowed land uses. Allowed uses and corresponding permit and entitlement requirements for the base zoning districts are listed in Table 17.30.030-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements by Base Zoning District). Uses are organized into common categories as follows: 1. Residential uses. 2. Agriculture and animal related uses. 3. Recreation, resource preservation, open space, education, and public assembly uses. 4. Utility, transportation, public facility, and communication uses. 5. Retail, service, and office uses. 6. Automobile and vehicle uses. 7. Industrial, manufacturing, and processing uses. B. Permit requirements. Generally, a use is either allowed by right, allowed through issuance of a conditional use permit, or not permitted. In addition to the requirements for planning permits or entitlements listed herein, other permits and entitlements may be required prior to establishment of the use (e.g., building permit or permits required by other agencies). The requirements for planning permits or entitlements identified in Table 17.30.030-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements by Base Zoning District) include: 1. Permitted(P). A land use shown with a "P" indicates that the land use is permitted by right in the designated zoning district, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of this title (e.g., development standards) as well state and federal law. 2. Permitted with a Minor Use Permit (M). A land use shown with an "M" indicates that the land use is permitted in the designated zoning district upon issuance of a minor use permit from the designated approving authority, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of this zoning code (e.g., development standards) as well as state and federal law. 3. Conditionally permitted (C). A land use shown with a "C" indicates that the land use is permitted in the designated zoning district upon issuance of a conditional use permit from the designated approving authority, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of this zoning code (e.g., development standards) as well as state and federal law. 4. Not permitted (N). A land use shown with an "N" is not allowed in the applicable zoning district. Additionally, uses not shown in the table are not permitted, except as otherwise provided for in this title. 5. Adult entertainment permit (A). A land use shown with an "A" indicates that the land use is permitted in the designated zoning district upon issuance of an adult entertainment permit from the designated approving authority, subject to compliance with all applicable 28 Page 260 provisions of this zoning code (e.g., development operational standards)as well as state and federal law. C. Base zoning district names and symbols. Base zoning district names for the zoning district symbols used in the table are listed below. Specific Plan (SP) District and Planned Community (PC) District are not listed in the table as the allowed uses for those base zoning districts are determined in compliance with the adopted Specific Plan or Planned Community. • Very Low Residential (VL) • Specialty Commercial (SC) • Low Residential (L) • Regional Related Commercial (RRC) • Low Medium Residential (LM) • Commercial Office (CO) • Medium Residential (M) • Industrial Park (IP) • Medium High Residential (MH) • Neo-Industrial (NI) • High Residential (H) • Industrial Employment (IE) • Mixed Use (MU) • Open Space (OS) • Office Professional (OP) • Hillside Residential District (HR) • Neighborhood Commercial (NC) • Flood Control-Open Space (FC) • General Commercial (GC) • Utility Corridor-Open Space (UC) • Community Commercial (CC) TABLE 17.30.030-1: ALLOWED LAND USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS BY BASE ZONING DISTRICT Land Use/Zoning� V �L L �M� M H M O N G C S RR C I �"� I O H F U District L M H U P C C C C C O P I E S R C C Residential Uses Adult Day Care P P P P P P P N N N N N N N NNN N P N N Home Caretaker Housing M M M M M M M P P P N N N N M M M P M P P Dwelling, Multi- N N P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Family Dwelling, Single- P P P P N N N N N N N N N N NNN P P N N Family Dwelling, Two- N N P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Family Emergency Shelter N N N IN, N N N N N P N N N N N N N I N N N N Family Day Care M M M M M M M N N N N N N N NNN N M N N Home, Large (") Family Day Care P P P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N N P N N Home, Small Guest House P P P N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Group Residential M M M M M M M M M M M N M N N N N N M N N Home Occupation(2) P P P P P P P N N N N N N N NNN P P N N Live-Work FacilityN N N N N N P N N N N N N N N C C N N N N Manufactured Home (3) P P P P N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P N N Mobile Home Park(3) M M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Residential Care N M M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Facility 29 Page 261 Land Use/Zoning V L L M M H M O N G C S RR C I N 1 O H F U District L M H U P C C C C C O P I E S R C C Residential Care P P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N N N P N N Home Short-Term P P P P P P P P P N N P P P P N P P P P P Rental(16) Single-Room N N N P P P P N N N N N N N NNN N N N N Occupancy Facility Transitional Housing P P P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N N P N N Agriculture and Animal- Related Uses Agricultural Uses N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P N P P Animal Keeping, P P P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N N P N N Domestic Pets(4) Animal Keeping, M M M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N M N N Exotic Animals(4) Animal Keeping, P N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Insects (4) Animal Keeping, P P N N N N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N Livestock Animals (4) Animal Keeping, P N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N Poultry (4) Equestrian Facility, M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N M M Commercial Equestrian Facility, P N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Hobby Land Use/Zoning V L M M O N G C S RR C I N 1 O H F U District L L M M H H U P C C C C C O P I E S R C C Recreation, Resource Preservation, Open Space, Education, and Public Assern ly Uses Assembly Use MIMI MIMI M M M M M M M M M M M C N N N N N Cemetery/Mausoleu NNNN N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N N N m Community M M M M M M M M M M M M M N P P N N M N N Center/Civic Use Community Garden M M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N P N P P Convention Center N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M C C N N N N Golf N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N M M Course/Clubhouse Indoor Amusement/ Entertainment N NNN N N M N M M P P P N M C N N N N N Facility Indoor Fitness and Sports Facility— N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M C N N N N N Large Indoor Fitness and Sports Facility— N NNIN, N N P P P P P M P P M C N N N N N Small 30 Page 262 Land Use/Zoning V L L M M H M O N G C S RR C I N 1 O H F U District L M H U P C C C C C O P I E S R C C Library and Museum M M M M M M P P P P N P N P M N N M M M M 31 Page 263 Outdoor Commercial N N N N N N M M M M N N M M M C N N N N N Recreation Park and Public P P P P P P P N N N N N N N M M M P P P P Plaza Public Safety M M M M M M M M M M M M M MM C C N M N N Facility Resource- Related P P P P P P P N N N N N N N N N N P P P P Recreation School, Academic MMMMMMMMMMMM M MM C N N M N N Private School, Academic P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P N N P N N (Public) School, College/Univer MMMMMMMMMMMM M MM C N N M N N sit Private School, College/Univer MMMMMMMMMMMM M MM C N N C N N sit Public Schools, Specialized N N N N N N M M M M M M M M C C C N N N N Education and Training/Studio Theaters and N N N N N N M N N M N N P N N N N N N N N Auditoriums Tutoring N N N N N N M M M M M M M M N N N N N N N Center—Large Tutoring N N N N N N P P P P P P P P N N N N N N N Center—Small Utility, Transportation, Public Facility, and Communication Uses Broadcasting and Recording N N N N N N N P N P N N N P P P N N N N N Studios Park and Ride N N N N N N N M M M N N N N C P C N N N N Facility Parking Facility N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Transit Facility N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M C C N N N N Utility Facility and Infrastructure N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M C C C N M M —Fixed Based Structures (5,12) Utility Facility and P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Infrastructure —Pi elines (5) 32 Page 264 Wind Energy System—Small P N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P P N N N N (10) Land V L M M O N G C S RR C H U Use/Zoning L L M M H H U P C C C C C O IP NI IE OS R FC C District Retail, Service, and Office Uses Adult Day Care N N N N N N M M M M N N N M C C N N N N N Facility Adult-Oriented Business (6) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N A A A N N N N Alcoholic Beverage N N N N N N M N M M M M M M M M N N N N N Sales Ambulance N N N N N N N M M M N N N N N C P N N N N Service Animal Sales N N N N N N P N P P P P N N N N N N N N N and Grooming Art, Antique, Collectable N N N N N N P N P P P P P N N N N N N N N Shop(13) Artisan Shop N N N N N N P N P P P P P N N N N N N N N (13) Bail Bonds N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Banks and Financial N N N N N N M M M P P P P P P P N N N N N Services Bar/Nightclub N N N N N N M M N M M M M MN C N N NJ N N Breakfast Innnd M M M N N N N N N N M M N N N N N N N N N Building Materials Store N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M P N N N N and Yard Business Support N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P P N N N N Services Call Center N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M C N N N N Card Room N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Check Cashing N N N N N N P N P P N N N N P N N N N N N Business (7) Child Day Care N N N N N N M M M M M N M M M P P N N N N Facility/Center Commercial Cannabis N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Activity Consignment N N N N N N M N M M N M N N N N N N N N N Store Convenience N N N N N N P N P P N M N N M M N N N N N Store 33 Page 265 Crematory N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N Services(7) Drive-In and SalesDrive-Throuand gh N N N N N N M M M M M N M M M M N N N N N Service(8) Land V L M M0NGCSRRC H U Use/Zoning L L M M H H U P C C C C C O IP NI IE OS R FC C District Equipment Sales and N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N C P N N N N Rental Feed and Tack N N N N N N N N P P N N N N N N N N N N N Store Furniture, Furnishing, and N N N N N N P N P P P P P N N N N N N N N Appliance Store Garden Center/Plant N N N N N N P N P P P N P N N P P P N P P Nurser Grocery Store/Superma N N N N N N P N P P P N P N N N N N N N N rket Gun Sales N N N N N N N N N M N N N N M M N N N N N Hookah Shop N N N N N N M N N M N N N N I N I N N N N N N Home Improvement N N N N N N P N P P P N P N M P P N N N N Supply Store Hotel N N N N N N M M N M N N M MM N N N N N N Internet Cafe N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P P N N N N Kennel, N N N N N N N N N M M N M N M C N N N N N Commercial Liquor Store N N N N N N M N M M M M M N M M N N N N N Maintenance and Repair, N N N N N N P N P P P N P P P P P N N N N Small Equipment Massage Establishment N N N N N N P P P P P P P P N N N N N N N (14) Massage Establishment, N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P N N N N N Ancillary(14) Medical Services, N M M M M M M P N P P N N P P P N N N N N Extended Care Medical Services, N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P N N N N N General 34 Page 266 Medical Services, N N M M M M M M N M N N N N P P N N N N N Hospitals Land V L M M O N G C S RR C H U Use/Zoning L L M M H H U P C C C C C O IP NI IE OS R FC C District Mobile Hot N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P N N N N Food Truck Mortuary/Funer N N N N N N N M M M N N N N N N N N N N N al Home Office, Business and N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P N N N N N Professional Office, N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P P N N N N Accessory Pawnshop(7) N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N Personal N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P P N N N N Services Restaurant, No Liquor Service N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P P N N N N Restaurant, N N N N N N P P P P P P P P P P C N N N N Beer and Wine Restaurant, Full Liquor N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M N N N N N Service Retail, N N N N N N P P P P P N P P M M P N N N N Accessory Retail, General N N N N N N P N P P P P P N M M C N N N N Retail, Warehouse N N N N N N P N N P P N P N P N N N N N N Club Secondhand N N N N N N P N P P N N N N N N N N N N N Dealer Shooting N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M C N N N N N Range Smoke Shop(7) N N N N N N N N N M M N M N N N N N N N N Specialty Food N N N N N N P N P P P P P N N N N N N N N Store (13) Tattoo Shop (7) N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N Thrift Store(7) N N N N N N M N M M M N M N N N N N N N N Veterinary M N N N N N M N P P M M M N N P P N N N N Facility Automobile and Vehicle Uses Auto and Vehicle Sales N N N N N N N M N M N N P N M M N N N N N and Rental Auto and Vehicle Sales, N N N N N N N P P P P N P P P N N N N N N Autobroker 35 Page 267 Auto and Vehicle Sales, N N N N N N N P P P P N P P P P N N N N N Wholesale Auto and Vehicle N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Stora e18 Auto Parts N N N N N N N N P P N N P N N P N N N N N Sales Car Washing N N N N N N N N N M M N M N M N N N N N N and Detailing Recreational Vehicle N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C C N N N N Storage Service N N N N N N M M M P M N M MM M N N N N N Stations Vehicle N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N P P N N N N Services, Major Vehicle N N N N N N N M M P N N M N P P N N N N N Services, Minor Land V L M M O N G C S RR C H U Use/Zoning L L M M H H U P C C C C C O IP NI IE OS R FC C District Industrial, Manufacturin , and Pr essing Uses (77) Commercial (Secondary/Ac N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P P N N N N cessory) - Industrial Commercial (Repurposing)- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M C C N N N N Industrial E-Commerce Distribution Distribution/ Fulfillment N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P P N N N N Center, Small(12) Distribution/ Fulfillment N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M N N N N Center, Large Parcel Sorting N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Facilities Parcel Hub Small (< N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 130,000 sq. ft. Paarceel Hub N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 36 Page 268 130,000 sq. ft. Lumber Yard N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C N N N N Maker Space/Access N N N N N M N N N N N N N N M P P N N N N cry Maker Space Manufacturing, Custom(12) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P N N N N N Manufacturing, Green N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P N N N N Technology Manufacturing, N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P P N N N N Light- Small(12) Manufacturing, N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M N N N N Light- Lar e(12) Microbrewery N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P P N N N N Printing and N N N N N N N N N P N N N N P P N N N N N Publishing Recycling Facility, N N N N N N N N P P N N N N N C C N N N N Collection Recycling Facility, N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C C N N N N Processing Research and N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P P N N N N Development Storage, Personal N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C C N N N N Storage Facility Storage N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N C C N N N N Warehouse Wholesale, Storage, and N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P P P N N N N Distribution - Li ht(12) Wholesale, Storage, and N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C C P N N N N Distribution - Medium (12) Work/Live N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M N N N N Table Notes: (1) Reserved. (2) See additional regulations for home occupations in Chapter 17.92. (3) See additional regulations for mobile homes in Chapter 17.96. (4) See additional regulations for animal keeping in Chapter 17.88. (5) Utility facilities and infrastructure involving hazardous or volatile gas and/or liquid pipeline development require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. (6) See additional regulations for adult entertainment businesses in Chapter 17.86.Adult-oriented businesses are not permitted west of Haven Avenue. (7) See additional regulations for special regulated uses in Chapter 17.102. (8) See additional regulations for drive-in and drive-through facilities in Chapter 17.90. 37 Page 269 (9) Not permitted within 300 feet of residentially zoned property. (10)See additional regulations for wind energy systems in Chapter 17.76. (11)Family Day Care Home—Large requires approval of a Large Family Day Care Permit,not a Conditional Use Permit. (12)Not permitted on any parcel that is located within,or partly within,five hundred(500)feet of the Foothill Boulevard right-of-way. (13)Permitted in Industrial Park and General Industrial zoning districts when proposed in conjunction with"Commercial(Repurposing) —Industrial'. (14)Massage establishment permit required.See additional regulations for massage establishments in chapter 5.18. (16)A short-term rental must be a single family residence in zoning districts other than VL, L,and LM.See additional regulations for short-term rentals in Chapter 8.34. (17)Maximum building gross floor area for all industrial uses is 450,000 square feet.A master plan is required for all industrial buildings larger than 450,000 square feet in gross floor area. (18)Auto and vehicle storage is permitted as an on-or off-site accessory use to any manufacturing use upon issuance of a minor use permit. The minor use permit may also permit truck storage as an accessory use to manufacturing. 38 Page 270 EXHIBIT G Amendments to Chapter 17.32 (Allowed Use Descriptions) 17.32.020 Allowed use descriptions. The following list represents the complete list of allowed uses by land use classification and corresponding descriptions as used in Table 17.30.030-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements by Base Zoning District) and throughout this title. Individual use classifications describe one or more uses having similar characteristics, but do not list every use or activity that may appropriately be within the classification.Allowed uses are organized into the following seven use categories as follows: • Residential uses. • Agriculture and animal-related uses. • Recreation, resource preservation, open space, education, and public assembly uses. • Utility, transportation, public facility, and communication uses. • Retail, service, and office uses. • Automobile and vehicle uses. • Industrial, manufacturing, and processing uses. A. Residential uses. 1. Adult day care home. Defined by state law as the provision of nonmedical care to six or fewer adults, including seniors, in the provider's own home, for a period of less than 24 hours at a time. Homes serving more than six adults are included in adult day care facility. 2. Caretaker housing. A residence that is accessory to a site with a nonresidential primary use and that is needed for security, 24-hour care or supervision, or monitoring of facilities, equipment, or other conditions on the site. 3. Dwelling, multi-family. A building designed and intended for occupancy by three or more households living independently of each other, each in a separate dwelling unit, which may be owned individually or by a single landlord (e.g., apartment, apartment house, townhouse, condominium). 4. Dwelling, single-family. A building designed exclusively for occupancy by one household on a single lot. This classification includes manufactured homes (defined in California Health and Safety Code §18007) and model homes for the first sale of homes within the subdivision. 5. Dwelling, two-family. An attached building (e.g., duplex) designed for occupancy by two households living independently of each other, where both dwellings are located on a single lot. For the purposes of this title, this definition also includes halfplexes (two attached units, each with a separate lot). Does not include accessory dwelling units. 6. Emergency shelter. A facility for the temporary shelter and feeding of indigents or disaster victims and operated by a public or nonprofit agency. 7. Family day care home, large. State-licensed facilities that provide nonmedical care and supervision of minor children for periods of less than 24 hours within a single-family or multi-family dwelling. The occupant of the residence provides care and supervision 39 Page 271 generally for seven to 14 children. As described in the Health and Safety Code, large day care homes may provide services for up to 14 children when specific conditions are met. 8. Family day care home, small. State-licensed facilities that provide nonmedical care and supervision of minor children for periods of less than 24 hours within a single-family or multi-family dwelling. The occupant of the residence provides care and supervision generally to six or fewer children. As described in the California Health and Safety Code, small day care homes for children may provide services for up to eight children when specific conditions are met. 9. Group residential. Shared living quarters without separate kitchen and/or bathroom facilities for each room or unit. This classification includes residential hotels, dormitories, fraternities, sororities, convents, rectories, and private residential clubs but does not include living quarters shared exclusively by a family. This category includes boardinghouses, which are defined as a building other than a hotel or restaurant where meals or lodging or both meals and lodging are provided for compensation for four or more persons. 10. Guest house. A detached structure accessory to a single-family dwelling, accommodating living and/or sleeping quarters, but without kitchen or cooking facilities. 11. Home occupation. The conduct of a business within a dwelling unit or residential site, employing occupants of the dwelling, with the business activity being subordinate to the residential use of the property. Examples include, but are not limited to, accountants and financial advisors, architects, artists, attorneys, offices for construction businesses (no equipment or material storage), and real estate sales. This category includes cottage food uses, consistent with state law. 12. Live-work facility. A structure or portion of a structure: a. That combines a commercial or manufacturing activity allowed in the zone with a residential living space for the owner of the commercial or manufacturing business, or the owner's employee, and that person's household; b. Where the resident owner or employee of the business is responsible for the commercial or manufacturing activity performed; C. Where the commercial or manufacturing activity conducted takes place subject to a valid business license associated with the premises; and d. The commercial or manufacturing activity is secondary to the residential living space. 13. Manufactured home. California Health and Safety Code § 18007 defines a manufactured home as a structure, that meets the following criteria: a. Transportable in one or more sections. b. When in the traveling mode, is eight body feet or more in width, or 40 body feet or more in length, or, when erected on-site, is 320 or more square feet. C. Built on a permanent chassis. d. Designed to be used as a residential dwelling. e. Erected with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities. f. Includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein. 40 Page 272 g. This term shall include any structure that meets all the requirements of this paragraph except the size requirements so long as the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification and complies with the standards established under this part. Manufactured home includes a mobile home subject to the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Act of 1974 (42 USC section 5401 et seq.). 14. Mobile home park. Consistent with definitions of state law(Health and Safety Code section 18214), a mobile home park is any site that is planned and improved to accommodate two or more mobile homes used for residential purposes, or on which two or more mobile home lots are rented, leased, or held out for rent or lease, or were formerly held out for rent or lease and later converted to a subdivision, cooperative, condominium, or other form of resident ownership, to accommodate mobile homes used for residential purposes. 15. Residential care facility. Consistent with the definitions of state law, a residential care facility provides 24-hour nonmedical care for more than six persons 18 years of age or older, or emancipated minors, with chronic, life-threatening illness in need of personal services, protection, supervision, assistance, guidance, or training essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual. This classification includes, but is not limited to, rest homes, residential care facilities for the elderly, adult residential facilities, wards of the juvenile court, and other facilities licensed by the State of California. Convalescent homes, nursing homes, and similar facilities providing medical care are included under the definition of medical services, extended care. When located in the low (L) and low-medium (LM) residential districts, a residential care facility shall maintain a minimum three-acre project area. 16. Residential care home. Consistent with the definitions of state law (Health and Safety Code section 1502), a residential care home is a home that provides 24-hour nonmedical care for six or fewer persons 18 years of age or older, or emancipated minors, with chronic, life-threatening illness in need of personal services, protection, supervision, assistance, guidance, or training essential for sustaining the activities of daily living, or for the protection of the individual. This classification includes rest homes, residential care facilities for the elderly, adult residential facilities, wards of the juvenile court, and other facilities licensed by the State of California. Convalescent homes, nursing homes, and similar facilities providing medical care are included under the definition of "medical services, extended care." 17. Short-term rental. A short-term rental is a dwelling unit, or any portion thereof, that is rented by the host to another party for a period of not more than 30 consecutive days in exchange for any form of monetary or non-monetary consideration, including trade, fee, swap or any other consideration in lieu of cash payment. Hosted stays, un-hosted stays, and vacation rentals are types of short-term rental. Related definitions are available in Section 8.34.010. 18. Single-room occupancy (SRO) facility. Multi-unit housing for very low-income persons that typically consists of a single room and shared bath and also may include a shared common kitchen and common activity area. SROs may be restricted to seniors or be available to persons of all ages. Subsidized versions may be supervised by a government housing agency. 19. Transitional housing. Consistent with Health and Safety Code section 50675.2, transitional housing is defined as buildings configured as rental housing developments but operated under program requirements that call for the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time, which shall be no less than six months. 41 Page 273 B. Agriculture and animal-related uses. 1. Agricultural uses. This use category includes farms, orchards, vineyards, livestock grazing, and hydroponics, including on-site sales of products grown on site. 2. Animal keeping. Care and maintenance of animals on private property. The listing below provides a distinction between various types of animals related to allowed use provisions in Table 17.30.030-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements by Base Zoning District). This classification is distinct from "animal sales and grooming" and "equestrian facility (commercial or hobby)." Also see Kennel, commercial, which provides for the boarding of animals (e.g., doggie day-care). a. Domestic pets. Small animals (no larger than the largest breed of dogs) customarily kept as pets within a dwelling unit. This classification includes dogs, cats, fish, and birds (excluding large tropical birds and poultry). b. Exotic animals. Wild animals not customarily confined or cultivated by man for domestic or commercial purposes, but kept as a pet or for display, including wolf-dog hybrids, non-poisonous snakes, reptiles, and large tropical birds (including peacocks). C. Insects. Small arthropod animals confined or cultivated by man for domestic purposes including but not limited to flies, crickets, mosquitoes, beetles, butterflies, and bees. d. Livestock animals. Domesticated animals that may be kept or raised in pens, barns, houses, and pastures for private use. Livestock includes, but is not limited to, cattle, sheep, swine, pot belly pigs, goats, and equine. e. Poultry. Domesticated birds (fowl) customarily kept for eggs or meat. This classification includes chickens, roosters, ducks, geese, turkeys, guinea fowl, and Cornish game hens. 3. Equestrian facility, commercial. Commercial horse, donkey, and mule facilities including horse ranches, boarding stables, riding schools and academies, horse exhibition facilities(for shows or other competitive events), pack stations, and barns, stables, corrals, and paddocks accessory and incidental to these uses. 4. Equestrian facility, hobby. Stables, corrals, and paddocks used by the individual homeowners of corresponding property and their animals. C. Recreation, resource preservation, open space, education, and public assembly uses. 1. Assembly use. A permanent meeting facility for organizations operating on a membership basis for the promotion of the interests of the members, including facilities for business associations; civic, social, and fraternal organizations; labor unions and similar organizations; political organizations; religious organizations; professional membership organizations; and other membership organizations. 2. Cemetery/mausoleum. Land used for the burial of the dead and dedicated for cemetery purposes, including columbariums and mausoleums. Also see Mortuary/funeral home and crematory services. 3. Community center/civic use. Multipurpose meeting and recreational facility typically consisting of one or more meeting or multipurpose rooms, kitchen, and/or outdoor barbecue facilities that are available for use by various groups for such activities as meetings, parties, receptions, dances, etc. 4. Community garden. A privately or publicly owned vacant parcel of land used by the community or a neighborhood for the growing of fruits, vegetables, and culinary herbs 42 Page 274 for personal consumption and/or to be offered for sale on site or at a local certified farmers' market. 5. Convention center. A large building designed to hold a convention, where individuals and groups gather to promote and share common interests. Convention centers typically offer sufficient floor area to accommodate several thousand attendees. Convention centers typically have at least one auditorium and may also contain concert halls, lecture halls, meeting rooms, and conference rooms. Some large resort-area hotels include a convention center. 6. Golf course%lubhouse. A golf course and accessory facilities and uses including clubhouses with bar and restaurant, locker and shower facilities, driving ranges, "pro shops" for on-site sales of golfing equipment, and golf cart storage and sales facilities. 7. Indoor amusement/entertainment facility. An establishment providing amusement and entertainment services in an indoor facility for a fee or admission charge, including, but not limited to, dance halls, ballrooms, bowling alleys, laser tag, inflatable playgrounds, trampoline parks, escape room venues and electronic game arcades, as primary uses. Four or more electronic games or coin-operated amusements in any establishment, or premises where 50% or more of the floor area is occupied by amusement devices, are considered an amusement device arcade as described above; three or less machines are not considered a land use separate from the primary use of the site. 8. Indoor fitness and sports facility, large. An establishment predominantly for participant sports and health activities conducted entirely within an enclosed building greater than 2,500 square feet. Typical uses include bowling alleys, billiard parlors, ice/roller skating rinks, indoor racquetball courts, indoor climbing facilities, soccer areas, athletic clubs, and health clubs. This use classification also includes studio-style facilities such as dance/ballet, yoga, martial arts, and fitness studios. 9. Indoor fitness and sports facility, small. An establishment predominantly for participant sports and health activities conducted entirely within an enclosed building less than or equal to 2,500 square feet. Typical uses include studio-style facilities such as dance/ballet, yoga, martial arts, and fitness studios but may also include uses described in "indoor fitness and sports facilities, large" if they are in an enclosed building less than or equal to 2,500 square feet. 10. Library and museum. A public or quasi-public facility including aquariums, arboretums, art exhibitions, botanical gardens, historic sites and exhibits, libraries, museums, and planetariums, which are generally noncommercial in nature. 11. Outdoor commercial recreation. Facility for various outdoor participant sports and types of recreation where a fee is charged for use (e.g., amphitheaters, amusement and theme parks, golf driving ranges, health and athletic club with outdoor facilities, miniature golf courses, skateboard parks, stadiums and coliseums, swim and tennis clubs, water slides, zoos). 12. Park and public plaza. A public park including playgrounds and athletic fields/courts and public plazas and outdoor gathering places for community use. If privately owned and restricted to the public (e.g., require payment of fee), the same facilities are included under the definition of"outdoor commercial recreation." 13. Public safety facility. Facility operated by public agencies including fire stations, other fire prevention and firefighting facilities, and police and sheriff substations and headquarters, including interim incarceration facilities. 43 Page 275 14. Resource-related recreation. Facility related to passive recreation in open space areas including bicycle and pedestrian trails, picnic areas, parking areas, and interpretive centers. 15. School, academic (private). Any privately owned and operated elementary school, middle school, secondary school, high school, or other institution providing academic instruction for students from kindergarten through 12th grade. This listing also includes a private school operating under a charter from the local school district and not managed directly by the governing body of the public school district (e.g., school board). 16. School, academic (public). Public elementary schools, middle schools, secondary schools, high schools, and any other public school providing academic instruction for students from kindergarten through 12th grade. 17. School, college/university (private). Any privately owned college or university, including medical schools, law schools, and other instruction of higher education, including dorms, offices, facility maintenance yards, offices, and similar supportive functions. 18. School, college/university (public). Public community colleges, colleges, and universities, including dorms, offices, facility maintenance yards, offices, and similar supportive functions. 19. School, specialized education and training. Specialty schools for instructing and training students in a variety of specialized programs, including, but not limited to, computers and electronics training, drama, driver educational, language, music. Includes professional, vocational, and trade schools of a nonindustrial nature (e.g., culinary, cosmetology, arts and media, accounting and finance, health and dental including nursing, legal, psychology, and technology). 20. Theater and auditorium. An indoor facility for public assembly and group entertainment, other than sporting events (e.g., civic theaters, facilities for "live" theater and concerts, exhibition and convention halls, motion picture theaters, auditoriums). Does not include outdoor theaters, concert and similar entertainment facilities, and indoor and outdoor facilities for sporting events; see Outdoor commercial recreation. 21. Tutoring center, large.An indoor facility where instructors teach, coach, or educate students with more than ten instructors and/or students using the facility at any given time. 22. Tutoring center, small.An indoor facility where instructors teach, coach, or educate students with ten or fewer instructors and/or students using the facility at any given time. D. Utility, transportation, public facility, and communication uses. 1. Broadcasting and recording studio. Commercial and public communications uses including radio and television broadcasting and receiving stations and studios, with facilities entirely within buildings. Does not include transmission and receiving apparatus such as antennas and towers. 2. Park and ride facility. A designated area where a vehicle may be left in order for the driver to carpool with other commuters or to ride public transit. 3. Parking facility. A parking lot or parking structure used for parking motor vehicles where the facility is the primary use of the site. Parking structures and lots that are developed in conjunction with another primary use of the site to satisfy the on-site parking requirements for the development are not included in this definition. 4. Transit facility. A maintenance and service center for the vehicles operated in a mass transportation system. Includes buses, taxis, railways, monorail, etc. 44 Page 276 5. Utility facility and infrastructure, fixed-base structures. Fixed-base structures and facilities serving as junction points for transferring utility services from one transmission voltage to another or to local distribution and service voltages. These uses include any of the following facilities that are not exempted from land use entitlements by Government Code section 53091: electrical substations and switching stations, natural gas regulating and distribution facilities, public water system wells, treatment plants and storage, telephone switching facilities, wastewater treatment plants, settling ponds, and disposal fields. These uses do not include office or customer service centers (classified in offices) or equipment and material storage yards. 6. Utility facility and infrastructure, pipelines. Pipelines for potable water, reclaimed water, natural gas, and sewage collection and disposal, and facilities for the transmission of electrical energy for sale, including transmission lines for a public utility company. Also includes telephone, telegraph, cable television, and other communications transmission facilities utilizing direct physical conduits. 7. Wind energy system, small. A machine which can convert kinetic energy in wind into a usable form of electrical or mechanical energy intended primarily for on-site consumption but may transfer excess energy into the electrical grid. E. Retail, service, and office uses. 1. Adult day care facility. State-licensed facility that provides nonmedical care and supervision for more than six adults for periods of less than 24 hours, with no overnight stays. 2. Adult-oriented business. a. Adult bookstore or adult video store. A commercial establishment which has as a significant or substantial portion of its stock-in-trade or derives a significant or substantial portion of its revenues or devotes a significant or substantial portion of its interior business or advertising to the sale, rental for any form of consideration, of any one or more of the following: i. Books, magazines, periodicals, or other printed matter or photographs, films, motion pictures, videocassette tapes, digital video discs, slides, tapes, records, compact discs, or other forms of visual or audio representations which are characterized by an emphasis upon the depiction or description of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas. ii. Instruments, devices, or paraphernalia which are designed for use or marketed primarily for stimulation of human genital organs or for sadomasochistic use or abuse of themselves or others. b. Adult cabaret. A nightclub, theater, concert hall, auditorium, bar, or other similar establishment that regularly features live or media presentations of performances by topless or bottomless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, or similar entertainers where such performances are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas. C. Adult motel. A motel, hotel or similar commercial establishment which: i. Offers public accommodations, for any form of consideration, which provides patrons with closed-circuit television transmissions, films, motion pictures, videocassettes, DVDs, CDs, slides, or other photographic reproductions which are characterized by the depiction or description of 45 Page 277 specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas and which advertise the availability of this sexually oriented type of material by means of a sign visible from the public right-of-way, or by means of any off- premises advertising including but not limited to, newspapers, magazines, pamphlets or leaflets, radio or television; ii. Offers a sleeping room for rent for a period of time less than ten hours; or iii. Allows a tenant or occupant to sub-rent the sleeping room for a time period of less than ten hours. d. Adult news rack. Any coin-operated machine or device that dispenses material substantially devoted to the depiction of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas. e. Adult theater. An enclosed or unenclosed building, to which the public is permitted or invited, used for presenting any form of audio or visual material, and in which a substantial portion of the total presentation time is devoted to the showing of material which is distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on depiction or description of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas. f. Adult viewing area.An area in any adult book and/or novelty store, cabaret, theater, motion picture arcade or other adult entertainment business, where a patron or customer would ordinarily be positioned for the purpose of viewing or watching a performance, picture show, or film. g. Bathhouse. An establishment or business that provides the services of baths of all kinds, including all forms and methods of hydrotherapy during which specified anatomical areas are displayed or specified sexual activity occurs. 3. Alcoholic beverage sales. The retail sale of beverages containing alcohol for off- site consumption subject to regulation by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) as an off-sale establishment. On-site alcoholic beverage sales are included in the definitions for bar/nightclub and restaurant. 4. Ambulance service. Emergency medical care and transportation, including incidental storage and maintenance of vehicles. 5. Animal sales and grooming. Retail sales of domestic and exotic animals, bathing and trimming services, and boarding of said animals for a maximum period of 72 hours conducted entirely within an enclosed building with no outdoor use. Boarding for periods longer than 72 hours is considered a kennel. 6. Art, antique, collectable shop. Retail sales uses including antique shops, art galleries, curio, gift, and souvenir shops, and the sales of collectible items including sports cards and comic books. Stores selling handcrafted items that are produced on the site are defined separately as artisan shops. 7. Artisan shop. A retail store selling art glass, ceramics, jewelry, and other handcrafted items and supplies needed to create finished items, where the facility includes an area for the crafting of the items being sold. 8. Bail bonds. A business providing a bond or obligation on behalf of a prisoner to insure the prisoner's appearance in court at the return of the writ. 9. Banks and financial services. Financial institutions such as banks and trust companies, credit agencies, holding (but not primarily operating) companies, lending and thrift institutions, and investment companies. Freestanding exterior automated teller machines (ATM) are considered an accessory use and not part of this definition. 46 Page 278 10. Bar/nightclub. Any bar, cocktail lounge, discotheque, or similar establishment, which may also provide live entertainment (e.g., music and/or dancing, comedy, subject to an entertainment permit) in conjunction with alcoholic beverage sales. These facilities do not include bars that are part of a larger restaurant. Includes bars, taverns, pubs, and similar establishments where any food service is subordinate to the sale of alcoholic beverages. Bars and nightclubs may include outdoor food and beverage areas. 11. Bed and breakfast inn. A residential structure with one family in permanent residence with up to six bedrooms rented for overnight lodging, where meals may be provided subject to applicable health department regulations. A bed and breakfast inn with more than six guest rooms is considered a hotel or motel and is included under the definition of hotels and motels. 12. Building materials store and yard. A retail establishment selling lumber and other large building materials, where most display and sales occur indoors. Includes stores selling to the general public, even if contractor sales account for a major proportion of total sales. Includes incidental retail ready-mix concrete operations, except where excluded by a specific zoning district. Establishments primarily selling electrical, plumbing, heating, and air conditioning equipment and supplies are classified in wholesale, storage, and distribution (heavy, light and medium). Hardware stores are listed in the definition of"retail, general," even if they sell some building materials. Also see Home improvement supply store for smaller specialty stores. 13. Business support services. Establishments primarily within buildings, providing other businesses with services such as maintenance, repair and service, testing, rental, etc. Support services include, but are not limited to: a. Equipment repair services (except vehicle repair, see Vehicle services); b. Commercial art and design (production); C. Computer-related services (rental, repair); d. Copying, quick printing, and blueprinting services (other than those defined as printing and publishing); e. Equipment rental businesses within buildings (rental yards are storage yards); f. Film processing laboratories; g. Heavy equipment repair services where repair occurs on the client site; h. Janitorial services; i. Mail advertising services (reproduction and shipping); j. Mail box services and other"heavy service" business services; k. Outdoor advertising services; and I. Photocopying and photofinishing. 14. Call center. An office equipped to handle a large volume of calls, especially for taking orders or servicing customers. 15. Card room. A gambling establishment that offers card games for play by the public. 16. Check cashing business. An establishment that, for compensation, engages in the business of cashing checks, warrants, drafts, money orders, or other commercial paper serving a similar purpose. Also includes establishments primarily engaged in cashing payroll or personal checks for a fee or advancing funds on future checks. This 47 Page 279 classification does not include a state or federally chartered bank, savings association, credit union, or similar financial institution (see Banks and financial services). 17. Child-care facility/center. A facility installed, operated, and maintained for the nonresidential care of children as defined under applicable state licensing requirements for the facility. Such facilities include, but are not limited to, infant centers, preschools, extended day care facilities, or school-age child-care centers as defined in this title. 18. Commercial cannabis activity. Any location providing for the cultivation, possession, manufacture, distribution, processing, storing, laboratory testing, packaging, labeling, transportation, delivery or sale of cannabis and cannabis product for medical, non-medical, or any other purpose and includes the activities of any business licensed by the state or other government entity under Division 10 of the California Business and Professions Code, or any provision of state law that regulates the licensing of cannabis businesses. Commercial cannabis activity does not include the cultivation, possession, storage, manufacturing, or transportation of cannabis by a qualified patient for his or her personal medical use so long as the qualified patient does not provide, donate, sell or distribute cannabis to any other person. Commercial cannabis activity also does not include the cultivation, possession, storage, manufacturing, transportation, donation or provision of cannabis by a primary caregiver, exclusively for the personal medical purposes of no more than five specified qualified patients for whom he or she is the primary caregiver, but who does not receive remuneration for these activities except for compensation in full compliance with California Health and Safety Code section 11362.765. 19. Consignment store. A retail store where goods are placed on consignment, which is the act of placing goods in the hands of another, while still retaining ownership, until the goods are sold. 20. Convenience store. An easy access retail store of 5,000 square feet or less in gross floor area, which carries a range of merchandise oriented to convenience and travelers' shopping needs. These stores may be part of a service station or an independent facility. 21. Crematory services. An establishment providing services involving the care, preparation, and disposition of human and/or animal remains by means of cremation. Uses typically include, but are not limited to, crematories and crematories with embalming services. 22. Drive-in and drive-through sales and service. A use where a customer is permitted or encouraged, either by the design of physical facilities or by the service and/or packaging procedures offered, to be served while remaining seated within an automobile including, but not limited to, drive-through food, financial services, and automatic car washes. 23. Equipment sales and rental. Service establishments with outdoor storage/rental yards, which may offer a wide variety of materials and equipment for rental (e.g., construction equipment). 24. Feed and tack store. A retail store selling animal food and equestrian supplies. 25. Furniture, furnishing, and appliance store. A store engaged primarily in selling the following products and related services, including incidental repair services: draperies, floor coverings, furniture, glass and chinaware, home appliances, home furnishings, home sound systems, interior decorating materials and services, large musical instruments, lawn furniture, movable spas and hot tubs, office furniture, other household electrical and gas appliances, outdoor furniture, refrigerators, stoves, and televisions. 48 Page 280 26. Garden center/plant nursery. Establishments providing for the cultivation and sale of ornamental trees, shrubs, and plants, including the sale of garden and landscape materials (packaged and/or bulk sale of unpackaged materials) and equipment. 27. Grocery store/supermarket. A retail business where the majority of the floor area open to the public is occupied by food products packaged for preparation and consumption away from the site of the store. Such uses may include up to ten percent of floor area for alcohol sales. These full-service businesses do not typically have limited hours of operation. 28. Gun sales. A business whose primary use is the sale of firearms, ammunition and related materials. 29. Home improvement supply store. An establishment (retail or wholesale) that sells kitchen, bath, carpeting, and other home-oriented supplies. Other retail uses are permitted if accessory to the primary use. These uses may include an expansive showroom. This use classification is a subcategory of the larger building materials stores and yards use classification and may be combined with or separate from such uses. 30. Hookah shop. Any facility or location whose business operation includes as an outdoor accessory use the smoking of tobacco or other substances through one or more pipes (commonly known as a hookah, waterpipe, shisha, or narghile)designed with a tube passing through an urn of water that cools the smoke as it is drawn through it, including but not limited to establishments known variously as hookah bars, hookah lounges, or hookah cafes. 31. Hotel. A facility with guest rooms or suites rented to the general public for transient lodging (less than 30 days). Hotels provide access to most guest rooms from an interior walkway and typically include a variety of services in addition to lodging, for example, restaurants, meeting facilities, personal services, etc. A hotel also includes accessory guest facilities such as swimming pools, tennis courts, indoor athletic facilities, accessory retail uses, etc. 32. Internet cafe. A cafe whose customers sit at computer terminals or bring portable computers and log on to the Internet while they eat and drink. 33. Kennel, commercial.A facility that provides boarding of animals as the primary use of the facility. May also include daytime boarding and activity for animals (e.g., "doggie day-care") and ancillary grooming facilities. Also see Animal sales and grooming. 34. Liquorstore. A retail establishment which has 50% or more of the shelving or gross floor area devoted to the public display and sale of alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption. 35. Maintenance and repair, small equipment. Establishments providing on-site repair and accessory sales of supplies for appliances, office machines, home electronic/mechanical equipment, bicycles, tools, or garden equipment, conducted entirely within an enclosed building. Does not include maintenance and repair of vehicles. 36. Massage establishment. Any establishment where customers can receive a massage either as a primary or accessory function and where all massage therapists and practitioners are certified by the California Massage Therapy Council. 37. Medical services, extended care. Residential facilities providing nursing and health-related care as a primary use with inpatient beds, such as board and care homes, convalescent and rest homes, extended care facilities, and skilled nursing facilities. Long- term personal care facilities that do not emphasize medical treatment are included under Residential care home. 49 Page 281 38. Medical services, general. Facility primarily engaged in providing outpatient medical, mental health, surgical, and other personal health services, but which is separate from hospitals, including medical and dental laboratories, medical, dental, and psychiatric offices, outpatient care facilities, and other allied health services. Counseling services by other than medical doctors or psychiatrists are included under Office, business and professional. 39. Medical services, hospitals. Hospitals and similar facilities engaged primarily in providing diagnostic services and extensive medical treatment, including surgical and other hospital services. These establishments have an organized medical staff, inpatient beds, and equipment and facilities to provide complete health care. May include on-site accessory clinics and laboratories, accessory retail uses (see the separate definition of "retail, accessory"), and emergency heliports. 40. Mobile hot food truck. Any vehicle, as defined in Vehicle Code section 670, which is equipped and used for retail sales of prepared prepackaged or unprepared unpackaged food or foodstuffs of any kind. For the purposes of this section, a mobile food vehicle shall also include any trailer or wagon equipped and used as described in this paragraph and pulled by a vehicle. 41. Mortuary/funeral home. A funeral home and parlor, where the deceased are prepared for burial or cremation and funeral services may be conducted. This use does not include crematorium, which is a separate use classification. 42. Office, accessory. An office that is incidental and accessory to another business or sales activity that is the primary use (part of the same tenant space or integrated development). The qualification criteria for this definition is that the floor area of the accessory office use shall not exceed 50% of the total net habitable or leasable floor area of the tenant space for a single-use development or the combined floor area of an integrated development for a mixed-use project. 43. Office, business and professional. This use listing includes offices of administrative businesses providing direct services to consumers (e.g., insurance companies, utility companies), government agency and service facilities (e.g., post office, civic center), professional offices (e.g., accounting, attorneys, public relations), and offices engaged in the production of intellectual property (e.g., advertising, architecture, computer programming). This use does not include medical offices (see Medical services, general); temporary offices, or offices that are incidental and accessory to another business or sales activity that is the primary use (see Office, accessory). Outdoor storage of materials is prohibited. 44. Pawnshop. Any room, store, building, or other place in which the business of pawn brokering, or the business of lending money upon personal property, pawns, or pledges, or the business of purchasing articles from vendors or their assignees at prices agreed upon at or before the time of such purchase, is engaged in, carried on, or conducted. 45. Personal services. Establishments providing nonmedical services as a primary use, including, but not limited to, barber and beauty shops (including permanent makeup), weight loss clinics, day spas, spiritualist reading or astrology forecasting, clothing rental, dry cleaning pickup stores with limited equipment, home electronics and small appliance repair, laundromats (self-service laundries), shoe repair shops, and tailors. These uses may also include accessory retail sales of products related to the services provided. This use classification does not include massage or tattoo establishments, which are separately classified herein. 50 Page 282 46. Restaurant. A retail business selling food and beverages prepared and/or served on the site, for on- or off-premises consumption. Includes eating establishments where customers are served from a walk-up ordering counter for either on- or off-premises consumption and establishments where most customers are served food at tables for on- premises consumption but may include providing food for take-out. Also includes coffee houses and accessory cafeterias as part of office and industrial uses. Restaurants are divided into three categories as follows: a. Restaurant, no liquor service. Restaurants that do not serve liquor, including fast food establishments. b. Restaurant, beer and wine. Restaurants with liquor services limited to beer and wine for on-site consumption. May also include the brewing of beer as part of a brewpub or micro-brewery. c. Restaurant, full liquor service. Restaurants with a full range of liquor service, including beer, wine, and distilled spirits, all for on-site consumption. 47. Retail, accessory. The retail sales of various products and services (including food service) in a subtenant store, space, or other clearly defined/dedicated area that is located within a building occupied by a primary tenant such as a health care facility, hotel, office building, or department store, supermarket, or warehouse store. These uses include, but are not limited to: a. Pharmacies, gift shops, and food services within a health care facility; b. Travel services, convenience stores, and food services within a hotel; c. Food services within an office building; and d. Food services and banking within a department store, supermarket, or warehouse store. The floor area of the subtenant store/unit, space, or other clearly defined/dedicated area occupied by the retail, accessory use shall not exceed 25% of the gross floor area of the primary tenant. 48. Retail, general. Stores and shops selling single and multiple lines of merchandise. These stores and lines of merchandise include, but are not limited to, bakeries (all production in support of on-site sales), clothing and accessories, collectibles, department stores, drug and discount stores, dry goods, fabrics and sewing supplies, florists and houseplant stores (indoor sales, only; outdoor sales are plant nurseries and included in the definition of"garden center/plant nursery"), general stores, gift shops, hardware, hobby materials, musical instruments, parts and accessories, newsstands, pet supplies specialty shops, sporting goods and equipment, stationery, and variety stores. 49. Retail, warehouse club. Retail stores that emphasize the packaging and sale of products in large quantities or volumes, some at discounted prices. Sites and buildings are usually large and industrial in character. Patrons may be required to pay membership fees. 50. Secondhand dealer. Any business where the primary or ancillary use includes buying, selling, trading, accepting for sale on consignment, accepting for auctioning, or auctioning secondhand tangible personal property such as "cash for gold." This use classification does not include a "coin dealer" or participants at gun shows or events, pawnshops or secondhand stores. 51. Shooting range. An establishment in which the primary use is an enclosed firing range with targets for rifle or handgun practice, training, or both. The establishment may include an ancillary retail space for a business that is engaged in the sale, transfer, 51 Page 283 exchange, leasing or vending of firearms, ammunition and/or related materials. The ancillary retail component may not exceed 25% of the gross floor area and may not engage in businesses related to the operation of pawnshops, secondhand stores or thrift stores as defined in this title. 52. Smoke shop. An establishment that either devotes more than 15% of its total floor area to smoking, drug, and/or tobacco paraphernalia or devotes more than a two-foot by four-foot(two feet in depth maximum)section of shelf space for display for sale of smoking, drug, and/or tobacco paraphernalia. 53. Specialty food store. A store selling specialty food ingredients, which typically preserve, emulsify, color, help process, and in some cases add an extra health dimension to produced food. 54. Tattoo shop. Any establishment that engages in the business of tattooing and/or branding human beings. 55. Thrift store. A retail establishment selling secondhand goods donated by members of the public. 56. Veterinary facility. Veterinary facility that is primarily enclosed, containing only enough cage arrangements as necessary to provide services for domestic and exotic animals requiring acute medical or surgical care with accessory outdoor use that provides long-term medical care. Grooming and boarding of animals is allowed only if accessory to the facility use. F. Automobile and vehicle uses. 1. Auto and vehicle sales and rental. Retail establishments selling and/or renting automobiles, trucks, and vans. Includes the sales and rental of mobile homes, recreational vehicles, and boats. May also include repair shops and the sales of parts and accessories, incidental to vehicle dealerships. Does not include the sale of auto parts/accessories separate from a vehicle dealership (see Auto parts sales), bicycle and moped sales (see Retail, general), tire recapping establishments (see Vehicle services, major), businesses dealing exclusively in used parts (see Recycling facility, scrap and dismantling), or service station, all of which are separately defined. 2. Auto and vehicle sales, autobroker. Establishments providing the service of arranging, negotiating, assisting or effectuating, for a fee or compensation, the purchase of a new or used vehicle, not owned by the broker for a person(s). This use, consistent with the licensing guidelines from the California Department of Motor Vehicles does not allow for the storage or display of vehicles on site. 3. Auto and vehicle sales, wholesale. Wholesale establishments selling new and used vehicles to licensed commercial auto dealers. This use, consistent with the licensing guidelines from the California Department of Motor Vehicles does not allow for the storage or display of vehicles on site. 4. Auto and vehicle storage. Facilities for the storage of operative and inoperative vehicles for limited periods of time. Includes, but is not limited to, storage of parking tow- aways, impound yards,fleet yards and storage lots for automobiles(excluding recreational vehicles), trucks, and buses. Does not include retail sales (see Auto and vehicle sales, wholesale). 5. Auto parts sales. Stores that sell new automobile parts, tires, and accessories. May also include minor parts installation (see Vehicle services). Does not include tire recapping establishments, which are found under Vehicle services, major, or businesses 52 Page 284 dealing exclusively in used parts, which are included under Auto and vehicle sales, wholesale. 6. Car washing and detailing. Permanent, drive-through, self-service, and/or attended car washing establishments, including fully mechanized facilities. May include detailing services. Temporary car washes (e.g., fundraising activities generally conducted at a service station or other automotive-related business, where volunteers wash vehicles by hand and the duration of the event is limited to one day) are not part of this use classification. 7. Recreational vehicle storage. Facilities for the storage of recreational vehicles for limited periods of time. 8. Service station. A retail business selling gasoline or other motor vehicle fuels. May include a convenience store. Vehicle services which are incidental to fuel services are included under Vehicle services, minor. 9. Vehicle services, major. The repair, alteration, restoration, towing, painting, or finishing of automobiles, trucks, recreational vehicles, boats, and other vehicles as a primary use, including the incidental wholesale and retail sale of vehicle parts as an accessory use. This use includes major engine and/or transmission repair and bodywork- repair facilities dealing with entire vehicles; such establishments typically provide towing, collision repair, other bodywork, and painting services and may also include tire recapping establishments. 10. Vehicle services, minor. Minor facilities specialize in limited aspects of repair and maintenance (e.g., muffler and radiator shops, quick-lube, smog check, and tires). Does not include repair shops that are part of a vehicle dealership on the same site (see Auto and vehicle sales) or automobile dismantling yards, which are included under Recycling facility, scrap and dismantling. G. Industrial, manufacturing, and processing uses. 1. Commercial (secondary/accessory)—Industrial. On-site, retail sales of products within an industrial building (the subject building) for walk-in customers and/or will call customers who order products via the internet/telephone or at a separate location such as a retail store. This use is secondary/accessory to the primary industrial use(s) that occur on-site and/or within the subject building, such as manufacturing, wholesale, storage, and distribution. The products available for retail sale shall be limited to products that are manufactured on-site or within the subject building, that are primarily sold on a wholesale basis, and/or are stored in, and/or distributed from, the subject building. Such products include, but are not limited to: a. Personal/home electronic equipment and accessories; b. Home improvement materials (tile,flooring, carpet, wall covering, etc.); and C. Automotive accessories (wheels, tires, engine components, etc.). This classification allows, but does not require, physical retail and/or display/showroom space within the subject building. If such space is proposed/required, then the floor area used for that purpose shall only occupy the floor area that was originally designated for the office of the subject building, or 25 percent of the gross floor area of the subject building, whichever is less, and shall be subject to the parking requirements for retail uses as described in Table 17.64.050-1 — Parking Requirements by Land Use. Use of, and/or expansion into, areas of the building previously designated for storage, warehousing, or manufacturing is only permitted if it is demonstrated that the number of parking stalls that exist on-site for the overall subject building complies with the parking requirements 53 Page 285 described in Table 17.64.050-1. A use not permitted to operate as a principal use, such as a marijuana dispensary, is not permitted within this land use classification. A use that requires a conditional use permit, entertainment permit, or adult entertainment permit in order to operate as a principal use is subject to the same permitting requirements within this land use classification. 2. Commercial (re-purposing)—Industrial. A set of multiple commercial uses operating together as subtenants in a building that was originally designed for a single industrial tenant such as a warehouse, or a single commercial tenant such as a department store. This land use classification applies only to commercial uses that, individually, could not utilize the entire floor space of the subject building and, therefore, would not operate as the sole, primary tenant of the building. This classification does not apply to single tenants/uses that could utilize the entire floor space of the subject building. Characteristics of this land use classification include, but are not limited to: a. An open floor plan with tenant demising walls that do not extend to the ceiling; b. Exterior wall signs that only provide identification of the subject building; C. Common, non-exclusive floor area within the interior of the building, and the exterior in the vicinity of the building, for use by the customers of all tenants; d. Tenant spaces with no direct access to the exterior of the building; and e. Shared parking. All proposals for re-purposing buildings shall require the submittal of a conditional use permit for review and approval by the planning director, and the submittal of a parking study prepared by a qualified traffic/parking engineer for review and acceptance by the director of engineering services/city engineer and planning director. With the exception of specific uses identified in Table 17.30.030-1, a use that is not permitted to operate as a principal use, such as a marijuana dispensary, is not permitted within this land use classification. A use that requires a conditional use permit, entertainment permit, or adult entertainment permit in order to operate as a principal use is subject to the same permitting requirements within this land use classification. 3. E-Commerce Distribution. Activities that involve the buying, selling, and distribution of products and associated services over the internet or through mobile applications. Products are transported using freight trucks and stored in warehouses or fulfillment centers to then be distributed to designated shipping locations using delivery trucks. Includes the following categories of e-commerce distribution: a. Distribution/Fulfillment Center. A fulfillment center or similar use's primary purpose is storage and distribution (non-sort) of e-commerce products to consumers or end-users, either directly or through a parcel hub. These facilities shall have a minimum ceiling height of 24 feet. 1) Distribution/Fulfillment Center, Large. A distribution/fulfillment center with a minimum gross floor area over 50,000 square feet. 2) Distribution/Fulfillment Center, Small. A distribution/fulfillment center with 50,000 square feet or less in gross floor area. b. Parcel Sorting Facilities. An establishment for sorting and/or re-distribution of parcels or products from distribution/fulfillment centers to a parcel hub via intramodal transit truck-to-truck. C. Parcel Hub. A"last mile"facility or similar establishment for the processing and/or re-distribution of parcels or products. A parcel hub's primary function is 54 Page 286 moving a shipment from one mode of transport to another for delivery directly to consumers or end-users. 1) Parcel Hub, Large. A parcel hub facility with a minimum gross floor area over 130,000 square feet. 2) Parcel Hub, Small. A parcel hub facility with less than 130,000 square feet in gross floor area. 4. Food processing/manufacturing. Activities include methods of turning fresh foods into food products through various processes including, for example, washing, chopping, pasteurizing, freezing, fermenting, packaging, and cooking. 5. Lumber Yard. Activities include the storage, sale, and display of lumber, wood, and building construction products. Lumber and wood products may be stored outside or within a structure. On-site milling and planing of wood is prohibited. 6. Maker Space. Activities typically include, but are not limited to on-site, small-scale production of tangible goods including assembly of completely hand-fabricated parts or hand-fabrication of custom or craft goods not for mass production. Examples of maker space uses include ceramic studios, fabrics, inlays, needlework, weaving, leatherwork woodwork, 3D printing, laser cutting, local food and beverage production, metal or glass work, candle making, or custom jewelry. Goods are predominantly manufactured and fabricated involving only the use of hand tools or domestic-scaled mechanical equipment and kilns not exceeding 20 square feet in size. Retail sales are permitted on site. Accessory retail areas cannot exceed 30 percent of the maker space floor area. 7. Manufacturing, custom. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, manufacturing, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment, or fabrication of custom- made products. These types of business establishments do not utilize raw materials for their finished products, but rather may utilize semi-finished type of manufactured materials for their custom made-to-order products. The finished products from these business establishments are ready for use or consumption and may include on-site wholesale and retail of the goods produced. Examples of custom manufacturing uses include, but are not limited to household furniture, apparel products, electrical instruments signs and advertising displays, and assembly of bicycle parts. The uses do not produce odors, noise, vibration, or particulates that would adversely affect uses in the same structure or on a same site. Where 24-hour on-site surveillance is necessary, a caretaker's residence may be permitted when approved by a minor use permit. 8. Manufacturing, Green Technology. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, manufacturing, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment, or fabrication of finished made-to-order products utilizing semi-finished manufactured materials rather than raw materials. Examples of green technology manufacturing uses include, but are not limited to solar panels, wind turbines, geothermal system components, and batteries for electric vehicles/bicycles. The uses do not typically produce odors, noise, vibration, or particulates that would adversely affect uses in the same structure or on a same site. Where 24-hour on-site surveillance is necessary, a caretaker's residence may be permitted with a minor use permit. 9. Manufacturing, light. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, labor- intensive manufacturing, assembly, fabrication, or repair processes which do not involve large container truck traffic or the transport of large-scale bulky products but may include limited rail traffic. The new product may be finished in that it is ready for use or consumption or it may be semi-finished to become a component for further assembly and packaging. These types of business establishments are customarily directed to the 55 Page 287 wholesale market, inter-plant transfer, rather than direct sale to the consumer. Such uses may include, but are not limited to, electronic microchip assembly; printing, publishing, and allied industries; food processing and manufacturing; candy and other confectionery products; bottled or canned soft drinks and carbonated water; apparel and other finished products; paperboard containers and boxes; drugs; medical equipment; and small fabricated metal products such as hand tools, general hardware, architectural, and ornamental metal work and toys, amusement, sports, and athletics goods. The activities do not produce odors, noise, vibration, hazardous waste materials, or particulates that would adversely affect other uses in the structure or on the same site. Where 24-hour on- site surveillance is necessary, a caretaker's residence may be permitted when approved by a minor use permit. a. Manufacturing, Light—Large. A light manufacturing facility with a minimum gross floor area over 50,000 square feet b. Manufacturing, Light — Small. A light manufacturing facility with 50,000 square feet or less in gross floor area. 11. Microbrewery. A small-scale brewery operation dedicated to the production of specialty beers and producing less than 15,000 barrels (465,000 U.S. gallons) per year. Ancillary on-site tasting and/or retail sales of beers produced on-site for off-site consumption may be permitted when approved by a conditional use permit. 12. Printing and publishing. Establishments engaged in printing by letterpress, lithography, gravure, screen, offset, or electrostatic (xerographic) copying, and other establishments serving the printing trade including bookbinding, typesetting, engraving, photoengraving, and electrotyping. This use also includes establishments that publish newspapers, books, and periodicals, and establishments manufacturing business forms and binding devices. Does not include "quick printing" services or desktop publishing which are included in "business support services." 13. Recycling facility, collection. A recycling facility used for the acceptance by donation, redemption, or purchase of recyclable materials from the public that does not occupy more than 500 square feet. This classification may include a mobile unit, kiosk- type units that may include permanent structures, and unattended containers placed for the donation of recyclable materials. Also includes so-called "reverse vending machines," an automated mechanical device that accepts one or more types of empty beverage containers including, but not limited to, aluminum cans, glass bottles, and plastic bottles, and issues a cash refund or a redeemable credit slip with value of not less than the container's redemption value as determined by the state. 14. Recycling facility, processing. A recycling facility located in a building or enclosed space and used for the collection and processing of recyclable materials. Processing means the preparation of material for efficient shipment or to an end-user's specifications by such means as baling, briquetting, compacting, flattening, grinding, crushing, mechanical sorting, shredding, cleaning, and remanufactu ring. Collection of recycling materials as the sole activity is included in the definition of Recycling facility, collection. 16. Research and development. Indoor facilities for scientific research, and the design, development, and testing of electrical, electronic, magnetic, optical, and mechanical components in advance of product manufacturing, that is not associated with a manufacturing facility on the same site. Includes, but is not limited to, chemical, medical, and biotechnology research and development. Does not include computer software companies (see Office, business and professional), soils and other materials testing laboratories (see Business support services). 56 Page 288 17. Storage, personal storage facility. A structure or group of structures containing generally small, individual, compartmentalized stalls or lockers rented as individual storage spaces and characterized by low parking demand. 18. Storage warehouse. Facility for the storage of furniture, household goods, or other commercial goods of any nature. Includes cold storage. Does not include warehouse, storage, or mini-storage facilities offered for rent or lease to the general public (see Storage, personal storage facility) or warehouse facilities in which the primary purpose of storage is for wholesaling and distribution (see Wholesale, storage and distribution (medium and light)). 21. Wholesale, storage, and distribution, light. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, wholesaling, storage, and warehousing services and storage and wholesale to retailers from the premises of finished goods and food products. Activities under this classification shall be conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy 50,000 square feet or less of building space. Retail sales from the premises may occur when approved by a conditional use permit. 22. Wholesale, storage, and distribution, medium. Activities typically include, but are not limited to, wholesale, storage, and warehousing services; moving and storage services; storage and wholesaling to retailers from the premises of finished goods and food products; and distribution facilities for large-scale retail firms. Activities under this classification shall be conducted in enclosed buildings and occupy greater than 50,000 square feet of building space. Included are multi-tenant or speculative buildings with over 50,000 square feet of warehouse space. 23. Work/Live. A building or spaces within a building used jointly for commercial and residential purposes where the residential use of the space is secondary or accessory to the primary use as a place of work. Typical types of work include small-scale, custom manufacturing of goods with limited on-site sales. The dedicated work area must be at least twice the size of the residential area with no more than two inhabitants living on the premises. Work/Live uses are typically found in industrial zones and have a maximum gross floor area of 30,000 square feet. 57 Page 289 EXHIBIT H Amendments to Chapter 17.36 (Development Standards by Base Zoning District) Amended Section: 17.36.040 Development standards for industrial districts. 17.36.040 Development standards for industrial districts. A. Purpose and applicability. The purpose of this section is to establish minimum development standards that are unique to development projects within the Industrial Zoning Districts. Development standards in this section apply to all land designated on the zoning map within an Industrial Zoning District. B. Industrial districts. As identified in chapter 17.26 (Establishment of Zoning Districts), the city includes three Industrial Zoning Districts: Industrial Park (IP), Neo-Industrial (NI), and Industrial Employment (IE). C. Industrial site development standards. General site development standards for Industrial Zoning Districts are listed in Table 17.36.040-1 (Development Standards for Industrial Zoning Districts). These development standards supplement the development standards in article IV(Site Development Provisions) that apply to all zoning districts (e.g., parking, signs, landscaping, and lighting). TABLE 17.36.040-1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Development Standard/Zoning IP NI IE District Lot area (minimum)(') 0.5 ac 0.5 ac 5 ac or 2 ac (2) Lot width (minimum) (3) 100 ft 100 ft 100 ft Min. Setback (ft.) (4) Front yard (and Street Side Yard) See Table 17.36.040-2 Major Arterial and Special 45 ft 45 ft 45 ft Boulevard Secondary 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft Local/Collector 25 ft 25 ft 25 ft Interior Side yard 5 ft (5) 5 ft(5) 5 ft(5) Rear yard O ft (5) 0 ft (5) O ft (5) Distance Between Buildings Primary buildings Must meet current building code requirements Accessory buildings Must meet current building code requirements Max. Building Height(ft.) Primary buildings(7) 35 feet at the front setback line (6) 45 ft 45 ft 65 ft Accessory buildings - Detached 25 ft 25 ft 25 ft Accessory buildings — Attached -- 35 ft 35 ft Maker Space Floor Area Ratio (Ratio of building floor area to lot square footage) Floor area ratio 0.4-0.6 (8) 0.4-0.6 (9) 0.4-0.6 (9) 58 Page 290 Max. Building Footprint(sq. ft.) Primary Building (10) -- 200,000 450,000 Accessory Building - Detached -- 5,000 10,000 Accessory Building —Attached Maker 30,000 30,000 Space Min. Open Space (minimum percentage of open space per parcel or project) Open space/landscape area 15% 10% 100 (2)/5% Performance standards (see chapter A A C/B (2) 17.66) Table notes: (1) Condominium lots. Condominium lots and lots within an approved master planned development are exempt from required minimum parcel size and dimension requirements. (2) The following applies within 1,000 feet of Arrow Route:minimum 2-acre lot area; 10%minimum landscape area;and the"B"level performance standards(chapter 17.66). (3) Setbacks shall be the minimum required under the city's currently adopted building code. (4) Setback shall be increased to 45 feet when abutting a residential property line or adjacent to Interstate 15. e See Table 17.36.040-2 for parcels abutting special boulevards as indicated in Figure 17.36.040-1 (Special Streetscape Requirements). s Buildings used for industrial uses that exceed 35 feet in height shall be set back an additional one foot from the front setback line for each one foot of building height up to a maximum setback of 70 feet.The portion of the building used for offices are not subject to this requirement. (7) Heights over 75 feet may be permitted with a conditional use permit. s For hotels and motels,the maximum floor area ratio is 1.0(100 percent). s Parking structures in the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE)Zoning Districts are exempt from floor area ratio requirements. (10) Conditional use permit approval by the city council is required for all industrial buildings larger than 75,000 square feet in gross floor area.See Section 17.20.060(Conditional use permit).A master plan is required for all industrial buildings larger than 450,000 square feet in gross floor area. D. Other miscellaneous industrial development standards. 1. Special streetscape. Future development and redevelopment within industrial areas shall be consistent with the special streetscape standards listed in Table 17.36.040- 2 (Streetscape Setback Requirements) and as depicted in Figure 17.36.040-1 (Special Streetscape Requirements). TABLE 17.36.040-2 STREETSCAPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS Street Type Average Depth of Building Setback(2,3, Parkin Setback�5� Landscape(1,2) 4,6) g Major Arterial, Special 45 ft 45 ft 25 ft Boulevard, and Interstate 15 Secondary 35 ft 35 ft 20 ft Local/Collector 25 ft 25 ft 15 ft Table notes: (1) The average depth shall be uninterrupted from the face of curb, except for sidewalks, pedestrian hardscape, plazas and courtyards,and monument signs. (2) Parcels less than 225 feet in depth from the ultimate curb face on special boulevards are not required to provide an average depth of landscaping or building setback greater than 25 feet or 20%the depth of the property,whichever is greater. (3) As determined from the face of curb. (4) Average depth of landscaping must still be provided. 59 Page 291 (5) Street frontage walls and fences over 3 feet in height are subject to building setbacks. (6) Setbacks may be increased based on building height.See Table 17.36.040-1. 2. Accessory maker spaces. Accessory maker spaces are required in or adjacent to all new buildings that exceed 200,000 square feet in gross floor area in the Neo-Industrial (NI)_and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts, subject to the following standards: a. A minimum gross floor area of 3,000 sq. ft. and a maximum gross floor area of 30,000 square feet. b. Accessory maker spaces shall face main arterial roads adjacent to the site. C. Maker space building frontages shall include either an at-grade loading area or an above-grade loading area on a terraced entry. FIGURE 17.36.040-1 SPECIAL STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS 60 Page 292 Streetscape Setback Requirements for Major Arterials and Special Boulevards *s'minimurn 45'xvemnoepm 25'minimum Building Setback of Landscaping F Parking Setback StveeLaape Setback Requirements for Secondary Streets srm/mmvm ss'«",raneoepm u«mimmum Building Setback F of Landscaping F Parking Setback Steetscape Setback Requirements for Local Streets Fzs'mm/mum 25'xve,ageoepm 1 S'mm/mvm Building Setback F of Landscaping F Parking Setback 3. Special building height standards. Building height limits shall not exceed the height limits prescribed in the LA/Ontario International Airport Compatibility Plan. For areas within the High Terrain Zone, the building height limit nho|| be 70 feet. Buildings or structures greater than 70 feet in height within the High Terrain Zone are subject to the ONT-|AC Project Notification Process and require a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)exception (Obstruction Evaluation - Form 7480). In cases where the LA/Ontario International Airport Compatibility Plan permits heights greater than 70 feet, building height limits aho|| be limited to maximum of height of 75 feet, unless a conditional use permit is granted permitting heights greater than 75 feet. 61 Page2Q3 4. Special height exceptions for ancillary equipment. Within the Industrial Employment(IE)Zoning District, height exceptions may be granted for ancillary equipment with special design and landscape considerations as follows: a. Maximum 90 feet with approval of a minor exception with the additional findings that the ancillary equipment is designed in a manner that integrates well within the subject site and existing and/or proposed landscaping will buffer the views of ancillary equipment from designated view corridors. b. Maximum 120 feet with approval of a conditional use permit with the additional findings that the ancillary equipment is designed in a manner that integrates well within the subject site and existing and/or proposed landscaping will buffer the views of ancillary equipment from designated view corridors. 5. Interim uses. Certain industrial properties may be vacant without any immediate plans for site development. In these instances, the properties may be utilized for a defined list of interim uses for a limited time period as specified below. The uses permitted within this section are supplemental to the uses listed in chapter 17.30 (Allowed Land Uses by Base Zoning District). a. Permitted interim uses include agricultural crops, roadside stands, farmers market, community garden, and private parks and picnic areas. b. Minor use permit required. Prior to the establishment of an interim use, a minor use permit shall be approved. C. Time period. The maximum time period for an interim use is five years. d. Conditions. At a minimum, the conditions should include an agreement between the city and the applicant stipulating timing, installation of permanent improvements and buildings, and/or restoration of the site to its original condition. At the end of five years, the use shall be removed or the site developed in accordance with the full development regulations of any adopted plan. 6. Interim use standards. The following standards shall apply in all industrial areas for interim uses: a. The minimum streetscape and parking setback requirement shall be contiguous with the ultimate right-of-way line, but in no case less than ten feet. b. No minimum landscape coverage requirements are required, except where necessary for screening purposes as determined by the planning director. C. All parking and storage areas shall be paved with slag, crushed aggregate, asphaltic concrete, concrete, or similar materials. The location, number, and design of the parking and storage areas shall be in accordance with Code requirements. d. All parking and storage areas, and other interim uses which require screening as determined by the planning director, shall be screened from public view through a combination of landscaping and fencing. Fencing may include a six-foot chain-link fence with slats, masonry or concrete, wood, or decorative metal. Screening must be maintained in good condition at all times. e. Landscaping required for screening purposes shall include 15-gallon trees and five-gallon shrubs to provide a dense landscape buffer to afford maximum screening from the public view, satisfactory to the planning director. 7. Rail service. If rail service is needed for properties which adjoin existing or proposed lead or spur lines, the following rail service access standards, unless modified 62 Page 294 by the rail service provider or the public utilities commission, shall apply: Rail crossings and any spur construction must be approved by the rail service provider and the public utilities commission. The following rail service standards, unless modified by the railroad or the public utilities commission, shall apply: a. Minimum easement width for a lead line, single track shall be 32 feet. b. Minimum easement width for a double rail track shall be 41 feet. C. The minimum radius of curvature for a track shall be 180 feet. d. The maximum gradient along spur tracks shall not exceed two percent. e. Dock height shall be no less than 4.5 feet above the top of the spur track. f. Road crossings at grade must be avoided wherever possible. g. Spur trackage is not permitted along any frontage between a building and a public right-of-way and must be confined to the side or rear yard area of the building that the rail spur serves. h. Rail loading areas shall be screened from view from the public right-of-way by a wall that matches the architecture, materials, colors, etc. of the building that the rail spur serves. i. Spur tracks shall not encroach onto/across any required parking stalls. Spur tracks shall not encroach across drive aisles for automobile / heavy truck and/or emergency vehicle access except when it is necessary to connect the main rail line with the rail loading area. j. Lot divisions and building layouts for properties which adjoin existing or proposed lead and spur lines shall be done in a manner to ensure full potential of future rail access and use and should not preclude rail access to other properties adjacent to such rail lines. Subdivisions, which could reduce a property's ability to accommodate potential rail served developments, may not be authorized. k. Building design shall include rail service features to ensure the potential use of available spur lines. I. Finished floor elevations and dock height door or"kick out"wall panels shall be provided in all properties abutting rail lines. M. The above-referenced rail service development standards may be amended or deleted on a site-by-site basis during the development review process. The following must be determined by the planning commission in order to authorize any modification of the rail service standard: i. That the installation of a lead or spur track cannot be accomplished due to physical constraints on or adjacent to the project site; and ii. Other existing or potential rail service properties will not be negatively affected in their ability to accommodate rail service activity as a result of modifications to the standards. 8. Equipment screening. The following screening standards shall apply to equipment such as HVAC units, storage tanks, ducting, etc.: a. All roof, wall, and ground mounted equipment shall be screened and not visible from the public right-of-way within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zoning District. b. Wherever possible, all roof, wall and ground mounted equipment shall be screened and not visible from the public right-of-way within the Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning District. 63 Page 295 C. The visibility of any equipment from the public right-of-way shall be determined by "line-of-sight" and measured from a point that is 6 feet above the finished surface of the centerline of the public right-of-way, e.g. street. d. All screening of roof mounted equipment shall be accomplished with a parapet wall that is consistent and compatible with the architecture, materials, colors, etc. of the building. Where a parapet wall is not possible, then a screen shall be provided to enclose the roof mounted equipment. This enclosure is exempt from the building height requirement established in Table 17.36.040-1 (Development Standards for Industrial Zoning Districts). Where roof mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork projects less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet it shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. 9. Design standards. The following design standards apply to all new developments in the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts: a. Site design standards i. General site design • Site elements such as buildings, parking areas, driveways, sidewalks, and outdoor recreational spaces must be arranged to emphasize the aesthetically pleasing components of the site (e.g., landscaping and the superior architectural design of office building element (refer to b. (Building design standards)) and to screen less attractive elements (e.g., service facilities, loading docks, outdoor storage, equipment areas, and refuse enclosures) through the proper placement and design of buildings, screen walls, and landscaping. • Sites shall have internal sidewalks that connect to sidewalks along public streets to create pedestrian connections. • Loading dock areas shall be located and designed so that they do not face toward (and are not visible from) any adjacent public right- of-way such as a street. These areas shall be screened with walls or fences and landscaped (Insert cross reference to applicable landscaping/screening sections). • All refuse, storage, and equipment areas placed outside of a building shall be screened from adjacent public rights-of-way and uses. ii. Block Network Parameters for Public Streets. • Intersection spacing along arterial edges shall be between 1/8 mile and '/4 mile with at least one mid-block intersection between intersecting arterials and rail, flood control, utility or freeway corridors. • Intersection spacing inside arterial/arterial blocks bounded by arterials shall be a minimum of 200 feet and a maximum of 1,320 feet. • Buildings greater than 400,000 sq. ft. in size shall have public streets on at least 3 sides. • A minimum of 1 public street shall run parallel with and within 500 feet of rail (excluding spurs), flood control, utility, or freeway 64 Page 296 corridors. The parallel street shall run through the block. Street crossings at intersecting corridors shall be established on a case- by-case basis based on feasibility and needs by the City Engineer. • Intersections along arterials shall be aligned with existing/proposed intersections on the opposite side of the arterial where possible and meet minimum design standards for offsets or clearance from adjacent corridors as required by the City Engineer. • Two distinct points of connection shall be provided through an internal block network to the arterial street network for every industrial parcel. Parking location and design • Surface parking shall be located to the side or to the rear of principle buildings to the greatest extent feasible. • Surface parking stalls for employees and guests may incorporate shade structures that are capable of supporting solar/photovoltaic array systems with a minimum clearance height of 12 feet. A minimum of 50 percent of the required parking stalls shall include these shade structures for this purpose. • The shade structures shall not encroach into the required access lanes. • The applicable tree and landscaping standards are not required in the sections of the parking areas where solar arrays systems are placed. See Section 17.56.060.N.1.b (Exception for solar collectors). • All new development within the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts requires a Parking management plan, see Section 17.64.070 (Parking management plan). iv. Open space • An outdoor seating/break area is required for every proposed and potential office area of a building • On-site open space areas shall contain an outdoor seating/break area with seating designed to allow a variety of sitting environments. • Outdoor seating areas shall provide shade under a suitable structure and wind protection using landscaping or transparent screening structures. • Outdoor seating areas shall be easily accessed from the lobby or interior break rooms and placed at the corner of the building or along the side of a building facing a public street. • Outdoor seating areas are included within the minimum open space requirement in Table 17.36.040-1 (Development Standards for Industrial Zoning Districts). V. Landscaping, screening, and street trees • All new industrial developments shall adhere to the standards in Chapter 17.56 (Landscaping standards) in addition to the standards 65 Page 297 provided below. In the event of a conflict, the provisions of this section shall apply. • Landscaping shall be provided along the public streets and sidewalks to define the street edge, buffer pedestrians from vehicles, and provide shade. • All new trees planted within the public right-of-way or to screen the front, side or rear of a building, and to screen the building from Interstate 15 shall be a minimum 24-inch box and planted 25 — 30 feet apart. • Trees shall be selected and planted to provide shade for walkways, outdoor seating areas, parking areas etc. and for their ability for filtering particulate matter and other pollutants from the air. • Walls and fences used to provide screening of loading facilities, outdoor trash receptacles, utility equipment, etc. must be solid and designed with materials and finishes that are consistent with and complimentary to the design of the primary buildings. Fences used for security purposes or around parking areas shall consist of wrought iron, tubular steel, or similar material. The use of chain-link is prohibited. Landscape materials as required in accordance with Chapter 17.56 (Landscaping Standards) may compliment the requirements for screening, but landscaping without a screen wall or fence does not meet the minimum screening requirement of this section. • When redevelopment occurs, new public streets as required by the city engineer shall be designed in compliance with the city's Complete Streets policies, public sidewalks along the frontage of the property being developed are required. • All new sidewalks shall be a minimum of 6 feet or wider as designated by the city engineer based on existing or planned adjacent land uses to ensure compliance with the city's Complete Streets policies, separated from the curb by a planted parkway, and installed parallel to the property line or curb. Meandering sidewalks along any frontage are prohibited. b. Building design standards i. Building orientation and placement. • Buildings shall have articulated and transparent frontages along a minimum of 50 feet on both sides of the building that define the corner. • Office and administration buildings associated with an industrial use shall be placed at the corner of a building at the intersection of two public streets and/or a main arterial road. The building corner shall have a prominent, vertical structural element (e.g. a tower) that projects no more than 15 feet above the maximum allowable height of the building and that occupies a maximum of 5 percent of the building roof area. In addition, raised parapets with enhanced decorative treatment such as cornices or crenellations are permitted not to exceed 8 feet above the maximum allowable height 66 Page 298 of the building. If an office or administration building is located at the intersection of two arterial streets the height of the tower or raised parapets may be increased an additional 25 percent. • The primary entrance to accessory maker spaces and an office/administration building must face the corner or an adjacent main arterial road. • Where feasible, equipment, electrical, and service rooms shall be placed within the footprint of the building, i.e. inside the building, or screened so that it is not visible from the public right-of-way. ii. Building facade articulation. • Primary building entries shall be readily identifiable and well- defined using projections, recesses, columns, roof structures, or other design elements. • All elevations of a building's facade shall include modulation and articulation of the wall plane and roof line, proportionate to the height and length of the building. Exceptions to this requirement are the wall planes at the dock areas and the rear elevation of the building. • All elevations of a building's facade must have vertical or horizontal variations in color, texture, material, and ornamentation. • The office component of building facades must contain offset or recessed structural bays, and projecting elements such as colonnades or bay windows. • Shade elements such as canopies, awnings, arcades, and overhangs shall be provided over all windows, and at all pedestrian entry points, along the front elevation, any street-facing elevation, and office portions of the building. • Roofs shall be designed as an integral component of building form, mass, and facade, particularly along the front and office portions of the building. Building form shall be enhanced by sloped or offset roof planes, eave heights, and rooflines. Materials and detailing • The front and office portions of buildings must be constructed of high-quality materials, including, but not limited to, brick, stone, textured cast stone, tinted masonry units, concrete, glass, and metal siding. • The following materials are prohibited along the front and office portions of the building: 1. Unadorned, plain or painted concrete block or panels; 2. Reflective glass; and 3. Vinyl, fiberglass, asphalt, or fiberboard siding. • Where feasible, the industrial/warehousing portion of the building must include a variety of materials and architectural elements to break up the linear planes of these building. Ideally, the building's design and architecture must express the nature of the industrial 67 Page 299 activity within, in keeping with the other requirements of this section and while respecting the functionality of the use within the building. iv. Door and window openings • For office portions of principle buildings, window and door openings must comprise at least 60 percent of the total area of exterior walls facing a public street. • These windows must be clear or translucent to improve visibility, add visual interest, and allow light into interior spaces. V. Lighting • Decorative lighting fixtures shall be provided with a minimum 1-foot candle illumination level above that of surrounding parking lots at vehicle driveways and driveway entry/exits, pedestrian pathways, plazas and courtyards, and other activity areas. • Building and landscape accent up-lighting shall be incorporated into the lighting plan for the development site, with a focus along the front and office portions of the building. • All exterior lighting shall be shielded to prevent glare and light trespass onto adjacent properties and streets. • Lighting systems shall be architecturally compatible with surrounding buildings to express the unique character of the area. 68 Page 300 EXHIBIT I Amendments to Chapter 17.38 (Overlay Zoning Districts and Other Special Planning Areas) New Section: 17.38.080 Large Warehouse Overlay Zoning District. 17.38.080 Large Warehouse Overlay Zoning District A. Purpose. The purpose of the Large Warehouse Overlay Zone is to ensure that large industrial buildings of 450,000 square feet or more are located in areas of the City with adequate public services and infrastructure and away from sensitive receptors who may be impacted by air pollutant emissions, noise, and other impacts generated by the predominant uses in such buildings. B. Applicability. Industrial buildings with gross floor space of 450,000 square feet or more that are developed after the effective date of the ordinance that codified this section shall be located within the Large Warehouse Overlay Zone. The Large Warehouse Overlay Zone applies to property designated on the zoning map by reference letters "LW" after the reference letter(s) identifying the base zoning district. C. Allowed uses. Permitted uses within the Large Warehouse Overlay Zone are those permitted and conditionally permitted uses within the underlying zoning district. D. Development standards. Development in the Large Warehouse Overlay Zone shall comply with the zoning regulations applicable to the underlying zoning district and any master plan applicable to the subject property. A master plan adopted pursuant to chapter 17.22.020 may also be required for the development of an industrial building located within the Large Warehouse Overlay Zone, unless amended by the city council as part of the establishment of the overlay district. 69 Page 301 EXHIBIT J Amendments to Chapter 17.48 (Fences, Walls, and Screening) Amended Sections: 17.48.040 Materials and maintenance. 17.48.050 Requirements by land use type. 17.48.040 Materials and maintenance. A. Fencing, wall, and screen materials. Fences, walls, and screens shall be constructed of attractive, long-lasting materials and architecturally integrated with the building design and with existing fences/walls on the site. The following limitations apply: 1. Fences and gates approved for screening purposes in residential districts shall be solid wood with steel frames, solid vinyl, tubular steel or wrought iron. Where tubular steel wrought iron is used, it shall be backed by solid or perforated metal sheeting painted to match the fence or gate. In new developments, decorative block walls shall be used. 2. Fences and gates approved for screening purposes in industrial or commercial districts shall be metal, tubular steel, or wrought iron (open fencing shall be backed by solid or perforated metal sheeting painted to match the fence or gate). In the Industrial Zoning Districts the requirements for fences, walls, and screening provided in Section 17.36.040.D.9.a.v (Landscaping, screening, and street trees) shall also apply. 3. Chain-link fences and/or gates are not permitted for screening purposes in any zoning district (including the Industrial Zoning Districts), including chain-link when backed with wood or plastic slats, solid plastic sheet, or knitted fabric privacy/wind screening . 4. Alternative materials may be approved by the planning director or planning commission as part of a discretionary entitlement approval. B. Graffiti-resistance. Graffiti-resistant aesthetic surface treatment shall be required for all fences and walls adjacent to a public right-of-way, in a residential zone, or as determined though the site development review process. C. Maintenance. Fences, walls, and screens shall be continuously maintained in an orderly and good condition, at no more than their maximum allowed height. (Code 1980, § 17.48.040; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012; Ord. No. 863 § 4, 2013) 17.48.050 Requirements by land use type. A. Applicable to all land use types. 1. Fencing and walls for pools, spas, and similar features. Swimming pools, spas, and other similar water features shall be enclosed in compliance with building code requirements. 2. Fences, walls, and screening between different land uses. Commercial and industrial uses shall be screened from adjacent residential zoning districts by plant materials and a solid, decorative masonry wall with a minimum height of six feet to screen the commercial use, as approved by the designated approving authority. Openings or pedestrian connections may be required at the discretion of the designated approving authority. A landscaping strip with a minimum width of five feet shall be installed adjacent to a screening wall facing the public street. 70 Page 302 3. Temporary fences. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to prohibit the erection of a temporary fence around construction projects in compliance with the building code and other applicable requirements of this Code. 4. Screening standards for fire district connections and double check devices. All ground-mounted equipment is required to be screened according to the following standards. Option A is preferred. Option C should only be used if the other two options are considered infeasible by the planning director. Additional provisions apply to fire check valves (as noted). a. Option A; block wall screen. i. Required materials are decorative block, finished stucco. or a wall designed to match building architecture. ii. Minimum height is three feet with a maximum height of four feet. iii. Minimum three feet clearance between the equipment and the wall. b. Option B; metal screen with vines and equipment painted green. i. Provide metal screen fence painted dark green. ii. Plant climbing vines along the base of the screen. iii. Minimum three feet clearance between the equipment and the screen. iv. If concrete pad is provided around the base of the equipment, the pad must be a minimum of three feet from the property line to allow installation of landscaping. V. Minimum two feet from the face of the screen and the property line. vi. Paint the equipment dark green or equivalent. C. Option C; landscape screen and equipment painted green. i. This option can only be considered if the equipment can be adequately screened by two rows of five-gallon shrubs. Otherwise only Option A or B may be used. ii. Provide two rows of five-gallon shrubs. iii. Spaced 18 inches on center. iv. Minimum three feet clearance between the equipment and the shrubs in required. V. If a concrete pad is provided around the base of the equipment, the pad must be a minimum of two feet from the property line to allow installation of landscaping. vi. No minimum clearance between the property line and the landscaping is required. d. Additional requirements for fire district check valves. i. Maximum five feet overall from the equipment and the property line. ii Signage shall be provided according to fire district standards. iii. The fire district connection must extend beyond the wall or landscaping and must not obstruct the fire district connection. 71 Page 303 B. Fencing and walls for agricultural land uses. All fences or walls which enclose livestock shall be constructed of an adequate height and shall be designed so as to control and contain such livestock at all times. C. Residential zoning districts. 1. Trail fences and gates shall be kept in good repair at all times, including replacing damaged members and maintaining plumb. This shall not preclude the property owner from replacing the existing trail fence with another fence or wall material. 2. Height. The height of fences in residential district is limited according to the following table. TABLE 17.48.050-1 MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF FENCES AND WALLS IN REQUIRED YARD AREA Location or Minimum Location of Fence/Wall/Screening Setback of Fence Maximum Height (2) Required front yard area 0 ft (2) 3 ft/ 6 ft (3) Required rear and interior side yard area (along 0 ft 6 ft rear and interior property lines) Required street side yard area (along corner 5 ft(z) 6 ft side property lines) At intersections of streets, alleys, and driveways Varies(4) 36 in within the clear visibility triangle All other areas of lot 0 ft 6 ft Table notes:** (1) As part of site development review,design review(minor or major),or other discretionary entitlement,the designated approving authority may grant additional height or location requirements to enclose or screen specific areas or uses or for fences and walls designed for noise attenuation. (2) Setback area for street side yard is measured property line to the fence or wall. (3) Height of front yard fence or wall may be increased to a maximum of six feet if the top three feet of fencing is constructed of material that is 90 percent visually open and transparent(e.g., picket fence,open wood slats,open wrought iron)including any architectural features designed as part of the fence(e.g.,pilasters and lights). (4) See definition of clear vision triangle in section 17.126(Universal Definitions). 3. Outdoor recreation courts. Fencing for outdoor recreation courts (e.g., tennis courts, basketball courts) shall not exceed 12 feet in height and shall be located five feet from any rear or side property lines, except when adjacent to outdoor recreation courts on adjacent properties. D. Commercial, office, and mixed use zoning districts. 1. Outdoor storage (including all dumpsters, commercial items, commercial construction, or industrial-related materials and equipment within commercial zoning districts) shall be fenced or screened from view. Such screening shall utilize enclosures including, but not limited to, fences, walls, landscaping, or earthen berms, so that no outdoor storage is visible from any public rights-of-way, parks, public trails, and adjacent properties. Screening shall be visually compatible with the primary buildings and landscape on the property. 2. Screening of commercial loading docks and refuse areas. Loading docks and refuse storage areas shall be screened from public view, adjoining public streets and rights-of-way and residentially zoned areas. The method of screening shall be 72 Page 304 architecturally compatible with other on-site development in terms of colors and materials. Trash enclosures shall be consistent with city standard drawings. Exceptions may be permitted through the administrative design review process for sites with unique characteristics (e.g., shallow lot depth, adjacency to single-family residential). E. Industrial zoning districts. 1. Storage area/screening. The purpose of storage area/screening regulations is to allow for on-site storage, which is screened from view from the public right-of-way or from adjacent properties accessible to the public and is architecturally compatible with the surrounding environment. The following standards shall apply according to land use category: a. Standards for storage area/screen wall height in all industrial zoning districts. The height of all storage area/screening walls shall not exceed eight feet, measured from the finished grade immediately adjacent to the wall and the top of the wall. b. Industrial Park (IP) Zoning District. No outdoor storage shall be permitted except for fleet vehicles and light trucks (not exceeding 6,000 pounds). Outdoor storage tanks may be permitted at a height not to exceed eight feet from highest finished grade when screened from public view by walls constructed of concrete, masonry, or other similar materials. C. Neo-Industrial (NI) Zoning District. All materials, supplies, equipment, loading docks, and trucks and trailers shall be stored within an enclosed building or an area screened from public view. d. Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning District. All materials, supplies, equipment, and operating trucks shall be stored within an enclosed building or storage area. Such storage areas within 120 feet of a street frontage shall be screened. e. Within 600 feet of the 1-15 right-of-way, all outdoor storage shall be screened from public view from the freeway. Screening may include the use or combination of block or masonry walls, 36-inch box trees planted a maximum of 30 feet apart, or the building mass. f. Within all industrial land use categories, all storage area screening shall be architecturally integrated with surrounding buildings utilizing concrete, masonry, or other similar materials. For walls comprised of the combination of a screen wall on top of a retaining wall, the overall height of the combined wall may exceed eight feet provided that the part of the wall that faces the public right-of-way (street, sidewalk, etc.), does not exceed the maximum height established in section 17.48.050.E.1.a. g. Within the Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning District, storage area screening may include masonry or concrete walls and, metal, or wood fences. The front and exterior side area shall be screened with non-opaque fencing, when loading areas or storage areas are not present. h. Storage of materials or equipment shall not exceed screen height within 100 feet of street-fronting screens. i. The planning director may waive screening requirements where future building expansion would screen an abutting storage area. 73 Page 305 j. The planning director may waive screening requirements along the front and exterior side of the building if there are no loading docks or storage areas present. 2. Security fences and walls. The purpose of security fencing and wall standards is to provide for a safe environment for businesses within the industrial area. a. Site planning, including building configuration and placement, is encouraged to create defined areas that may be adequately secured. b. Any wall or fence along a street frontage over three feet in height is subject to the streetscape setback requirements. C. Within all industrial land use categories except the Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning District, all fencing or walls shall be wrought iron, concrete, masonry, or other similar materials, not to exceed the maximum height established in section 17.48.050.E.1.a. The use of barbed wire or similar materials is prohibited from these land use categories. Chain-link fencing is not permitted in the area(s) of a property that is/are located between the public right-of-way (street, sidewalk, etc.), and the building wall plane(s) of the building(s) on the property, that face(s) the public right-of-way. Chain-link fencing may only be used along the side and rear property lines, and within the interior of the property, if the fencing will not be visible from any portion of the public right-of-way that is adjacent to the property. d. Within the Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning District, security fencing may include wrought iron, masonry or concrete walls, and wood or metal fences. Barbed wire may be permitted atop fencing. e. Security gates are subject to site plan review according to section 17.16.110 (Site Development Review). 3. Trash enclosures. City standard drawings shall be used for all trash enclosures. 74 Page 306 EXHIBIT K Chapter 17.56 (Landscaping Standards) Amended Sections: 17.56.050 General landscape development standards. 17.56.060 Special landscape requirements. 17.56.050 General landscape development standards. A. General location for landscape improvements. Landscaping shall be provided in the following locations for all types of development as listed below, unless the designated approving authority determines that the required landscape is not necessary to fulfill the purposes of this chapter. Nothing in this chapter is intended to discourage landscape areas outside and beyond the minimum requirements listed herein. 1. Setbacks. All setback areas required by this Code shall be landscaped in compliance with this chapter except where a required setback is occupied by a sidewalk or driveway or is enclosed and screened from abutting public rights-of-way. In the Neo- Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts only the front and exterior side yard setback areas adjoining public rights-of-way are required to be landscaped, including the property frontage within the right-of-way. All other areas within these Industrial Zoning Districts must be paved or surfaced to minimize dust. 2. Undeveloped areas. All areas of a project site not intended for a specific use or purpose in conjunction with a current application, including pad sites being held for future development, shall be landscaped in compliance with this chapter. 3. Parking areas.Within parking lots, landscaping shall be used for shade and climate control, to enhance project design, and to screen the visual impact of vehicles and large expanses of pavement consistent with the requirements of this chapter. B. Plant type. Landscape planting shall emphasize drought-tolerant and native species (especially along natural, open space areas), shall complement the architectural design of structures on the site, and shall be suitable for the soil and climatic conditions specific to the site. In the wildland-urban interface fire area, planting shall emphasize wildfire hazard reduction. 1. Planting layout and plant diversity. Plant selection shall vary in type and planting pattern. Informal planting patterns are preferred over uniform and entirely symmetrical planting patterns. Use of deciduous flowering trees and shrubs and colorful plantings is encouraged in conjunction with evergreen species. Groupings of shrubs shall contain multiple plant types, interspersed with varying heights and blooming seasons for year- round interest. 2. Street and parking lot trees. Street and parking lot trees shall be selected from the city's adopted master list of street trees and parking lot trees. A minimum of 30 percent of the street trees and parking lot trees, respectively, shall be an evergreen species. For parking lots in the Industrial Zoning Districts with primary buildings greater than 200,000 sf in gross floor area, a minimum of 50 percent of the street trees and parking lot trees shall be an evergreen species. 3. Trees planted within ten feet of a street, sidewalk, paved trail, or walkway shall be a deep-rooted species or shall be separated from hardscapes by a root barrier to prevent physical damage to public improvements. 4. In the wildland-urban interface fire area, plant types shall not include those identified as fire prone or those types that are specifically prohibited by the fire district. 75 Page 307 C. Planting size, spacing, and planter widths. In order to achieve an immediate effect of a landscape installation and to allow sustained growth of planting materials, minimum plant material sizes, plant spacing, and minimum planter widths (inside measurements) are as follows: 1. Trees. The minimum planting size for trees for commercial, office, and community/civic uses shall be 15-gallon, with 25 percent of all trees on a project site planted at a minimum 24-inch box size. For commercial, office, and community/civic uses tree spacing within perimeter planters along streets and abutting residential property shall be planted no farther apart on center than the mature diameter of the proposed species. Minimum planter widths for trees shall be between five feet and ten feet, consistent with the city's adopted master list of street trees and parking lot trees. 2. Trees in industrial zoning districts. a. The minimum planting size for trees for industrial uses shall be 15-gallon with 25 percent of all trees on a project site planted at a minimum 24-inch box size b. The minimum planting size for trees for industrial uses in primary buildings greater than 200,000 square feet in gross floor area shall be minimum 24-inch box size with 25 percent of all trees at 36-inch box size. C. Tree spacing for all industrial uses within perimeter planters along streets and abutting residential property shall be planted no farther apart on center than the mature diameter of the proposed species. Minimum planter widths for trees shall be between five feet and ten feet, consistent with the city's adopted master list of street trees and parking lot trees. 3. Shrubs. Shrub planting shall be a minimum five-gallon size, with a 15-gallon minimum size required where an immediate landscape screen is conditioned by the designated approving authority (e.g., screening of headlights from drive-through aisles). The minimum planter width for shrubs is four feet. 4. Ground cover. Plants used for mass planting may be grown in flats of up to 64 plants or in individual one-gallon containers. Rooted cuttings from flats shall be planted no farther apart than 12 inches on center, and containerized woody, shrub ground cover plantings shall be planted no farther apart than three feet on center in order to achieve full coverage within one year. Minimum planter width for ground cover is two feet, with the exception of sod, which requires a minimum planter width of six feet. D. Synthetic turf. Synthetic turf may be used as a substitute for natural turf for the purposes of water conservation. The following standards shall apply to the use and maintenance of synthetic turf. 1. Synthetic turf shall consist of lifelike individual blades of grass that emulate real grass in look and color and have a minimum pile height of one and one-half inches. 2. A proper drainage system shall be installed underneath to prevent excess runoff or pooling of water. 3. Synthetic turf shall be installed and maintained to effectively simulate the appearance of a well maintained lawn. 4. The use of indoor or outdoor plastic or nylon carpeting as a replacement for synthetic turf or natural turf shall be prohibited. 5. Synthetic turf shall be installed in combination with natural plant materials (e.g. trees, shrubs and groundcover) to enhance the overall landscaping design. 76 Page 308 E. Water efficiency. If applicable, projects are required to comply with provisions within chapter 17.82 (water efficient landscaping) of this article. (Code 1980, § 17.56.050; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012; Ord. No. 860 § 4, 2013; Ord. No. 879 § 4, 2015) 17.56.060 Special landscape requirements. In addition to the general requirements of section 17.56.050 (general landscape development standards), the requirements listed below apply to the special types of landscaping. However, in the wildland-urban interface fire area, the fire district requirements preclude the application of these special types of landscaping. A. Residential landscape. See section 17.56.070 (additional requirements for residential areas). B. Project entry landscaping. Entries to multi-tenant projects (both residential and nonresidential) shall be designed as a special statement reflective of the character and scale of the project to establish identity for tenants, visitors, and patrons. Flowering access plantings and specimen trees shall be used to reinforce the entry statement. C. Trees adjacent to building walls. With the exception of single-family housing developments, trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building length, particularly to interrupt expansive horizontal and vertical surfaces. Tree clusters may be used subject to approval by the approving authority. D. Screening of drive-through aisles. To screen vehicles and associated headlights in a drive- through lane from view of abutting street rights-of-way, a minimum five-foot wide planter shall include a minimum three-foot tall (maximum four-foot tall) landscape barrier planted with trees and other landscaping consistent with those in the parking area. At no time shall this landscape barrier be pruned in a manner that allows the vehicle headlights from the drive-through lane to be visible from abutting street rights-of-way. Plantings shall also be designed to discourage potential safety issues (e.g., persons lying in wait). E. Screening of outdoor equipment. Screening is required according to chapter 17.48 (fences, walls, and screening). F. Wireless communication facilities. Where feasible, facilities shall be installed so as to maintain and enhance existing landscaping on the site, including trees, foliage, and shrubs, whether or not utilized for screening. Additional landscaping may be planted around the tower and related equipment to buffer abutting residential zoning districts or uses and to buffer public trails. Specifically, landscaping around the perimeter of the facility (leased area) shall include dense tree and shrub plantings with the necessary irrigation. Trees shall be fast-growing evergreen species, with a minimum size of 24-inch box. Shrubs shall be a minimum 15-gallon size covering a minimum planter area depth of five feet around the facility. Trees and shrubs shall be planted no farther apart on center than the mature diameter of the proposed species. G. On-site pedestrian pathways. Pedestrian pathway landscaping shall include shade trees placed so as to cover 60 percent of the total pathway area with tree canopies within 15 years of securing building permit. H. Creeks. To the extent that landscaping or planting is required or provided along creeks, such landscaping shall be native plants. I. Public spaces. Pedestrian space landscaping shall include a combination of shade trees and pedestrian shading devices (e.g. canopies, awnings, and umbrellas) placed so as to cover 60 percent of the total space with a shade canopy within 15 years of securing the building permit. 77 Page 309 J. Signs. Landscaping shall be provided at the base of the supporting structure of freestanding signs equal to twice the area of one face of the sign. For example, 50 square feet of sign area requires 100 square feet of landscaped area. K. Buffering between uses. A landscape buffer shall be provided between residential and nonresidential uses and between single-family uses and multi-family uses containing three or more units. Buffer areas shall include a minimum ten-foot wide planter strip with shrubs and both deciduous and evergreen trees planted a maximum of 30 feet on center. L. Interior property boundaries. When a landscaped area is provided, trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of interior property line within a planter area that is a minimum of six feet wide. Tree clusters may be used subject to approval by the approving authority. M. Sound walls/masonry walls. Where setback and open space areas are screened from public view by walls or similar approved structures, landscaping shall be provided such that 50 percent of the wall shall be covered by landscape material within five years. N. Parking lot landscape. Parking lot landscape includes perimeter planters, abutting parking lots and drive aisles, tree planting for parking lot shade, and a combination of continuous planting strips, planting fingers, and parking islands throughout the parking lot. Parking lot landscape requirements applicable to commercial, industrial, mixed-use, and multi-family residential parking lots with five or more spaces are listed below: 1. Number of trees required. Trees shall be required at a rate of one tree for every three parking stalls. At maturity, trees should reach a minimum height and spread of 40 feet so as to form a shade canopy over parking stalls. Smaller ornamental trees may not be used to satisfy this requirement. The minimum width for planters containing a parking lot tree is six feet. Tree selections shall be approved by the planning director. a. Exception for solar collectors. The minimum requirement for trees and shrubs may be waived for the portion of a parking area over which photo-voltaic solar collectors are installed where they also function as shade structures. 2. A minimum of ten percent of the total off-street parking area shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs, and appropriate ground cover. The parking area shall be computed by adding the areas used for access drive aisles, stalls, maneuvering, and landscaping within that portion of the premises that is devoted to vehicular parking and circulation. 3. Each unenclosed parking facility shall provide a perimeter landscaped strip at least five feet wide (inside dimension)where the facility adjoins a side or rear property line. The perimeter landscaped strip may include any landscaped yard or landscaped area otherwise required and shall be continuous, except for required access to the site or parking facility. 4. Screening. All surface parking areas shall be screened from streets and adjoining properties, and the open space areas between the property line and public street right-of- way shall be landscaped with a combination of trees, shrubs, and ground cover. Screening between residential and nonresidential uses shall not be less than five feet in height. Parking lot landscaping shall be located so that pedestrians are not required to cross unpaved areas to reach building entrances from parked cars (see Figure 17.56.060-1 [Parking Lot Landscaping]). 5. Existing trees. Existing mature trees on the site in good health shall be preserved whenever possible. 6. Planter design. All parking lot planters shall be designed to meet the following minimum requirements (see Figure 17.56.060-2 [Parking Lot Planter Design]): 78 Page 310 a. Planters shall be separated from maneuvering and parking areas by a six- inch, raised concrete curb or equivalent. b. Tree planting wells located at the front of parking stalls shall contain a minimum of 25 square feet and the smallest outside dimension shall not be less than five feet. O. Landscape planters along the sides of parking stalls shall contain a minimum of 90 square feet and the smallest outside dimension shall not be less than six feet. FIGURE 17.56.060-1 PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING Landscape Screen Low Profile Wall FIGURE 17.56.060-2 PARKING LOT PLANTER DESIGN 79 Page 311 90 SO FT.Minimum Planter 6' Along Side of Stall 5' 1:5 15' OR 6' 5' 25 SO FT.Minimum Planter Along Per Stall Front (Code 1980, § 17.56.060; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012; Ord. No. 879 § 4, 2015) 80 Page 312 EXHIBIT L Amendments to Chapter 17.64 (Parking and Loading Standards) Amended Sections: 17.64.050 Number of parking spaces required. 17.64.060 Reductions in parking requirements. 17.64.070 Parking management plan 17.64.080 Parking requirements for the disabled. 17.64.090 Parking and driveway design and development. 17.64.100 Loading area requirements. 17.64.110 Bicycle parking requirements. 17.64.120 Electric vehicle parking requirements. New Section: 17.64.130 Maintenance. 17.64.050 Number of parking spaces required. A. The following number of parking spaces shall be required to serve the uses or buildings listed, as established in Table 17.64.050-1 (Parking Requirements by Land Use). Multiple property owners may apply for a conditional use permit for shared parking pursuant to section 17.64.060 (Reductions in Parking Requirements). Otherwise, all uses must provide the sum of the requirements for each individual use. Where the requirements result in a fractional space, the next larger whole number shall be the number of spaces required. In addition, the requirements listed below shall apply. 1. "Square feet' means "gross square feet" and refers to the sum gross square feet of the floor area of a building and its accessory buildings unless otherwise specified. 2. For the purpose of calculating residential parking requirements, dens, studies, or other similar rooms that may be used as bedrooms shall be considered bedrooms. 3. Where the number of seats is listed to determine required parking, seats shall be construed to be fixed seats. Where fixed seats provided are either benches or bleachers, one seat shall be construed to equal 18 linear inches for pews and 24 inches for dining, but in no case shall seating be less than determined as required by the building code. 4. When the calculation of the required number of off-street parking spaces results in a fraction of a space, the total number of spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 5. Where private streets are proposed for residential development, resident and guest parking shall be provided as determined by the approving authority in conjunction with the required planning entitlement(s). 6. For projects on commercial, office and industrial zoned properties, square footage dedicated to office hallways 44 inches or less, electrical and mechanical rooms, elevator shafts, stairwells, bathrooms and storage closets may be deducted from the gross square footage for parking stall calculation purposes. 7. For all warehouse/storage/e-commerce uses in the industrial zoning districts, the established minimum parking requirements are intended targets. Reductions in the amount of required parking appropriate for a specific use(s) may be approved by the approving authority based on the approval of a parking management plan as well as 81 Page 313 through the conditional use permit and master plan processes, as applicable. See footnote 1 in Table 17.14.060-1 (Approving Authority for Land Use Entitlements). TABLE 17.64.050-1 PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY LAND USE Use Spaces Notes Residential Single-family detached dwellings 2 per unit 2 in garage Multi-family development (condominium, townhome, etc.), semi-detached single-family (zero lot line, patio homes, duplexes, etc.), and mobile home parks(') - Studio 1.3 per unit 1 in garage or carport - One bedroom 1.5 per unit 1 in garage or carport - Two bedrooms 2 per unit 1 in garage or carport - Three bedrooms 2 per unit 2 in garage or carport - Four or more bedrooms 2.5 per unit 2 in garage or carport - Visitor (additional required) 1 per 3 units Commercial, Service, and Office Uses Shopping centers - Less than 25,000 square feet Varies See individual uses - 25,000 to 599,000 square feet 5 per 1,000 sf Centers built prior to 1988 4.5/1,000 5.5 per 1,000 sf or a Centers built prior to - 599,000 to 1,000,000 square feet parking study may be 1988 require 4.5/1,000 provided Additional applied to - Food service (if over 15% of GLA) (2) +1 per 100 sf floor area of food service use - Cinemas in centers less than 100,000 square +3 per 100 seats feet (occupying less than 10% of GLA) (2) p - Cinemas in centers of 100,000 to 200,000 square feet, additional parking only required +3 per 100 after the first 750 seats - Offices (if over 10% of GLA) (2) - Parking study required - Shopping center over 1,000,000 square feet - Parking study required Carwash and detail (full-service) 16 stalls Carwash (self-service and drive-thru) 2.5 per wash bay Service/gas station 3.0 per 1,000 sf + 2 per service bay Barber shops/beauty parlors Park at retail Laundromats and/or dry cleaners Park at retail Offices, financial institutions, retail stores 4 per 1,000 sf Commercial storage yards (e.g., contractors, Separated from salvage) 6 spaces enclosed storage area Lumber yard 4 per 1,000 sf Includes area of open area devoted to display 82 Page 314 Use Spaces Notes of lumber and other products Applies only to the Mortuaries and funeral homes 1 per 35 sf assembly room floor area Motels and hotels 1 per unit + 2 2 additional spaces for manager Customer parking (additional spaces Vehicle sales, repair, service 2.5 per 1,000 sf needed for vehicle storage related to business operations) Furniture and appliance stores 2 per 1,000 sf Day cares/preschools 1 per employee + 1 per 5 children Storage for utility- 1 per 2 employees (2 owned vehicles must Public utilities uses also be provided for minimum) Commercial Recreation Uses Bowling alleys and/or billiard halls 5 per alley and/or 2 per table Stables 1 per 5 horses Additional parking Driving ranges 1 per tee required for related uses on site Additional parking Golf courses 6 per hole required for related uses on site Additional parking Miniature golf course 3 per hole required for related uses on site Includes related uses Skating rinks 5 per 1,000 sf and all indoor and outdoor"active" areas Included related uses Swimming pool (commercial) 5 per 1,000 sf and all indoor and outdoor"active" areas Additional parking Tennis, handball, and racquetball facilities 3 per court required for related uses on site Health clubs and other fitness related facilities 5 per 1,000 sf Educational Uses Elementary and junior high schools 2 per classroom Senior high school 1 per employee + 1 per 6 students 83 Page 315 Use Spaces Notes Colleges, universities 1 per 2 employees + 1 per 3 students Commercial schools (trade, business colleges, 1 per student + 1 per etc.) faculty Medical/Health Uses Dentist, medical, veterinary offices/clinics 5 per 1,000 sf Congregate care facilities (e.g., nursing, 1 per 4 beds Based on resident children's, sanitariums) capacity Hospitals 1.75 per bed Places of Assembly Restaurants and lounges 10 per 1,000 sf Fast-food restaurant 10 per 1,000 sf Auditoriums, sports arenas, stadiums 1 per 3 seats or 1 per Movie theaters 35 sf of seating area - Single screen 1 per 3 seats - Multi-screen 1 per 4 seats 1.5 linear feet on a 1 per 3 seats or 1 per bench is equivalent to 1 Other places of assembly (e.g., churches) seat; schedule of 35 sf of main auditorium activities and/or parking study may be required Industrial, Warehousing, and Manufacturing(3)(4) 1 per 1,000 sf for first 20,000 sf; 1 per 2,000 Warehouse/Storage/E-Commerce sf for the next 20,000 sf; and 1 per 4,000 sf for the remaining sf Industrial/manufacturing 2 per 1,000 sf Research and development 3 per 1,000 sf Office and administration 4 per 1,000 sf Multi-tenant buildings (office less than 35 p 2.5 per 1,000 sf percent GLA) (2) Indoor wholesale/retail commercial 4 per 1,000 sf Table notes: (1) Fifty percent of the total required covered spaces shall be within enclosed garage structures.The use of carports requires approval from the design review committee. (2) GLA is gross leasable area. (3) See section 17.64.100.D.4(Trailer parking required)for trailer parking requirements. (4) See section 17.64.120(Electric vehicle parking requirements)for electric vehicle parking requirements. B. Uses not listed. Other uses not specifically listed in this section shall furnish parking as required by the designated approving authority in determining the off-street parking requirements. The approving authority shall be guided by the requirements in this section generally and shall determine the minimum number of spaces required to avoid interference with public use of streets and alleys. (Code 1980, § 17.64.050; Ord. No. 855, §4, 2012; Ord. No. 863 § 4, 2013) 84 Page 316 17.64.060 Reductions in parking requirements. A. The required number of parking spaces may be reduced in accordance with the following requirements. B. Shared parking. In order to encourage efficient use of parking spaces and good design practices, the total parking requirements for conjunctive uses shall be based on the number of spaces adequate to meet various needs of the individual uses operating during the peak parking period. 1. Conditional use permit for shared parking. A conditional use permit may be approved for shared parking facilities serving more than one use on a site or serving more than one property. The conditional use permit may allow for a reduction of the total number of spaces required by this chapter if the following findings are made: a. The peak hours of parking demand from all uses do not coincide so that peak demand will not be greater than the parking provided. i. The efficiency of parking provided will equal or exceed the level that can be expected if parking for each use were provided separately. 2. Shared parking agreement. A written agreement between the landowners and in some cases the city that runs with the land shall be filed, in a form satisfactory to the city attorney, and include: a. A guarantee that there will be no substantial alteration in the uses that will create a greater demand for parking without application for approval of an amended conditional use permit. b. A reciprocal grant of nonexclusive license among the business operator(s) and the landowner(s)for access to and use of the shared parking facilities. C. Evidence that the agreement has been recorded in the county recorder's office. C. Other parking reductions. Required parking for any use except a single-family dwelling, accessory dwelling unit, or two-family dwelling may be reduced through approval of a minor exception by the planning director. Required parking may be reduced with approval of a conditional use permit for all new industrial uses in the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts. 1. Criteria for approval. The approving authority will only grant a minor use permit or a conditional use permit for reduced parking if it is determined that the project meets all of the minor use permit criteria in section 17.16.120 (Minor use permits) or the conditional use permit criteria in section 17.20.060 (Conditional use permit), and that three or more of the circumstances listed below are true. a. The use will be adequately served by the proposed parking due to the nature of the proposed operation; proximity to frequent transit service; transportation characteristics of persons residing, working, or visiting the site; or because the applicant has undertaken a travel demand management program that will reduce parking demand at the site. b. Parking demand generated by the project will not exceed the capacity of or have a detrimental impact on the supply of on-street parking in the surrounding area. C. The site plan is consistent with the objectives of the zoning district and incorporates features such as unobtrusive off-street parking placed below the 85 Page 317 ground level of the project with commercial uses above or enclosed parking on the ground floor. d. The applicant has provided on-site parking for car-share vehicles via a recorded written agreement between the landowner and the city that runs with the land. Agreement shall provide for proof of a perpetual agreement with a car-share agency to provide at least one car share vehicle on-site. 2. Application submittal requirements. In order to evaluate a proposed project's compliance with the above criteria, the planning director may require submittal of a parking demand study that substantiates the basis for granting a reduced number of spaces. D. Mixed use parking. All mixed use projects shall include a parking study prepared by a qualified traffic/parking consultant that demonstrates how proposed land uses utilize the parking spaces that are required per section 17.64.050-1. Parking studies are subject to review and acceptance by the director of engineering services/city engineer and planning director, and an independent peer review consultant. The parking study may also include a discussion of the following options for a reduction of required parking, including, but not limited to: 1. Shared parking may be provided per section 17.64.060 B. 2. State density bonus may be provided per chapter 17.46. 3. Tandem parking may be counted towards the required parking calculation. 4. Implement a parking management strategy that may contain the following provisions, but are not limited to: a. Monitored with periodic inspections; b. Storage within the unit, and not within garage (view windows on garages); C. HOA to enforce limitation of number of vehicles per unit; d. Time restriction on guest parking; and e. Shuttles that cater to users within the development. 5. Implement a car/bicycle share program in which vehicles/bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a short term basis. (Code 1980, § 17.64.060; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012; Ord. No. 881 § 4, 2015; Ord. No. 938 § 9, 2018) E. Industrial use parking— "land banking". 1. If the final end-user has not been determined for an industrial development for which entitlements are requested pursuant to the provisions of this Code, and the parking and loading demand characteristics for the use are unknown, the anticipated maximum amount of employee, truck, and trailer parking specified in Table 17.64.050-1 (Parking Requirements by Land Use) shall be determined. In addition, the director may require the submittal of a parking and loading demand study to be prepared by the applicant or by the city and funded by the applicant. Such a study shall estimate the parking demand for the likely proposed use(s) including a worst case scenario based on the recommendations of the Institute of Traffic Engineers, Urban Land Institute, the American Planning Association, or other acceptable source of parking demand data for uses and/or combinations of uses of comparable activities, scale, bulk, area, and location. 2. The applicant shall submit a site plan acceptable to the director showing how all the parking for employees, trucks, and trailers will be provided on the site in compliance with the applicable requirements of this chapter. However, if the director determines that not all of the parking is required for the final proposed use(s), then subject to the provisions of section 17.14.100 (Modification), the excess "land banked" parking may be identified on the approved site plan and not constructed until such time as the parking is required 86 Page 318 for a future use(s). These areas shall be set aside as open space and landscaped in such a manner that they will not be used for parking. In addition, a binding covenant or other legal agreement in a form acceptable to the city attorney shall be submitted and signed by the property owner and tenant guaranteeing that the reserved open space will be constructed for employee, truck or trailer parking if a change to a more parking-intensive use occurs. 3. The applicant shall conduct a study of actual parking use to be carried out by a qualified consultant at the time of change of tenancy or within three years after the facility is fully occupied and the use established or at other such earlier time as deemed necessary by the director due to observed parking deficiencies or traffic queuing. The parking study shall be subject to approval by the director.The city may require construction of some or all of the additional parking if the parking study demonstrates need. If the owner fails to comply, the city may, but shall not be obligated to, undertake construction of the required additional parking. Any costs and expenses incurred by the city shall be the responsibility of the owner. 17.64.070 Parking management plan A. Purpose. This section provides regulatory standards governing the requirements of parking management plans in the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts. The purpose of the plan is to minimize traffic, manage on-site circulation, and effectively allocate parking needs for each industrial site. B. Applicability. A parking management plan shall be provided as part of a comprehensive effort for establishing employee, guest, truck, and trailer parking in a new industrial development within the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts and how those spaces are managed. C. Parking management plan. A parking management plan shall be processed as a part of the site development review, subject to approval of the planning commission. The plan shall comply with the following: 1. The parking management plan shall be based on a parking study documenting parking demand beyond the minimum allowance in Table 17.64.050-1 (Parking Requirements by Land Use). 2. The parking management plan shall identify the location of specific parking facilities and the number of parking spaces in such facilities that are available to meet the parking demand of the new development. 3. Parking identified on the plan shall be delineated as being reserved for employees, guests, trucks, or trailers, and whether other access control measures are used to ensure the availability and enforcement of the plan as well as on-site vehicle circulation. 4. The parking analysis shall demonstrate that parking for all users is provided, identifying existing supply and demand for similar uses and what will be provided on site. 5. The owner or manager designee of a development approved under the parking management plan shall provide an accurate and current record of the uses and parking allocation for the development. The planning director may require this record to be provided or updated annually if it is determined that parking for the proposed use is impacting adjacent streets, and when the owner applies for a change in use or development plan review for the subject site. 87 Page 319 17.64.080 Parking requirements for the disabled. A. Number of spaces, design standards. Parking spaces for the disabled shall be provided in compliance with the building code and state and federal law. B. Reservation of spaces required. The number of disabled accessible parking spaces required by this chapter shall be reserved by the property owner/tenant for use by the disabled throughout the life of the approved land use. C. Upgrading of markings required. If amendments to state or federal law change standards for the marking, striping, and signing of disabled access parking spaces, disabled accessible spaces shall be upgraded in the time and manner required by law. (Code 1980, § 17.64.070; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012) 17.64.090 Parking and driveway design and development. A. Surface parking area. All surface parking areas shall have the following improvements: 1. Each required parking space and aisle shall be graded, drained, and surfaced so as to prevent dust, mud, or standing water and shall be identified by pavement markings, wheel stops, entrance and exit signing, and directional signs, to the satisfaction of the city engineer. All new parking spaces shall be painted with double stripe pavement markings. 2. Lighting, giving a ground-level illumination of one to five footcandles, shall be provided in the parking area during the time it is accessible to the public after daylight. Lighting shall be shielded to prevent glare on contiguous residential properties. 3. Where such parking area abuts a street, it shall be separated by an ornamental fence, wall, or compact evergreen hedge having a height of not less than two feet and maintained at a height of not more than four feet. Such fence, wall, or hedge shall be maintained in good condition. 4. Parking spaces shall be marked and access lanes clearly defined. Bumpers and wheel stops shall be installed, as necessary. 5. Landscape materials are permitted to overhang the curb/wheel stop creating a reduction in impervious surface material. B. Driveway location standards. Development projects located at intersections shall be accessed as follows: 1. Driveways to access parcels located at the intersection of two streets shall, where feasible, be gained through driveways from the lesser street. Determination of which street is lesser shall be made based on total paving width, amount of traffic, adjacent traffic controls, and likely destinations along each street in question. 2. Driveways serving parcels located at the intersection of two streets shall be situated at the maximum practical distance from the intersection. 3. Where a proposed driveway is located at least 75 feet from the nearest cross street, the requirements of section 17.64.90.C.1 and 2 may be waived. C. Driveway size and composition. All residential driveways shall be a minimum of 19 feet in length and shall be constructed with a lasting, durable surface (e.g., concrete, asphalt, grasscrete, or similar material) and shall be constructed to appropriate requirements as determined by the city. (Code 1980, § 17.64.080; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012; Ord. No. 860 § 4, 2013) 88 Page 320 17.64.100 Loading area requirements. A. Required loading spaces for delivery and distribution. A building, or part thereof, having a floor area of 10,000 square feet or more that is to be occupied by any use requiring the receipt or distribution by vehicles or trucks of material or merchandise must provide at least one off-street loading space, plus one additional such loading space for each additional 40,000 square feet of floor area. The off-street loading space(s) must be maintained during the existence of the building or use it is required to serve. Truck-maneuvering areas must not encroach into required parking areas, travelways, or street rights-of-way (see Figure 17.64.090-2 (Loading Areas for Delivery)). B. Required loading spaces for customers. Customer loading spaces allow bulky merchandise to be loaded into customers' vehicles. For uses that sell bulky items (furniture, appliances, home improvement sales, etc.), at least two customer loading spaces per business establishment or one customer loading space per 40,000 square feet of floor area, whichever is greater shall be provided. Customer loading spaces shall be located adjacent to the building or to an outdoor sales area where bulky merchandise is stored and shall be clearly visible from the main building entry or through directional signage visible from the main entry. Customer loading spaces shall not be located in such a way that they impede on-site traffic circulation, as determined by the director of engineering services/city engineer or encroach into designated emergency vehicle/fire access lanes as determined by the fire chief (see Figure 17.64.090-1 (Customer Loading Areas). C. Required loading spaces for industrial uses. All industrial uses shall provide a minimum of one loading space per proposed loading bay. For every 10 loading bays proposed, a minimum of one on-site truck queuing space must be provided. Each on-site truck queuing space shall be a minimum of nine feet in width and 65 feet in length and shall be included on the circulation management plan if required by the approving authority. The truck queuing spaces shall be grouped together in a designated area with clear access to loading bays. The entrance gate to all industrial buildings shall be a minimum of 135 feet from the public right-of-way. Alternative queuing standards less than the minimum required may be considered by the approving authority with a conditional use permit and the development of an approved parking management plan. D. Requirements for off-street loading spaces. 1. Minimum size. Each off-street loading space required by this section must be not less than 12 feet wide, 30 feet long, and 15 feet high, exclusive of driveways for ingress and egress and maneuvering areas. Loading spaces for customers may be 12 feet wide, 26 feet long, and 12 feet high. 2. Driveways for ingress and egress and maneuvering areas. Each off-street loading space required by this section must be provided with driveways for ingress and egress and maneuvering space adequate for trucks, per city standards. 3. Location of loading areas. An off-street loading space (excluding loading spaces for customers) required by this section must not be located closer than 30 feet to any lot or parcel of land in a residential district, unless such off-street loading space is wholly enclosed within a building or on all sides by a wall not less than eight feet in height. Except in industrial zoning districts, a loading door or loading dock that is visible from a public street must be screened with an eight-foot high, solid masonry or other sound-absorbing wall, with landscaping planted between the wall and the right-of-way. 4. Trailer parking required. One parking space for a trailer is required for each loading dock door. The minimum dimensions of a single trailer parking space is 50 feet in length, 14 feet in width, and 14 feet in vertical clearance. Trailer parking spaces shall be located 89 Page 321 in a designated area located away from the loading bays and paths of travel. All trailer parking areas must be screened according to the provisions of section 17.48.050 (Requirements by land use type) for industrial areas. 17.64.110 Bicycle parking requirements. A. Applicability. Bicycle parking shall be provided for all new construction, additions of ten percent or more floor area to existing buildings, and changes in land use classification. Single- family homes, duplexes, and multi-family dwellings of less than four units are exempt. B. Number of required bicycle parking spaces. 1. Short-term bicycle parking. If a land use or project is anticipated to generate visitor traffic, the project must provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 50 feet of the visitor's entrance. To enhance security and visibility the bicycle racks shall be readily visible to passers-by. The bicycle capacity of the racks must equal an amount equivalent to five percent of all required motorized vehicle parking. There shall be a minimum of one rack with capacity for two bicycles. 2. Long-term bicycle parking. Buildings with over ten tenant-occupants (e.g., multi- family tenants, owners, employees) shall provide secure bicycle parking for five percent of required motorized vehicle spaces, with a minimum of one space. Acceptable parking facilities shall be convenient from the street and include a power outlet for charging electric bicycles and one or a combination of the following: a. Covered, lockable enclosures with permanently anchored racks for bicycles, b. Lockable bicycle rooms with permanently anchored racks, C. Lockable, permanently anchored bicycle lockers. 17.64.120 Electric vehicle parking requirements. The following requirements apply to electric vehicle parking facilities. All charging facilities shall be approved through the plan check/zoning clearance process: A. Electric vehicle charging. When provided, electric vehicle charging stations shall meet the requirements of the California Electrical Code. B. Designated spaces. Outdoor charging of electric vehicle shall only occur in designated electric vehicle spaces, according to the following: 1. Electricity shall only be provided from outdoor electrical outlets installed according to the California Electrical Code. 2. Electric cords shall not cross vehicular or pedestrian pathways. 3. When installed in common parking areas (e.g., surface parking lots, garages, etc.), the spaces shall be restricted to electric vehicles charging only and identified with signage and pavement markings. C. Electric vehicles in single-family residential zoning districts. When installed, electric vehicle charging in single-family residential areas shall be located as follows: 1. Within a garage or carport; 90 Page 322 2. Outside of setback area; or 3. If within a setback area, screened from view of the public right-of-way with landscaping or fencing. (Code 1980, § 17.64.110; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012) D. Electric vehicles in Industrial Zoning Districts. A minimum of 10 percent of required parking in all new developments within the Industrial Zoning Districts for employees and guests shall be reserved for electric vehicles and shall conform to the standards in subsections A and B above. One charging station shall be installed for every two spaces dedicated to electric vehicles. Additionally, charging stations for electric powered trucks may be required as determined by the approving authority. 17.64.130 Maintenance. The minimum number of parking spaces required in this chapter shall be provided and continuously maintained. A parking, loading, or bicycle parking area provided for the purpose of complying with the requirements of this chapter shall not be eliminated, reduced, or converted unless equivalent facilities approved by the approving authority are provided elsewhere in compliance with this chapter. 91 Page 323 Exhibit M Amendments to Chapter 17.66 (Performance Standards) Amended Section: 17.66.110 Special industrial performance standards. 17.66.110 Special industrial performance standards. A. Purpose. The performance standards allow industrial uses to operate consistent with the overall characteristics of the land use category to provide for a healthy, safe, and pleasing environment in keeping with the nature and level of surrounding industrial activity. The performance standards contained in Table 17.66.110-1 (Industrial Performance Standards) are applied based on the zoning districts as follows: 1. Industrial Park (IP) Zoning District; Class A performance standards. The most restrictive of the performance standards to ensure a high quality working environment and available sites for industrial and business firms whose functional and economic needs require protection from the adverse effects of noise, odors, vibration, glare, or high- intensity illumination, and other nuisances. 2. Neo-Industrial (NI) Zoning District; Class 8 performance standards. These standards are intended to enable a complementary mix of uses and provide for a limited range of industrial activity while assuring a basic level environmental protection. It is the intent of the standards of this section to provide for uses whose operational needs may produce noise, vibration, particulate matter and air contaminants, odors, or humidity, heat, and glare which cannot be mitigated sufficiently to meet the Class A standards. The standards are so designed to protect uses on adjoining sites from effects which could adversely affect their functional and economic viability. 3. Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning District; Class C performance standards. It is the intent of the standards of this section to make allowances for industrial uses whose associated processes produce noise, particulate matter and air contaminants, vibration, odor, humidity, heat, glare, or high-intensity illumination which would adversely affect the functional and economic viability of other uses. The standards, when combined with standards imposed by other governmental agencies, serve to provide basic health and safety protection for persons employed within or visiting the area. 92 Page 324 TABLE 17.66.110-1 INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Class A Class B Class C Noise Maximum • 70dB (anywhere on lot) • 80 dB (anywhere on lot) • 85 dB (lot line) • 65 dB (interior space of • 65dB (at residential property • 65dB (at residential property neighboring use on same lot) line) line) • Noise caused by motor • Noise caused by motor • Where a use occupies a lot vehicles is exempted from this vehicles and trains is exempted abutting or separated by a standard. from this standard. street from a lot within the designated Class A or B performance standard or residential property, the performance standard of the abutting property shall apply at the common or facing lot line. Vibration All uses shall be so operated as All uses shall be operated so as All uses shall be operated so as not to generate vibration not to generate vibration not to generate vibration discernible without instruments discernible without instruments discernible without instruments by the average person while on by the average persons beyond by the average person beyond or beyond the lot upon which the lot upon which the source is 600 feet from where the source the source is located or within located. Vibration caused by is located. Vibration caused by an adjoining enclosed space if motor vehicles, trains, and motor vehicles, trains, and more than one establishment temporary construction or temporary construction and occupies a structure. Vibration demolition is exempted from demolition is exempted from caused by motor vehicles, this standard. this standard. trains, and temporary construction or demolition work is exempted from this standard. Particulate Matter and Air Contaminants In addition to compliance with In addition to compliance with In addition to compliance with the Air Quality Management the AQMD standards, all uses the AQMD standards, all uses District (AQMD) standards, all shall be operated so as not to shall be operated so as not to uses shall be operated so as emit particulate matter or air emit particulate matter or air not to emit particulate matter or contaminants that are readily contaminants that (a) are air contaminants that are detectable without instruments injurious to the health of either readily detectable without by the average person beyond persons engaged in or related instruments by the average any lot line of the lot containing to the use of the lot, or persons person while on the lot such uses. residing, working, visiting, or containing such uses. recreating in neighboring areas; (b) substantially and adversely affect the maintenance of property in nearby areas; (c) are disruptive of industrial processes carried on in other parts of the industrial area. Where a use occupies a lot abutting or separated by a street lot with 93 Page 325 designated Class A or B, the A or B performance standard for particulate matter and air contaminants shall apply at the common or facing lot line. Odor All uses shall be operated so as All uses shall be operated so as All uses shall be operated so as not to emit matter causing not to emit matter causing not to emit matter causing unpleasant odors that are unpleasant odors that are unpleasant odors that are perceptible to the average perceptible to the average perceptible to the average person while within or beyond person beyond any lot line of person beyond any lot line of the lot containing such uses. the lot containing such uses. the lot containing such uses. Humidity, Heat, and Glare All uses shall be operated so as All uses shall be operated so as All uses shall be operated so as not to produce humidity, heat, not to produce humidity, heat, not to produce humidity, heat, glare, or high-intensity glare, or high-intensity glare, or high-intensity illumination that is perceptible illumination that is perceptible illumination that is perceptible without instruments by the without instruments by the without instruments by the average person while on or average person beyond the lot average person while on any lot beyond the lot containing such line of any lot containing such zoned for residential purposes use. use. or any industrial property with a Class A or B performance standard designation. 94 Page 326 Exhibit N Amendment to Chapter 17.76 (Alternative Energy Systems and Facilities) Amended Sections: 17.76.010 Purpose and applicability. 17.76.020 Development criteria for solar systems. 17.76.030 Development standards for wind energy systems. 17.76.010 Purpose and applicability. This chapter sets forth provisions for the development of alternative energy systems to protect public health and safety while supporting efforts to develop small-scale, distributed energy generation to reduce the amount of electricity drawn from the regional power grid. (Code 1980, § 17.76.010; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012; Ord. No. 858 § 4, 2013) 17.76.020 Development criteria for solar systems. A. All new residential development projects, except condominium conversions, shall provide for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities (lot size and configuration permitting orientation of a structure in an east-west alignment for southern exposure or lot size and configuration permitting orientation of a structure to take advantage of shade or prevailing breezes). 1. Consideration shall be given to local climate, to contour, to lot configuration, and to other design and improvement requirements. 2. Consideration shall be given to provide the long axis of the majority of individual lots shall be within 22.5 degrees east or west of true south for adequate exposure for solar energy systems. B. In the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zoning Districts an on-site renewable energy system must be provided on all new industrial developments that include the construction of a new building, which meets the following standards. 1. The renewable energy system may be a solar collector system or other form of on- site renewable energy, provided such renewable energy source is recognized by the State of California as a renewable resource under the Renewable Portfolio Standard Program. 2. The renewable energy system shall be built to generate an amount of electricity sufficient to meet the following criteria: a. Annualized building demand based on the approved use or, if no use is proposed, then the demand for the most energy intensive use that could occupy the building; and b. Demand required to charge fully electric vehicles and trucks, assuming that all vehicles and trucks to the site are fully electric; and C. A reasonable rate of efficiency loss over 10 years. 3. The renewable energy system shall be metered separately from the non- renewable metered power usage of the building. 4. Solar collectors may be installed on support structures that provide shade over parking areas to achieve minimum requirements. 95 Page 327 C. No person shall allow a tree or shrub to be placed or grown so as to cast a shadow greater than ten percent of the collector absorption area upon that solar collector surface on the property of another at any one time between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., provided that this section shall not apply to specific trees and shrubs which at the time of installation of a solar collector or during the remainder of that annual solar cycle cast a shadow upon that solar collector. D. The location of a solar collector is required to comply with the local building and setback regulations and to be set back not less than five feet from the property line or any easement that is adjacent to the property line. E. Developers of all new residential subdivisions shall dedicate easements for the purpose of assuring that each lot or dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a declaration of restrictions for the subdivision, which shall be recorded concurrently with recordation of the final map or issuance of permits, whichever shall first occur. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixture, or any other object, except for utility wires and similar objects. FIGURE 17.76.020-1 SOLAR ACCESS w l` j~ \4. Ar N No tree or shrub shall be placed or grown so as to \ cast a shadow greater than 10 percent of the collector absorption area upon that solar collector \ surface on the property of another at any one time between the hours of 1 o a.m.and 2 p.m. FIGURE 17.76.020-2 SOLAR ORIENTATION 96 Page 328 N i:i: i 5 (Code 1980, § 17.76.020; Ord. No. 855, § 4, 2012) 17.76.030 Development standards for wind energy systems. A. General development standards. 1. Siting. Wind energy systems are prohibited on ridgelines. 2. Setbacks.All wind energy systems shall comply with existing setbacks for the zone in which it is located as well as any fire code setback requirements. 3. Color. Structural components including, but not limited to, towers and blades shall be of a nonreflective, unobtrusive color. 4. Guy wires. The use of guy wires is prohibited. Towers shall be self-supporting. 5. Utility connections. For interconnected systems, no wind energy system shall be installed until evidence has been notified and indicated that the proposed interconnection is acceptable. On-site electrical wires associated with the system shall be installed underground, except for"tie-ins" to the electric utility service provider and its transmission poles, towers and lines. 6. Exterior lighting. Exterior lighting on any wind energy system shall be prohibited unless specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration. 7. Signs. No advertising sign or logo shall be placed or painted on any wind energy system, including towers and blades. 8. Noise. All wind energy systems are subject to noise standards as outlined in section 17.66.050 (Noise Standards). 9. Rotor safety. All wind energy systems must be equipped with manual and automatic over-speed controls to limit the rotational speed of the blades within the design limits of the rotor. 10. Electromagnetic interference. All wind energy systems shall be designed, installed and operated so that no distributing electromagnetic interference is caused. Disruptive interference from the facility shall be promptly rectified to include the discontinued operation of the wind energy system. 97 Page 329 11. FAA regulations. All wind energy systems shall comply with applicable FAA regulations, including any necessary approvals for installations to close to airports. B. Residential site development standards. 1. Height. The maximum height for a small wind energy system is limited as follows: i. Freestanding systems shall not exceed 40 feet in height above grade level. ii. Roof-mounted systems shall not exceed 15 feet in height above the structure on which the system is mounted. 2. Number of systems. The maximum number of wind energy systems is limited as follows: i. Freestanding systems: One per parcel. ii. Roof-mounted systems: Two per parcel. C. Industrial site development standards. 1. Height. The maximum height for a small wind energy system is limited as follows: i. Freestanding systems shall not exceed 100 feet above grade level measured from finished grade to the center of the turbine hub. ii. Roof-mounted systems shall not exceed 25 feet in height measured from the center of the turbine hub to the roof surface above the structure on which the system is mounted. 2. Number of systems. The maximum number of wind energy systems is limited as follows: i. Freestanding systems: Two per parcel. ii. Roof-mounted systems: Four per parcel. 3. Tower access. Towers must provide one of the following: i. Tower climbing apparatus located no closer than 12 feet from the ground; ii. Have an anti-climb device installed on the tower; iii. Provide a tower-access limitation program approved by the reviewing authority. D. Abandoned wind energy systems. Any wind energy system that is not used for a consecutive 12-month period shall be deemed abandoned. The property owner or permittee shall remove the wind energy system, clear the site of all equipment and restore the site as nearly as practicable to the condition prior to the installation of the wind energy system. 98 Page 330 Exhibit O Amendments to Section 17.126.090 Amended Section: 17.126.020 Universal Definitions. 17.126.020 Universal definitions. Parking Study describes a report prepared by a qualified traffic/parking engineer for review and acceptance by the director of engineering services/city engineer and planning director that analyzes the amount of parking proposed for a site relative to the parking demand generated by a proposed use(s). The report may include calculations and recommendations for reducing the number of parking spaces for a proposed use(s) and an analysis of shared on-site parking. The report may include parking counts of vehicles parked in an area during selected days and times to evaluate the ratio of available parking spaces to the number of vehicles parked . A parking study may also provide details on any recommended transportation demand management measures. 99 Page 331 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SCIMU MANAGEMENT CORPORATION Hi Mayor and City Council Members, Can I ask you to please take a couple minutes to review our thoughts below regarding the upcoming General Plan revisions on Land Uses that Staff is preparing? I believe that the first draft dealing with the City's Industrial Zones was blind to the negative effects on our small local businesses by requiring them to obtain CUP's for most of their current uses. The target was the big distribution centers, but the "smalls" were unintentionally getting caught in the same net. with that, I'd like to praise Anne Maintosh and her Team, as well as Matt Burris and John Gillison for being very open to dialog and quickly admitting to the fact that they had not considered the unintended consequences to our Small Local Entrepreneurs I strongly believe that although much of the focus of the proposed changes is directed at curtailing the large nationwide, "high inventory turn" type of businesses within the City, it is actually doing far more damage and has horrific unintended consequences to literally well over a thousand "home grown" small entrepreneurs. A 1,200 sf user is under the same criteria as a 600,000-sf user. The following outlines what I believe are unintended consequences: Severe damage to the Small Local Entrepreneurs in Industrial Zones • These folks typically lease out 1,200 to 50,000 sf units. • They live within our community and already at high risk due to the nature of small business. • They require 1-3 year leases, as they are constantly upsizing and downsizing to match revenue with overhead expenses. o They could be required to undergo a CUP process every couple of years, whereas a typical Large Co. will sign a 10-15 year lease, incurring much less expense and difficulty. • They don't have the resource or knowhow that the large entities have to navigate the CUP or MUP process. • They don't have the leverage with landlords to ask them to hold a unit open (vacant) for the 4-6 months on a contingency that they will hopefully receive a CUP. • They don't have the long-range planning or consistency of a business model to undergo a process (CUP/MUP)that has added inherent risk, being vulnerable for 4-6 months in "hopes" of being successful in a process they typically don't understand. o Flexibility and being nimble is a large part of survival as a small business. • They are not in the "high-inventory turn" business that effect the City's resources and truck traffic volumes. 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE o Most deliveries are via existing UPS routes. Not all E-Commerce is the same • E-Commerce appears to be a target in this zone redesign. o Fulfillment Centers are the target, but it is capturing many Small Entrepreneur in the same net. • Local entrepreneurs create businesses by finding a small niche, and to compete with the Nationwide competitors, they often need to sell Direct to the end user (internet). o Barriers to entry in many markets is too great to utilize wholesale traditional distribution channels. ■ Additionally, the lower profit margins and risk of customer concentrations add significantly to their risk. ■ E- Commerce is an important aspect of their market and business models. • This has been the trend of small startups for the past 5-7 years. • Again, trucking is mostly UPS with currently existing routing. o They may sell thru an Amazon, etc., hence classified as E-Commerce, but these are not the folks whom I believe the re-zoning's target is meant to curtail. Obsolescence of large existing Districts of Industrial Properties • To survive, these folks will move to Fontana or Ontario. • A thousand plus small Industrial Units will be forced into high vacancy and/or accepting very poor candidates as tenants. o This Market, already ignored by the REITS and Pension Fund Developers due to the higher levels of risk and management required, will be forced to take on even higher risk tenants. ■ Downturns will create high vacancy rates and insolvent Properties. ■ Properties will go into disrepair. ■ Bank financing may be hard to attract on many buildings that are obsolete. o Our Family has just this month completing a state-of-the-art project designed for small distributors that have grown in our existing parks and now require 10-20k sf due to their success (East of 71" and Archibald). ■ By the way, Matt B and John G just toured the Project and called it the best Industrial Project he has seen within the City in the past decade & o If this re-zoning goes thru as is, our new Project (which we had planned on holding for multiple generation as we typically do) will be obsolete and struggle to find tenants. o No bank is going to put permanent financing on a Project that has "Zoned Uses" that no longer fit the property's designed purpose. 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE Recommendations for Changes to Proposed Industrial Zones • Our recommendations are focused solely on the "Industrial Park", "Neo-Industrial', and "Industrial Employment Zones". 1. Carve out a "Small User" classification a. Create classifications for Businesses utilizing facility sizes of less than 40k to 50k sf. for the following Land Uses: i. Commercial ii. E-Commerce Distribution iii. Manufacturing Custom iv. Manufacturing Light v. Wholesale Light vi. Wholesale Medium b. In the "Industrial" related zones 1) Industrial Park, 2) Neo-Industrial, and 3) Industrial Employment, change the Land Uses noted above to "Permitted" uses for these newly created "Small User" classifications. c. Ensure that the criteria is based on "User" or "Unit" size and NOT"Building" size as the vast majority are in multi-tenant business parks with multiple Users/ Units in the same building 2. Grandfather in "existing" Industrial Projects to the current Zoning / Land Use requirements. a. The Grandfather needs to be to the Developed "Property", NOT the "End user", as they will move regularly and in a very short period of time, Property obsolescence will start to impact the City. 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE I feel that we, the Scheu Family have some expertise in the topic, as our Family has owned a number of small businesses in the area for over 100 years, as well as being a landlord catering to small business users utilizing spaces between 1,200 to 20,000 sf. We know these small business folks well and understand the damage this will inflict on them, as well as the Market that serves them. Additionally, this will bury the CUP process, as our (Scheu) Parks alone will likely generate 4-6 CUP/MUP applicants monthly thru the City Council from our 200 tenants looking for approval, but the more likely situation is it will cause a large migration of small business out of our City. Personally, I feel that Local Small Entrepreneurs are a major pillar and the "life blood" of our community. We should encourage their presence and do what we can to support them, not allow them to get caught up in a net that is meant to curtail the actions of others. Thank you for taking the time to hear my thoughts and I hope that you'll take action to do the right thing. Thank you for your consideration. Craig Scheu, As representative for the Scheu Family 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1 - ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE R U TAN Hans Van Ligten Direct Dial:(714)662-4640 RUTAN &TUCKER, LLP E-mail:hvanligten@rutan.com June 15, 2021 VIA E-MAIL Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Agenda Item G-1: Objection to Attempt to Illegally Adopt Development Code Update in Clear Violation of Various State Laws Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: The Law Firm of Rutan & Tucker, LLP represents Phelan Development Company and its affiliates ("Phelan"), the current owner of the property located at 8768 E. 9th Street, Ranch Cucamonga, California 91730. This letter is being sent to you in regards to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's ("City") consideration of Development Code Amendment DRC2021-00170 (the "Development Code Amendment"). The Development Code Amendment is a transparent attempt to essentially prohibit the development and maintenance of certain industrial uses throughout the City, with the City conducting absolutely no environmental review prior to making such a fundamental shift in development patterns. Further, the City's attempt to adopt this Development Code Amendment before updating its General Plan is impermissible piecemealing in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA"-Pub.Res.Code§§21000,et seq.),and violates California's planning and zoning law. For the reasons outlined below, Phelan objects to the City's adoption of the Development Code Amendment, and requests that the City delay its consideration adoption of any future amendment until the City has addressed the infirmities below, and otherwise complied with the mandates of the State Planning & Zoning law, the CEQA, the California Constitution, and other State laws. 1. Failure to Provide Notice Before the Planning Commission and City Council Hearings Both state and local law require that notice of a proposed zoning amendment, such as those portions of the Development Code Amendment that purports to alter certain properties zoning designation, include a general description of the matter to be considered and a general description, in text or diagram, of the real properties that are the subject of the hearing. (Gov. Code §§ 65094, Rutan & Tucker, LLP 1 18575 Jamboree Road, 911 Floor Irvine, CA 92612 1 714-641-5100 1 Fax 714-546-9035 2545/027225-0001 Orange County I Palo Alto I San Francisco I www.rutan.com 16595635.4a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 2 65854, 65090(b), 65091(b);see also Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code ["RCMC"] § 17.22.040 [stating City's consideration of zoning amendments is consistent with Gov't Code § 65863].) The City has simply failed to comply with this requirement. In particular, the City has completely failed to provide the requisite notice under Gov't Code sections 65090 and 65091. (Gov't Code § 65854 [requiring notice to be given pursuant to Government Code §§ 65090 and 65091, where a proposed amendment to a zoning ordinance affects the permitted uses of real property].) Under Government Code section 65090, notice of the purported zone change must be published via newspaper, and posted in at least three public places within the jurisdiction of the City, at least ten days prior to the public hearing before both the Planning Commission and City Council. Under Government Code section 65091, notice of the potential zone change was also required to be mailed individually to all property owners whose property could be impacted by the zone change at least 10 days prior to the hearing at issue. (Gov't Code § 65091(a)(1).) In this instance,the City has never mailed any complaint notice to Phelan,let alone 10 days prior to the relevant hearings. Indeed,the City did not release the staff report for the June 16,2021 City Council meeting until the afternoon of June 14, 2021, wherein the City for the first time admitted that it was trying to effect a zone change on all property with the General Industrial(GI), Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (MI/HI) and Heavy Industrial (HI) zoning designations. Notably, the Staff Report does not indicate that any of the property owners within those districts actually received the required individual notice. In light of the foregoing, the City has not complied with California's Zoning and Planning laws, and has failed to provide the requisite notice to Phelan, other impacted property owners, or the public in general. 2. The Development Code Amendment Improperly Implements the City's Unadopted and Unanalyzed Draft Updated General Plan. The proposed Development Code Amendment is inconsistent with the adopted City's General Plan in violation of Government Code section 65860(a). "Because of its broad scope, long-range perspective, and primacy over subsidiary land use decisions, the general plan has been aptly described as the `constitution for all future developments'within the city or county."(Orange Citizens for Parks &Recreation v. Superior Court(2016)2 Cal. 5th 141, 153.) All local land use actions must be consistent with the existing General Plan. (Ibid.) The proposed Development Code Amendment runs afoul of this prohibition, and is contrary to this fundamental rule of land use law, as the Supreme Court made clear in Lesher Communications v. City of Walnut Creek(1990) 52 Cal.3d 531 at 544: 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 3 The Planning and Zoning Law itself precludes consideration of a zoning ordinance which conflicts with a general plan as a pro tanto repeal or implied amendment of the general plan. The general plan stands. A zoning ordinance that is inconsistent with the general plan is invalid when passed (deBottari v. City Council(1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 1204, 1212; Sierra Club v. Board of Supervisors (1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 698, 704) and one that was originally consistent but has become inconsistent must be brought into conformity with the general plan. (§ 65860.) The Planning and Zoning Law does not contemplate that general plans will be amended to conform to zoning ordinances. The tail does not wag the dog. The general plan is the charter to which the ordinance must conform. The City's proposed Development Code Amendment is a textbook example of the tail wagging the dog, so to speak. Here, as admitted by the City's staff report to the Planning Commission,the proposed modification of the zoning districts is intended to ensure that the City's zoning designations are "consistent with the draft General Plan," i.e. the draft general plan that is currently being considered by the City and may someday be adopted to update and replace the existing General Plan. (See May 26, 2021 Planning Commission Staff Report,p. 3 [Attachment 2 to June 16, 2021 Staff Report to City Council];see also Ex. A,p. 2 [Dec. 16, 2020 Staff Report re Moratorium, stating: "The City is currently in the process of updating the Development Code as part of the General Plan update . . ."].) By doing so, the City is putting the cart before the horse in that it is purporting to update the City's zoning code to be consistent with a general plan that does not yet exist. As explained above, this is improper, as the zoning code has to be consistent with the existing general plan,not some future,unadopted general plan. Accordingly,should the City adopt the proposed Development Code Amendment, such action would be void ab initio because the City cannot adopt a zoning code without first demonstrating that the Development Code Amendment is consistent with the existing General Plan. (See City of Morgan Hill v. Bushey (2018) 5 Cal.5t' 1068, 1075 ["Government Code section 65860, subdivision (a) requires zoning ordinances to `be consistent with the general plan of the county or city.' This provision renders invalid any change to the zoning ordinance that would make it inconsistent with the general plan_, whether the change is made by a local government or a local initiative."].) The fact that the Staff Report for the City Council conveniently omits reference to the updated General Plan despite its prior staff report's candor does not correct this deficiency, as it is clear the City is prematurely updating its zoning code to reflect the proposed updated General Plan. 3. The City has Failed to Comply with CEQA. The proposed Development Code Amendment will have far-reaching significant environmental impacts both within the City itself, and on the region as a whole. As such, the City's attempt to approve the Development Code Amendment based on the "common sense" 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 4 exemption (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(B)(3)) is wholly inappropriate and not supported by substantial evidence, or in face, any evidence. Further, by purporting to adopt a Development Code Amendment to essentially implement the draft general plan update that has not been subject to any kind of environmental review,the City is impermissibly piecemealing its adoption of a new general plan and the necessary zoning code updates. For each of these following reasons, the proposing Development Code Amendment must not be approved until the proper level of environmental review is conducted. (a) Reliance Upon the "Common Sense" Exemption Defies Common Sense and Violates CEQA. To justify its reliance on the proposed common sense exemption, based upon staff s recommendation, the City's Planning Commission found as follows: The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(B)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have significant effect on the environment,the activity is not subject to CEQA. The consolidation of zoning districts, changes to the entitlement process and the elimination of higher impact industrial uses from the land use table will impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. The implementation of requirements for solar collector systems for new industrial development will provide a renewable electric resource for the development and reduce dependence on non-renewable electric resources. Requiring development electric vehicle charging infrastructure will encourage use of electric vehicles for industrial uses, reducing GHG emissions in future developments. These requirements impose greater limitations on industrial development than exist today and will thereby serve to eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. Each of these components, individually and cumulatively, does not result in the possibility of creating significant to cumulative effects on the environment. Future development subject to these provisions will be reviewed for CEQA compliance under separate entitlements or actions as proposed by these code updates. During the entitlement process, the applicant will be required to comply with CEQA. In reviewing each project for compliance with CEQA, an applicant may be required to submit environmental studies that analyze potential impacts such as air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise levels, and transportation/traffic caused by the site-specific project. On a case-by-case review 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 5 of each project, the appropriate environmental document will be prepared to address project-specific impacts. Based on this evidence and all the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the Planning Department staffs determination that the Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA.1 Based on the Planning Commission's finding, the City argues that the consolidation of zoning districts and the elimination of higher impact industrial uses as well as the imposition of more restrictive operation standards results in less impacts overall in a conclusory fashion,without any explanation. However, this conclusory finding ignores certain key impacts that would result from the City's amendment, most notably, impacts on traffic patterns and traffic volumes within the City, as well as the numerous potentially significant impacts that would result in the City's neighboring communities. Under established California law,local agencies may rely on the common-sense exemption provided there is substantial evidence in the record that shows that there is no reasonable possibility of potentially significant impacts. Further, the burden to demonstrate that a project qualifies for the exemption falls on the City. Accordingly, if the record demonstrates that there is a "reasonable possibility" that the proposed action will lead to the displacement of development, and the resulting significant effects on the environment, the common sense exemption cannot apply. (Rominger v. County of Colusa (2014) 229 Cal.AppAth 690, 704 disapproved on other grounds by Union of Medical Marijuana Patients,Inc. v. City of San Diego(2019)7 Cal.5th 1171.) As articulated by the Supreme Court, the common sense exemption can only apply: "Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment." (Muzzy Ranch Co. v. Solano County Airport Land Use Com. (2007) 41 Cal.4th 372, 385.) Here, the City cannot meet this burden. First, the consolidation of certain zoning districts, and prohibition on certain higher intensity uses will have a direct and significant impact on the City's traffic patterns and volume. That is in fact the entire point of this zone change. Simply put, where in the past certain industrial uses could be placed in one part of the City,they will no longer be allowed to be located there, resulting in those passenger vehicles and trucks having to be rerouted to those areas within the City that now allow those uses. 1 The City Council's proposed finding to this effect, proposed Section 3 to the draft ordinance attached as Attachment 5 to the June 16, 2021 staff report, is almost entirely identical to the deficient finding found in the Planning Commission's finding,which is quoted here. In particular, the highlighted language is identical. 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 6 Second,by restricting if not outright banning purported"high impact"industrial uses from the City, those uses will now have to be located outside of the City to continue to serve both the City and the region, which will have significant impacts on neighboring communities and their residents. Nothing the City proposes somehow quells the demand for goods and services in the City or in the region. Therefore, needed zoning industrial uses effectively out of the City diverts traffic, it does not reduce traffic. It is evident that the City's proposal is intended to and would redirect trucks that would have previously been within the City to travel farther distances to provide their goods to the City,resulting in potential impacts to regional traffic patterns,air quality issues (from longer routes), and accordingly GHG impacts. If the City categorically prohibits certain industrial uses in the City, it does not mean that these uses will stop—they will have to go elsewhere, i.e. neighboring communities to serve the demand within the City as well as within the region. Tellingly,the City itself has admitted that these industrial uses it seeks to prohibit can have significant impacts on traffic, air quality, noise, and other environmental factors. In particular, simply looking at the City's recent adoption and continuance of its own urgency ordinance imposing a moratorium on any new industrial uses within the south-east portion of the City shows that the City believes that these uses will have significant impacts throughout the City and the region. For example, in the City's November 4, 2020 (Ex. A, Att. 1) staff report the City acknowledged that industrial uses can result in the following significant impacts: • Potentially impact the operations of other area businesses due to the high volume of deliveries • Quicker road degradation due to increased truck traffic • Potential public safety impacts, which can degrade these industrial uses; • "Severe traffic problems," including truck queuing, congestion resulting from employee commutes • Potentially overwhelming existing intersections, service stations and other uses. • Potential impacts to air quality due to "various toxic gases" and particulate matter, as well as greenhouse gas emissions. (Ex. A, Att. 1, pp. 2-5.) Likewise, the City's Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 976 adopts each of these findings as well,admitting the potentially significant impacts that could result from these industrial uses. (See Ordinance No. 976 [Ex. A, Att. 2], Finding E; see also § 3 ["As described in Section 1, the staff report accompanying this Interim Urgency Ordinance, and other evidence in the record, such continued industrial development in the Affected Areas of the City could threaten the health, safety and welfare of the community through negative impacts that include, but are not limited 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 7 to,public safety, air quality, air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, traffic congestion, City infrastructure, affordable housing, fire protection services, and fire and emergency vehicle access."].) When the City then renewed and expanded the moratorium a little more than a month later, the City again confirmed that these industrial uses could result in significant impacts. (See December 16, 2020 Staff Report [Ex. A, pp. 3-5]; Ordinance No. 977 [Ex. B], Findings E-G, H; see also Ord. 977 § 3 [continuing Ord. 976].) As such, the City's proposed Development Code Amendment which purports to limit the location where some of these uses could be located, and wholly disallows other such uses within the City, displaces industrial development to different parts within its own jurisdiction and also forces this development to happen beyond its borders. These potentially significant impacts must be assessed via proper environmental review under CEQA. Put simply, the City cannot blindly export its environmental impacts upon its neighbors. Yet it has attempted to do so here by assuming, without evidence, that its action "cannot" have a potential impact on the environment. A few moments of honest reflection show that is not true. The case of Muzzy Ranch Co. v. Solano County Airport Land Use Com. (2007) 41 CalAth 372 is instructive. There,the Supreme Court determined that the adoption of an airport's land use compatibility area plan qualified as a CEQA project, where the land use plan essentially froze development in that area, which meant that the plan would "have the consequence, notwithstanding existing zoning or land use planning, of displacing development to other areas of the jurisdiction." Significantly, there the Court ultimately held that the project was exempt under the common sense exemption because the plan "simply incorporate[d] existing general plan and zoning law restrictions on residential housing density" and thus "any potential displacement the [plan] might otherwise have effected already ha[d] already been caused by the existing land use policies and zoning regulations." (Id. at 389, emphasis added.). In other words, locking in existing zoning did not change anything. Here, the City's adoption of the proposed Development Code Amendment is the opposite scenario because the City's proposed amendment would actually change the land use categories and ultimately distribution and location(when the General Plan is updated someday)and therefore cause the displacement of industrial uses and spread the impacts beyond the City's boundaries. At a minimum, therefore, the City must conduct an initial environmental study to determine the Development Code Amendment's potential significant impacts to both the City and the surrounding region that would result from the relocation and displacement of industrial uses. (See Fullerton Joint Union High School Dist. v. State Bd. of Education (1982) 32 Cal.3d 779, 794 [requiring initial study to assess school district's secession plan, which could lead to the creation of a new school and the abandonment of other schools,which could result in changes to bus routes and schedules, and traffic patterns throughout the area]; see also Muzzy Ranch Co., supra, 41 CalAth at 383 [approving Fullerton's requirement of an initial study].) 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 8 (b) Adoption of the Proposed Development Code Amendment is Impermissible Piecemealing. Adoption of the proposed Development Code Amendment is impermissible piecemealing in that it should only be considered in conjunction with or after the City's adoption of an updated general plan. As recognized by numerous California courts: There is no dispute that CEQA forbids "piecemeal" review of the significant environmental impacts of a project. This rule derives, in part, from section 21002.1, subdivision (d), which requires the lead agency—in this case, the Port—to "consider[ ] the effects, both individual and collective, of all activities involved in [the] project." It has been recognized that " `[a] curtailed or distorted project description may stultify the objectives of the reporting process. Only through an accurate view of the project may affected outsiders and public decision-makers balance the proposal's benefit against its environmental cost, consider mitigation measures, assess the advantage of terminating the proposal ... and weigh other alternatives in the balance. (Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Committee v. Board of Port Com'rs (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1358.) Here, the City has admitted that this proposed Development Code Amendment is being adopted to ensure consistency with the "draft general plan"update. (PC Staff Report p. .) By trying to approve the zone change through an exemption determination, and then later consider the general plan, admits environmental impact,the City is impermissibly separating these two projects when in fact the City has admitted, as part of this record of proceedings, that the purpose of this Development Code Amendment is to make the Code consistent with the draft general plan. This attempt at legislative legerdemain is the epitome of piecemealing. And CEQA prohibits exactly that behavior. As such, to avoid violating the prohibition against piecemealing, the City must consider the proposed Development Code Amendment in conjunction with or after the full consideration of the general plan update, including the certification of an environmental impact report. To do otherwise clearly would violate CEQA. 4. The Planning Commission Did Not Consider a Zone Change as a Part of the Development Code Amendment Before the Planning Commission,the Development Code Amendment purported to amend the "land uses" authorized and/or addressed by the City's Development Code, and specifically eliminates the existing General Industrial (GI), Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (MI/HI) and Heavy Industrial(HI)designations,and creates two new and purportedly different use designations — Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE). However, the Development Code Amendment at that time, and the proposed modifications to the existing code, did not explain what 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 9 this means, or how these uses are to be applied to property within the City because, as part of its piecemealing, it had not made clear what "new" zones apply to which property. The City Council version on the other hand has changed the proposed action, and now includes a statement in its proposed ordinance that it is actually changing the zoning code of the GI, MVHI and HI zones, and that the change would impact the City's zoning map. (See Proposed Ordinance, Section 19.) Under RCMC § 17.22.040(B)(2) and Government Code sections 65854-65857, the Planning Commission must first make a recommendation on a proposed action, before the City Council can act on it. Here, the nature of the action has changed to explicitly amend certain properties' zoning designation,which was not considered by the Planning Commission, depriving the Planning Commission and the public from the benefit of having an informed recommendation. To resolve this issue, this matter should be continued to the future until the Planning Commission has actually considered the proposed zoning change, and all of the impacted parties can be given the necessary opportunity to provide comments. 5. Permits Issued Under the Existing Development Code Run with The Land The Development Code Amendment revised the existing Development Code to convert the existing "Conditional Use Permit" into a "Minor Use Permit," while creating a new "Conditional Use Permit"that must be approved by the Planning Commission. Further,the Development Code Amendment adds provisions that could be interpreted as requiring a new use permit every time a new tenant or user occupies an existing building, even if the contemplated use had been approved by the City. While Phelan hopes that is not the City's goal, for the record, it does wish to explain how such a requirement is unconstitutional, and contrary to CEQA. The creation of the new Planning Commission-level Conditional Use Permit does not require every future tenant of a building with an existing permit to acquire a new conditional use permit because the property has vested rights to continue operating in accordance with the prior approval. Where a property owner has "performed substantial work and incurred substantial liabilities in good faith reliance upon a permit issued by the government,he acquires a vested right to complete construction in accordance with the terms of the permit." (Avco Community Developers, Inc. v. South Coast Regional Com. (1976) 17 Cal.3d 785, 791 ["Once a landowner has secured a vested right the government may not, by virtue of a change in the zoning laws, prohibit construction authorized by the permit upon which he relied."]; see also Anderson v. La Mesa(1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 657, 660.) Moreover,once a vested right is established,it"runs with the land," a city thus cannot require a new discretionary permit merely because a new tenant or operator moves into a property. (See The Park at Cross Creek, LLC v. City of Malibu (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 1196, 1209 ["A CUP is not a personal interest. It does not attach to the permittee; rather, a CUP creates a right that runs with the land."]; Malibu Mountains Recreation, Inc. v. 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 10 County of Los Angeles (1998) 67 Cal.AppAth 359, 367 [same]; Goat Hill Tavern v. City of Costa Mesa (1992) 6 Cal.AppAth 1519, 1530 ["Once a use permit has been properly issued, the power of a municipality to revoke it is limited."].) Nor can the government infringe on a vested right by changing the requirements of the original entitlements, e.g., by requiring additional mitigation. (See, e.g., Kaufman &Broad Central Valley, Inc. v. City of Modesto (1994) 25 Cal.AppAth 1577, 1591 [City could not impose new fees on developer who had already obtained vested right to complete project].) Here, Phelan, and other industrial property owners, have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in constructing facilities in the City, in reliance on prior entitlements approved by the City, and consequently, has a vested right in the continued operation of such facilities. The City cannot lawfully interfere with that right by requiring additional discretionary review every time a new tenant moves into an existing facility. Accordingly,Phelan requests that the proposed Development Code Amendment be revised to reflect the fact that it does not impact existing vested rights based on entitlements that were issued by the City previously. 6. CEOA Prohibits the City From Requiring Additional Review of Entitled Proiects. As the City well knows, the process for evaluating projects under the CEQA is extremely time-consuming and expensive. The upshot,however, is that once the process is finally complete, and a project receives an initial approval, CEQA forbids an agency from re-opening the CEQA process unless a further discretionary approval is required, and even then, sharply restricts when additional analysis may be required. (See Pub. Res. Code § 21166; CEQA Guidelines, § 15162; San Diego Navy Broadway Complex Coalition v. City of San Diego (2010) 185 Cal.AppAth 924, 936 ["Information appearing after an approval does not require reopening of that approval."]; Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians v. Rancho Cal. Water Dist. (1996) 43 Cal.AppAth 425, 437 [any CEQA challenge brought in connection with a subsequent project approval "is limited to the legality of the agency's decision about whether to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR, or subsequent negative declaration, and the underlying EIR or negative declaration may not be attacked."].) Here, by trying to force any subsequent tenant or user of an industrial property to obtain some sort of discretionary permit (either a Planning Commission-level CUP or a zone change to expand the proposed overlay district), the City is acing outside of the scope of what is authorized by CEQA. The purpose of an EIR or other CEQA document is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of a project (including future tenants' operations) before it is approved. (Guidelines § 15352(b) ["With private projects, approval occurs upon the earliest commitment to issue or the issuance by the public agency of a discretionary. . .permit, license,certificate, or other entitlement for use of the project."].) Once a project is approved, CEQA documents do not continue to function as some sort of separate regulatory control limiting the operation of a project. 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 11 Put simply, if a use is permitted under existing zoning,the mere fact that a new tenant may move into that use does not re-open the door for further analysis. As such, to the extent the proposed Development Code Amendment seeks to require additional environmental review whenever a new tenant occupies a property, the proposed amendment is contrary to CEQA, because it would require previously-approved and legally operating projects to undergo additional environmental analysis every time they are re-tenanted. Accordingly, Phelan asks that the proposed Development Code Amendment be revised to clarify that it is not requiring subsequent environmental review simply because a new tenant uses a previously entitled property. 7. The Development Code Amendment Violates Due Process. The touchstone of substantive due process is the protection of the individual against arbitrary government action; the due process clause was intended to prevent government officials from abusing their power or employing it as an instrument of oppression. (Wolff v. McDonnell (1974)418 U.S. 539,558; Collins v. City of Harker Heights(1992)503 U.S. 115, 126.) A violation of substantive due process rights occurs if a government agency's actions are (1) irrational or arbitrary or (2) not rationally related to a legitimate government interest. (Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. (1926) 272 U.S. 365; Lingle v. Chevron (2005) 544 U.S. 528.) The test is disjunctive. Thus, a property owner need only demonstrate facts to support one of the two bases in order to state a viable due process claim. In Arnel Development Co. v. City of Costa Mesa(1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 330,337,the court of appeal ruled that enactment of a zoning ordinance downzoning certain property was arbitrary and discriminatory where enacted without considering appropriate planning criteria and for sole and specific purpose of defeating a single development. (See also Del Monte Dunes, Ltd. v. City of Monterey (9th Cir. 1990) 920 F.2d 1496, 1508 [court finds local agency's land use decision, motivated by "political pressure from neighbors" instead of legitimate regulatory concerns, supported a substantive due process claim] and Herrington v. County of Sonoma (9th Cir. 1987) 834 F.2d 1488 [denial of subdivision and subsequent downzoning of property violated property owner's due process rights given evidence that county's general plan/subdivision inconsistency determination was irrational and arbitrary and aimed at defeating particular development project].) If the City were to enact the Development Code Amendment and the associated zoning changes, its actions would be arbitrary and irrational, and would constitute an abuse of power, subjecting it to liability also under the substantive process clause. The seemingly random size restrictions and prohibitions on warehouse uses are irrational and arbitrary. They are not rationally related to a legitimate government interest. The City has recently approved many industrial projects, including Phelan's. Yet,now the City is purporting to prohibit or greatly restrict the size of warehouse developments and make these 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 RUTAN RUTAN&TUCKER,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 15, 2021 Page 12 recently approved projects nonconforming uses. Such arbitrary action would subject the City to liability for violation of due process rights. Additionally, while it was clear the City was well aware of the properties that would be drastically affected by the proposed action, the City apparently decided to move forward with this amendment without giving the effected parties the requisite notice. (See above.) This is a clear violation of the procedural due process rights of the affected property owners,including Industrial. (Scott v. City oflndian Wells (1972) 6 Cal.3d 541, 549.) 8. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, Phelan points out the City cannot adopt the current version of the Development Code Amendment, that it cannot do so at this time as such would violate California's Planning & Zoning laws, CEQA, and Phelan's due process rights, and therefore, requests the make the necessary revisions to address the foregoing issues. Sincerely, RUTAN &TUCKER, LLP Hans Van Ligten HVL:TV:kw 2545/027225-0001 16595635.4 a06/15/21 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1 -ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE ATTORNEYS AT LAW 18101 Von Karman Avenue NOSSAMAN 1800 Irvine, CA 92612 LLP T 949.833.3.7800 F 949.833.7878 Bradford B.Kuhn D 949.477.7651 bkuhn@nossaman.com VIA EMAIL AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Refer To File#190373-0094 June 16, 2021 Mayor and Members of the City Council c/o City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Email: City.Clerk(c)-Cityof RC.us Re: City Council Meeting; June 16, 2021 Item No. G1 First Reading of Ordinance No. 982 Southern California Edison Public Comments Dear Mayor Michael and Members of the City Council, Southern California Edison ("Edison") submits this opposition letter and objects to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's ("City") proposed first reading of Ordinance No. 982, which would amend Title 17 of the City's Development Code. The proposed Ordinance No. 982, to be considered as part of Item G1 on the City's June 16, 2021 City Council Meeting Agenda, proposes a comprehensive overhaul of the Development Code as it relates to existing and proposed industrial uses located in the City, including the City's Southeast Industrial Quadrant ("SEIQ"). Edison has a direct interest in the City's proposal to overhaul the City's land use regulation of industrial uses located within the City's boundaries since Edison owns multiple parcels within the SEIQ, on which its Etiwanda Substation, Rancho Vista Substation, Grapeland Peaker Plant, and a variety of associated electrical infrastructure both above and below ground are located. Edison uses this infrastructure to serve its millions of customers, including the City itself, as well as individual customers, businesses, and other governmental and private entities. The above assets are necessary to maintain a reliable supply of electricity in Southern California. Edison has been engaging with the City regarding the City's forthcoming General Plan update, inclusive of the identification of various street corridors running through the SEIQ and Edison's property and the City's proposal to amend the Development Code. Edison opposes the proposed amendments to the Development Code because they are infeasible as a matter of law and because the City is required to, but has failed to comply with, the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21000 et seq., and the Ralph M. Brown Act in connection with the City Council's proposed June 16, 2021 action to adopt Ordinance No. 982. 58099981.0 nossarnan.com Mayor and Members of the City Council June 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Item G1 First Reading of Ordinance No. 982 June 16, 2021 Page 2 For the above reasons, and as discussed in greater detail below, Edison strongly urges the City to take Item G1 off its agenda for the June 16, 2021 City Council meeting, and delay the City Council's action on proposed Development Code amendments until after the City has adequately considered and resolved the legal infeasibility of the proposed amendments and complied with CEQA. 1. THE CITY IS IN VIOLATION OF THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT. The Ralph M. Brown Act requires the agenda for a public meeting to be posted a minimum of 72 hours in advance of the meeting. (Gov. Code, § 54954, subd. (a); Gov. Code, § 54954.2, subd. (a)(1).) Members of the public can seek declaratory and injunctive relief against a government agency for engaging in practices that violate the mandates of the Brown Act. (Gov. Code, § 54960.) The agenda for the City Council's June 16, 2021 regular meeting was originally published in the evening on Thursday, June 10, 2021. However, an update specifically to item G1 —the proposed Ordinance No. 982 —was posted and distributed at approximately 6 PM on Monday, June 14, 2021. This is less than the 72 hours' notice required by the Brown Act. (See Gov. Code, § 54954.2, subd. (a)(1).) It also became clear that multiple stakeholders were entirely unable to access the documents for Item G1 until after the amended agenda documents were posted on June 14, 2021. The City's latent amended agenda posting violates the Brown Act and precludes meaningful public comment on the proposed ordinance. Because the Ordinance involves significant changes to the City's Development Code and because the notice provided of the update fails to comply with the Brown Act, Edison demands that item G1 be postponed and continued to allow the public sufficient time under the Brown Act to review and comment on the proposed changes contained in Ordinance No. 982. 2. ORIDNANCE NO. 982 IS LEGALLY INFEASIBLE. While Edison is continuing to review the new text of the proposed Ordinance and reserves its right to supplement these comments, based on a preliminary review it is clear that the revisions include entirely new verbiage specifically addressing performance standards for utility infrastructure. These latent additions raise concerns that the City's proposed amendments to the Development Code are ultra vires and invalid as a matter of law. The City's police powers with respect to utility infrastructure are preempted under state law, which grants the California Public Utilities Commission jurisdiction to regulate electric power line projects, distribution lines, substation and other regulated electric facilities. (See California Public Utilities Commission, General Order 131-D, § XIV.B ["local jurisdictions acting pursuant to local authority are preempted from regulating . . . electric facilities constructed by public utilities subject to the Commission's jurisdiction"]; see also Utility Consumers Action Network v. Cal. Public Utilities Commission (2010) 187 Cal.AppAth 88.) Ordinance No. 982 also proposes to add section 17.20.040(D)(9) to the Development Code to implement the so-called "Block Network Parameters." The Block Network Parameters 58099981A Mayor and Members of the City Council June 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Item G1 First Reading of Ordinance No. 982 June 16, 2021 Page 3 contemplate the construction of a new circulation network in the SEIQ to effectuate the City's forthcoming Circulation Element and General Plan Update. New development within the SEIQ would be subject to the new Block Network Parameters. As discussed at length in Edison's prior correspondence with the City, including Edison's May 11, 2021 comments relating to General Plan Update (SCH # 2000061027) Circulation Element and Streets Update/Amendment SEIQ, the City's contemplated new circulation network for the SEIQ poses significant logistical and legal challenges both for the City and Edison because the contemplated roadway network would significantly interfere with Edison's operations and use of Edison's property, in part because one proposed roadway would actually bisect an existing, operational substation. Edison also cannot— and will not— unilaterally dedicate portions of Edison's property for the streets proposed in the SEIQ Assessment both because the proposed streets would have significant impacts both to the environment and to Edison's operations, and because Edison is a public utility subject to regulation by the CPUC. Edison's status as a CPUC regulated public utility means that the CPUC would need to review and approve any proposed dedication of public property (see Pub. Util. Code, § 851), and that the CPUC (not the City) is responsible for reviewing and approving the majority of Edison's public utility infrastructure projects, including efforts to move or underground transmission lines, or to move or alter existing substations Ordinance No. 982 would essentially codify the infeasible street network that the City identified in its May 2021 SEIQ Assessment. The Block Network Parameters are legally infeasible and without effect to the degree that they require construction of streets within Edison's property or which interfere with Edison's operations. The City cannot legally require Edison to dedicate portions of Edison property for the proposed streets. Additionally, despite proposed language suggesting otherwise, the City's Development Code amendments legally cannot apply to Edison's facilities which are solely subject to CPUC authority; likewise, the City's proposed Development Code amendments should not apply to any accessory structures or developments on Edison's property, or otherwise adversely impact Edison's existing infrastructure and operations. Therefore, the amendments are infeasible, as the existing facilities or future development on Edison's property should not be required to comply with the Development Code. 3. THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 982 IS NOT EXEMPT FROM CEQA REVIEW. A. The So-Called "Common Sense" Exemption from CEQA Review is Facially Inapplicable to the Development Code Amendments. CEQA applies to "discretionary projects proposed to be approved or carried out by public changes." (Pub. Resources Code, § 21080, subd. (a).) A"project" is an activity that may cause a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical environmental changes that is undertaken by a public agency. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21065.) The California Natural Resources Agency's CEQA-implementing regulations specifically identify amendments and enactments of zoning ordinances among the categories of actions that may constitute a "project" under CEQA. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14 ["CEQA Guidelines"], § 15378, subd. (a)(1).) Indeed, the City concedes in 58099981A Mayor and Members of the City Council June 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Item G1 First Reading of Ordinance No. 982 June 16, 2021 Page 4 the staff report that the proposed Development Code amendments are a project within the meaning of CEQA. However, the City is proposing to exempt its action on Ordinance No. 982 from CEQA review under the catch-all "common sense" exemption found at section 15061(13)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. (City Staff Report, at pp. 6-7.) Section 15061(b)(3) provides that a project is exempt from CEQA review if: The activity is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The City's reliance on the "common sense" CEQA exemption is misplaced because the exemption is facially inapplicable to the City's proposed Development Code amendments. The proposed Development Code amendments lift a development moratorium (and thus facilitate new development within the City) (see May 26, 2021 Planning Commission Staff Report, p. 1); are intended to phase out older industrial development and phase in "modern industrial development" (see id. at p. 2); introduce entirely new and potentially conflicting uses, including residential uses, into an industrial park (see Proposed Ordinance, § 17.30.030.1); remove all height limitations for all development within the SEIQ (see Staff Report, p. 4); alter building intensity requirements for buildings (ibid.); implement a new transportation and circulation network (see id. at p. 6); facilitate increased trucking operations (see id. at p. 4); and relax requirements for parking lot trees (ibid.). Given all of the changes made possible by these proposed provisions, and likely many others, the City lacks substantial evidence to support its conclusion that there is "no possibility' that the proposed reimagining of development within the SEIQ will not have a significant effect on the environment. (See CEQA Guidelines, § 15061, subd. (b)(3), emphasis added.) The City has failed to identify a valid ground for exempting the Development Code amendments from CEQA review because there is no exemption from state-mandated environmental analysis for a project of this scope. 4. THE CITY HAS IMPROPERLY PIECEMEALED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS AND THE FORTHCOMING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. CEQA prohibits piecemealing of projects. (Christward Ministry v. Superior Court(1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 180, 228.) CEQA mandates that "environmental considerations do not become submerged by chopping a large project into many little ones— each with minimal potential impact on the environment—which cumulatively may have disastrous consequences." (Citizens Assn. for Sensible Development of Bishop Area v. County of Inyo (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 151, 165, citation omitted.) As the California Supreme Court recently observed in Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach (2012) 211 Cal.AppAth 1209, 1223, activities must be 58099981A Mayor and Members of the City Council June 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Item G1 First Reading of Ordinance No. 982 June 16, 2021 Page 5 reviewed together when the project under review is the first major step toward future development, or the project under review practically compels or presumes completion of another project. In other words, activities must be reviewed together as one "project" when they are "interdependent." (See Communities for a Better Environment v. City of Richmond(2010) 184 Cal.AppAth 70, 101.) CEQA provides that a "project" is the "whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment . . . ." (CEQA Guidelines, § 15378, subd. (a).) The term "project" further refers to the whole of an action and the underlying activity being approved, not to each separate governmental approval required. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15378, subd. (c).) An "accurate, stable and finite project description" is the "sine qua non of an informative and legally sufficient" CEQA document. (South of Market Community Action Network v. City & County Of San Francisco (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 321, 332.) A court is not required to defer to the City's definition of"project"for purposes of scoping the City's environmental analysis. Whether or not the project description here is sufficient to fulfill CEQA's informational purposes is a question of law, subject to de novo review. (Rodeo Citizens Assn. V. County of Contra Costa (2018) 22 Cal.App.5th 214, 219.) Here, the proposed Development Code amendments are intended to function in concert with and to implement the City's forthcoming General Plan Update, inclusive of the City's forthcoming Circulation Plan Amendment -- a point that City Planning Staff has reiterated during each planning meeting with stakeholders, and which is set forth in the staff report for item No. G1. (See City Staff Report, at pp. 1-2 [indicating that the moratorium on development was intended to consider changes to the Development Code in conjunction with work being done on the General Plan].) The interdependence of the General Plan Update and Ordinance No. 982 is further evidenced by, for example, new ordinance provisions requiring the finding that new conditionally permitted development be consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan and that the site be physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of the use, including access and utilities (see Ordinance No. 982, § 17.20.060F) and the Block Network Parameters (id., § 17.36.040(D)(9)(a)(ii)) discussed above. The Development Code amendments and the General Plan Update are interdependent activities that must be reviewed as one project in the forthcoming General Plan Update EIR. The City's piecemeal approval of a new development vision for the SEIQ violates CEQA. 5. THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO PREPARE AND CERTIFY AN EIR BEFORE IT MAY ADOPT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS. An EIR is required to be prepared whenever there is a fair argument based on substantial evidence that a project may result in a potentially significant impact on the environment. (Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.AppAth 1597, 1602.) This standard effectuates CEQA's strong presumption in favor of environmental review and sets a low threshold for the preparation of an EIR. (Consolidated Irrigation Dist. v. City of Selma (2012) 204 Cal.AppAth 187, 207.) Here, there is a fair argument based on substantial evidence that the 58099981A Mayor and Members of the City Council June 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Item G1 First Reading of Ordinance No. 982 June 16, 2021 Page 6 proposed Development Code amendments will result in potentially significant public utilities and land use impacts. As explained in Edison's prior letters to the City, based on the plans provided to Edison by City planning staff over the course of several meetings, and those presented at the Planning Commission's November 12, 2020, and December 9, 2020 meetings, it is Edison's understanding that the City's proposed circulation network in the SEIQ includes new streets running between the Etiwanda and Rancho Vista Substations, the Grapeland Peaker Plant and the Rancho Vista Substation, Edison's property and the Inland Empire Utility Agency's property, and between the Former Etiwanda Generating Station and the existing Etiwanda Substation. One of the proposed streets in the most recent iteration that the City has provided to the public would literally bisect the existing Rancho Vista Substation. At present, there are no paved streets in any locations on Edison's parcels. Edison staff travel between the installations and parcels using dirt roads that are substantially narrower than would be required for a paved public street. Part of the reason for this, aside from the fact that use of the parcels is limited entirely to Edison staff, is that there are Edison installations that run both above and underneath the parcels. As disclosed to City planning staff on several occasions, SCE has transmission lines that run both overhead and underneath the proposed streets contemplated by the City as part of its SEIQ circulation network, as well as electrical towers along the routes proposed for such streets, and electrical poles running along those routes as well. In order to comply with the development standards mandated by the Development Code amendments, proponents of new development within the SEIQ would be required to impact and potentially relocate Edison infrastructure. This includes excavating undergrounded transmission lines running to and from the Rancho Vista Substation, the Etiwanda Substation, and the Grapeland Peaker Plant. It would also require the relocation of multiple aboveground electrical towers and poles which currently sit within the likely right-of-way for the proposed streets. Relocation of this magnitude of essential infrastructure so close to two substations and a peaker plant poses a significant risk of causing service disruptions to Edison's millions of customers, including the City itself. The City has not analyzed the need to relocate any existing utility infrastructure, let alone Edison's Mira Loma-Rancho Vista 500 kilovolt (kV) transmission line, the Padua-Rancho Vista No. 1 & No. 2 220 kV transmission line, the Etiwanda-Arbors-Forge- Reduction 66 kV electrical line, the Etiwanda-Archline-Cucamonga-Genamic 66kV electrical line, and the Fields 12kV underground electrical line. Each of these impacts was flagged for the City in Edison's September 29, 2020 letter. Additionally, the proposed Development Code amendments would, for the first time, open the Industrial Park within the SEIQ to residential development and encourage additional commercial development that has previously been restricted within the SEIQ. The City has not analyzed or addressed the potential that new residences (or live/work spaces) and sensitive receptors (e.g., daycare facilities) may now be located in proximity of heavy industrial operations, including Edison's Grapeland Peaker Plant, and exposed to elevated emissions of criteria and hazardous air pollutants from these operations. The same is true for the other existing heavy industrial uses within the SEIQ. 58099981A Mayor and Members of the City Council June 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Item G1 First Reading of Ordinance No. 982 June 16, 2021 Page 7 The City is required to proceed to prepare an Initial Study and to comply with CEQA's requirements for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prior to taking an action to approve the proposed Development Code amendments. 6. CONCLUSION. The City's proposed action on Ordinance No. 982 is premature and would violate state environmental review and government transparency laws. We urge the City to delay action on Ordinance No. 982 until such time that the City has complied with the Brown Act, put forward a legally feasible ordinance amendment, and has fully complied with CEQA's requirements for the preparation of an EIR that cohesively and fully addresses the City's land use plans and implementing ordinances and their potentially significant impacts on the environment. Should the City continue to proceed down this ill-conceived and piecemealed path, Edison reserves all its rights and remedies to challenge the City's actions. Sincerely, q;ek Bradford B. Kuhn Nossaman LLP BBK: cc: Elizabeth Klebaner 58099981A 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Guillermo Calvillo<CalvilloConsultingServices@outlook.com> Date:Tue,Jun 15, 2021 at 4:50 PM Subject: Letter of Concern on Ordinance XXX To: Lynne Kennedy CC: Eddie Soya <sova@att.net>, Eduardo Soya <sova-a@outlook.com>, Guillermo Calvillo<CalviIIoConsultingServices@ outlook.com> Dear Mrs. Kennedy, Please refer to the attached letter to the city council regarding our grievance on the resolutions adopted regarding zoning for projects that involve parking facilities for trucks,that affects our development plans for the addresses mentioned to you before: 12997 Arrow Rt. &8889 Etiwanda Ave We met with Ms. Macintosh and another member of the Planning department. Unfortunately City Manager Gillison did not attend the meeting as scheduled, therefore no chance of any progress was possible as we were talking to the same people that created the ordinance and are closed to listen to our case. I asked Ms. Macintosh for specific reasons to deny this kind of permit in the whole city and no other reason was given than it was the consensus of the Planning Commission.That answer, being non- factual, does not satisfy our question. We were hoping to count on you as support for your constituent Mr. Soya, and we still need your help to address our issue during tomorrow's City Council meeting which we will attend virtually. Best regards, Guillermo Caluillo Calvillo Con.5ulting fervice5 Upland, CA 91784 (951 ) 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL:ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE C ALVI LLO C.0IVLJJ1AG f r_RVI CV 1255 Tamarisk Circle Upland,California 91784 Phone(951) 990—5705 "luilloCor-giAltiri9,f6rOGe-g@OL4tlook.com Attn. Rancho Cucamonga City Council 15 June 2021 10500 Civic Center Dr Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 cc: Eduardo Soya File To the City Council Members, We are writing this letter to express disappointment and protest regarding Ordinance XXX which impedes the development of our two projects located on 12977 Arrow Route(5.2 acres for offices,3 bays for maintenance and parking for 53 trucks). The second one located on 8889 Etiwanda Ave. is currently being used as such and we are asking for a permit to expand to the back of the property(1.09 acres)to park an additional 10 units. According to Exhibit E,Amendments to Chapter 17.26(Establishment of Zoning Districts) under IE Zoning: "Industrial Employment. Designates areas reserved for manufacturing, processing, construction and heavy equipment yards,warehousing and storage,e-commerce distribution, light industrial research parks,automobile and vehicle services,and a broad range of similar clean industrial practices and processes that typically generate more truck traffic, noise, and environmental impacts than would be compatible with office and residential uses. This zoning district prohibits non-industrial uses,except for accessory office and commercial uses(such as restaurants or convenience stores)that support the employees of the primary industrial use, and on-site caretaker units". The nature of our business is transportation of building materials; more specifically, aggregates such as sand, gravel, and soil,which falls into our category of a parking facility for our truck and trailer units. Exhibit F,TABLE 17.30.030-1 under Parking Facilities, denies permits for this kind of project overall and citywide. Our project would generate considerably less traffic in the area than any of the big box warehouses or distribution centers being built by companies owned by transnationals or huge developers such as Goodman. The affected business is owned by Mr. Eduardo Soya,a resident of Rancho Cucamonga,whom has chosen to invest in his own city with his small business and development. As a resident of Rancho Cucamonga and small business owner in our city,we kindly ask for your consideration to allow this type of project that is being negatively impacted by this ordinance,while also not providing us with any specific reason as to why the project was denied citywide. We demand a list of reasons and arguments that are valid to prohibit this kind of project,and/or a revision to the current ordinance. Thank you, L Guillermo Calvillo foi duardo Soyl Eddie's Trucking 8889 Etiwanda Ave. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Phone: (951)990-3705&(909)714-1351 oe,fIGA PRAFTI/YG PLA/iAIAG 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE G R ES HAM I SAVAG E Matthew.Nelson@GreshamSavage.com • San Bernardino Office Ai i O R N E Y S Al -,. (909)890-4499 • fax(909)890-9877 June 15, 2021 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Opposition to July 16,2021 City Council Public Hearing Item G1: Ordinance No. 982 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: This firm represents Brookfield Properties ("Brookfield") and submits this letter in opposition to the above-referenced item. Among other things, Ordinance No. 982 would result in a complete ban on auto and vehicle storage anywhere within the City (except as an accessory use) without any rational basis or valid justification, which directly impacts and is harmful to Brookfield's property interests. Should the City Council approve Ordinance No. 982,we are fully prepared to bring legal action against the City. The following statement included on page 208 of the June 16,2021 City Council packet: "The data shows that the majority of the City's existing industrial stock consists of smaller units. 65% of the units (521) are under 30,000 square feet and 75% (602) are under 50,000 square feet. It is not the intent to more heavily regulate these smaller industrial uses, but rather to encourage them to locate and thrive here in Rancho Cucamonga. Fiscally, these smaller industrial uses employ more people per acre, produce more revenue per acre (sales and property tax), and have equal or lower impacts per acre than most of the larger industrial uses." Brookfield currently owns a site proposed for auto and vehicle storage, which is less than five acres in size and is developed with an approximately 8,000 square foot building, and is therefore within the category of "smaller industrial uses" that the City purportedly wishes to encourage based upon their unique characteristics. Yet, auto and vehicle storage uses are now inexplicably proposed to be banned City-wide even though their operational characteristics do not significantly differ from an enclosed warehouse use (and in fact, typically result in fewer impacts than a warehouse). The supporting materials in the June 16, 2021 City Council staff report also fail to provide any rational basis or justification for unfairly targeting this use. As a whole, the amendments proposed under Ordinance No. 982 are unduly burdensome and onerous to smaller industrial uses. SAN BERNARDINO 550 East Hospitality Lane, Suite III • San Bernardino, California 92408 SAN DIEGO 401 West A Street, Suite 925 • San Diego, California 92101 GreshamSavage.com B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 2 As shown on the attached Exhibit "A", Ordinance No. 982 would expand the CUP findings to include "consistency' with the General Plan rather than "compliance" and would require consistency with the "purposes" of the Development Code and zoning district instead of simply requiring compliance with applicable provisions. Other language and considerations within the proposed new Section 17.20.060 that are ambiguous and likely to result in confusion are also highlighted. For example, what are the limits of the General Plan consistency analysis? Should this not be amended to require consistency only with relevant and applicable General Plan policies? Who is the final arbiter of what uses are "undesirable" and what standards are utilized in making this determination? In what manner could an individual project possibly be injurious to an entire zoning district?What threshold will be utilized to determine whether traffic volumes are "significantly" increased or whether a pattern of traffic will be "negatively" altered? In addition, Brookfield intends to file an appeal to the City Council related to the recent denial of its application for Conditional Use Permit DRC2020-00439, under which Brookfield sought to operate an auto and vehicle storage facility in an existing industrial building located at 9910 6th Street ("Project"). Central to Brookfield's appeal is the fact that City staff and Planning Commission improperly and prematurely applied the future provisions contemplated by Ordinance No. 982 to the Project, rather than limiting their review to the permissible scope of findings under the then-existing Code. A copy of the appeal letter is attached as Exhibit "B", which is being submitted concurrently with this letter. For this reason, Brookfield urges the City Council not to take further action related to adoption of Ordinance No.982 until this appeal can be heard. In conclusion, Ordinance No. 982 improperly targets auto and vehicle storage without any justification. Ambiguous language has been proposed to be included within the new CUP findings, which is likely to result in confusion, misinterpretation and further abuses of discretion. Brookfield urges the Council to decline to adopt Ordinance No. 982; or at minimum, postpone final adoption of Ordinance No. 982 until its appeal related to Conditional Use Permit DRC2020-00439 is heard before the City Council to avoid undue prejudice to Brookfield's appeal. Very truly yours, Matthew Wm.Nelson, of GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN&TILDEN, A Professional Corporation B 1210-001--4079620.1 Exhibit A Current Findings Under Development Code Section 17.16.120 D. Findings.The director shall approve,or approve with conditions,an application for a conditional use permit after finding all of the following.If the director does not make all of these findings,he/she shall deny the conditional use permit: 1. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this zoning code,Municipal Code,general plan,and any applicable specific plans or city regulations/standards. 2. The site is physically suited for the type,density,and intensity of the proposed use including access, utilities,and the absence of physical constraints and can be conditioned to meet all related performance criteria and development standards. 3. Granting the permit would not be detrimental to the public interest,health,safety,convenience,or welfare, or materially injurious to persons,property,or improvements in the vicinity in which the project is located. Proposed Findings Under Ordinance No.982 (New Section 17.20.060 would require CUPs to be considered by Planning Commission) E.Findings.The approving authority shall make the following findings before approving a conditional use permit application: 1.The proposed use is consistent with the general plan. 2.The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the development code and the purposes of the applicable zoning district as well as any applicable specific plans or city regulations/standards. 3.The site is physically suitable for the type,density,and intensity of the use being proposed,including access,utilities,and the absence of physical constraints that would make conduct of the use undesirable. 4.The design,location,size and operating characteristics of the proposed use would be compatible with the existing and other permitted uses in the vicinity including transportation and service facilities. 5.Granting the permit would not constitute a nuisance or be injurious to detrimental to the public interest,health,safety, convenience,or welfare,or materially injurious to persons,property,or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. The factors to be considered in making this finding include: a.Property damage or nuisance arising from noise,smoke,odor,dust,vibration or illumination caused by the use; b.Hazard to persons or property from possible explosion,contamination,fire or flood caused by the use;and, c.Significantly increase the volume of traffic or negatively alter the pattern of traffic. 6.The proposed use will not pose an undue burden on city services,including police,fire,streets,and other public utilities, such that the city is unable to maintain its current level of service due to the use;and 7.The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Exhibit B G R ES HAM I SAVAG E Matthew.Nelson@GreshamSavage.com • San Bernardino Office Ai i O R N E Y S Al " (909)890-4499 • fax(909)890-9877 June 15, 2021 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council c/o Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant, Planning Department City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Notice of Appeal of Planning Commission Decision Regarding Planning Director Denial of DRC2020-00439 (Rancho Cucamonga Development Code §17.14.070) Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: This firm represents Brookfield Properties ("Brookfield") in connection with its application on behalf of H.E.R. Trucking, Inc. for the above-referenced Conditional Use Permit DRC2020-00439 seeking to operate an auto and vehicle storage facility in an existing industrial building located at 9910 6th Street (APN Nos. 0209-211-42 and 43) ("Site") in the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("City") (the "Project"). This notice of appeal is submitted as a final attempt to give the City Council the opportunity to remedy the unlawful actions of City staff and the Planning Commission due to the improper denial of the Project and avoid the drain on City resources that will occur should we be required to litigate this matter. On May 4, 2021, the City Planning Director issued a troubling and unusual decision denying Brookfield's application for the Project solely on the grounds that the proposed vehicle storage use was allegedly inconsistent with certain economic policies and goals of the City's current General Plan, including Goal ED-1, Policy ED-1.3, Goal ED-3 and Policy ED-3.3. The Planning Director's denial and the written findings supporting that denial were wholly inadequate and insufficient to justify denial of the Project. Brookfield timely filed an appeal of the Planning Director's decision, which was heard by the Planning Commission on June 9, 2021. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 21-38 denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Director's decision. Unfortunately, there was also no basis in law or fact to justify the Planning Commission's denial of Brookfield's appeal. We respectfully request that this correspondence be included as part of the administrative record for this matter. Enclosed herewith is a check in the amount of $1,685.00 as payment of the appeal processing fee for this matter. SAN BERNARDINO 550 East Hospitality Lane, Suite 300 • San Bernardino, California 92408 SAN DIEGO 401 West A Street, Suite 925 • San Diego, California 92101 GreshamSavage.com B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 2 In accordance with Municipal Code Sections 17.14.070, et seq., Brookfield respectfully submits this appeal of the Planning Director's denial of the Project and the Planning Commission's subsequent denial of the appeal for the following reasons: 1. Previous Arguments Raised on Appeal. Correspondence dated May 12,2021 and June 2, 2021 was submitted to the City as part of Brookfield's appeal and was included as part of the June 9, 2021 Planning Commission Staff Report packet at Exhibits B and C, respectively. Additional arguments and information were presented by Brookfield and its legal counsel at the Planning Commission hearing. For sake of brevity the analysis and arguments made therein will not be fully reiterated in this letter,but are briefly summarized as follows: • The Planning Director's General Plan "consistency analysis" was beyond the scope of the permissible findings under Development Code Section 17.16.120 which only requires "compliance" with applicable provisions of the General Plan, etc.—NOT a consistency analysis based upon broader economic considerations. • The Planning Director's decision did not cite to a single General Plan Land Use Policy in justifying the denial of the Project, nor did the June 9, 2019 Planning Commission staff report address any of the above policies or dispute Brookfield's consistency analysis. Instead, the Planning Commission staff report instead discussed three completely inapplicable General Plan Land Use Policies in an attempt to justify the denial: LU-1.1, LU-6.1 and LU-6.4 (dealing with residential neighborhoods, commercial services and infrastructure, respectively). These policies are irrelevant to an industrially-zoned project site that will have no impact on residential neighborhoods and is already served by existing infrastructure. • The Project is infill development (beneficial reuse of a 4.55 acre site that was previously used as a recycling center) and is therefore consistent with General Plan Land Use Policies discussed at page LU-53 of the General Plan as well as policies LU-1.2, LU-3.2, LU-3.3, LU-3.4, LU-3.5 and LU-3.7 due to the Project's strategic access close to the I-10 Freeway via Archibald Avenue; creation of jobs; support of a healthy jobs-housing balance; reduction of vehicle miles traveled; and sustainability due to reuse of the existing site with no new construction proposed. This consistency analysis related to these policies was never addressed or refuted by City staff. • The Project site is currently zoned General Industrial (GI), which designation allows for auto and vehicle storage as a conditionally permitted use. (Rancho B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 3 Cucamonga Development Code§ 17.30.030;Table 17.30.030-1.) The Project site also has a General Plan designation of General Industrial, which permits a "wide range of industrial activities" (Rancho Cucamonga General Plan at LU- 17). There was no finding or other determination by staff that the Project fails to comply with any uniformly-applicable, mandatory development standard for uses in the General Industrial (GI) zoning district or the General Industrial General Plan designation. • Brookfield demonstrated that the Project will comply with all performance standards contained within Chapter 17.66 of the Development Code; however, none of these performance standards were mentioned in the Planning Director's denial or the June 9, 2021 staff report. There was absolutely no factual basis for the finding that the Project would be "detrimental to the public interest or welfare to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity in which the project is located." • Some of the Planning Commissioners expressed general concern about "incompatibility" with surrounding land uses, most notably the adjacent Rowdy's Brewery. However, all surrounding property owners received notice of the hearing and no letters were received, nor were there any public comments made at the Planning Commission hearing from any concerned adjacent property owners. In addition, staff's June 9, 2021 presentation also focused exclusively on nearby office park and manufacturing uses to support the argument that a truck storage facility was "incompatible" with the area, while ignoring the warehouse and larger industrial uses to the north and south of the Project site. • The Project meets each and every one of the CUP findings under Development Code Section 17.16.120 based upon a plain, common sense reading of the Code and General Plan. However, these provisions have been stretched, misinterpreted and misapplied in such a way as to amount to an abuse of discretion.1 Brookfield hereby incorporates by reference each and every one of the statements and arguments in support of its position contained in the above-referenced correspondence into the record for this appeal before the City Council. ' Cal.Code Civ.Proc.§1094.5; Topanga Assn.for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974)11 Cal.3d 506,517. B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 4 2. The Real Reason for Denial: Attempted Unlawful "Retroactive" Application of Code Provisions Not Yet In Effect. The failure of City staff and the Planning Commission to analyze any of the relevant standards, code requirements and policies that actually apply to the Project was puzzling and initially suggested that this denial was prejudicial and based on other inappropriate reasons (perhaps a "general dislike" of the Project) rather than any of the required findings. Also troubling was that the Planning Commission packet only included a Resolution for denial of the appeal, which suggested that a decision had already been prematurely made before considering any of the relevant information presented at the hearing. In fact, the reason for this inexplicable and seemingly prejudicial denial of the Project and subsequent appeal became clear the following week upon review of the June 16, 2021 City Council Agenda which contained Item G.1: Ordinance No. 982 entitled "An Ordinance Of The City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code To Modify Administrative Procedures within the Development Code And Establish New Zoning Districts, Amend Land Uses And Definitions And Create New Development Standards For Industrial Development Within The City, Making Findings In Support Thereof, And Making A Determination That The Ordinance Is Exempt From The California Environmental Quality Act". Among other things, Ordinance No. 982 would result in a complete ban on auto and vehicle storage anywhere within the City without any rational basis or valid justification; it would also change the required CUP findings to include expanded considerations that were seemingly the basis for this Project denial on May 4, 2021, even though the Ordinance had not pet been adopted. During the June 9, 2021 Planning Commission hearing, staff and Planning Commissioners repeatedly stated that the Project would be better suited to the City's Southeast Industrial Quadrant ("SEIQ")—despite the fact that a moratorium on industrial development was enacted for the SEIQ on November 4, 2020 and despite staff's knowledge that Ordinance No. 982 would be introduced less than one week later,proposing to ban the Project's proposed use City-wide. City staff acted in bad faith by denying and delaying the Project until just before the proposed City-wide ban was to be announced. The proposed Project did not involve any tenant improvements, therefore Brookfield's tenant could have potentially begun operations at the site immediately after CUP approval upon obtaining a business license, which would have vested the entitlement well before Ordinance No. 982 was introduced. Were it not for staff's improper actions in denying the CUP based on inapplicable criteria in an attempt to "run the clock", the Project would already be operational. B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 5 As shown on attached Exhibit "A", Ordinance No. 982 would expand the CUP findings to include "consistency' with the General Plan rather than "compliance' and would require consistency with the "purposes" of the Development Code and zoning district instead of simply requiring compliance with applicable provisions. Other language and considerations within the proposed new Section 17.20.060 that were improperly applied to the Project (before ever having been made available to the public) have also been highlighted within Exhibit A. Review of the Planning Director denial letter and the record of the Planning Commission appeal clearly shows that these new, expanded considerations were the basis for the denial rather than the scope of permissible findings under the Code section then in effect. This sheds some light upon why the Planning Director's decision was solely based upon revenue and economic considerations and an assertion that the Project would be "fiscally underperforming". This term "fiscally underperforming use," is not defined in the denial letter nor does it exist in the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Municipal Code or any other published City regulation or guideline. Furthermore, there are no identified thresholds, criteria or guidelines for fiscal performance of a land use. Under the Development Code Amendments proposed under Ordinance No. 982 (which have yet to take effect) these expanded considerations might arguably be permissible; however, they are clearly beyond the scope of the current Code which was in effect at the time of Project denial and the subsequent Planning Commission denial of Brookfield's appeal. Because the Project clearly met each and every finding under current Section 17.16.120, the Planning Director was forced to instead rely on these newly-developed standards in an attempt to justify denial of the Project. Basing the denial of a project upon a newly-invented, "on the fly" standard is the most clear cut example of an arbitrary and capricious action. A property owner has the right to know what legal standards will apply to the use and development of their property, so that they can make investment decisions accordingly. Those standards cannot be a "moving target" based on an opinion that a different, hypothetical use might be more desirable or beneficial. The Planning Director's decision was clearly based on a premature application of the Development Code Amendments proposed under Ordinance No. 982 before they were even introduced at a public hearing in a clear attempt to advance the City's interests in enforcing these new policies which had been under development for the past six months. This violates the well-established legal principle that new laws are only intended to operate prospectively unless specific language of retroactive application is included.2 The proposed amendments to the Development Code also make clear that they are 2 Myers v.Phillip Morris Companies,Inc.,28 Ca1.4th 833, 840;see also Evangelatos v. Superior Court, 44 CAM 1188, 1206-1208; Quarry v.Doe I(2012)53 Ca1.4th 945,955. B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 6 only intended to be applied to projects prospectively and following the effective date according to Section 17.02.020(F),which provides: F. Effect of zoning code changes on projects in process. The enactment of this title, or any amendments thereto, may have the effect of imposing different standards on new land uses, development, and/or structures than those that applied to existing land uses, development, and/or structures. Following the effective date of this title the following provisions shall apply. Successive amendments to this title shall specify their applicability to pending applications and projects not yet or under construction; in the event an amendment is silent on this matter, the following shall apply. 1. Pending applications. All land use permit applications that are active and that have been determined by the planning director to be complete before the effective date of this title, or any amendments thereto, will be processed according to the regulations in effect when the application was deemed complete. (Emphasis added). Therefore, the Planning Director and Planning Commission erred by applying the considerations outlined in the Development Code Amendments proposed under Ordinance No. 982, rather than limiting their review to the findings in effect at the time of Project submittal and review. Furthermore,in the event that Ordinance No. 982 is approved prior to Brookfield's City Council appeal hearing, it is clear that only the findings under existing Development Code Section 17.16.120 may be considered. 3. Decision to Unfairly Target Auto and Vehicle Storage is Not Supported by Substantial Evidence. The May 4,2021 Planning Director denial letter contained the following reasoning: "Using data relative to property and sales tax generation, staff has found that those parcels within the vicinity of the subject site which are similarly sized and within the same zoning designation provide a much higher number of businesses which support a diverse economic base and generally perform much better on a value-per-acre basis than Auto and Vehicle Storage. Staff has found that, on average, industrial zoned parcels throughout the City perform at a value-per-acre of approximately $4,000. Generally, Auto and Vehicle Storage facilities provide a much lower value-per-acre." Besides the fact that there was absolutely no supporting data or evidence provided for the above statement, this reasoning is now particularly disingenuous given that it is B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 7 contradicted by the following statement included on page 208 of the June 16, 2021 City Council packet: "The data shows that the majority of the City's existing industrial stock consists of smaller units. 65% of the units (521) are under 30,000 square feet and 75% (602) are under 50,000 square feet. It is not the intent to more heavily regulate these smaller industrial uses, but rather to encourage them to locate and thrive here in Rancho Cucamonga. Fiscally, these smaller industrial uses employ more people per acre, produce more revenue per acre (sales and property tax), and have equal or lower impacts per acre than most of the larger industrial uses." The Project site is less than five acres in size and is developed with an approximately 8,000 square foot building, and is therefore within the category of "smaller industrial uses" that the City purportedly wishes to encourage based upon their unique characteristics. Yet, auto and vehicle storage uses are now inexplicably proposed to be banned City-wide even though their operational characteristics do not significantly differ from an enclosed warehouse use (and in fact, typically result in fewer impacts than a warehouse). The supporting materials in the June 16, 2021 City Council staff report also fail to provide any rational basis or justification for unfairly targeting this use. Conclusion Based on the foregoing, Brookfield has demonstrated that the Planning Director and Planning Commission's denial of the CUP and subsequent appeal for the Project was arbitrary and capricious and entirely lacking in evidentiary support. The denial was based on prejudicial reasons and clearly based on proposed Development Code amendments which were not in effect and had not even yet been introduced at the time of Project denial. Therefore, the City's denial of the project was an abuse of discretion and failed to follow the procedures required by law. Both the Planning Director and Planning Commissions decisions were based on considerations entirely outside the scope of the required findings then in effect, despite the fact that as demonstrated in ample materials provided by Brookfield, the Project meets each and every one of the CUP findings under the Code. To deny the property owner the lawful use of their property in this manner amounts to an unconstitutional taking. We appreciate the City's processing of this appeal and look forward to a just and fair hearing on the Project before the City Council to avoid the need for costly and protracted litigation. However, we are prepared to bring legal action and are confident that a reviewing court would find favorably for Brookfield in light of the entire record and the suspicious timing and circumstances surrounding the B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 8 Project's CUP denial and proposed Ordinance No. 982. Please contact me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. Very truly yours, Matthew Wm. Nelson, of GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN &TILDEN, A Professional Corporation B 1210-001--4079620.1 Exhibit A Current Findings Under Development Code Section 17.16.120 D. Findings.The director shall approve,or approve with conditions,an application for a conditional use permit after finding all of the following.If the director does not make all of these findings,he/she shall deny the conditional use permit: 1. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this zoning code,Municipal Code,general plan,and any applicable specific plans or city regulations/standards. 2. The site is physically suited for the type,density,and intensity of the proposed use including access, utilities,and the absence of physical constraints and can be conditioned to meet all related performance criteria and development standards. 3. Granting the permit would not be detrimental to the public interest,health,safety,convenience,or welfare, or materially injurious to persons,property,or improvements in the vicinity in which the project is located. Proposed Findings Under Ordinance No.982 (New Section 17.20.060 would require CUPs to be considered by Planning Commission) E.Findings.The approving authority shall make the following findings before approving a conditional use permit application: 1.The proposed use is consistent with the general plan. 2.The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the development code and the purposes of the applicable zoning district as well as any applicable specific plans or city regulations/standards. 3.The site is physically suitable for the type,density,and intensity of the use being proposed,including access,utilities,and the absence of physical constraints that would make conduct of the use undesirable. 4.The design,location,size and operating characteristics of the proposed use would be compatible with the existing and other permitted uses in the vicinity including transportation and service facilities. 5.Granting the permit would not constitute a nuisance or be injurious to detrimental to the public interest,health,safety, convenience,or welfare,or materially injurious to persons,property,or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. The factors to be considered in making this finding include: a.Property damage or nuisance arising from noise,smoke,odor,dust,vibration or illumination caused by the use; b.Hazard to persons or property from possible explosion,contamination,fire or flood caused by the use;and, c.Significantly increase the volume of traffic or negatively alter the pattern of traffic. 6.The proposed use will not pose an undue burden on city services,including police,fire,streets,and other public utilities, such that the city is unable to maintain its current level of service due to the use;and 7.The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE G R ES HAM I SAVAG E Matthew.Nelson@GreshamSavage.com • San Bernardino Office Ai i O R N E Y S Al " (909)890-4499 • fax(909)890-9877 June 15, 2021 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council c/o Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant, Planning Department City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Notice of Appeal of Planning Commission Decision Regarding Planning Director Denial of DRC2020-00439 (Rancho Cucamonga Development Code §17.14.070) Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: This firm represents Brookfield Properties ("Brookfield") in connection with its application on behalf of H.E.R. Trucking, Inc. for the above-referenced Conditional Use Permit DRC2020-00439 seeking to operate an auto and vehicle storage facility in an existing industrial building located at 9910 6th Street (APN Nos. 0209-211-42 and 43) ("Site") in the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("City") (the "Project"). This notice of appeal is submitted as a final attempt to give the City Council the opportunity to remedy the unlawful actions of City staff and the Planning Commission due to the improper denial of the Project and avoid the drain on City resources that will occur should we be required to litigate this matter. On May 4, 2021, the City Planning Director issued a troubling and unusual decision denying Brookfield's application for the Project solely on the grounds that the proposed vehicle storage use was allegedly inconsistent with certain economic policies and goals of the City's current General Plan, including Goal ED-1, Policy ED-1.3, Goal ED-3 and Policy ED-3.3. The Planning Director's denial and the written findings supporting that denial were wholly inadequate and insufficient to justify denial of the Project. Brookfield timely filed an appeal of the Planning Director's decision, which was heard by the Planning Commission on June 9, 2021. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 21-38 denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Director's decision. Unfortunately, there was also no basis in law or fact to justify the Planning Commission's denial of Brookfield's appeal. We respectfully request that this correspondence be included as part of the administrative record for this matter. Enclosed herewith is a check in the amount of $1,685.00 as payment of the appeal processing fee for this matter. SAN BERNARDINO 550 East Hospitality Lane, Suite 300 • San Bernardino, California 92408 SAN DIEGO 401 West A Street, Suite 925 • San Diego, California 92101 GreshamSavage.com B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 2 In accordance with Municipal Code Sections 17.14.070, et seq., Brookfield respectfully submits this appeal of the Planning Director's denial of the Project and the Planning Commission's subsequent denial of the appeal for the following reasons: 1. Previous Arguments Raised on Appeal. Correspondence dated May 12,2021 and June 2, 2021 was submitted to the City as part of Brookfield's appeal and was included as part of the June 9, 2021 Planning Commission Staff Report packet at Exhibits B and C, respectively. Additional arguments and information were presented by Brookfield and its legal counsel at the Planning Commission hearing. For sake of brevity the analysis and arguments made therein will not be fully reiterated in this letter,but are briefly summarized as follows: • The Planning Director's General Plan "consistency analysis" was beyond the scope of the permissible findings under Development Code Section 17.16.120 which only requires "compliance" with applicable provisions of the General Plan, etc.—NOT a consistency analysis based upon broader economic considerations. • The Planning Director's decision did not cite to a single General Plan Land Use Policy in justifying the denial of the Project, nor did the June 9, 2019 Planning Commission staff report address any of the above policies or dispute Brookfield's consistency analysis. Instead, the Planning Commission staff report instead discussed three completely inapplicable General Plan Land Use Policies in an attempt to justify the denial: LU-1.1, LU-6.1 and LU-6.4 (dealing with residential neighborhoods, commercial services and infrastructure, respectively). These policies are irrelevant to an industrially-zoned project site that will have no impact on residential neighborhoods and is already served by existing infrastructure. • The Project is infill development (beneficial reuse of a 4.55 acre site that was previously used as a recycling center) and is therefore consistent with General Plan Land Use Policies discussed at page LU-53 of the General Plan as well as policies LU-1.2, LU-3.2, LU-3.3, LU-3.4, LU-3.5 and LU-3.7 due to the Project's strategic access close to the I-10 Freeway via Archibald Avenue; creation of jobs; support of a healthy jobs-housing balance; reduction of vehicle miles traveled; and sustainability due to reuse of the existing site with no new construction proposed. This consistency analysis related to these policies was never addressed or refuted by City staff. • The Project site is currently zoned General Industrial (GI), which designation allows for auto and vehicle storage as a conditionally permitted use. (Rancho B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 3 Cucamonga Development Code§ 17.30.030;Table 17.30.030-1.) The Project site also has a General Plan designation of General Industrial, which permits a "wide range of industrial activities" (Rancho Cucamonga General Plan at LU- 17). There was no finding or other determination by staff that the Project fails to comply with any uniformly-applicable, mandatory development standard for uses in the General Industrial (GI) zoning district or the General Industrial General Plan designation. • Brookfield demonstrated that the Project will comply with all performance standards contained within Chapter 17.66 of the Development Code; however, none of these performance standards were mentioned in the Planning Director's denial or the June 9, 2021 staff report. There was absolutely no factual basis for the finding that the Project would be "detrimental to the public interest or welfare to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity in which the project is located." • Some of the Planning Commissioners expressed general concern about "incompatibility" with surrounding land uses, most notably the adjacent Rowdy's Brewery. However, all surrounding property owners received notice of the hearing and no letters were received, nor were there any public comments made at the Planning Commission hearing from any concerned adjacent property owners. In addition, staff's June 9, 2021 presentation also focused exclusively on nearby office park and manufacturing uses to support the argument that a truck storage facility was "incompatible" with the area, while ignoring the warehouse and larger industrial uses to the north and south of the Project site. • The Project meets each and every one of the CUP findings under Development Code Section 17.16.120 based upon a plain, common sense reading of the Code and General Plan. However, these provisions have been stretched, misinterpreted and misapplied in such a way as to amount to an abuse of discretion.1 Brookfield hereby incorporates by reference each and every one of the statements and arguments in support of its position contained in the above-referenced correspondence into the record for this appeal before the City Council. ' Cal.Code Civ.Proc.§1094.5; Topanga Assn.for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974)11 Cal.3d 506,517. B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 4 2. The Real Reason for Denial: Attempted Unlawful "Retroactive" Application of Code Provisions Not Yet In Effect. The failure of City staff and the Planning Commission to analyze any of the relevant standards, code requirements and policies that actually apply to the Project was puzzling and initially suggested that this denial was prejudicial and based on other inappropriate reasons (perhaps a "general dislike" of the Project) rather than any of the required findings. Also troubling was that the Planning Commission packet only included a Resolution for denial of the appeal, which suggested that a decision had already been prematurely made before considering any of the relevant information presented at the hearing. In fact, the reason for this inexplicable and seemingly prejudicial denial of the Project and subsequent appeal became clear the following week upon review of the June 16, 2021 City Council Agenda which contained Item G.1: Ordinance No. 982 entitled "An Ordinance Of The City Of Rancho Cucamonga, Amending Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code To Modify Administrative Procedures within the Development Code And Establish New Zoning Districts, Amend Land Uses And Definitions And Create New Development Standards For Industrial Development Within The City, Making Findings In Support Thereof, And Making A Determination That The Ordinance Is Exempt From The California Environmental Quality Act". Among other things, Ordinance No. 982 would result in a complete ban on auto and vehicle storage anywhere within the City without any rational basis or valid justification; it would also change the required CUP findings to include expanded considerations that were seemingly the basis for this Project denial on May 4, 2021, even though the Ordinance had not pet been adopted. During the June 9, 2021 Planning Commission hearing, staff and Planning Commissioners repeatedly stated that the Project would be better suited to the City's Southeast Industrial Quadrant ("SEIQ")—despite the fact that a moratorium on industrial development was enacted for the SEIQ on November 4, 2020 and despite staff's knowledge that Ordinance No. 982 would be introduced less than one week later,proposing to ban the Project's proposed use City-wide. City staff acted in bad faith by denying and delaying the Project until just before the proposed City-wide ban was to be announced. The proposed Project did not involve any tenant improvements, therefore Brookfield's tenant could have potentially begun operations at the site immediately after CUP approval upon obtaining a business license, which would have vested the entitlement well before Ordinance No. 982 was introduced. Were it not for staff's improper actions in denying the CUP based on inapplicable criteria in an attempt to "run the clock", the Project would already be operational. B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 5 As shown on attached Exhibit "A", Ordinance No. 982 would expand the CUP findings to include "consistency' with the General Plan rather than "compliance' and would require consistency with the "purposes" of the Development Code and zoning district instead of simply requiring compliance with applicable provisions. Other language and considerations within the proposed new Section 17.20.060 that were improperly applied to the Project (before ever having been made available to the public) have also been highlighted within Exhibit A. Review of the Planning Director denial letter and the record of the Planning Commission appeal clearly shows that these new, expanded considerations were the basis for the denial rather than the scope of permissible findings under the Code section then in effect. This sheds some light upon why the Planning Director's decision was solely based upon revenue and economic considerations and an assertion that the Project would be "fiscally underperforming". This term "fiscally underperforming use," is not defined in the denial letter nor does it exist in the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Municipal Code or any other published City regulation or guideline. Furthermore, there are no identified thresholds, criteria or guidelines for fiscal performance of a land use. Under the Development Code Amendments proposed under Ordinance No. 982 (which have yet to take effect) these expanded considerations might arguably be permissible; however, they are clearly beyond the scope of the current Code which was in effect at the time of Project denial and the subsequent Planning Commission denial of Brookfield's appeal. Because the Project clearly met each and every finding under current Section 17.16.120, the Planning Director was forced to instead rely on these newly-developed standards in an attempt to justify denial of the Project. Basing the denial of a project upon a newly-invented, "on the fly" standard is the most clear cut example of an arbitrary and capricious action. A property owner has the right to know what legal standards will apply to the use and development of their property, so that they can make investment decisions accordingly. Those standards cannot be a "moving target" based on an opinion that a different, hypothetical use might be more desirable or beneficial. The Planning Director's decision was clearly based on a premature application of the Development Code Amendments proposed under Ordinance No. 982 before they were even introduced at a public hearing in a clear attempt to advance the City's interests in enforcing these new policies which had been under development for the past six months. This violates the well-established legal principle that new laws are only intended to operate prospectively unless specific language of retroactive application is included.2 The proposed amendments to the Development Code also make clear that they are 2 Myers v.Phillip Morris Companies,Inc.,28 Ca1.4th 833, 840;see also Evangelatos v. Superior Court, 44 CAM 1188, 1206-1208; Quarry v.Doe I(2012)53 Ca1.4th 945,955. B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 6 only intended to be applied to projects prospectively and following the effective date according to Section 17.02.020(F),which provides: F. Effect of zoning code changes on projects in process. The enactment of this title, or any amendments thereto, may have the effect of imposing different standards on new land uses, development, and/or structures than those that applied to existing land uses, development, and/or structures. Following the effective date of this title the following provisions shall apply. Successive amendments to this title shall specify their applicability to pending applications and projects not yet or under construction; in the event an amendment is silent on this matter, the following shall apply. 1. Pending applications. All land use permit applications that are active and that have been determined by the planning director to be complete before the effective date of this title, or any amendments thereto, will be processed according to the regulations in effect when the application was deemed complete. (Emphasis added). Therefore, the Planning Director and Planning Commission erred by applying the considerations outlined in the Development Code Amendments proposed under Ordinance No. 982, rather than limiting their review to the findings in effect at the time of Project submittal and review. Furthermore,in the event that Ordinance No. 982 is approved prior to Brookfield's City Council appeal hearing, it is clear that only the findings under existing Development Code Section 17.16.120 may be considered. 3. Decision to Unfairly Target Auto and Vehicle Storage is Not Supported by Substantial Evidence. The May 4,2021 Planning Director denial letter contained the following reasoning: "Using data relative to property and sales tax generation, staff has found that those parcels within the vicinity of the subject site which are similarly sized and within the same zoning designation provide a much higher number of businesses which support a diverse economic base and generally perform much better on a value-per-acre basis than Auto and Vehicle Storage. Staff has found that, on average, industrial zoned parcels throughout the City perform at a value-per-acre of approximately $4,000. Generally, Auto and Vehicle Storage facilities provide a much lower value-per-acre." Besides the fact that there was absolutely no supporting data or evidence provided for the above statement, this reasoning is now particularly disingenuous given that it is B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 7 contradicted by the following statement included on page 208 of the June 16, 2021 City Council packet: "The data shows that the majority of the City's existing industrial stock consists of smaller units. 65% of the units (521) are under 30,000 square feet and 75% (602) are under 50,000 square feet. It is not the intent to more heavily regulate these smaller industrial uses, but rather to encourage them to locate and thrive here in Rancho Cucamonga. Fiscally, these smaller industrial uses employ more people per acre, produce more revenue per acre (sales and property tax), and have equal or lower impacts per acre than most of the larger industrial uses." The Project site is less than five acres in size and is developed with an approximately 8,000 square foot building, and is therefore within the category of "smaller industrial uses" that the City purportedly wishes to encourage based upon their unique characteristics. Yet, auto and vehicle storage uses are now inexplicably proposed to be banned City-wide even though their operational characteristics do not significantly differ from an enclosed warehouse use (and in fact, typically result in fewer impacts than a warehouse). The supporting materials in the June 16, 2021 City Council staff report also fail to provide any rational basis or justification for unfairly targeting this use. Conclusion Based on the foregoing, Brookfield has demonstrated that the Planning Director and Planning Commission's denial of the CUP and subsequent appeal for the Project was arbitrary and capricious and entirely lacking in evidentiary support. The denial was based on prejudicial reasons and clearly based on proposed Development Code amendments which were not in effect and had not even yet been introduced at the time of Project denial. Therefore, the City's denial of the project was an abuse of discretion and failed to follow the procedures required by law. Both the Planning Director and Planning Commissions decisions were based on considerations entirely outside the scope of the required findings then in effect, despite the fact that as demonstrated in ample materials provided by Brookfield, the Project meets each and every one of the CUP findings under the Code. To deny the property owner the lawful use of their property in this manner amounts to an unconstitutional taking. We appreciate the City's processing of this appeal and look forward to a just and fair hearing on the Project before the City Council to avoid the need for costly and protracted litigation. However, we are prepared to bring legal action and are confident that a reviewing court would find favorably for Brookfield in light of the entire record and the suspicious timing and circumstances surrounding the B 1210-001--4079620.1 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga June 15, 2021 Page 8 Project's CUP denial and proposed Ordinance No. 982. Please contact me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. Very truly yours, Matthew Wm. Nelson, of GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN &TILDEN, A Professional Corporation B 1210-001--4079620.1 Exhibit A Current Findings Under Development Code Section 17.16.120 D. Findings.The director shall approve,or approve with conditions,an application for a conditional use permit after finding all of the following.If the director does not make all of these findings,he/she shall deny the conditional use permit: 1. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this zoning code,Municipal Code,general plan,and any applicable specific plans or city regulations/standards. 2. The site is physically suited for the type,density,and intensity of the proposed use including access, utilities,and the absence of physical constraints and can be conditioned to meet all related performance criteria and development standards. 3. Granting the permit would not be detrimental to the public interest,health,safety,convenience,or welfare, or materially injurious to persons,property,or improvements in the vicinity in which the project is located. Proposed Findings Under Ordinance No.982 (New Section 17.20.060 would require CUPs to be considered by Planning Commission) E.Findings.The approving authority shall make the following findings before approving a conditional use permit application: 1.The proposed use is consistent with the general plan. 2.The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the development code and the purposes of the applicable zoning district as well as any applicable specific plans or city regulations/standards. 3.The site is physically suitable for the type,density,and intensity of the use being proposed,including access,utilities,and the absence of physical constraints that would make conduct of the use undesirable. 4.The design,location,size and operating characteristics of the proposed use would be compatible with the existing and other permitted uses in the vicinity including transportation and service facilities. 5.Granting the permit would not constitute a nuisance or be injurious to detrimental to the public interest,health,safety, convenience,or welfare,or materially injurious to persons,property,or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. The factors to be considered in making this finding include: a.Property damage or nuisance arising from noise,smoke,odor,dust,vibration or illumination caused by the use; b.Hazard to persons or property from possible explosion,contamination,fire or flood caused by the use;and, c.Significantly increase the volume of traffic or negatively alter the pattern of traffic. 6.The proposed use will not pose an undue burden on city services,including police,fire,streets,and other public utilities, such that the city is unable to maintain its current level of service due to the use;and 7.The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1 - ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE RUTAN Hans Van Ligten Direct Dial:(714)662-4640 RUTAN &TUCKER, LLP E-mail:hvanligten@rutan.com June 16, 2021 VIA E-MAIL Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Agenda Item G-1: Objection to Attempt to Illegally Adopt Development Code Update in Clear Violation of Various State Laws Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: As you are aware, the Law Firm of Rutan& Tucker, LLP represents Phelan Development Company and its affiliates ("Phelan"), the current owner of the property located at 8768 E. 9th Street, Ranch Cucamonga, California 91730. This letter is being sent to you in regards to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's ("City") consideration of Development Code Amendment DRC2021- 00170 (the "Development Code Amendment"), and the deficient notice provided to Phelan and other impacted property owners to date. As referenced in our prior correspondence, dated June 15, 2021, the City has failed to provide the requisite notice for these proceedings under Government Code section 65091. Under Government Code section 65091, the City must provide notice to the public using four different methods, as follows: (a) When a provision of this title requires notice of a public hearing to be given pursuant to this section, notice shall be given in all of the following ways: (1) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to the owner of the subject real property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll. Instead of using the assessment roll, the local agency may use records of the county assessor or tax collector if those records contain more recent information than the information contained on the assessment roll. Notice shall also be mailed to the owner's duly authorized agent, if any, and to the project applicant.. (4) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to all owners of real property as shown on the latest equalized Rutan & Tucker, LLP 1 18575 Jamboree Road, 9` Floor Irvine, CA 92612 1 714-641-5100 1 Fax 714-546-9035 2545/027225-0001 Orange County I Palo Alto I San Francisco I www.rutan.com 16613988.1a06/16/21 RUTAN R AN L TUCxE R,LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 16, 2021 Page 2 assessment roll within 300 feet of the real property that is the subject of the hearing. In lieu of using the assessment roll, the local agency may use records of the county assessor or tax collector which contain more recent information than the assessment roll. If the number of owners to whom notice would be mailed or delivered pursuant to this paragraph or paragraph (1) is greater than 1,000, a local agency, in lieu of mailed or delivered notice, may provide notice by placing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the local agency in which the proceeding is conducted at least 10 days prior to the hearing. . . . While City staff has informed our office that the City has published a notice of the Planning Commission and City Council hearings in a newspaper(presumably pursuant to Government Code § 65091(a)(4)), the City has entirely failed to provide the individualized notice to the impacted property owners as required by Government Code § 65091(a)(1). These two requirements are entirely separate, and both must be complied with prior to the City taking action on the Development Code Amendment. (See Gov't Code § 65091 (" . . . notice shall be given in all of the following ways. . ."].) While Government Code § 65091(a)(4) address how the City must give notice to the neighbors of the impacted properties, Government Code § 65901(a)(1) imposed a higher standard of notice in regards to the owners of the real property that is subject to the Development Code Amendment(in addition to the owner's duly authorized agent and/or project applicant). As such, compliance with Government Code § 65091(a)(4) by itself is insufficient. Accordingly, based on the City's own admission, the City has failed to comply with the requirements of Government Code § 65091(a)(1) before both the Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Should the City move forward with considering the proposed Development Code Amendment without providing proper notice, the City would violate Government Code § 65091, in addition to Phelan's and other impacted property owners' procedural due process rights. Doing so, would make any action taken by the City Council void, and potentially subject the City to having to pay a challengers' attorney fees. (C.f. Harris v. County of Riverside (9th Cir. 1990) 904 F.2d 497, 504.) Sincerely, RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP &O Hans Van Ligten HVL:TV:kw 2545/027225-0001 16613988.1 a06/16/21 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1 -ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDI21 OFFICERS AND F DIRECTORS NA10P PRESIDENT Joseph Finnigan,Link Logistics Real Estate COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE PRESIDENT-ELECT DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION Jason Korengold,Shea Properties INLAND EMPIRE CHAPTER TREASURER Steve Young,Black Creek Group SECRETARY Larry Cochrun,LDC Industrial Realty NAIOP CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE Kim Snyder,Prologis J PAST PRESIDENT June 16, 2021 Steve Haston,Lee&Associates Taline Agopian, Conor Commercial Real Estate Mayor L. Dennis Michael and Members of the City Council Steven Ames,USAA Real Estate c/o City Clerk Kevin Apel,Prologis City of Rancho Cucamonga Jonathan Bagnall,Alston Construction 10500 Civic Center Drive Tom Bak,Trammell Crow Company Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Ian Britton,CBRE,Inc. Ian Carpe,Alere Property Group LLC Eloy Covarrubias,CBRE,Inc. Re: City Council Agenda Item G.l: Ordinance No. 982 Creating Josh Cox,Hillwood,A Perot Company New Development Standards for Industrial Development Matt Englhard,Proficiency Capital LLC Carter Ewing,CT Realty Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council: Paige Fullmer-West,Fullmer Construction Josh Hayes,CBRE,Inc. NAIOP, Inland Empire Chapter (NAIOP IE) appreciates the efforts of Scott Hildebrandt,Albert A.Webb Associates Mike Lee,City of Moreno Valley City of Rancho Cucamonga staff in working with industrial stakeholders Ward Mace,Goodman throughout the region over the past several months in developing, Hunter McDonald,CBRE,Inc. drafting and refining the new development standards that are the subject Michael McKenna,Rexford Industrial of proposed Ordinance No. 982. The standards are not perfect and Tom Myers,Ware Malcomb NAIOP IE believes that allowing additional time could provide for Tony Perez,Oltmans Construction important collaboration in crafting the development standards that are Bud Pharris,Link Logistics Real Estate both operationally feasible for stakeholders and effective at achieving Collin Phillips,Duke Realty Matt Pilliter,First American Title Insurance the City's goals of a robust, diverse and economically beneficial John Privett,Transwestern Development Company industrial sector, to the benefit of all parties. Jared Riemer,Trammell Crow Company Jonathan Shardlow, Gresham Savage Nolan&Tilden PC Unfortunately, some stakeholders in the industrial sector were not able Andrew Starnes,Cushman&Wakefield of California,Inc. to access the Agenda Report and the proposed Ordinance No. 982 until Jay Tanjuan,Panattoni Development Company just yesterday(June 15)and that certain statements in the Agenda Report Terry Thompson,County of San Bernardino which was prepared by Staff appear to be inconsistent with the Jeffrey N.Trenton,Proficiency Capital LLC Nicole Welch,Clarion Partners corresponding specific language set forth in Ordinance No. 982. We Sharon Wortmann,JLL believe that given the extensive dialogue and transparency between the Tracy Zinn,T&B Planning,Inc. parties since adoption of the moratorium in November/December 2020 and the rush to bring this matter before the Council is why there appears ADVISORY BOARD Stephen Batcheller,Transwestern Development Company to be inconsistencies with these documents. Chuck Belden,Cushman&Wakefield of California,Inc. Joe Cesta,CBRE,Inc. In addition, NAIOP IE is concerned that City Staff is interpreting the John Condas,Allen Matkins Lack Gamble Mallory&Natsis LLP approval of Ordinance No. 982 would render many of the existing Mike Del Santo,Alere Property Group LLC industrial uses and warehouses in the City legal nonconforming uses. Jahn Dobrott,Conor Commercial Real Estate We believe that this sends the wrong message to both legacy industrial Gary Edwards,Western Realco owners and recently approved project operators alike and could have Ed Konjoyan,Majestic Realty Co. John Magness,Hillwood,A Perot Company unanticipated and potentially significant long-term impacts. Graham Tingler,Kearny Real Estate Company NAIOP INLAND EMPIRE STAFF Robert Evans,Executive Director Devon Sulli,Executive Assistant 25241 Paseo de Alicia, Suite 120, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Tel: (951)710-8768 NAIOP 2021 OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS NA10P PRESIDENT Joseph Finnigan,Link Logistics Real Estate COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE PRESIDENT-ELECT DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION Jason Korengold,Shea Properties INLAND EMPIRE CHAPTER TREASURER Steve Young,Black Creek Group SECRETARY Larry Cochrun,LDC Industrial Realty NAIOP CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE Notwithstanding the foregoing, and subject to the minor clarifications Kim Snyder,Prologis PAST PRESIDENT outlined below, NAIOP IE cautiously supports the adoption of Steve Haston,Lee&Associates Ordinance No. 982 and the industrial development standards set Taline Agopian, Conor Commercial Real Estate forth by the representations from City Staff. (1)flexibility is built Steven Ames,USAA Real Estate into the proposed development standards; (2) City Staff are open to Kevin Apel,Prologis proposed revisions to the development standards if it is subsequently Jonathan Bagnall,Alston Construction determined that any of the standards are infeasible or unworkable; and, Tom Bak,Trammell Crow Company (3) the City is undertaking a comprehensive Municipal Code update in Ian Britton,CBRE,Inc. Ian Carpe,Alere Property Group LLC the next year during which time City Staff are willing to consider further Eloy Covarrubias,CBRE,Inc. revisions to the standards being adopted as part of Ordinance No. 982. Josh Cox,Hillwood,A Perot Company Matt Englhard,Proficiency Capital LLC In conjunction with the proposed adoption of Ordinance No. 982, Carter Ewing,CT Realty NAIOP IE respectfully requests that the city clarify and confirm the Paige Fullmer-West,Fullmer Construction following specific items: Josh Hayes,CBRE,Inc. Scott Hildebrandt,Albert A.Webb Associates Mike Lee,City of Moreno Valley Municipal Code, § 17.22.020(c)(iii)(2): This provision states: "Upon Ward Mace,Goodman recommendation by the city engineer and fire marshal,a master plan may Hunter McDonald,CBRE,Inc. vary or waive the traffic standards identified in Section 17.36.040 if the Michael McKenna,Rexford Industrial city council determines that doing so would not impede the underlying Tom Myers,Ware Malcomb purpose of the subject standard(s)or cause a significant impact on public Tony Perez,Oltmans Construction health, safety or welfare." Bud Pharris,Link Logistics Real Estate Collin Phillips,Duke Realty Matt Pilliter,First American Title Insurance We believe that the City should delete the word"traffic"from the above- John Privett,Transwestern Development Company referenced provision as Municipal Code section 17.36.040 does not Jared Riemer,Trammell Crow Company include the term"traffic" and/or reference any"traffic standards"which Jonathan Shardlow, Gresham Savage Nolan&Tilden PC may be waived or varied by the City. We understand that the intent Andrew Starnes,Cushman&Wakefield of California,Inc. behind this provision was to confirm that the Master Plan process may Jay Tanjuan,Panattoni Development Company be used to obtain waivers/variances from all standards set forth in Terry Thompson,County of San Bernardino Municipal Code section 17.36.040, including those related to the Jeffrey N.Trenton,Proficiency Capital LLC Nicole Welch,Clarion Partners proposed block street network. We believe the specific language of Sharon Wortmann,JLL Ordinance No. 982 should be revised to reflect this specific intent to Tracy Zinn,T&B Planning,Inc. avoid confusion with respect to application of this provision to future ADVISORY BOARD projects. Stephen Batcheller,Transwestern Development Company Chuck Belden,Cushman&Wakefield of California,Inc. Master Plan for Projects Less Than 450,000 SF: Although Ordinance Joe Cesta,CBRE,Inc. No. 982 is clear that the master plan process is required for warehouses John Condas,Allen Matkins Lack Gamble Mallory&Natsis LLP that are greater than 450,000 square feet(SF)(see Table 17.30.030-1,f i. Mike Del Santo,Alere Property Group LLC 17), we are requesting the city to confirm that industrial projects that are John Dobrott,Conor Commercial Real Estate less than 450,000 SF may also apply for and obtain entitlements as part Gary Edwards,Western Realco of the master plan process. Ed Konjoyan,Majestic Realty Co. John Magness,Hillwood,A Perot Company Graham Tingler,Kearny Real Estate Company NAIOP INLAND EMPIRE STAFF Robert Evans,Executive Director Devon Sulli,Executive Assistant 25241 Paseo de Alicia, Suite 120, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Tel: (951)710-8768 NAIOP 2021 OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS NA10P PRESIDENT Joseph Finnigan,Link Logistics Real Estate COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE PRESIDENT-ELECT DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION Jason Korengold,Shea Properties INLAND EMPIRE CHAPTER TREASURER Steve Young,Black Creek Group SECRETARY Larry Cochrun,LDC Industrial Realty NAIOP CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE Municipal Code § 17.76.020(b)(2) and Staff Report: The Agenda Kim Snyder,Prologis PAST PRESIDENT Report prepared by City Staff states that solar or other renewable energy Steve Haston,Lee&Associates sources for all new industrial developments will be required in an amount Taline Agopian, Conor Commercial Real Estate based on the following formula: (1) annualized building demand based Steven Ames,USAA Real Estate on the approved use; (2) Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) generation Kevin Apel,Prologis offset for trucks and vehicles; and(3) a reasonable rate of efficiency loss Jonathan Bagnall,Alston Construction over 10 years. (Agenda Report, p. 4.) Tom Bak,Trammell Crow Company Ian Britton,CBRE,Inc. Ian Carpe,Alere Property Group LLC However, with respect to the second prong of the solar equation related Eloy Covarrubias,CBRE,Inc. to VMT generation offset, proposed Municipal Code section Josh Cox,Hillwood,A Perot Company 17.76.020(b)(2) includes a different standard related to "demand Matt Englhard,Proficiency Capital LLC required to charge fully electric vehicles and trucks, assuming that all Carter Ewing,CT Realty vehicles and trucks to the site are fully electric." Although the language Paige Fullmer-West,Fullmer Construction of Ordinance No. 982 —not the Agenda Report—will ultimately govern Josh Hayes,CBRE,Inc. application of these requirements to a proposed project, the city should Scott Hildebrandt,Albert A.Webb Associates Mike Lee,City of Moreno Valley clarify the intent behind this prong of the solar calculation and reaffirm Ward Mace,Goodman that the city will not require more electrical demand than will be required Hunter McDonald,CBRE,Inc. to serve the project's needs. Michael McKenna,Rexford Industrial Tom Myers,Ware Malcomb Municipal Code § 17.36.040(D)(9)(a)(ii): The third bullet point of this Tony Perez,Oltmans Construction provision states that buildings greater than 400,000 SF are required to Bud Pharris,Link Logistics Real Estate have public streets on at least 3 sides. We are respectively requesting Collin Phillips,Duke Realty Matt Pilliter,First American Title Insurance that this provision be revised to state that buildings greater than 450,000 John Privett,Transwestern Development Company SF be subject to this requirement so that it is consistent with the 450,000 Jared Riemer,Trammell Crow Company SF threshold previously established in the City's Code. Jonathan Shardlow, Gresham Savage Nolan&Tilden PC Andrew Starnes,Cushman&Wakefield of California,Inc. Municipal Code § 17.36.040(D)(9)(a)(iii): The second bullet-point of Jay Tanjuan,Panattoni Development Company this provision states "Surface parking stalls for employees and guests Terry Thompson,County of San Bernardino may incorporate shade structures that are capable of supporting Jeffrey N.Trenton,Proficiency Capital LLC Nicole Welch,Clarion Partners solar/photovoltaic array systems with a minimum clearance height of 12 Sharon Wortmann,JLL feet.A minimum of 50 percent of the required parking stalls shall include Tracy Zinn,T&B Planning,Inc. these shade structures for this purpose." ADVISORY BOARD Stephen Batcheller,Transwestern Development Company We believe that the City should strike the second sentence of this bullet Chuck Belden,Cushman&Wakefield of California,Inc. point as the mandatory requirement of 50 percent of parking stalls Joe Cesta,CBRE,Inc. including solar/photo-voltaic shade structures ("shall") is inconsistent John Condas,Allen Matkins Lack Gamble Mallory&Natsis LLP with the discretionary language of the preceding sentence ("may"). Mike Del Santo,Alere Property Group LLC Developers should have the flexibility to meet their solar demands in any John Dobrott,Conor Commercial Real Estate manner that they deem feasible. Gary Edwards,Western Realco Ed Konjoyan,Majestic Realty Co. John Magness,Hillwood,A Perot Company Municipal Code § 17.64.100(C): The last sentence of this provision Graham Tingler,Kearny Real Estate Company states: "Alternative queuing standards less than the minimum required NAIOP INLAND EMPIRE STAFF Robert Evans,Executive Director Devon Sulli,Executive Assistant 25241 Paseo de Alicia, Suite 120, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Tel: (951)710-8768 NAIOP 2021 OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS NA10P PRESIDENT Joseph Finnigan,Link Logistics Real Estate COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE PRESIDENT-ELECT DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION Jason Korengold,Shea Properties INLAND EMPIRE CHAPTER TREASURER Steve Young,Black Creek Group SECRETARY Larry Cochrun,LDC Industrial Realty NAIOP CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE may be considered by the approving authority with a conditional use Kim Snyder,Prologis PAST PRESIDENT permit and the development of an approved parking management plan." Steve Haston,Lee&Associates We are respectively requesting that this provision be revised to clarify Taline Agopian, Conor Commercial Real Estate that an alternative to the established queuing standards may be obtained Steven Ames,USAA Real Estate via the master plan process and development of an approved parking Kevin Apel,Prologis management plan, as consistent with prior sections of the Code. This Jonathan Bagnall,Alston Construction would confirm that a master plan applicant would not also be required to Tom Bak,Trammell Crow Company Ian Britton,CBRE,Inc. obtain a conditional use permit (CUP) solely for purposes of a variance Ian Britton, Carpe ,CB Property Group LLC from the City's minimum queuing standards. Eloy Covarrubias,CBRE,Inc. Josh Cox,Hillwood,A Perot Company On behalf of NAIOP IE and the community of industrial stakeholders Matt Englhard,Proficiency Capital LLC that have been active participants throughout the process of developing Carter Ewing,CT Realty the industrial development standards set forth in Ordinance No. 982, we Paige Fullmer-West,Fullmer Construction very much appreciate the City Council's consideration of these Josh Hayes,CBRE,Inc. comments and the above-described requests for clarification from the Scott Hildebrandt,Albert A.Webb Associates city. Lee,City of Moreno Valley City. Ward Mace,Goodman Hunter McDonald,CBRE,Inc. Please contact me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter Michael McKenna,Rexford Industrial further. Tom Myers,Ware Malcomb Tony Perez,Oltmans Construction Sincerely, Bud Pharris,Link Logistics Real Estate Collin Phillips,Duke Realty Matt Pilliter,First American Title Insurance John Privett,Transwestern Development Company Jared Riemer,Trammell Craw Company Jonathan Shardlow, Gresham Savage Nolan&Tilden PC Bill Blankenship, Director of Government Affairs Andrew Starnes,Cushman&Wakefield of California,Inc. NAIOP IE Chapter Jay Tanjuan,Panattoni Development Company Terry Thompson,County of San Bernardino Jeffrey N.Trenton,Proficiency Capital LLC Nicole Welch,Clarion Partners Sharon Wortmann,JLL Tracy Zinn,T&B Planning,Inc. ADVISORY BOARD Stephen Batcheller,Transwestern Development Company Chuck Belden,Cushman&Wakefield of California,Inc. Joe Cesta,CBRE,Inc. John Condas,Allen Matkins Lack Gamble Mallory&Natsis LLP Mike Del Santo,Alere Property Group LLC John Dobrott,Conor Commercial Real Estate Gary Edwards,Western Realco Ed Konjoyan,Majestic Realty Co. John Magness,Hillwood,A Perot Company Graham Tingler,Kearny Real Estate Company NAIOP INLAND EMPIRE STAFF Robert Evans,Executive Director Devon Sulli,Executive Assistant 25241 Paseo de Alicia, Suite 120, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Tel: (951)710-8768 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE From: Chris Sanford <chris.sanford@blackcreekgroup.com> Sent: Wednesday,June 16, 2021 3:01 PM To: Burris, Matt<Matt.Burris@cityofrc.us> Cc: McIntosh, Anne<Anne.Mclntosh@cityofrc.us>; Smith, Michael <Michael.Smith@cityofrc.us>; Eoff, David <David.Eoff@cityofrc.us>; Welday,Jason <Jason.Welday@cityofrc.us> Subject: City Council tonight CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments lunless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.l Matt, Just wanted to follow up and let you and Staff know I probably won't be in attendance at the City Council meeting tonight, but if I were I would simply provide comment thanking Staff for all their efforts to date, especially since the Planning Commission meeting on 5/26. We recognize it has been a massive undertaking for Staff over the past few weeks to make the final revisions to the current proposed standards, and we appreciate all the collaboration to date. We look forward to when the moratorium for the SEIQ is lifted so we can proceed to the next steps in providing a world class industrial facility for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Thank you, -Chris Christopher Sanford Senior Vice President Development I Western Region BLACK CREEK GROUP 4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 625 Newport Beach, California 92660 Direct: 949-892-4911 Cell Phone: 949-795-6272 Main: 949-892-4900 christopher.sanford@blackcreekgroup.com www.blackcreekgroup.com ` _ 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G1 -ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE June 16, 2021 VIA E-MAIL Mayor and City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: City's Proposed Development Code Amendment on June 16, 2021 Agenda as Item No. G 1 Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: As you may know, CP Logistics Vineyard LLC is the developer of the real property generally located west of Vineyard Avenue, south of E. 9th Street, east of Baker Avenue, and north of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California(collectively, the "Property"). We understand that the City Council is considering a Development Code Amendment this evening. Our concern regarding the Development Code Amendment is related to the modification to the land use and zoning table to require conditional use permits due to the time to obtain these permits, the uncertainty created, and the possibility of new conditions. We would propose that any such process be done at the staff level to allow timely tenanting and potentially re-tenanting of the Property. We appreciate your consideration in modifying the proposed land use and zoning table as set forth herein. If you would like to discuss further, please do not hesitate to contact Jacob LeBlanc at (949) 836-0907. Sincerely, CP LOGISTICS VINEYARD LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: CP LOGISTICS PLATFORM, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its Sole Member By: PANATTONI CLP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its Administrator By: PANATTONI CLP OPERATOR, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its Manager By: William Bullen, Vice President p1 t—U la - i to CC�-V COun C I G e4j 4ivrt,%.,J M et 4t et"Cl Oriel, Jasmin From: Jonathan Shardlow <Jonathan.Shardlow@GreshamSavage.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 9:22 PM To: City Clerk Cc: McIntosh, Anne Subject: G1 - Comment Letter CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Further, given the revelation for the first time tonight that Staff relied on an undated (and issued prior to incorporation of the ISR) report titled "Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act," we offer the following Even with significant population and warehouse growth, air quality is getting much better. SCAQMD rule development and implementation of programs through the 1970s and 1980s resulted in significant improvement in air quality within the SCAB. Nearly all control programs developed through the early 1990s relied on (i)the development and application of cleaner technology;(ii)add-on emission controls,and(iii)uniform CEQA review throughout the SCAB. Industrial emission sources have been significantly reduced by this approach and vehicular emissions have been reduced by technologies implemented at the state-level by CARB through incorporation of tailpipe emissions standards. SCAQMD has adopted several Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) which represent a regional blueprint for achieving healthful air on behalf of the 16+ million residents of the SCAB. The 2012 AQMP states, "the remarkable historical improvement in air quality since the 1970's is the direct result of Southern California's comprehensive, multiyear strategy of reducing air pollution from all sources as outlined in its AQMPs." Emissions of Os, NOx, VOC, and CO have been decreasing in the SCAB since 1975. These decreases result primarily from motor vehicle controls and reductions in evaporative emissions. Although vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the SCAB continue to increase, NOx and VOC levels are decreasing because of the mandated controls on motor vehicles and the replacement of older polluting vehicles with lower-emitting vehicles.NOx emissions from electric utilities have also decreased due to use of cleaner fuels and renewable energy. Ozone(Os)contour maps show that the number of days exceeding the 1-hour NAAQS has decreased between 1997 and 2018. By 2018, there is an overall decrease in exceedance days compared with the 1997 period. As shown, Os levels in the SCAB have decreased substantially over the last 30 years with the current maximum measured concentrations being approximately one-third of concentrations within the late 70's. i Table 1: Trend in 1-Hr Ozone Exceedances 200 - -- 1-hr Basin-Days Exce�dir�g' 1$0 160 V 140 U 120 m a 100 .Fn cc on 80 0 60 E Z 40 20 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Source: SCAQMD: http://www.agmd.gov/home/air-quahty/historical-air-quality-data/historic-ozone-air-duality_ trends The overall trends of PM10 and PM2.5 concentration levels in the air also show an overall improvement since 1988. As with other pollutants, the most recent PM10 statistics show an overall improvement as illustrated in Tables 2 and 3. During the period for which data are available, the 24-hour national annual average concentration for PM10 decreased by approximately 48 percent,from 103.7 µg/m3 in 1988 to 53.5 µgW in 2018.Although the values are below the federal standard,it should be noted that there are days within the year where the concentrations will exceed the threshold.The 24-hour state annual average for emissions for PM1o,have decreased by approximately 53 percent since 1988.Although data in the late 1990's show some variability,this is probably due to the advances in meteorological science rather than a change in emissions. Similar to the ambient concentrations, the calculated number of days above the 24-hour PM10 standards has also shown an overall drop. 2 Table 2: SCAB Average 24-Hour Concentration PM10 Trend (Based on Federal Standard)' 200.0 _ 180.0 160.0 - -- - - 140.0 120.0 --*--National 24-flour Average E or 100.0 - - —Federal Standard z 51 80.0 - - -- -- - -- - - a 60.0 _. 40.0 -20.0 --- - 0.0 Year Source: CARB Table 3: SCAB Annual Average Concentration PMio Trend (Based on State Standard)' 100.0 _ - 90.0 +--State Annual Average - 80.0 - ---- - :State Standard 70.0 t-- E60.0 - - ------—---_- ,? 50.0 40.0 o. 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 _ 00 Year Source: CARB 3 Tables 4 and 5 shows the most recent 24-hour average PM2.5 concentrations in the SCAB from 1999 through 2018.Overall, the national and state annual average concentrations have decreased by almost 52 percent and 33 percent respectively (4).It should be noted that the SCAB is currently designated as nonattainment for the state and federal PM2.5 standards. Table 4: SCAB 24-Hour Average Concentration PM2.5 Trend (Based on Federal Standard)' 50.0 45.0 4 Federal24-Hour Average 40.0 - Federal Standard 35.0 m E 30.0 __. 2 5.0 - 20.0 - a 15.0 _- 10.0 — -- — -- -- - - CaN Year Source: CARB Table 5: SCAB Annual Average Concentration PM2.5 Trend (Based on State Standard)' 30.0 25.0 - - 20.0 E ._. 15.0 --- _—_--- - a c�. 10.0 -4--State Annual Average 5.0 State Standard 0.0 le 1153"' Year Source: CARB 4 In March 2017, the AQMD released the Final 2016 AQMP. The 2016 AQMP continues to evaluate current integrated strategies and control measures to meet the NAAQS, as well as, explore new and innovative methods to reach its goals. Some of these approaches include utilizing incentive programs, recognizing existing co-benefit programs from other sectors, and developing a strategy with fair-share reductions at the federal, state, and local levels. Similar to the 2012 AQMP, the 2016 AQMP incorporates scientific and technological information and planning assumptions,including the 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories. The most recent CO concentrations in the SCAB are shown in Table 2-6. CO concentrations in the SCAB have decreased markedly — a total decrease of more about 80 percent in the peak 8-hour concentration since 1986. It should be noted 2012 is the most recent year where 8-hour CO averages and related statistics are available in the SCAB. The number of exceedance days has also declined.The entire SCAB is now designated as attainment for both the state and national CO standards. Ongoing reductions from motor vehicle control programs should continue the downward trend in ambient CO concentrations. 5 Table 6: SCAB 24-Hour Average Concentration CO Trend' 30.00 -#-Maximum 8-hour CO Averages 25.00 20.00 -- -- 15.00 — ----- a. CL 0 10.00 --- 5.00 0.00 Year Source: CARB I The most recent year where 8-hour concentration data is available is 2012. The most recent NOz data for the SCAB is shown in Tables 7 and 8. Over the last 50 years, NO2 values have decreased significantly; the peak 1-hour national and state averages for 2018 is approximately 82 percent lower than what it was during 1963. 6 Table 7: SCAB 1-Hour Average Concentration NO2 Trend (Based on Federal Standard) 800.0 i -- 1-Hour Average (National) 700.0 - k K Federal Standard 600.0 ----- -- -- - - 500.0 - -- c 400.0 of4 300.0 200.0 - - 100.0 0.0 1 1 T I I I T r r T 7 1 1 j T T I I r I I T I T I I I I I I T T F I I I I I I I T t I T T I T Ir , CO I Year Source: CARB Table 8: SCAB 1-Hour Average Concentration NO2 Trend (Based on State Standard) 800.0 —�--1-hour average (State) 700.0 —State Standard 600.0 ---- 500.0 400.0CL . ----- CL .y 300.0 *2t 200.0 100.0 - - 0.0 - - - _ .�--,---T--T--T---T-,-,-,- so C5 lip IV T Year Source: CARB The American Lung Association website includes data collected from state air quality monitors that are used to compile an annual State of the Air Report. The latest State of the Air Report compiled for the SCAB was in 2018. As noted, air quality in the SCAB has significantly improved in terms of both pollution levels and high pollution days over the past three decades. The area's average number of high Oa days dropped from 230 days in the initial 2000 State of the Air report(1996-1998)to 146 days in the 2018 report. The region has also seen dramatic reduction in particle pollution since the initial 2000 State of the Air report. Based on information available from CARB, overall cancer risk throughout the SCAB has had a declining trend since 1990. In 1998, following an exhaustive 10-year scientific assessment process, CARB identified particulate matter from 7 diesel-fueled engines as a toxic air contaminant. The SCAQMD initiated a comprehensive urban toxic air pollution study called the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES). DPM accounts for more than 70 percent of the cancer risk. In 2008 the SCAQMD prepared an update to the MATES-II study, referred to as MATES-III. MATES-III estimates the average excess cancer risk level from exposure to TACs is an approximately 17%decrease in comparison to the MATES- II study. In 2015,the SCAQMD published an in-depth analysis of the toxic air contaminants and the resulting health risks for all of Southern California. The Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the SCAB, MATES 1V," which shows that cancer risk has decreased by 57% since MATES III(2005). In 2000,CARB's Diesel Risk Reduction Plan(DRRP)recommended the replacement and retrofit of diesel-fueled engines and the use of ultra-low-sulfur (<15ppm) diesel fuel. As a result of these measures, DPM concentrations have declined 68% from 2000 to 2010, even though the state's population increased 31% and the amount of diesel vehicles miles traveled increased 81%, as shown below. With the implementation of statewide diesel-related control regulations, CARB expects a DPM decline of 85%by 2020. s Diesel Particulate Matter and Diesel Vehicle Miles Trend California Population, Gross State Product (GSP), Diesel Cancer Risk, Diesel Vehicle-Miles-Traveled (VIVIT) Diesel MT c GS Population 0% ' ----- -----__ . M Diesel Cancer Risk -100"/a 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Source: CARB: https:Hww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health Statewide DPM Ambient Concentration 2.4 �,$ { HEW Engine STO P�art.rule 1.4 1,2 m 1.0 E 0.8 Reformulated PSIP LJSL© 0.2 Diesel Transit Bus 0,0 Program H DV-Off road 1990 1995 2000 2Q05 2010 Year Source: CARB: biWs:Hww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health 9 The CARB and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach (POLA and POLB) have adopted several iterations of regulations for diesel trucks that are aimed at reducing DPM. More specifically, the CARB Drayage Truck Regulation, the CARB statewide On-road Truck and Bus Regulation, and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach "Clean Truck Program" (CTP) require accelerated implementation of "clean trucks" into the statewide truck fleet. In other words, older more polluting trucks will be replaced with newer, cleaner trucks as a function of these regulatory requirements. Moreover, the average statewide DPM emissions for Heavy Duty Trucks (HDT), in terms of grams of DPM generated per mile traveled, will dramatically be reduced due to the aforementioned regulatory requirements. Jonathan Shardlow Shareholder Gresham Savage Nolan &Tilden, PC 550 East Hospitality Lane, Suite 300 San Bernardino, CA 92408 Office: (909) 890-4499 Ext. 1770 Fax: (909) 890-9877 www.GreshamSavage.com Jonathan.shardlowC&greshamsavage.com 1. Privileged and Confidential Communication. The information contained in this email and any attachments may be confidential or subject to the attorney client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you may not use, disclose, print, copy or disseminate the same. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender and destroy all copies of this message. 2. Notice re Tax Advice. Any tax advice contained in this email, including any attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other recipient for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties that may otherwise be imposed by the IRS, or (b) supporting, promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter to any third party. 3. Transmission of Viruses. Although this communication, and any attached documents or files, are believed to be free of any virus or other defect, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free, and the sender does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. 4. Security of Email. Electronic mail is sent over the public internet and may not be secure. Thus, we cannot guarantee the privacy or confidentiality of such information. 10 2021-06-16-REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING-ITEM G1 ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE From: Jonathan Shardlow To: City Clerk Cc: McIntosh.Anne Subject: Item G1-Comment Date: Wednesday,June 16,2021 9:18:31 PM Attachments: NAIOP IE Warehouse Sitino Evaluation Rot Summary 04092021 Ramboll Executive Summampdjf f NAIOP IE Warehouse Sitina Evaluation Final Rot 04092021 Ramboll odf [AUTIONi This email i,from o not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. - Given the revelation for the first time tonight that Staff relied on an undated (and issued prior to incorporation of the ISR) report titled"Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act," we would like to offer, at a minimum,the following document prepared by SCAQMD's preferred Air Quality Consultant. Much of what is included in this report is outdated and uniformly believed to be inaccurate. Jonathan Shardlow Shareholder Gresham Savage Nolan &Tilden, PC 550 East Hospitality Lane, Suite 300 San Bernardino, CA 92408 Office: (909) 890-4499 Ext. 1770 Fax: (909) 890-9877 www.GreshamSavage.com ion athan.shardlow(agreshamsavage.com 1. Privileged and Confidential Communication. The information contained in this email and any attachments may be confidential or subject to the attorney client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, You may not use, disclose, print, copy or disseminate the same. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender and destroy all copies of this message. 2. Notice re Tax Advice. Any tax advice contained in this email, including any attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other recipient for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties that may otherwise be imposed by the IRS, or (b) supporting, promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter to any third party. 3. Transmission of Viruses. Although this communication, and any attached documents or files, are believed to be free of any virus or other defect, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free, and the sender does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. 4. Security of Email. Electronic mail is sent over the public internet and may not be secure. Thus, we cannot guarantee the privacy or confidentiality of such information. Prepared for NAIOP, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association Laguna Hills, California Prepared by Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. Irvine, California Project Number 1690018427 Date April 2021 EVALUATING SITING DISTANCES FOR NEW SENSITIVE RECEPTORS NEAR WAREHOUSES NAIOP WAREHOUSE SITING EVALUATION SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN, CALIFORNIA �� l 1 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY California Air Resources Board's (CARB's) April 2005 Air Quality and Land Use Handbook' ("CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook") recommends a minimum separation distance of 1,000 feet between new sensitive land uses and warehouses that either accommodate more than 100 trucks per day or 300 hours per week of transportation refrigeration unit (TRU) operation. Per CARB's analysis, the potential cancer riskz for diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions from trucks and TRUs operating in calendar year 2000 would be less than 100 in a million at this distance (see Section 1 for further discussion of the development of the minimum separation distance guidance). DPM emissions from heavy-duty trucks (HDTs or"trucks") and TRUs have reduced significantly over the last 15 years with the implementation of federal and state regulations such as United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Highway Engines and Vehicles CARB's Truck and Bus Regulation and CARB's Airborne Toxic Control Measure for TRUs.5 Additionally, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) updated their guidance for estimating health risk in 2015.6 Therefore, an analysis using present-day emissions data for modern trucks and TRUs along with the most recent risk assessment guidance may yield different results than those presented in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook. Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. ("Ramboll") has performed a health risk assessment (HRA) analysis to evaluate effects of the reductions in HDT and TRU emissions factors and the changes in health risk assessment guidance on CARB's siting distance recommendation. Specifically, we analyzed the following modeling scenarios in calendar years 2000 and 2023: • Scenario 1 — "HDT with TRU": A warehouse in this scenario would reflect 40 HDTs per day? and 300 hours per week of TRU operation. This scenario is conservative and represents a combination of the two types of warehouses noted in CARB's handbook, i.e., warehouses that accommodate more than 40 trucks with operating TRUs per day and warehouses where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week. ' California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook. A Community Health Perspective. April. Available at: 1v^L. pci . Accessed: October 2020. 2 Risk estimates are shown in CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook.These were developed using the 2003 cancer risk methodology guidance. 3 United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2016. Heavy-Duty Highway Compression-Ignition Engines and Urban Buses: Exhaust Emission Standards. EPA-420-B-16-018. March. Available at: Fe 7yPDF.cgi?Dockev=P100O9ZZ.p6f. Accessed: October 2020. 4 Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants from In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles, Title 13 California Code of Regulation (CCR) §2025. Available at: http www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents/tbfinalreg.pdf? ga=2.217177366.1039373648.16032382 24- `98844410 15S3175297. Accessed: October 2020. 5 Airborne Toxic Control Measure for In-Use Diesel-Fueled Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRU) and TRU Generator Sets, and Facilities Where TRUs Operate. Title 13 CCR§2477 and Article S. Available at: i ttps./,wwvd.arb.ca.yov'diesN trs n%u! ��r��-sifr� ''� 16-i2.pdf7 ga=2.240750851A039373648.1603238224- 1598844410.15831-7,5297. Accessed: October 2020. 6 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. March 6. Available at: baps., a,, hot-spots-program-guidance-manual-preparation- health-risk-0. Accessed: October 2020. ' Each truck is assumed to travel a total distance of one quarter mile within the warehouse facility between its arrival at and departure from the facility. Executive Summary Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California ES-2 • Scenario 2 — ' HDT only": A warehouse in this scenario would reflect 100 HDTs per day7. Ramboll used CARB models (EMFAC2017 and OFFROAD2017) to estimate DPM emissions from both scenarios in calendar years 2000 and 2023. These emissions were then modeled using the OEHHA risk assessment guidance to estimate potential cancer risk at specific distances from HDT/TRU activity in both scenarios. For calendar year 2000, Ramboll used the 2003 OEHHA guidance to estimate potential cancer risk which is consistent with the methodology in the 2005 CARE, Land Use Handbook. For the modern HDTs/TRUs operating in 2023, Ramboll estimated the potential cancer risk using the current version of the risk assessment guidance, the 2015 OEHHA Guidance, which increased the cancer risk estimates for DPM by a factor of 2.3 as compared to the 2003 OEHHA Guidance. Refer to Section 2 and Section 3 for further details on the scenarios and the modeling methodology. Figure ES-1 below compares the results of Ramboll's analysis to the CARE, analysis for TRUs presented in their 2005 Land Use Handbook (refer to Section 4 for further details). This figure depicts the estimated potential cancer risk (represented by the color of the bars: dark-yellow for a potential cancer risk greater than or equal to 100 in a million, and light-yellow for potential cancer risk values from 10 to a 100 in a million) as a function of the distance from the center of the source (represented by the height of the bar) for each modeled scenario. TRU Emission Truck Activity Factor' (number of 2000 Scenario /bh -hr trucks/day) HRA Guidance CY 2000,TRU Only CAR" 0.70 N/A 2003 OEHHA 1800 CRarnboll HDT with TRU 0.42 40 2003 OEHHA CY 2000,HDT Only Ramboll N/A 100 2003 OEHHA 1600 CY 2020,TRU Only CARB 0.05 NJA 2003 OEHHA -' CY 2023,HDT with TRU N 1400 Ramboll 0.02 40 2015 OEHHA �; CY 2023,HDT Only Ramboll N/A 100 2015 OEHHA O 'TRU activity is 300 hours/week f 1200 0 1,000`eet from Source Bounaary v C 1000 L 0 Soo v U 600 N C 400 Modeled Source 200 Boundary 0 CY 2000,TRU CY 2000, HDT CY 2000,HDT CY 2020,TRU CY 2023, HDT CY 2023, HDT Only with TRU Only Only with TRU Only (CARB) (Ramboll) (Ramboll) (CARB) (Ramboll) (Ramboll) ❑>_ 100 in a million o?10 and < 100 in a million Figure ES-1.Estimated Risk Range Versus Distance from Center of Source: CARB and Ramboll Data$ 8 This is not equivalent to a lead agency determination of significance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which would be based on the highest health risk impacts of project related sources at specific locations of sensitive receptors like residences, schools, etc. In addition, as noted in Section 2 and Section 3, the modeling assumptions used in Ramboll's analyses are conservative. Executive Summary Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California ES-3 In calendar year 2000, results for Ramboll's Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) show agreement with CARB's results for TRUs. This demonstrates that our modeling is consistent with CARB's original analysis. In calendar year 2023, results for Ramboll's Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) are similar to CARB's results for TRUs in calendar year 2020. Ramboll's results show greater potential risk values due to use of the 2015 OEHHA Guidance for risk calculations, which includes higher exposure factors for sensitive populations as compared to the 2003 OEEHA Guidance9 used in the CARB analysis. Further details on the differences in the OEHHA Guidance documents is provides in Section 3.3. Ramboll's analysis shows that potential cancer risks for modern trucks and TRUs operating in 2023 are significantly lower than that of older trucks and TRUs operating in 2000, even with the updated risk assessment methodology. Potential cancer risk estimates in 2023 are below the 100 in a million level used by CARB to establish the original minimal siting guidance of 1,000 feet except at distances very close to the site boundary (<79 feet for HDTs with TRUs). Further, as described in Section 4 of this report, these distances may be even lower, if warehouse specific truck fleet mixes10 are used. Additionally, future reductions in DPM emissions from modern trucks and TRUs resulting from CARB's proposed TRU11 and HDT regulations12,13,14 and statewide electrification efforts15 would reduce these distances even more. Overall, our analysis demonstrates that federal and state regulations have led to significantly lower- emitting trucks and TRUs such that, even with the latest risk assessment methodology, CARB's 2005 Land Use Handbook minimum siting guidance of 1,000 feet for sensitive receptors located in the vicinity of warehouses is now overly conservative. The analysis demonstrates that there is no basis for proposals to increase the minimum siting distance and that the CARB recommended minimum siting distance of 1,000 feet could be significantly reduced or eliminated in the land use guidance. 9 OEHHA. 2003. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. August. Available at: hops., "oe` -�a a; Accessed: October 2020. 10 WSP. 2017. RCTC Truck Study and Regional Logistics Mitigation Fee Technical Memorandum. October. Available at: https://www.rctc.org/wp content/uploads/2018/07/Final_RCI-CLGgisiticsFeeExistrngFutureConditioi,sReport171030.pof. Accessed: October 2020 11 CARB. 2020.Transport Refrigeration Unit Regulation Draft Regulatory Language for Stakeholder Review March 12, 2020. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic;/cUcol_: storage;de ue?er.ts F'raft°i,20TRU°i-,2GRegulatory°%20Language_03122020.pdf. Accessed: October 2020 12 CARB, 2020. Advanced Clean Trucks. Available at: iittps://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean- trucks. Accessed: October 2020 13 CARB, 2020. Heavy-Duty Omnibus Regulation. Available at: -Itt[,,z , . arb.ca.gcv Accessed: October 2020. 14 CARB, 2020. Advanced Clean Fleets. Available at: https iww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean- eets. Accessed: October 2020. 15 EXECUTIVE ORDER N-79-20. Available at: https://w%vw.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09j9.23.20-EO-N- -�j-text pdf. Accessed: October 2020. Executive Summary Ramboll Prepared for NAIOP, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association Laguna Hills, California Prepared by Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. Irvine, California Project Number 1690018427 Date April 2021 EVALUATING SITING DISTANCES FOR NEW SENSITIVE RECEPTORS NEAR WAREHOUSES NAIOP WAREHOUSE SITING EVALUATION SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN, CALIFORNIA NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-1 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. MODELING SCENARIOS 3 3. ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 5 3.1 Emission Estimation 5 3.1.1 Heavy Duty Truck Emission Factors 5 3.1.2 Transportation Refrigeration Unit Emission Factors 6 3.1.3 Emission Estimates 6 3.2 Air Dispersion Modeling Methodology 7 3.2.1 Model Selection 7 3.2.2 Source Characterization 8 3.2.3 Meteorology 8 3.2.4 Land Use and Terrain Data 9 3.2.5 Receptors 9 3.3 Cancer Risk Calculations 9 4. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 12 Contents Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California ii CONTENTS (CONTINUED) TABLES Table 1: Heavy Duty Truck Emission Factors for South Coast Air Basin in Calendar Year 2000 Table 2: Heavy Duty Truck Emission Factors for South Coast Air Basin in Calendar Year 2023 Table 3: Transportation Refrigeration Unit Emission Factors for South Coast Air Basin in Calendar Years 2000 and 2023 Table 4: Diesel Particulate Matter Emission Estimates for Modeled Scenarios Table 5: Modeled Source Parameters Table 6: Heavy Duty Truck Emission Factors for Warehouse Fleet Mixes in Calendar Year 2023 Table 7: Diesel Particulate Matter Emission Estimates for Warehouse Fleet Mixes in Calendar Year 2023 FIGURES Figure ES-1: Estimated Risk Range versus Distance from Center of Source: CARB and Ramboll Data Figure 1: VMT Weighted Average HDT DPM Total Exhaust Emission Factors: 2000-2035 Figure 2: Aggregated Fleet Average TRU DPM Emission Factors: 2000-2035 Figure 3: Annual DPM Emissions for Modeled Scenarios Figure 4: Wind Rose for Ontario Airport Meteorological Station Figure 5: Estimated Risk Range versus Distance from Center of Source: CARE; and Ramboll Data Figure 6: Cancer Risk Isopleths: Year 2000, Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU Figure 7: Cancer Risk Isopleths: Year 2023, Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU Figure 8: Cancer Risk Isopleths: Year 2000, Scenario 2 — HDT Only Figure 9: Cancer Risk Isopleths: Year 2023, Scenario 2 — HDT Only Figure 10: Heavy Duty Truck Fleet Mix Comparison Figure 11: Comparison of Annual DPM Emissions across Warehouse Fleet Mixes in Calendar Year 2023 APPENDICES Appendix A: AERMOD Modeling Files Appendix B: Heath Risk Assessment Results Contents (Continued) Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California iii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AERMIC AMS/EPA Regulatory Model Improvement Committee AERMOD AMS/EPA Regulatory Model Improvement Committee Model AMS/EPA American Meteorological Society/ Environmental Protection Agency AQMD Air Quality Management District ARB Air Resources Board ASF Age sensitivity factor CARB California Air Resources Board CCR California Code of Regulation CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CEF Combined Exposure Factor CPF cancer potency factor DBR Daily Breathing Rate DPM Diesel particulate matter EF emission factor EMFAC EMission FACtors model EVF Exposure Value Factor g/bhp-hr grams per brake horsepower hour g/m3 gram/cubic meter g/s gram/second HDTs Heavy-duty trucks HDVs heavy-duty vehicles HHDTs Heavy-heavy duty trucks HRA health risk assessment LHDT light-heavy duty trucks L/kg liter per kilogram MDVs medium-duty vehicles pg/m3 Micrograms/cubic meter mg/kg milligram/kilogram MHDT Medium-heavy duty truck MICR Maximum individual cancer risk MP Multipathway MPR Multipathway factor for residential exposure MRLC Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium Acronyms and Abbreviations Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California iv ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (CONTINUED) MWAF Molecular weight adjustment factor NAIOP IE NAIOP, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association's Inland Empire Chapter NED National Elevation Dataset NOx Oxides of Nitrogen OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment OEMs Original Equipment Manufacturers PM Particulate Matter PM10 Particulate Matter less than 10 Microns in diameter SC South Coast SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency TRU transportation refrigeration units VMT vehicle miles traveled WAF Worker adjustment factor ZE zero emission Acronyms and Abbreviations Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY California Air Resources Board's (CARB's) April 2005 Air Quality and Land Use Handbook' ("CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook") recommends a minimum separation distance of 1,000 feet between new sensitive land uses and warehouses that either accommodate more than 100 trucks per day or 300 hours per week of transportation refrigeration unit (TRU) operation. Per CARB's analysis, the potential cancer risk2 for diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions from trucks and TRUs operating in calendar year 2000 would be less than 100 in a million at this distance (see Section 1 for further discussion of the development of the minimum separation distance guidance). DPM emissions from heavy-duty trucks (HDTs or"trucks") and TRUs have reduced significantly over the last 15 years with the implementation of federal and state regulations such as United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Highway Engines and Vehicles,3 CARB's Truck and Bus Regulation,4 and CARB's Airborne Toxic Control Measure for TRUs.5 Additionally, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) updated their guidance for estimating health risk in 2015.6 Therefore, an analysis using present-day emissions data for modern trucks and TRUs along with the most recent risk assessment guidance may yield different results than those presented in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook. Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. ("Ramboll") has performed a health risk assessment (HRA) analysis to evaluate effects of the reductions in HDT and TRU emissions factors and the changes in health risk assessment guidance on CARB's siting distance recommendation. Specifically, we analyzed the following modeling scenarios in calendar years 2000 and 2023: • Scenario 1 — "HDT with TRU": A warehouse in this scenario would reflect 40 HDTs per day' and 300 hours per week of TRU operation. This scenario is conservative and represents a combination of the two types of warehouses noted in CARB's handbook, i.e., warehouses that accommodate more than 40 trucks with operating TRUs per day and warehouses where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week. ' California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook. A Community Health Perspective. April. Available at: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. 2 Risk estimates are shown in CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook. These were developed using the 2003 cancer risk methodology guidance. 3 United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2016. Heavy-Duty Highway Compression-Ignition Engines and Urban Buses: Exhaust Emission Standards. EPA-420-B-16-018. March. Available at: http:,/nepis,epa.gov!Exe,/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P10009ZZ.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. 4 Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants from In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles. Title 13 California Code of Regulation (CCR) §2025. Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents/tbfinalreg.pdf?_ga=2.217177366.1039373648.16032382 24-1598844410,1583175297. Accessed: October 2020. 5 Airborne Toxic Control Measure for In-Use Diesel-Fueled Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRU) and TRU Generator Sets, and Facilities Where TRUs Operate. Title 13 CCR§2477 and Article 8. Available at: https://www,arb.ca.gov/diesel;tru'd ucuments/frc_10-16-12.pdf?_ga=2.240750851.1039373648.1603238224- 1598844410.1583175297. Accessed: October 2020. 6 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, March 6. Available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/airjcrnr/notice-adoption-air-toxics-hot-spots-program-guidance-manual-preparation- health-risk-0. Accessed: October 2020. ' Each truck is assumed to travel a total distance of one quarter mile within the warehouse facility between its arrival at and departure from the facility. Executive Summary Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California ES-2 • Scenario 2 — "HDT only": A warehouse in this scenario would reflect 100 HDTs per day'. Ramboll used CARB models (EMFAC2017 and OFFROAD2017) to estimate DPM emissions from both scenarios in calendar years 2000 and 2023. These emissions were then modeled using the OEHHA risk assessment guidance to estimate potential cancer risk at specific distances from HDT/TRU activity in both scenarios. For calendar year 2000, Ramboll used the 2003 OEHHA guidance to estimate potential cancer risk which is consistent with the methodology in the 2005 CARB Land Use Handbook. For the modern HDTs/TRUs operating in 2023, Ramboll estimated the potential cancer risk using the current version of the risk assessment guidance, the 2015 OEHHA Guidance, which increased the cancer risk estimates for DPM by a factor of 2.3 as compared to the 2003 OEHHA Guidance. Refer to Section 2 and Section 3 for further details on the scenarios and the modeling methodology. Figure ES-1 below compares the results of Ramboll's analysis to the CARB analysis for TRUs presented in their 2005 Land Use Handbook (refer to Section 4 for further details). This figure depicts the estimated potential cancer risk (represented by the color of the bars: dark-yellow for a potential cancer risk greater than or equal to 100 in a million, and light-yellow for potential cancer risk values from 10 to a 100 in a million) as a function of the distance from the center of the source (represented by the height of the bar) for each modeled scenario. TRU Emission Truck Activity Factor' (number of 2000 Scenario bh -hr trucks/day) HRA Guidance CY 2000,TRU Only CARE 0.70 N/A 2003 OEHHA 1800 CY 2000,HDT with TRU Ramboll 0.42 40 2003 OEHHA CY 2000,HDT Only Ramboll N/A 100 20030EHHA 1600 cY 2020,TRU Only CARE 0.05 N/A 2003 OEHHA CY 2023,HDT with TRU N 1400 Ramboll 0.02 40 2015 OEHHA CY 2023,HDT Only Ramboll N/A 100 2015 OEHHA O U) 1200 'TRU activity is 300 hours/week 0 1,000 feet from Source Boundary v v 1000 U 2 800 co 600 w 0 400 200 Modeled Source Boundary 0 CY 2000,TRU CY 2000, HDT CY 2000, HDT CY 2020,TRU CY 2023, HDT CY 2023, HDT Only with TRU Only Only with TRU Only (CARB) (Ramboll) (Ramboll) (CARB) (Ramboll) (Ramboll) ❑? 100 in a million ❑?10 and < 100 in a million Figure ES-1.Estimated Risk Range Versus Distance from Center of Source: CARB and Ramboll Data$ 8 This is,not equivalent to a lead agency determination of significance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which would be based on the highest health risk impacts of project related sources at specific locations of sensitive receptors like residences, schools, etc. In addition, as noted in Section 2 and Section 3, the modeling assumptions used in Ramboll's analyses are conservative. Executive Summary Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California ES-3 In calendar year 2000, results for Ramboll's Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) show agreement with CARB's results for TRUs. This demonstrates that our modeling is consistent with CARB's original analysis. In calendar year 2023, results for Ramboll's Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) are similar to CARB's results for TRUs in calendar year 2020. Ramboll's results show greater potential risk values due to use of the 2015 OEHHA Guidance for risk calculations, which includes higher exposure factors for sensitive populations as compared to the 2003 OEEHA Guidance9 used in the CARB analysis. Further details on the differences in the OEHHA Guidance documents is provides in Section 3.3. Ramboll's analysis shows that potential cancer risks for modern trucks and TRUs operating in 2023 are significantly lower than that of older trucks and TRUs operating in 2000, even with the updated risk assessment methodology. Potential cancer risk estimates in 2023 are below the 100 in a million level used by CARB to establish the original minimal siting guidance of 1,000 feet except at distances very close to the site boundary (<79 feet for HDTs with TRUs). Further, as described in Section 4 of this report, these distances may be even lower, if warehouse specific truck fleet mixes10 are used. Additionally, future reductions in DPM emissions from modern trucks and TRUs resulting from CARB's proposed TRU11 and HDT regulations12,13,14 and statewide electrification efforts15 would reduce these distances even more. Overall, our analysis demonstrates that federal and state regulations have led to significantly lower- emitting trucks and TRUs such that, even with the latest risk assessment methodology, CARB's 2005 Land Use Handbook minimum siting guidance of 1,000 feet for sensitive receptors located in the vicinity of warehouses is now overly conservative. The analysis demonstrates that there is no basis for proposals to increase the minimum siting distance and that the CARB recommended minimum siting distance of 1,000 feet could be significantly reduced or eliminated in the land use guidance. 9 OEHHA. 2003. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. August. Available at: https://oehha,ca.gov/media/downioads/crnr/liraftnalnoapp.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. 10 WSP. 2017. RCTC Truck Study and Regional Logistics Mitigation Fee Technical Memorandum. October. Available at: https://www.rctc.org/wp- content/uploads/2018/07/Final_RCTCLogisiticsFeeExistingFutureConditionsReport171030.pdf. Accessed: October 2020 11 CARB. 2020. Transport Refrigeration Unit Regulation Draft Regulatory Language for Stakeholder Review March 12, 2020. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/cold- storage,docuo,,ents/nraft%20TRU%20Regulatory%20Language_03122020.pdf. Accessed: October 2020 12 CARB, 2020. Advanced Clean Trucks. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work,%programs/advanced-clean- trucks. Accessed: October 2020 13 CARB, 2020. Heavy-Duty Omnibus Regulation. Available at: https:/,/wnv2.arb.ca,gov!rulemaking/2020/hdomnibuslownox. Accessed: October 2020. 14 CARB, 2020. Advanced Clean Fleets. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean- fleets. Accessed: October 2020. 15 EXECUTIVE ORDER N-79-20. Available at: https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/9.23.20-EO-N- 79-20-text.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. Executive Summary Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 1 1. INTRODUCTION California Air Resources Board's (CARB's) Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, dated April 200516 ("CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook") provides recommendations regarding the siting of new sensitive land uses near distributions centers ("warehouses") and other air pollution sources such as freeways, rail yards, ports, refineries, etc. In order to do this, CARB evaluates relative risk using cancer health impacts and, where possible, recommends a minimum separation distance between a new sensitive land use and known air pollution source. For warehouses that accommodate more the 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transportation refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week, CARB recommends a separation distance of at least 1,000 feet for siting new sensitive land uses. At this distance, potential cancer risk would be expected to be less than 100 in a million based on CARB's analysis of TRU emissions in calendar year 2000 and the then current (2003) OEHHA health risk analysis guidance. As stated in the CARE, 2005 Land Use Handbook, this siting distance recommendation is tailored "to minimize the highest exposures for each source category independently" and "are advisory and should not be interpreted as defined 'buffer zones"'. Additionally, the CARE, 2005 Land Use Handbook states that"these recommendations are only guidelines and are not designed to substitute for more specific information if it exists" and "to determine the actual risk near a particular facility, a site-specific analysis would be required. Potential risk from diesel PM will decrease over time as cleaner technology phases in." While the CARE, 2005 Land Use Handbook acknowledges that the potential risk from diesel particulate matter (DPM) will decrease over time and states that"CARB staff plans to provide further information on distribution centers as we collect more data and implement the TRU control measure", no formal updates have been made to the recommendations provided in the CARE, 2005 Land Use Handbook. More recently, CARB released the Concept Paper for the Freight Handbooks' ("CARE, Concept Paper"), which introduces CARB's preliminary approach for identifying the minimum transition zone distances to separate land use zones for new or expanded freight facilities (such as warehouses) away from sensitive land uses. The transition zone concept focuses on the proximity of diesel vehicles and equipment to people and the associated near-source cancer risks to community members. The CARB Concept Paper discusses the data and approach that could be used to develop the distances for the transition zones. For example, an analysis could be performed to evaluate the general DPM-related exposure trends for freight facilities based on current practices and pollution control technology. One analytic approach proposed in the CARB Concept Paper consists of modeling of a "representative warehouse" and the associated potential cancer risk estimates using the most recent OEHHA Guidance. The CARB Concept Paper also suggests examining the downwind distances from warehouses needed to achieve an 85, 90, and 95 percent reduction in DPM concentration and associated potential cancer risk. However, it fails to define a "representative warehouse" and evaluate the cancer risk associated with potential DPM emissions from a "representative 16 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook. A Community Health Perspective. April. Available at: https:; !r; _.a! .ca.00v/ch/hPndbooK.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. 17 CARB. 2019. Concept Paper for the Freight Handbook. December 12. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/2019.12.12%20- %20Concept%2OPaper%20for%20the%2OFreight%2OHandbook_l.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. Introduction Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 2 warehouse" at specific downwind distances which could provide some insight into siting distances for new sensitive land uses near warehouses. As acknowledged in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook, the implementation of control measures and phase in of new technologies contribute to reduced DPM emissions over time. The primary sources of DPM considered in the modeling presented in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook are heavy duty trucks (HDTs) and Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRUs). Emissions from HDTs and TRUs have reduced significantly over the last 15-years with the implementation of federal and state regulations such as United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Highway Engines and Vehicles,18 CARB's Truck and Bus Regulation,19 and CARB's Airborne Toxic Control Measure for TRUs.20 Additionally, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) updated their guidance for estimating health risk associated with DPM in 2015.21 Therefore, an analysis using present-day emissions data and the most recent risk assessment guidance available may yield different results than those presented in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook. Cities and counties in the Inland Empire region are considering adopting policies that would use CARB's recommended siting distance of 1,000 feet as a minimum separation distance between sensitive receptors and new warehouse facilities. In order to inform the decision making process of these cities/counties, NAIOP, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association's Inland Empire Chapter ("NAIOP IE") contracted Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. ("Ramboll") to perform a health risk assessment (HRA) analysis to evaluate the effects of changes in HDT and TRU emissions and risk assessment methodologies over the last 15 years on the CARB recommended siting distance of 1,000 feet for new sensitive land uses near warehouses. This technical report presents a brief description of the modeling scenarios, analysis methodology for estimating emissions, dispersion modeling and cancer risk calculations, and HRA results and conclusions on the siting distance evaluation. 18 United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2016. Heavy-Duty Highway Compression-Ignition Engines and Urban Buses: Exhaust Emission Standards. EPA-420-B-16-018, March. Available at: http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P10009ZZ.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. 19 Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants from In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles. Title 13 California Code of Regulation (CCR) §2025. Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents/tbfinalreg.pdf?_ga=2.217177366.1039373648.16032382 24-1598844410.1583175297. Accessed: October 2020. 20 Airborne Toxic Control Measure for In-Use Diesel-Fueled Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRU) and TRU Generator Sets, and Facilities Where TRUs Operate.Title 13 CCR§2477 and Article 8. Available at: https://www.a rb.ca.gov/diesel/tru/documents/fro_10-16-12.pdf?_ga=2.240750851.1039373648.1603238224- 1598844410.1583175297. Accessed: October 2020. 21 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. March 6. Available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/air/crnr/notice-adoption-air-toxics-hot-spots-program-guidance-manual-preparation- health-risk-0. Accessed: October 2020. Introduction Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 3 2. MODELING SCENARIOS As stated in the introduction, CARB recommends a separation distance of at least 1,000 feet for siting new sensitive land uses near warehouses that accommodate more the 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transportation refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week. Hence, Ramboll chose the following modeling scenarios to represent the warehouses for which CARB's recommended siting distance would apply. • Scenario 1 — "HDT with TRU": A warehouse in this scenario would reflect 40 HDTs per day and 300 hours per week of TRU unit operations. Ramboll assumed that each HDT visiting this warehouse would travel one-quarter (0.25) mile distance within the warehouse facility between its arrival at and departure from the facility, and idle for a total of 15-minutes on-site (5-minutes at entry, 5-minutes at dock, and 5-minutes at exit). Note, this scenario is conservative and represents a combination of the two types of warehouses noted in CARB's handbook, i.e., warehouses that accommodate more than 40 trucks with operating TRUs per day and warehouses where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week. • Scenario 2 — "HDT only": A warehouse in this scenario would reflect 100 HDTs per day. As noted under Scenario 1, Ramboll assumed that each HDT would travel one quarter (0.25) mile distance within the warehouse facility between its arrival at and departure from the facility, and idle for a total of 15 minutes on-site. In order to evaluate the effect of changes in HDT and TRU emissions and risk assessment methodology that have occurred over the last 15-years on CARB's recommended siting distance, Ramboll modeled each scenario (Scenario 1 and Scenario 2) in calendar year 2000 and calendar year 2023. The choice of calendar year 2000 was based on the modeling analysis presented in CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook that was used to develop the 1,000 feet siting distance recommendation. As shown in Figure 1-2 of the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook, CARB estimated potential cancer risk associated with 300 hours per week of TRU engine operation in calendar years 2000, 2010, and 2020. The risk values presented in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook were estimated based on the OEHHA's August 2003 Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines22 (2003 OEHHA Guidance). Hence, Ramboll used the 2003 OEEHA Guidance to estimate potential cancer risks for both scenarios (Scenario 1 and Scenario 2) in calendar year 2000. Calendar year 2023 was chosen to represent trucks and TRU operations associated with new projects that would be developed in the future. The choice of this calendar year was based on an evaluation of the changes in HDT and TRU emission factors over time. As shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2,23 based on the current version of CARB's mobile source emission models, HDT and TRU exhaust emission factors have reduced significantly from calendar year 2000 to 2023 and are expected to remain relatively constant with slight reductions 22 OEHHA. 2003. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. August. Available at: littps://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr,/hrafinaliioapp.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. 23 These figures represent DPM emission factors for HDTs and TRUs operating in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) and were developed using CARB's mobile source emission inventory models EMFAC2017 and OFFROAD2017 - ORION respectively. These emission inventory models are available at: nttps://ww2.arb.ca.gov'our- work!programs/mobile-source e ,fissions inventory/nisei �riodeling-tools, accessed: October 2020. Modeling Scenarios Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 4 beyond 2023. Hence, using calendar year 2023 emission factors provides a conservative representation of HDT and TRU emissions in future years, although recently adopted and proposed regulations that are not accounted yet accounted for in CARB"s mobile source emissions models will likely result in further reductions to HDT and TRU emission factors, as discussed in Section 4. Since new projects would use the current version of OEHHA's risk assessment guidance to evaluate health impacts, Ramboll used 2015 OEHHA Guidance to estimate potential cancer risks for both scenarios (Scenario 1 and Scenario 2) in calendar year 2023, which increased the cancer risk estimates for DPM by a factor of 2.3 as compared to the 2003 OEHHA Guidance. Details of the analysis methodology for both scenarios in calendar years 2000 and 2023 are provided in the following section. Modeling Scenarios Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 5 3. ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY This section describes the methodology used to estimate DPM emissions for HDTs and TRUs operating in Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, followed by the dispersion modeling methodology and the potential cancer risk calculations for each Scenario in calendar years 2000 and 2023. 3.1 Emission Estimation Ramboll used the current versions of on-road and off-road CARB's mobile source emission inventories EMFAC201724 and OFFROAD2017 — ORION25 to estimate the emission factors for HDTs and TRUs operating in calendar years 2000 and 2023. We then applied these emission factors to the activity data for each modeled scenario to estimate the daily and annual average DPM emission factors. The following sub-sections provide details of the EMFAC2017 and OFFROAD2017 — ORION model inputs used in this analysis followed by a brief description of the DPM emission estimates that were calculated for each modeled scenario. 3.1.1 Heavy Duty Truck Emission Factors HDT emission factors were estimated using CARB's current version of the on-road mobile source emission inventory, EMFAC2017.26 Particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns (PMio) exhaust emissionS27 from diesel vehicles was used as a proxy for DPM. Ramboll ran the "Project Analysis" version of EMFAC2017 to determine running exhaust emission factors in grams per mile and idling exhaust emissions in grams per idle-minute. Running exhaust emission factors were calculated at a travel speed of 5 mph to represent on-site HDT travel at the modeled warehouse facility. Input parameters used for the EMFAC model run are shown below: • Run Mode: Emission Rates • Region: Air District, South Coast AQMD • Calendar Year: 2000, 2023 • Season: Annual • Vehicle Categorv:28 LHDT1, LHDT2, MHDT, HHDT • Model Year: Aggregated • Fuel: By Fuel 24 CARB. Mobile Source Emissions Inventory. Available at: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/. Accessed: October 2020. 25 CARB. Mobile Source Emissions Inventory, OFFROAD2017 - ORION. Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/orion/?_ga=2.140186611.1957439318.1602191818-2008260070,1572389583 . Accessed: October 2020. 26 EMFAC2017 v1.0.2 was used in this analysis. While EMFAC2017 v1.0.3 just recently became available, this update only addresses some issues related to Custom Activity (SG) mode when users intended to input speed profiles for multiple years and reflects a bug fix related to methane speciation. Therefore, emissions estimates in this analysis would be unaffected by the updates in EMFAC2017 v1.0.3. 27 DPM emissions from trucks are predominantly particulate matter emissions with a diameter less the 2.5 micros (PM2.5). Since, PM,o emissions include all PM2.5 emissions use of PM,o as a surrogate for DPM is conservative. 28 The vehicle categories in the EMFAC2017 represents a combination of in-state trucks, out-of-state trucks, and trucks with a California international registration plan that travel within the selected region. For example, EMFAC2017 assumes that out-of-state HHDT trucks travel approximately 28% of the total HHDT VMT within the South Coast Air District in calendar year 2023. Analysis Methodology Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 6 • Speed: 5 mph • Temperature and Humidity: 29 64 °F, 45 • Pollutants: PM10 Table i and Table 2 present running exhaust and idling exhaust DPM emission factors each individual HDT vehicle class (light-heavy duty truck (LHDT), medium-heavy duty truck (MHDT), and heavy-heavy duty truck (HHDT)) and the HDT vehicle class as a whole for calendar years 2000 and 2023. These emission factors were estimated using a VMT-weighted approach based on the default fleet mix in EMFAC2017. 3.1.2 Transportation Refrigeration Unit Emission Factors TRU emission factors were estimated using CARB's current version of the off-road mobile source emission inventory database, OFFROAD2017 - ORION. Particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns (PMio) exhaust emissions from diesel TRUs was used as a proxy for DPM. Input parameters used for the OFFROAD2017 - ORION model run are shown below: • Region: Air District, South Coast AQMD • Calendar Year: 2000, 2023 • Scenario: All Adopted Rules: Exhaust • Category:30 Equipment Type — Pick —TRU - Instate Genset TRU, TRU - Instate Trailer TRU, TRU - Instate Truck TRU, TRU - Instate Van TRU, TRU - Out-of-State Genset TRU, TRU - Out-of-State Trailer TRU • Model Year: Aggregated • Horsepower Bin: All Horsepower Bins • Fuel: Diesel Table 3 presents fleet average DPM emission factors for TRUs in calendar years 2000 and 2023. These emission factors were estimated using an activity-weighted approach based on the default activity data in OFFROAD2017 — ORION. 3.1.3 Emission Estimates Table 4 and Figure 3 present the DPM emission estimates for each modeled scenario (Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU and Scenario 2 — HDT Only) in calendar years 2000 and 2023. These emissions were estimated using the activity data for each scenario described in Section 2 and HDT and TRU emission factors derived from CARB's current versions of the on-road and off-road mobile source inventory models as described in Section 3.1.1 and Section 3.1.2 respectively. To determine annual emissions, Ramboll conservatively assumed that warehouse operations would occur 7 days per week and 365 days per year. 29 Annual average temperature and humidity are based on averages of the EMFAC2017 default values for these parameters across the following sub-areas that form the South Coast (SC)Air Quality Management District (AQMD) region: Los Angeles (SC), Orange (SC) , San Bernardino (SC), and Riverside (SC). 30 All TRU categories except railcar TRU are included in the model run. The categories include both in-state and out-out-state Genset TRUs that can plug in to the electric power plugs provided by facilities at the docking stations and parking lots. Analysis Methodology Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 7 As shown in Figure 3, annual DPM emissions vary widely between the modeled scenarios, with the highest emissions occurring for Scenario 1 in calendar year 2000. Furthermore, Figure 3 shows that TRUs are the major source of DPM emissions in both calendar years for Scenario 1. DPM emissions in calendar year 2023 decrease significantly compared to calendar year 2000 due to large decreases in TRU and HDT emission factors resulting from the implementation of federal and state regulations such as USEPA's Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Highway Engines and Vehicles,31 CARB's Truck and Bus Regulation,32 and CARB's Airborne Toxic Control Measure for TRUs.33 3.2 Air Dispersion Modeling Methodology Air dispersion modeling was performed to estimate the concentrations of DPM at receptors in the vicinity of the warehouse facility for each scenario (Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU and Scenario 2 — HDT Only) in calendar years 2000 and 2023. The following sections describe the methodology used for modeling, including model selection, source characterization, meteorological data, land use, and receptor placement. 3.2.1 Model Selection The AMS/EPA Regulatory Model Improvement Committee (AERMIC) Model (AERMOD) (Version 19191) was used to estimate ambient air concentrations of DPM. AERMOD has been approved for use in various regulatory applications by USEPA, CARB, and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). AERMOD uses mathematical equations to simulate the movement and dispersion of air contaminants in the atmosphere. This model, which has been approved for use by USEPA, CARB, and SCAQMD, incorporates multiple variables in its algorithms including: • Meteorological data representative of surface and upper air conditions; • Local terrain data to account for elevation changes; • Multiple receptor locations; • Physical specification of emission sources including information such as: — Location; — Release height; and — Source dimensions. For each receptor location, the model generates air concentrations (or air dispersion factors as unit emissions were modeled) that result from emissions from multiple sources. 31 United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2016. Heavy-Duty Highway Compression-Ignition Engines and Urban Buses: Exhaust Emission Standards. EPA-420-B-16-018. March. Available at: http://nepis.epa,gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cg ?Dockey=P10009ZZ.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. 32 Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants from In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles. Title 13 California Code of Regulation (CCR) §2025. Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents/tbfina lreg.pdf?_ga=2.217177366.1039373648.16032382 24-1598844410,1583175297. Accessed: October2020. 33 Airborne Toxic Control Measure for In-Use Diesel-Fueled Transportation Refrigeration Units (TRU) and TRU Generator Sets, and Facilities Where TRUs Operate. Title 13 CCR§2477 and Article 8. Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/tru/documents/fro_10-16-12.pdf?_ga=2.240750851.1039373648.1603238224- 1598844410.1583175297. Accessed: October2020. Analysis Methodology Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 8 The regulatory default option, urban dispersion characteristics, and PERIOD averaging time were selected based the SCAQMD modeling recommendations.34 Dispersion model averaging times are specified based on the averaging times of ambient air quality standards and the air quality significance thresholds established by the appropriate regulatory agencies. For the HRA, the PERIOD averaging time was used to evaluate chronic (long-term) health effects. Emissions from diesel combustion were assumed to occur 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, and 365 days per year based on the operation schedule of the warehouse. Emissions were modeled using the x/Q ("chi over cue") method, such that each source group had unit emission rates (i.e., a total of 1 gram per second [g/s]) and the model estimated dispersion factors (with units of microgram per cubic meter [µg/m3]/[g/s]). The model output was used in a post-processing calculation with actual emission rates to estimate the DPM concentrations at each receptor (see Section 3.2.5 for additional information regarding receptors). The air dispersion model file is included in Appendix A. 3.2.2 Source Characterization This HRA evaluates the emissions from on-site truck travel, on-site truck idling, and TRU operations at the warehouse facility for each modeled scenario (Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU and Scenario 2 — HDT Only) in calendar years 2000 and 2023. The model was run in accordance with the x/Q method, using a single area source with an emission rate of 1 g/s to represent DPM exhaust emissions from HDTs and TRUs operating at the modeled warehouse. Ramboll used a square one-acre area source with a 63.6-meter edge to model HDT and TRU activity within the modeled warehouse facility. Since there is no specific location for the modeled warehouse, the area source was placed directly over the monitoring location for meteorological dataset, i.e., Ontario Airport (refer to Section 3.2.3 for details on choice of meteorological dataset). Table 5 presents the source parameters that were developed based on USEPA's Transportation Conformity Guidance35. Table 4 presents emission rates for each modeled scenario that were used to estimate the ground level DPM concentrations at modeled receptors for calendar years 2000 and 2023. 3.2.3 Meteorology SCAQMD provides AERMOD model-ready meteorological datasets for use in air quality and risk impact analyses in the SCAB. SCAQMD's Ontario Airport meteorological data set was selected to perform the dispersion modeling, as this location has the most conservative dispersion factor for an area source in south coast air basin.36 The SCAQMD meteorological data set is for January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016.37 The wind rose in Figure 4 shows the distribution of wind speeds and directions, which directly affect the dispersion of the air emissions. The"petals" of the wind rose indicate the direction from which the wind blows 34 SCAQMD Modeling Guidance for AERMOD. Available at: https://www.agmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality- data-studies/meteorological-data/modeling-guidance. Accessed: September 2020. 35 USEPA. 2015. EPA Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM,0 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas Appendix J: Additional Reference Information on Air Quality Models and Data Inputs. November. EPA-420-B-15-084. Available at: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPdf.cgi?Dockey=P100NN22.pdf. Accessed: September 2020. 36 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401, 1401.1 and 212. Version 8.1. Available at: http://www.agmd.gov,'docs/default-source/permitting/rule-1401-risk-assessment/riskassessproc-v8- l.pdf?sfvrsn=l2. Accessed: September 2020. 37 Data for AERMOD. Available at: https://www.agmd,gov/home/air-quality/air-quality-data- studies/meteorological-data/data-for-aermod. Accessed: September 2020. Analysis Methodology Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 9 from, and the colors represent the wind speed. The air dispersion model uses this data to evaluate how emissions are dispersed through the air. 3.2.4 Land Use and Terrain Data As stated in Section 3.2.2, the area source was placed directly over Ontario Airport which is located in San Bernardino County. AERMOD offers the option of using either rural or urban dispersion characteristics. While selection of rural or urban dispersion characteristics can be based on the predominant land use within a three-kilometer radius of the site, per SCAQMD Modeling Guidance, AERMOD was run using the urban modeling option and population of 2,035,210 people for San Bernardino County.38 Data specifying terrain elevations of sources and receptors are imported into the model. Elevations are based on National Elevation Datasets (NEDs) and consist of an array of regularly spaced points on a horizontal plane for which an elevation is specified. NEDs used in this analysis were obtained from the United States Geologic Survey.39 3.2.5 Receptors Analyzing impacts of receptors close to emission sources is important in determining potential cancer risks. Receptor exposure to emission sources is greatest nearest to the emission source. CARB and SCAQMD emissions and modeling analyses showed an 80- percent drop-off in pollutant concentration at approximately 1,000 feet from distribution centers.40 In order to evaluate potential cancer risk at off-site sensitive receptors such as residences, the geographic scope of this assessment was extended to a 600 meter radius or nearly 1,970 feet from the center of modeled area sources. The following receptors were used for this analysis: • a 50-meter x 50-meter receptor grid starting at a distance of 50-meters from the center of the modeled area source and extending up to a distance of 600-meters from the center of the source; and • twelve fenceline receptors, equally spaced along the area source boundary. 3.3 Cancer Risk Calculations This section describes the methods used to estimate maximum incremental cancer risk (MICR) associated with exposure to exhaust DPM emissions at modeled sensitive/residential receptors for each scenario (Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU and Scenario 2 — HDT Only) in calendar years 2000 and 2023. As stated in Section 2, potential cancer risk estimates for calendar year 2000 were performed based on the 2003 OEEHA guidance using the equations and constants presented in the July 2005 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures41 as shown below: 38 SCAQMD Modeling Guidance for AERMOD. Available at: https://www,agmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality- data-studies/meteorological-data/modeling-guidance. Accessed: September 2020. 39 Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC) -National Land Cover Database. Available online at: https://\,dvvw.i-nric.gov/lviewerjs/. Accessed September 2020. 40 CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. Available at: https;//www.arb.ca.gov/'ch/handbook.pdf. Accessed: September 2020. 41 SCAQMD. 2005. Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 212, Version 7.0. July 1. Available at: http://www.agmd.gov/dots/default-source/planning/risk-assessment/risk-assessment-procedures-v- 7.pdf?sfvrsn=4 and http://www.agmd.gov/dots/default-source/planning/risk-assessment/attachment-l.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. Analysis Methodology Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 10 MICR(for Calendar Year 2000) = CP x Q x XIQ x AFann x DBR x EVF x MP x 10-6 Where: MICR = Maximum Individual Cancer Risk estimated in calendar year 2000 CP = Cancer Potency Factor of 1.1 (mg/kg/day)-1 for DPM from Table 8A in the July 2005 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure Q = Emissions rate in g/s from Table 4 X/Q = Dispersion Factor [(pg/m3)/(g/s)] at each receptor from AERMOD output file in Appendix A AFann = Annual Concentration Adjustment Factor of 1.0 from Table 3C in the July 2005 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure DBR = Daily Breathing Rate of 302 L/kg body weight-day from Table 9A in the July 2005 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure EVF = Exposure Value Factor of 0.96 from Table 9B in the July 2005 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure MP = Multi-pathway Factor of 1.0 for DPM from Table 8A in the July 2005 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure In February 2015, OEHHA released an updated guidance manual for preparation of HRAs, which included the following changes to cancer risk calculations for sensitive/residential receptors: • Age Sensitivity Factors: OEHHA developed age sensitivity factors (ASFs) to account for the increased sensitivity to carcinogens during early-in-life exposure. These include a 10-fold multiplier for exposure to infants (3rd trimester to age 2) and a 3-fold increase in exposure for children (ages 2 to 16 years old). Ages 16 and older continue to have an exposure factor of 1. • Breathing Rates: In addition to the increased ASFs noted above, OEHHA added an additional layer of conservativeness by adjusting for age-based breathing rates as children breathe more rapidly than adults. • Years of Exposure: The exposure duration for estimating residential cancer risk was reduced to 30 years from 70 years. • Age Groups or Bins: Risk calculations were disaggregated to allow for calculations by age groups/bins (3rd trimester to age two, ages 2 to 16 years old, and ages above 16 years) rather than a single lifetime calculation. This would allow incorporation of the variation in ASFs and breathing rates that are noted above. As a result of these updates, residential cancer risk estimates for a DPM emissions increased by factor of 2.3 as compared to the 2003 OEHHA Guidance. As noted in Section 2, potential cancer risk estimates for calendar year 2023 were performed based on the this updated Analysis Methodology Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 11 2015 OEHHA guidance using the equations and constants presented in the September 2017 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures42 for sensitive/residential receptors as shown below: MICR(for Calendar Year 2023) = CP x Q x XIQ x MWAF x CEF x MP x 10-6 Where: MICR = Maximum Individual Cancer Risk estimated in calendar year 2023 CP = Cancer Potency Factor of 1.1 (mg/kg/day)-1 for DPM from Table 2.0 in the September 2017 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure Q = Emissions rate in g/s from Table 4 X/Q = Dispersion Factor [(pg/m3)/(g/s)] at each receptor from AERMOD output file in Appendix A MWAF = Molecular Weight Adjustment Factor of 1.0 for DPM from Table 2.0 in the September 2017 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure CEF = Combined Exposure Factor of 677.4 for residential exposure from Table 4.1 D in the September 2017 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure MP = Multi-pathway Factor of 1.0 for DPM from Table 2.0 in the September 2017 SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedure Dispersion factors (X/Q), ground-level DPM concentrations (Q x X/Q), and MICR estimates at all modeled receptors for each scenario (Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU and Scenario 2 — HDT Only) in calendar years 2000 and 2023 are presented in Tables B-1 through B-4 in Appendix B. 42 SCAQMD. 2017. Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 212, Version 8.1. September 1. Available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs,/default-source/permitting/rule-1401-risk-assessment/riskassessproc-v8- l.pdf?sfvrsn=l2 and http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/permitting/rule-1401-risk- assessment/attachmentn-v8-l.pdf?sfvrsn=4. Accessed: October 2020. Analysis Methodology Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 12 4. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Figure 5 shows estimated potential cancer risk43 as a function of distance from the center of the source, analogous to Figure 1-2 in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook. In this figure the estimated potential cancer risk is represented by the color of the bar for each scenario. A dark-yellow color represents potential cancer risk values greater than or equal to the 100 in a million level that CARB used to develop the 1,000 feet siting guidance in the 2005 CARB Land Use Handbook. The light-yellow color represents potential cancer risk values that are less than 100 in a million but greater than or equal to 10 a million. Figure 5 includes data for calendar years 2000 and 2020 from the 2005 CARB Land Use Handbook (labelled as"CARB") as well as results from calendar years 2000 and 2023 for Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) and Scenario 2 (HDT Only) considered in the present analysis (labelled as"Ramboll"). Note, for Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) in calendar year 2000, the distance at which the potential cancer risk drops below 10 in a million in the downwind direction is not precisely known as it extends beyond Ramboll's modeling domain (see Figure 6). In all other scenarios, the estimated potential cancer risk is significantly lower (see Figure 7, Figure 8, and Figure 9), and the maximum distance at which the potential risk drops below 10 in a million is as shown in Figure 6. In calendar year 2000, results for Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) show good agreement with those for calendar year 2000 presented in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook. The difference between Ramboll's results and CARB's results in calendar year 2000 are likely due to differences in TRU emission factors and meteorological data between the two analyses. The TRU emission factors for calendar year 2000 presented in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook (0.70 g/bhp-hr) are higher than those Ramboll obtained from OFFROAD2017 for the same calendar year (0.42 g/bhp-hr as shown in Table 3). Additionally, because CARB did not provide information on metrological data used for the analysis in the CARB 2005 Land Use Handbook, Ramboll utilized the most conservative dataset available in the South Coast Air Basin as discussed in Section 3.2.3. In calendar year 2023, results for Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) are similar to CARB results for calendar year 2020. We note that CARB's results for 2020 were based on potential future state truck and TRU regulations, while Ramboll's 2023 analyses include post-2005 adopted state regulations. Ramboll's results show greater potential risk values due to use of 2015 OEEHA Guidance for risk calculations, which includes higher exposure factors for sensitive populations as compared to the 2003 OEEHA Guidance used in the CARB analysis, resulting in a 2.3-fold increase in risk estimates for DPM. However, the potential cancer risks for Scenario 2 (HDT Only) in 2023 are significantly lower than those predicted in CARB's analysis for calendar year 2020. Overall, we find that potential cancer risks greater than 10 in a million still extend to distances less than CARB's original siting distance recommendation of 1,000 feet (which was established consistent with a 100 in a million risk) for both scenarios (HDT with TRU and HDT Only) in 2023. Our analysis demonstrates that DPM emissions from HDTs and TRUs have decreased significantly in the last twenty years, resulting in corresponding decreases in estimated 43 This is not equivalent to a lead agency determination of significance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which would be based on the highest health risk impacts of project related sources at specific locations of sensitive receptors like residences, schools, etc. In addition, as noted in Section 2 and Section 3, the modeling assumptions used in Ramboll's analyses are conservative. Results and Conclusions Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 13 potential cancer risk even when utilizing the most recent OEEHA Guidance for the risk assessment calculations. Therefore, it is clear that there is no need to increase the CARB recommended siting distance of 1,000 feet for siting sensitive land uses near warehouses. In fact, as described below, a case can be made to reduce that the recommended siting distance to values below 1,000 feet. Figures 6 through 9 present modeled cancer risk isopleths for each scenario (Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU and Scenario 2 — HDT Only) in calendar years 2000 and 2023. These figures demonstrate the extent to which reductions in DPM emissions from HDTs and TRUs between calendar years 2000 and 2023 reduce the magnitude and extent of potential cancer risks resulting from the modeled warehouse operations, despite higher exposure factors (based on 2015 OEHHA Guidance as compared to the 2003 OEHHA Guidance) associated with the risk calculations for calendar year 2023. The shape of the isopleths in these figures reflect the predominant wind direction as depicted by the wind rose shown in Figure 4. In Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU), the maximum distance from the source boundary to the location where potential cancer risk drops below 100 in a million is reduced from 205 meters (673 feet) in calendar year 2000 to 24 meters (79 feet) in calendar year 2023. Although the maximum distance at which the MICR drops below 10 in a million in the downwind direction is not precisely known for Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) in calendar year 2000, a comparison of Figure 6 and Figure 7 shows that the distance is reduced significantly. In Scenario 2 (HDT Only), the maximum distance from the source boundary to the location where the modeled cancer risk drops below 100 in a million is 33 meters (108 feet) in calendar year 2000. In calendar year 2023, potential cancer risk remains below 100 in a million at all receptors, including those along the source boundary. The maximum distance from the source boundary to the location where the modeled cancer risk drops below 10 in a million is also reduced significantly in Scenario 2 (HDT Only) from 266 meters (873 feet) in calendar year 2000 to 45 meters (148 feet) in calendar year 2023. The October 2015 RCTC Truck Study44 summarizes the HDT vehicle fleet mixes for two different warehouse types (light warehouse and heavy warehouse) in the City of Fontana. A comparison of these fleet mixes with the default EMFAC2017 fleet mix used in this analysis is presented in Figure 10. In order to assess the effects of HDT fleet mix changes on the results of this analysis, Ramboll estimated HDT emission factors and annual DPM emissions for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 using these warehouse fleet mixes in calendar year 2023 (see Table 6 and Table 7). As shown in Figure 11, annual DPM emissions estimated using the warehouse fleet mixes are similar (and slightly lower) than those used in analysis to estimate potential cancer risk for both scenarios (Scenario 1 — HDT with TRU and Scenario 2 HDT Only). Therefore, utilizing warehouse-specific fleet mix data with a greater percentage of HHDTs than the EMFAC-derived fleet mix percentages would result in lower potential cancer risk results, providing further support for reduction of the recommended siting distance for locating sensitive receptors in the vicinity of warehouses. While our analysis for new projects focused on calendar year 2023, several CARB regulations indicate that emissions from TRUs and HDTs are expected to decrease further in the future. 44 WSP. 2017. RCTC Truck Study and Regional Logistics Mitigation Fee Technical Memorandum. October. Available at: https://vvwtv.rctc.org/vvp- content/uploads/2018/07/Final_RCTCLogisiticsFeeExistingFutureConditionsReport171030.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. Results and Conclusions Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 14 For example, the draft regulatory language for the proposed TRU regulation45 will require all TRUs operating in California on or after December 31, 2023 to meet or exceed a PM emission standard of 0.02 g/bhp-hr. By the same date, TRU OEMs will be required to sell only zero emission (ZE) truck TRUs in California. Starting in 2023, TRU Owners/Operators will be also required to follow a new phase-in compliance schedule for ZE truck TRU fleets, requiring the phase in of 15% ZE truck TRUs per year (over 7 years). Finally, all trailer and domestic shipping container TRUs will need to meet zero-emission operation when parked or stationary for more than 15 minutes at an applicable facility. Combined, these changes would reduce DPM emissions and the associated potential cancer risk from TRUs even lower than the levels estimated in our scenarios. Several adopted and proposed regulations for HDTs are also expected to reduce DPM emissions from trucks further into the future. For example, the Advanced Clean Trucks regulation46 approved on June 25, 2020 requires manufacturers who certify Class 2b — 8 chassis or complete vehicles with combustion engines to sell zero-emission trucks as an increasing percentage of their annual California sales from 2024 to 2035. By 2035, zero-emission truck/chassis sales would need to be 55% of Class 2b — 3 truck sales, 75% of Class 4 — 8 straight truck sales, and 40% of truck tractor sales. The Heavy-Duty Omnibus regulation,47 adopted on August 27, 2020, includes lower NOx and PM emission standards on existing regulatory cycles, revamping of the heavy-duty in-use testing program, and powertrain certification test procedures for heavy-duty hybrid vehicles. This regulation also imposes a PM standard of 0.005 g/bhp-hr (which is 50% below the current standard) for all model year 2024 and beyond medium-duty vehicles (MDV) and heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs). The Governor's Executive Order on Electric Vehicles,48 released September 23, 2020, directs CARB to develop regulations that mandate that all operations of MDVs and HDVs be 1000/0 zero emission by 2045 where feasible, with the mandate going into effect by 2035 for drayage trucks. Finally, CARB is currently developing a medium- and heavy-duty zero- emission fleet regulation with the goal of achieving a zero-emission truck and bus California fleet by 2045 everywhere feasible and significantly earlier for certain market segments such as last mile delivery and drayage applications. CARE, held its first workshop for this proposed Advanced Clean Fleet regulation September 18, 202049 and the rule is expected to be adopted by the board at the end of 2021. All of these regulations are expected to further reduce DPM emissions from HDTs in the future, resulting in lower potential cancer risk than that estimated in our analysis. Ramboll's analysis shows that potential cancer risks for modern trucks and TRUs operating in 2023 and later are significantly lower than that of older trucks and TRUs operating in 2000, even with the updated OEHHA methodology. For the modeled 2023 scenarios (Scenario 1 45 CARB, 2020. Transport Refrigeration Unit Regulation Draft Regulatory Language for Stakeholder Review March 12, 2020. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/cold- storageidocuments/Draft°o20TRU%20Regulatory°ro20Language_03122020.pdf. Accessed: October 2020 46 CARB, 2020. Advanced Clean Trucks. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work,'programs/advanced-clean- trucks. Accessed: October 2020 47 CARB, 2020. Heavy-Duty Omnibus Regulation. Available at: https:/'ww2.arb.ca.gov'rulemaking/2020/hdomnibusiowriox. Accessed: October 2020. 48 EXECUTIVE ORDER N-79-20. Available at: https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/9.23.20-EO-N- 79-20-text.pdf. Accessed: October 2020. 49 CARB, 2020. Advanced Clean Fleets. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov//our-work/programs/advanced-clean- fleets. Accessed: October 2020. Results and Conclusions Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California 15 (HDT with TRU) and Scenario 2 (HDT Only)), conservative cancer risk estimates are below the 100 in a million level used by CARB to establish the original minimal siting guidance of 1,000 feet except at distances very close to the site boundary (<79 feet for trucks with TRUs). Note, a newer version of emissions inventory model for trucks, EMFAC2021 v1.0.0 was released in January 202150 after completion of this analysis. While the running exhaust DPM emissions for HDTs in 2023 increases by 85% with this model update,51 the increase in total DPM emissions for Scenario 1 (HDT with TRU) in 2023 is less than 1%. Hence, the conclusions presented here are not expected to change with the use of EMFAC2021. Potential cancer risk estimates for the 2023 scenarios drop to below 10 in a million at distances of 774 feet and 148 feet from the site boundary for trucks with and without TRUs, respectively. These distances may be even lower, if warehouse specific truck fleet mixes are used. Additionally, future reductions in DPM emissions from HDTs and TRUs resulting from CARB's proposed TRU and HDT regulations and statewide electrification efforts would reduce these distances even more. Overall, our analysis demonstrates that federal and state regulations have led to significantly lower-emitting trucks and TRUs such that, even with the latest OEHHA methodology, CARB's 2005 Land Use Handbook minimum siting guidance of 1,000 feet for sensitive receptors located in the vicinity of warehouses is now overly conservative. The analysis demonstrates that there is no basis for proposals to increase the minimum siting distance and that the CARB recommended minimum siting distance of 1,000 feet could be significantly reduced or eliminated in the land use guidance. 50 CARB bulletin, January 15, 2021. Available at: https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/CARB/bulletins/2b62927. Accessed: April 2021. 51 HDT idling exhaust DPM emissions estimated using EMFAC2021 v1.0.0 for calendar year 2023 are similar to the values used in this analyses that are calculated using EMFAC2017. Results and Conclusions Ramboll NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California TABLES Ramboll Table 1.Heavy Duty Truck Emission Factors for South Coast Air Basin in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin,California Weighted Average DPM Emission Factor Weighted Average DPM Emission for Each HDT Vehicle DPM Emission Factor Factors' Class for HDTs Running Idling EMFAC Running Idling Running Idling EMFAC EMFAC VMT Exhaust Exhaust HDT Default Exhaust Exhaust3 Exhaust Exhaust3 Vehicle Fuel Output' at Smph (g/idle- Vehicle Fleet MIX2 at 5 mph3 (g/idle- at 5 mph3 (g/idle- Class Sub Area Type (miles/day) (g/mile) hour) Class %,VMT (g/mile) hour) (g/mile) hour) LHDT1 Los Angeles(SC) Gas 4,188,606 0 0 LHDT1 Los Angeles(SC) Dsl 636,748 0.27 1.9 LHDT1 Orange(SC) Gas 1,537,962 0 0 LHDT1 Orange(SC) Dsl 266,321 0.24 1.7 LHDT1 Riverside(SC) Gas 546,132 0 0 LHDT1 Riverside(SC) Dsl 209,470 0.23 1.6 LHDT1 San Bernardino(SC) Gas 623,155 0 0 LHDT1 San Bernardino(SC) Dsl 177,425 0.24 1.7 LHDT 39% 0.05 0.34 LHDT2 Los Angeles(SC) Gas 644,644 0 0 LHDT2 Los Angeles(SC) Dsl 316,767 0.28 1.7 LHDT2 Orange(SC) Gas 217,179 0 0 LHDT2 Orange(SC) Dsl 134,788 0.26 1.6 LHDT2 Riverside(SC) Gas 1 66,799 0 0 LHDT2 Riverside(SC) Dsl 73,358 0.21 1.5 LHDT2 San Bernardino(SC) Gas 88,486 0 0 LHDT2 San Bernardino(SC) Dsl 62,793 0.25 1.7 MHDT Los Angeles(SC) Gas 874,563 0 0 MHDT Los Angeles(SC) Dsl 3,239,041 2.2 3.5 1.7 1.8 MHDT Orange(SC) Gas 235,631 0 0 MHDT Orange(SC) Dsl 1,256,445 2.0 3.0 MHDT 27% 1.7 2.8 MHDT Riverside SC Gas 60,445 0 0 MHDT Riverside(SC) Dsl 443,078 2.2 3.7 MHDT San Bernardino(SC) Gas 91,003 0 0 MHDT San Bernardino(SC) Dsl 617,145 2.1 3.6 HHDT Los Angeles(SC) Gas 110,503 0 0 HHDT Los Angeles(SC) Dsl 4,896,500 3.7 2.8 HHDT Los Angeles(SC) NG 356 0 0 HHDT Orange(SC) Gas 27,292 0 0 HHDT Orange(SC) Dsl 931,036 3.5 2.9 HHDT Orange(SC) NG 121 0 0 HHDT 34% 3.6 2.8 HHDT Riverside SC Gas 10,350 0 0 HHDT Riverside SC Dsl 1,308 310 3.7 2.8 HHDT Riverside(SC) NG 58 0 0 HHDT San Bernardino(SC) Gas 18,069 0 0 HHDT San Bernardino(SC) Dsl 1,210,165 3.7 2.8 HHDT San Bernardino SC NG 74 0 0 Notes: 'Data obtained from EMFAC2017 v1.0.2.Refer to Section 3.1.1 of the report for model inputs.For purposes of this analysis,DPM is assumed to be equal to PM10 exhaust emissions from diesel vehicles. Z Fleet mix percentages determined using EMFAC VMT outputs. 3 DPM running and idling exhaust emission factors were estimated using VMT-weighted approach. Abbreviations: DPM-diesel particulate matter HHDT-heavy-heavy duty truck PMlo-particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter Dsl-diesel LHDT-light-heavy duty truck SC-South Coast EMFAC-EMission FACtors model MHDT-medium-heavy duty truck VMT-vehicle miles travelled g-gram mph-miles per hour HDT-heavy duty truck NG-natural gas Conversion Factor: 907,185 grams per ton \\wdaofps1\Projects\N\NAI0P IE\Technical Work\[NAIOP IE_Report Tables.xlsx]Table 1-Truck EFs 2000 Page 1 of 1 Ramboil Table 2. Heavy Duty Truck Emission Factors for South Coast Air Basin in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin,California Weighted Average DPM Emission Factor Weighted Average DPM Emission for Each HDT Vehicle DPM Emission Factor Factors' Class for HDTs Running Idling Project Running Idling Running Idling EMFAC EMFAC VMT Exhaust Exhaust HDT Specific Exhaust Exhaust3 Exhaust Exhaust' Vehicle Fuel Output' at Smph (g/idle- Vehicle Fleet Mix at 5 mph3 (g/idle- at 5 mph3 (g/idle- Class Sub Area Type (miles/day) (g/mile) hour) Class (%,VMT) (g/mile) hour) (g/mile) hour) LHDT1 Los Angeles(SC) Gas 3,800,052 0 0 LHDT1 Los Angeles(SC) Dsl 2,893,383 0.0385 0.8012 LHDT1 Orange(SC) Gas 1,293,611 0 0 LHDT1 Orange(SC) Dsl 1,009,903 0.0457 0.7925 LHDT1 Riverside(SC) Gas 489,408 0 0 LHDT1 Riverside(SC) Dsl 523,249 0.0713 0.7861 LHDT1 San Bernardino(SC) Gas 474,687 0 0 LHDT1 San Bernardino(SC) Dsl 429,402 0.0651 0.7886 LHDT 39% 0.0227 0.3909 LHDT2 Los Angeles(SC) Gas 625,879 0 0 LHDT2 Los Angeles(SC) Dsl 1,126,544 0.0441 0.8176 LHDT2 Orange(SC) Gas 222,130 0 0 LHDT2 Orange(SC) Dsl 388,074 0.0465 0.8067 LHDT2 Riverside(SC) Gas 72,844 0 0 LHDT2 Riverside(SC) Dsl 203,610 0.0648 0.7877 LHDT2 San Bernardino(SC) Gas 82,907 0 0 LHDT2 San Bernardino(SC) Dsl 162,996 0.0614 0.8003 MHDT Los Angeles(SC) Gas 797,300 0 0 MHDT Los Angeles(SC) Dsl 4,201,925 0.0061 0.0364 0.0149 0.1661 MHDT Orange(SC) Gas 377,899 0 0 MHDT Orange(SC) Dsl 1,884,701 0.0053 0.0280 MHDT 26% 0.0051 0.0299 MHDT Riverside(SC) Gas 55,523 0 0 MHDT Riverside(SC) Dsl 741,031 0.0067 0.0440 MHDT San Bernardino(SC) Gas 79,321 0 0 MHDT San Bernardino(SC) Dsl 984,562 0.0059 0.0350 HHDT Los Angeles(SC) Gas 5,905 0 0 HHDT Los Angeles(SC) Dsl 6,812,450 0.0144 0.0156 HHDT Los Angeles(SC) NG 250658 0 0 HHDT Orange(SC) Gas 1,170 0 0 HHDT Orange(SC) Dsl 1,251 228 0.0144 0.0162 HHDT Orange(SC) NG 67009 0 0 HHDT 35% 0.0135 0.0144 HHDT Riverside(SC) Gas 0,471 0 0 HHDT Riverside(SC) Dsl 1,951 879 0.0130 0.0126 HHDT Riverside(SC) NG 48482 0 0 HHDT San Bernardino(SC) Gas 0,502 0 0 HHDT San Bernardino(SC) Dsl 1,793,911 0.0135 0.0144 HHDT San Bernardino(SC) NG 81733 0 0 Notes: 'Data obtained from EMFAC2017 v1.0.2.Refer to Section 3.1.1 of the report for model inputs.For purposes of this analysis,DPM is assumed to be equal to PMio exhaust emissions from diesel vehicles. Z Fleet mix percentages determined using EMFAC VMT outputs. 3 DPM running and idling exhaust emission factors were estimated using VMT-weighted approach. Abbreviations: DPM-diesel particulate matter HHDT-heavy-heavy duty truck PMlo-particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter Dsl-diesel LHDT-light-heavy duty truck SC-South Coast EMFAC-EMission FACtors model MHDT-medium-heavy duty truck VMT-vehicle miles travelled g-gram mph-miles per hour HDT-heavy duty truck NG-natural gas Conversion Factor: 907,185 grams per ton \\wclaofpsl\projects\N\NAIOP IE\Technical Work\[NAIOP IE_Report Tables.xlsx]Table 2-Truck EFs 2023 Page 1 of 1 Ramboll 0 L E ZLf1 M V '1 Ln O q 'O V O N 0 O •-+ N �'�- cr U = O O O O O O O G a -, o CD CD C) O Q u O LL Of M C E O L W 0 y L � Ln w -C .�-� r oo M ti M t0 N v7 (•t cn 0 0 ~ O O O O O O C T w p v d U p T O N G Li x N = o Ln Ln LA W to x a ri M Lf1 M D1 L N ri M yj N.�i� O O o 0 0 00 O_ N n 0 0 0 0 0 o E o ° G m m U N C Ln M Ln co " LT ° d L V V' Ln 0 N V 'D v 'C N Lb O O N .-L C d C fa a V H r Ln o r, O L Ln � N *'L h 11 Cy C L n D) N .-L LD ,t O O yN = Ln ID t1 M N N O Q m z O o L N W LD m N O r0 n N N .-i m O C �' t\ Ili M L� n LT > yL O a La+ \ N O D M V 'D L0 u •a O 'y L co 00 n lU M rl .-L Lb 0 CL <U Q p O W a w U c ° L � C a L O T O Ln '0 E z a N 7 M M N [t d' E Ln N z .N A = O O O o 0 0 Q v 0 'o �^ N M m OL U. U O C N Ln o L O E C Q y Ln E O Y N � Rui a m E L rn N �— o ff a V g cm b v c 0 m ora O v X t ''O-O = O v OE v a u CL Ln N w N a no O V 0 0 0 N L O a) Ln a N O d O L a •� 000000 0 y L O N p C E o 44 C Ln IT 't O 7 00 N .-L O L LU fo (p U y L O W t\ cocoQ LU y L O N 0 rl M ti M 3O 5 L o ?J ry lf1 O Ol lf1 M O LY c O OL O O a C C H M tD L, O CO n U- O (6 O O_ to O O L L b p n W fM lD L U- O x i m m W i t N .-+ 7 cY N L N q) O O. C L.N L S M .-( o C Ln L _ M N L E = L oL a n 0 W m Lv Ln a Q ~ ++ a) C N V N LD O O co � O LO �, D1 q LD V oc co LT C N O D Ln D CO O Q) O C L T l 4 E a ;L.0 F C LT ni Lr a > N L L l0 Q o n Ln m O L C y O ll O tU p O)z f d h � v 0 W C C i � Q a O. a j o > - in o f v LIJ O' tY Q U- = to O Ls u a�i c m �' o E w e H C _ D Ln Q) w E c a S j t �Ln .c a H F z 'm u. 3 o N o o O N@ U N a> >[ h FA (D ~ o n C o o C CO u aci U c@ c y m vO a o 3 C O Q = U fL H > Lj m o c a 0 n Ln p a a O O V 0 o M LNn c0 LO JJ i� (U C, .L.d (y M U O O (0 0 c 0 0 " E _ o da. c alb -MaE � � o = 0 m Ln o o > o ° Ln o = a i ° z (n (- E- F- CC- f � Z .. ry M (o a Q o L C o E O ,� y o o o o is LY In •In y L N\ W W W W C 'Q tT V O N A f0 O U W d: M 14 Ln c O N a0+ v w � OC) N n �.•j d. tV Lo N C C Ln C Ln N O O x Wth ~ E L @ C7 O) C > a o CL M fY1 V L N \ CL 0 uj N L C_ T (a ->• O fu C m O 1, N Ln O et Q L LL tD m kD ID N z Ln M } C N N O 3 O M Y S = �_ LU W i O c Ln n U C N v L D D O w Ln �- O) o o O Q E z Ln i O) O C '� w y C N O fo Ln O N V 'O si co N Lb .N-i T ai la N C G W Ln i O S kDCh F L o 2 c m E @ m u N _ c 3 V1 W o Y M •o O _ vfa H N C ind Ln Ln Lo .0 m V n N O E O O 5. 2 a H 0 0 m Q q) L L L to E O O Z Ln (� La O O O S � W s IA L ru O Z O Ln CI- �` cE m o E 2 V O M O M ooOLn o o (La_ 'D Ln v (U } N N N N 'U Ln La '= L Ln of U CL `o s E E n F�- O G ^ i c y os ° iq is y to E 'O •� M W =u E fu M 0 tL d \ o O c) ul -c L m Q H M p O O G p N L6 m M — ,a > a s m L E i N O V)' d t6 O > N c ,a) Lo a) L > W V Y_ n fa (a N N (a Q y O N E C 6 V c)U 9 C) O rj N O E y i+ E" N O Y L G w./ N L Ln fa O Ln CL LA ul C7 n m ~ O Ln Q) i N! O ¢ E •0 m 0 (a � CI y O L L O n .0 O n O_ p jL � ,-r �- N E axi p > O G O O = C U d •L •L G to •O E .� O O O cn cc Cs F- 1� Z to V u o O Q c[ a m to S (A S Z a Q tT S .c a Table S. Modeled Source Parameters NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Source Type Area (Square) Area (acres) 1 Initial Vertical Dimension' (m) 6.8 Initial Vertical Dispersion 3.2 Coefficient3.4 (m) Release Heights (m) 3.4 Notes: 'The initial vertical dimension for HDT and TRU exhaust is assumed to be equal to 1.7 times the vehicle height. HDT vehicle height is 4 meters based on the USEPA Transportation Conformity Guidance. 2 The initial vertical dispersion coefficient is estimated as the initial vertical dimension divided by 2.15 based on the USEPA Transportation Conformity Guidance. 3 Release height is estimated as half of the initial vertical dimension based on the USEPA Transportation Conformity Guidance. Abbreviations: HDT- heavy-duty truck m - meters PM - particulate matter TRU -transportation refrigeration unit USEPA- United States Environmental Protection Agency References: USEPA. 2015.Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas Appendices. November. Available at: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPdf.cgi?Dockey=P100NN22.pdf. Accessed: August 2018. \\wclaofpsi\projects\N\NAIOP IE\Technical Work\[Modeling Methodology.xlsx]Table 5-Source Parameters Page 1 of 1 Ramboll \ & § ƒ 0o J = 3 uj ? \ k a ■ j i 0 2 = k 0 \ { \\ u ( § ) k \ / � & ID k2U. \ t� / \ \ ' } / x > � � / a» » » § n � � � a } 7 73 _ _ / } ¢ / \ § e m J » 2 = ± ( 0 LL V) � \ / I j-W / \ � \ \ � N / j 2 \ � I / ) \ / 2 c � \ / / e Mo ƒ ) ■ % o z o - q = / gu 2 - c E LU & w :./ e - LU f� /\ \ / Q a � § h = 3 \ e E ■ UO ` e _ e ; _ ; ( k § cm 0 E / / 3 k ) B0 ; 5 & = J / » A a 2 • « ; 2 = ^ \ ■ ■ 2U 3EA \ &/ f / £ 2 s C ■In o %2 / / _ ■ o I � � 3 m2 � ® 2 � � 2m � } \ / ) 0 £ Ln § ■ 2 Q) 3 \ ƒ 8 / \ \ fy \ k X + + < & \ fa \ \ ■ — z _ G w w z / f j / \ J % o / u ` % 2 � \ k / i j 2 2 « e # _ / / I f � & § 3 3 $ 2 LU ¥ r o o g , $ k § ■ \ E 6 6 6 / £ % 3 \ f / cm E /\ ■ 2 3 ® $ \ / § ) \0)ui / \ [X _ ]eU 45 E £ \/ L. E % \ \ \ \/\ \ R �= Ln n o o w » e . § E o o \ U. ) 0 f \ ® © ° e e li"Ti) } /? 3 § } ) E _ \ \ » � � � } / � \ \ � \ / \ \ : \ 3 & \ / w ) U) § Q Q c = = w \ - \ E \ / uj _ ID \ & \ R_ > 5 g 7 } ( X J w f 1 _ = e 2 E 2 / / / / 2 } } 2xuj y & E \ c \ N \ ID \ \ } e � c = _ 0 o \ / g \ \ m / M 2 cu \ \ \ / , x § / / / / i » | 2uj % { c I rN f 2 � E � ` - _ ) 2 = ? @ ? R \ \ \ 2 2 f § § § § 2 � ] ocoo cr -fo \ I = « CL 41 U. § { £ k § / / / / } ( ) \ \ 2 ) w f , e R $ « fu ra a E* _ _ % ® IA o 20 ^ L \ \ 2 � a ° % £ 7 fa uj ( - fuj 2 > � o 3 ° ^ LU 222 k j { M x e a a E Ig � em : 41> t / { { : 2 © � � l � k ° \ [ \ © q /u U. / 3 - E 7 � ® IV ja o /\ a) CP\ m f) $ / { - - ra � k® _ -m - {\/ /) _\ / - \±} �0 .27 CU ) \ \ / / \ \ \ / \ \ \ \ \ NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California FIGURES Ramboll N ^, V W Lr) L o N 0)_ C) LL. 'o m � a r) Q O a--� M � O � N (� X w 0 (� Lr) �n 4-1 M N OO O N � O ~ O 0 _ N N N O L- Ol U ro _ LL u >Q O , O Ln Ln� .E LU O O N c \G o O N 00 O N w 0 O O O Q1 00 lD Ln M N ,-i O N .--i O O O O O O O O O O r m (!w/6) aoloed uoissiwa ] jsneyx�3 Wd4 U- Q 0 N ^\ V W � L. o m M � Ln N 'o ' a I I 1 I I I ' O � ' fn 0 1 O _ ' N Ln I I (n I — ' •C 1 1 1 1 I. Ln I N � O N 0 Ln 0 LL � N I � I 0 N 0 0 O L N O N I } "�� N I . I > 1 Q �- I 0 L I ' Ln � V I rl ' O ru N U- LL I L I Q' W cI ru N i O 0) O _0 L 0) I � 1 � 1 (� I 4 I Ln ' Ln r , Q CD � I O L 1 OI w C-1 Q Q , L a I I O I O Ll) O Ln O Ln O U) O LI) O N d M M N N O O O O O O O O O O O O (ay-dy/6) aoiDe=l uoissiWI Wda co 0 W LL Q 0 N n\ V W � L o i� o w IL O M O N p U) cu = O •L V p Cn N N �. N c O 00 O ,"�fir,^Ft f6 O r ru LU m � f Q p _ •V) M V) N .` •— O i N Ln w o � � Y— � LL N u Q U) c _ 0 � 0 = Q 0 O i N O 12 �- o � � w u 3 ❑ Lr) � p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Ln o Lr) o Ln o Ln o Ln Ln d M M N N r-I +--� r m (ae@A/ql) suoissiwD Wda w U- LL Q N W 2 L o ] Y" co i m r �_ w L r r CA L'i P7 i t LL o LU A CO L} M iC'l C7 � V w O O O M � ti 4-J _ � :- - = O m �L 4-J j0 o ! r z co 4—J O L i � 4 � F- o G� N W M O W Q 0] W H W Q O © < < < < < < $ Q / \ / / \ / Ln j 0 0 0 0 0 0 / \ / / / / \ \ ¥ 0 I = \ \ \ \ \\ \ ?q � \m 0 ƒ -0ra CI- ■ N J - 4-J < o / < o / fo ¥ \\ } 2» § 7 ® - � 25 E 0 0 k_ k ` � f o L- ru _ _ % 4- C) k 2 = \ k \ / ¥ LU ■ m o o z o o z U k � _ 2 E ro -0 ¥ 2 (\ � E \ \ ± 0 0 < urru Ln _ _ m 00 U $a / \ 0 / \ 0 \ u L V) 70 �� g \ ) 2 /\ � ro _ / C/ C/ a N\ N\ \ R ± v ( \ E \ ƒ \ f \ i \ f \ ƒ / � 2 2 \) < m m < m e m � \ U / � \ � U >U- u E ƒ R o {/ 2 0 / /\ E] . . . ± w u 0 2 - - 0 % � - o C �2 \ .� % 0 J E � � 3 4- \ c � O � � % � -0Al ° ? k 2o \\ \\ LU U {\ ! 0 - � \ ¥ - 2 RCS - j o0U G ro � - U / 0 .. 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 00 � It q 0 % 2 ? % >\ 4 (&) ems nosjoua ueg o} a ue4 @g j \ \ / / \ § N ^' V W � L o U O a O LU O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • N . • ; . . , . . � 0 1 • f • • i • • • • • • • ; • • • . . • . ♦ r . • • . �— • • _Ile O • • • • • • • . • • • ; . . . • CD 0 . . . . . . . . . . • IT U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O 0 • • • • • ♦ • ♦ • • M • • • . ♦ ♦ • . • • . s r • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . . • • • • O O N O o "~ N • ♦ • ♦ • ♦ • • . • • • • • • • • ; • . • • O O lf1 O a � O ry _ L O Q O � cn CD V Al Al m o � D ❑ W J LL 0 N W O L o Z3 p 0)UL U 'O a • . • • • • f . f • • • • • • • • • • ♦ • • • ♦ • C N • O • • i L � t^ o f� o 0 r� O N • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 00 N • f • • • • f • ! . • • • • • • • f • • . • • 0 O O H Q O ra � 0 � r L C •� C O co O _ CD O O ci� (A V Al Al m U o LL J a of ❑ N ^, V W � L o � M m w U FL LIU O 0 a O O • • • • • • • • • ♦ • • • a . • • • • a • • • a ♦ 1..1.. W • W V) L U O /TS . . . . • r . • • • • • • ♦ • • • • r • • • • O O M O N • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • 0 0 � o N • • • • t • • • • • ♦ • • • • • ! f • . • r • O O L O r r • • r r • • • • . r • • r • • • r • r • ♦ p LLi H Q ^ O = O L D a m CD O v a C '� '� ■ V Al Al ro U ° LL J � � N n, V W � L_ o U F O cyi a • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r N O N • • . s • • . • . • • • . . . . • . . • . . . L • • • • • . • • • • i a..+ O rR • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • O O (Y1 • • • • • ► + r • • • • • • • . • • • • • r • O O N • ♦ • • ♦ • ! • • • • • • • f • • ! • • • • O O Lr) O • . i • • • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • p W H Q 0 C C) T v I' = .� 1 O O O � � CDa m O O CD U o a J � 0 N ^' W cn i.i a 0 a Q) L Q) ,O V �L 0" Lr)Q) x E :3 O + U Q) X (0 _ J rt_ W r. LL x x ,1 fo V N f M o Q U = 0 0 0 N U- x 2: ro W N 0 O J O 0 N U CD O iu N F- U o Q LL LLLI 0 0 0 0 0 0 -.0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 O O O O O O O o O O O x O O o0 tD Ln d M N .-I � m a6e4ua:)aad xiW 4aaU o U- Q 0 N ^\ V O 0) � _�� W Q) a O fo _ > f0 = M cn N a) O O L U N c v L _ u ~ .L x E C Q) � W ru 'E a ro U O : x d EO < � •— _ LLf= — cn 2: N w C X , � 0 Q .-, � 0 4 O a� N L _ � C LL a O N p > x (n (n = a� w C _ 0' (0 O Q � v C N O L � L O ru U � _ M o � J N x ^3;7, Q LL 3 u oLL = w o in o Ln o in o M N N o U- (.ie@A/ql) suoissiw�j Wda 0 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California APPENDIX A AERMOD MODELING FILES Ramboll ** **************************************** ** ** AERMOD Input Produced by: ** AERMOD View Ver. 9.6.0 ** Lakes Environmental Software Inc. ** Date: 10/2/2020 ** File: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\aermod.inp ** **************************************** ** ** **************************************** ** AERMOD Control Pathway **************************************** ** ** CO STARTING TITLEONE C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc MODELOPT DFAULT CONC AVERTIME PERIOD URBANOPT 2035210 POLLUTID PM_10 RUNORNOT RUN ERRORFIL NAIOP.err CO FINISHED **************************************** ** AERMOD Source Pathway **************************************** ** ** SO STARTING ** Source Location ** ** Source ID - Type - X Coord. - Y Coord. ** LOCATION AREA AREAPOLY 446725.563 3768225.527 278.860 ** Source Parameters ** SRCPARAM AREA 0.0002471 3.400 4 3.200 AREAVERT AREA 446725.563 3768225.527 446789.177 3768225.527 AREAVERT AREA 446789.177 3768161.913 446725.560 3768161.913 URBANSRC ALL SRCGROUP ALL SO FINISHED ** **************************************** ** AERMOD Receptor Pathway **************************************** ** ** RE STARTING INCLUDED NAIOP.rou RE FINISHED ** **************************************** ** AERMOD Meteorology Pathway **************************************** ** ** ME STARTING ** Surface File Path: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\ SURFFILE KONT_v9.SFC ** Profile File Path: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\ PROFFILE KONT_v9.PFL SURFDATA 3102 2012 UAIRDATA 3190 2012 PROFBASE 289.0 METERS ME FINISHED ** **************************************** ** AERMOD Output Pathway **************************************** ** ** OU STARTING ** Auto-Generated Plotfiles PLOTFILE PERIOD ALL "C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.AD\PE00GALL.PLT" 31 FILEFORM EXP SUMMFILE "C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.sum" OU FINISHED *** Message Summary For AERMOD Model Setup *** --------- Summary of Total Messages -------- A Total of 0 Fatal Error Message(s) A Total of 2 Warning Message(s) A Total of 0 Informational Message(s) ******** FATAL ERROR MESSAGES ******** *** NONE *** ******** WARNING MESSAGES ******** ME W186 67 MEOPEN: THRESH_1MIN 1-min ASOS wind speed threshold used 0.50 ME W187 67 MEOPEN: AD7_U* Option for Stable Low Winds used in AERMET *********************************** *** SETUP Finishes Successfully *** *********************************** T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 1 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** MODEL SETUP OPTIONS SUMMARY *** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - **Model Is Setup For Calculation of Average CONCentration Values. -- DEPOSITION LOGIC -- **NO GAS DEPOSITION Data Provided. **NO PARTICLE DEPOSITION Data Provided. **Model Uses NO DRY DEPLETION. DRYDPLT = F **Model Uses NO WET DEPLETION. WETDPLT = F **Model Uses URBAN Dispersion Algorithm for the SBL for 1 Source(s), for Total of 1 Urban Area(s) : Urban Population = 2035210.0 ; Urban Roughness Length = 1.000 m **Model Uses Regulatory DEFAULT Options: 1. Stack-tip Downwash. 2. Model Accounts for ELEVated Terrain Effects. 3. Use Calms Processing Routine. 4. Use Missing Data Processing Routine. 5. No Exponential Decay. 6. Urban Roughness Length of 1.0 Meter Assumed. **Other Options Specified: AD]_U* - Use AD7_U* option for SBL in AERMET CCVR_Sub - Meteorological data includes CCVR substitutions TEMP—Sub - Meteorological data includes TEMP substitutions **Model Assumes No FLAGPOLE Receptor Heights. **The User Specified a Pollutant Type of: PM_10 **Model Calculates PERIOD Averages Only **This Run Includes: 1 Source(s); 1 Source Group(s); and 649 Receptor(s) with: 0 POINT(s), including 0 POINTCAP(s) and 0 POINTHOR(s) and: 0 VOLUME source(s) and: 1 AREA type source(s) and: 0 LINE source(s) and: 0 RLINE/RLINEXT source(s) and: 0 OPENPIT source(s) and: 0 BUOYANT LINE source(s) with 0 line(s) **Model Set To Continue RUNning After the Setup Testing. **The AERMET Input Meteorological Data Version Date: 16216 **Output Options Selected: Model Outputs Tables of PERIOD Averages by Receptor Model Outputs External File(s) of High Values for Plotting (PLOTFILE Keyword) Model Outputs Separate Summary File of High Ranked Values (SUMMFILE Keyword) NOTE: Option for EXPonential format used in formatted output result files (FILEFORM Keyword) **NOTE: The Following Flags May Appear Following CONC Values: c for Calm Hours m for Missing Hours b for Both Calm and Missing Hours **Misc. Inputs: Base Elev. for Pot. Temp. Profile (m MSL) = 289.00 ; Decay Coef. = 0.000 Rot. Angle = 0.0 Emission Units = GRAMS/SEC ; Emission Rate Unit Factor = 0.10000E+07 Output Units = MICROGRAMS/M**3 **Approximate Storage Requirements of Model = 3.6 MB of RAM. **Input Runstream File: aermod.inp **Output Print File: aermod.out **Detailed Error/Message File: NAIOP.err **File for Summary of Results: C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.sum T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 2 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** AREAPOLY SOURCE DATA *** NUMBER EMISSION RATE LOCATION OF AREA BASE RELEASE NUMBER INIT. URBAN EMISSION RATE SOURCE PART. (GRAMS/SEC X Y ELEV. HEIGHT OF VERTS. SZ SOURCE SCALAR VARY ID CATS. /METER**2) (METERS) (METERS) (METERS) (METERS) (METERS) BY - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AREA 0 0.24710E-03 446725.6 3768225.5 278.9 3.40 4 3.20 YES T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 3 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** SOURCE IDs DEFINING SOURCE GROUPS *** SRCGROUP ID SOURCE IDs ----------- ---------- ALL AREA , T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 4 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** SOURCE IDs DEFINED AS URBAN SOURCES *** URBAN ID URBAN POP SOURCE IDs -------- --------- ---------- 2035210. AREA , T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 5 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) (METERS) ( 446157.4, 3767593.7, 269.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767593.7, 269.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767593.7, 269.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767593.7, 270.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767593.7, 270.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3767593.7, 271.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767593.7, 271.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767593.7, 270.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767593.7, 270.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767593.7, 269.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767593.7, 270.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767593.7, 270.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767593.7, 271.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767593.7, 271.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767593.7, 271.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3767593.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767593.7, 272.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767593.7, 273.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767593.7, 273.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767593.7, 274.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767593.7, 274.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767593.7, 274.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767593.7, 274.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767593.7, 273.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767593.7, 273.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3767643.7, 269.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767643.7, 268.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767643.7, 268.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767643.7, 267.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767643.7, 267.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3767643.7, 267.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767643.7, 267.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767643.7, 266.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767643.7, 267.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767643.7, 267.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767643.7, 269.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767643.7, 270.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767643.7, 272.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767643.7, 272.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767643.7, 272.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3767643.7, 273.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767643.7, 274.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767643.7, 274.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767643.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767643.7, 274.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767643.7, 273.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767643.7, 274.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767643.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767643.7, 273.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767643.7, 273.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3767693.7, 270.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767693.7, 268.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767693.7, 269.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767693.7, 271.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767693.7, 271.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3767693.7, 271.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767693.7, 271.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767693.7, 272.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767693.7, 272.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767693.7, 271.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767693.7, 271.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767693.7, 272.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767693.7, 272.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767693.7, 273.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767693.7, 273.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3767693.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767693.7, 274.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767693.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767693.7, 275.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767693.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767693.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767693.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767693.7, 274.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767693.7, 274.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767693.7, 274.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3767743.7, 272.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767743.7, 273.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767743.7, 271.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767743.7, 272.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767743.7, 272.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3767743.7, 272.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767743.7, 272.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767743.7, 272.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767743.7, 272.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767743.7, 272.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767743.7, 272.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767743.7, 272.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767743.7, 272.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767743.7, 273.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767743.7, 274.6, 3068.2, 0.0); T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 6 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) (METERS) ( 446907.4, 3767743.7, 275.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767743.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767743.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767743.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767743.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767743.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767743.7, 274.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767743.7, 274.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767743.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767743.7, 274.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3767793.7, 273.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767793.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767793.7, 272.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767793.7, 273.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767793.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767793.7, 274.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767793.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3767793.7, 275.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767793.7, 275.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767793.7, 275.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767793.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767793.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767793.7, 274.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767793.7, 274.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767793.7, 274.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767793.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767793.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3767843.7, 274.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767843.7, 275.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767843.7, 273.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767843.7, 273.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767843.7, 273.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3767843.7, 273.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767843.7, 273.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767843.7, 273.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767843.7, 273.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767843.7, 273.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767843.7, 273.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767843.7, 273.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767843.7, 273.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767843.7, 274.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767843.7, 276.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3767843.7, 276.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767843.7, 276.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767843.7, 275.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767843.7, 275.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767843.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767843.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767843.7, 274.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767843.7, 274.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767843.7, 275.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767843.7, 275.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3767893.7, 275.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767893.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767893.7, 273.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767893.7, 274.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767893.7, 274.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3767893.7, 274.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767893.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767893.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767893.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767893.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767893.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767893.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767893.7, 274.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767893.7, 274.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767893.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3767893.7, 277.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767893.7, 276.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767893.7, 276.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767893.7, 275.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767893.7, 275.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767893.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767893.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767893.7, 275.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767893.7, 275.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767893.7, 275.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3767943.7, 276.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767943.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767943.7, 274.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767943.7, 274.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767943.7, 274.6, 3068.2, 0.0); T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 7 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) (METERS) ( 446407.4, 3767943.7, 274.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767943.7, 274.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767943.7, 274.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767943.7, 274.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767943.7, 274.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767943.7, 274.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767943.7, 274.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767943.7, 274.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767943.7, 274.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767943.7, 277.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3767943.7, 277.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767943.7, 277.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767943.7, 276.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767943.7, 275.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767943.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767943.7, 275.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767943.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767943.7, 275.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767943.7, 275.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767943.7, 276.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3767993.7, 276.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3767993.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3767993.7, 274.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3767993.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3767993.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3767993.7, 275.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3767993.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3767993.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3767993.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3767993.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3767993.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3767993.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3767993.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3767993.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3767993.7, 278.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3767993.7, 278.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3767993.7, 277.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3767993.7, 276.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3767993.7, 276.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3767993.7, 277.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3767993.7, 276.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3767993.7, 275.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3767993.7, 276.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3767993.7, 276.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3767993.7, 276.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768043.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768043.7, 275.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768043.7, 275.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768043.7, 275.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768043.7, 275.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768043.7, 275.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768043.7, 275.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768043.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768043.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768043.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768043.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768043.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768043.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768043.7, 275.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768043.7, 279.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768043.7, 278.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768043.7, 278.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768043.7, 277.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768043.7, 277.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768043.7, 277.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768043.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768043.7, 277.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768043.7, 276.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768043.7, 276.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768043.7, 276.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768093.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768093.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768093.7, 277.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768093.7, 277.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768093.7, 276.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768093.7, 276.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768093.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768093.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768093.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768093.7, 276.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768093.7, 276.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768093.7, 276.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768093.7, 276.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768093.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768093.7, 279.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768093.7, 279.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768093.7, 279.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768093.7, 278.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768093.7, 278.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768093.7, 277.9, 3068.2, 0.0); T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 8 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) (METERS) ( 447157.4, 3768093.7, 277.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768093.7, 278.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768093.7, 277.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768093.7, 277.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768093.7, 277.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768143.7, 278.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768143.7, 278.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768143.7, 278.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768143.7, 277.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768143.7, 276.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768143.7, 278.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768143.7, 280.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768143.7, 280.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768143.7, 279.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768143.7, 279.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768143.7, 279.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768143.7, 278.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768143.7, 278.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768143.7, 278.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768143.7, 278.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768143.7, 278.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768143.7, 278.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768193.7, 278.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768193.7, 279.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768193.7, 278.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768193.7, 278.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768193.7, 277.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768193.7, 277.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768193.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768193.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768193.7, 277.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768193.7, 277.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768193.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768193.7, 277.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768193.7, 281.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768193.7, 280.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768193.7, 280.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768193.7, 279.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768193.7, 279.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768193.7, 279.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768193.7, 279.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768193.7, 279.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768193.7, 279.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768193.7, 278.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768193.7, 278.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768243.7, 279.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768243.7, 280.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768243.7, 279.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768243.7, 279.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768243.7, 278.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768243.7, 278.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768243.7, 279.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768243.7, 279.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768243.7, 279.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768243.7, 279.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768243.7, 279.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768243.7, 279.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768243.7, 279.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768243.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768243.7, 281.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768243.7, 281.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768243.7, 280.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768243.7, 280.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768243.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768243.7, 280.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768243.7, 279.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768243.7, 279.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768243.7, 279.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768243.7, 279.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768243.7, 279.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768293.7, 280.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768293.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768293.7, 280.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768293.7, 279.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768293.7, 279.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768293.7, 279.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768293.7, 279.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768293.7, 279.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768293.7, 280.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768293.7, 279.71 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768293.7, 280.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768293.7, 281.6, 3068.2, 0.0); T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 9 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) (METERS) ( 446757.4, 3768293.7, 282.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768293.7, 281.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768293.7, 282.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768293.7, 281.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768293.7, 281.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768293.7, 281.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768293.7, 281.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768293.7, 280.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768293.7, 280.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768293.7, 280.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768293.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768293.7, 280.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768293.7, 279.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768343.7, 280.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768343.7, 281.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768343.7, 280.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768343.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768343.7, 280.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768343.7, 280.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768343.7, 280.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768343.7, 280.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768343.7, 280.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768343.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768343.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768343.7, 281.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768343.7, 282.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768343.7, 283.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768343.7, 283.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768343.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768343.7, 282.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768343.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768343.7, 281.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768343.7, 281.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768343.7, 280.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768343.7, 281.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768343.7, 280.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768343.7, 280.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768343.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768393.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768393.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768393.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768393.7, 281.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768393.7, 281.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768393.7, 281.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768393.7, 281.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768393.7, 281.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768393.7, 280.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768393.7, 280.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768393.7, 281.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768393.7, 281.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768393.7, 282.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768393.7, 283.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768393.7, 283.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768393.7, 282.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768393.7, 282.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768393.7, 281.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768393.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768393.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768393.7, 281.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768393.7, 281.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768393.7, 281.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768393.7, 281.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768393.7, 280.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768443.7, 281.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768443.7, 281.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768443.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768443.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768443.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768443.7, 281.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768443.7, 281.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768443.7, 281.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768443.7, 281.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768443.7, 280.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768443.7, 280.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768443.7, 281.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768443.7, 282.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768443.7, 283.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768443.7, 284.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768443.7, 282.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768443.7, 282.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768443.7, 282.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768443.7, 282.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768443.7, 282.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768443.7, 282.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768443.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768443.7, 281.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768443.7, 281.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768443.7, 281.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768493.7, 281.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768493.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 10 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) (METERS) ( 446257.4, 3768493.7, 281.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768493.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768493.7, 282.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768493.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768493.7, 281.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768493.7, 281.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768493.7, 281.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768493.7, 281.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768493.7, 281.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768493.7, 282.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768493.7, 283.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768493.7, 284.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768493.7, 284.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768493.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768493.7, 283.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768493.7, 283.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768493.7, 283.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768493.7, 283.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768493.7, 283.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768493.7, 282.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768493.7, 282.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768493.7, 282.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768493.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768543.7, 282.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768543.7, 282.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768543.7, 282.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768543.7, 282.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768543.7, 282.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768543.7, 282.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768543.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768543.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768543.7, 282.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768543.7, 282.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768543.7, 282.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768543.7, 282.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768543.7, 283.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768543.7, 285.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768543.7, 285.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768543.7, 285.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768543.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768543.7, 284.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768543.7, 283.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768543.7, 283.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768543.7, 283.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768543.7, 283.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768543.7, 282.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768543.7, 282.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768543.7, 282.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768593.7, 283.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768593.7, 283.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768593.7, 283.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768593.7, 283.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768593.7, 283.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768593.7, 283.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768593.7, 282.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768593.7, 282.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768593.7, 282.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768593.7, 283.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768593.7, 283.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768593.7, 283.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768593.7, 284.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768593.7, 285.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768593.7, 286.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768593.7, 286.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768593.7, 285.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768593.7, 284.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768593.7, 283.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768593.7, 284.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768593.7, 284.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768593.7, 284.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768593.7, 283.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768593.7, 282.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768593.7, 283.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768643.7, 284.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768643.7, 284.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768643.7, 284.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768643.7, 284.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768643.7, 283.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768643.7, 283.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768643.7, 283.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768643.7, 283.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768643.7, 283.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768643.7, 283.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768643.7, 284.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768643.7, 284.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768643.7, 284.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768643.7, 285.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768643.7, 286.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768643.7, 287.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768643.7, 286.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ob *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 11 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) (METERS) ( 447007.4, 3768643.7, 285.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768643.7, 284.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768643.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768643.7, 284.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768643.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768643.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768643.7, 283.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768643.7, 283.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768693.7, 284.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768693.7, 284.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768693.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768693.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768693.7, 284.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768693.7, 284.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768693.7, 284.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768693.7, 283.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768693.7, 283.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768693.7, 284.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768693.7, 285.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768693.7, 285.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768693.7, 285.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768693.7, 285.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768693.7, 287.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768693.7, 287.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768693.7, 286.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768693.7, 286.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768693.7, 286.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768693.7, 286.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768693.7, 285.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768693.7, 285.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768693.7, 285.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768693.7, 285.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768693.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768743.7, 285.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768743.7, 285.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768743.7, 285.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768743.7, 285.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768743.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768743.7, 284.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768743.7, 284.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768743.7, 284.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768743.7, 284.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768743.7, 285.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768743.7, 285.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768743.7, 286.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768743.7, 286.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768743.7, 286.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768743.7, 287.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768743.7, 287.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768743.7, 287.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768743.7, 287.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768743.7, 287.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768743.7, 286.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768743.7, 286.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768743.7, 286.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768743.7, 285.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768743.7, 285.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768743.7, 285.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446157.4, 3768793.7, 285.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446207.4, 3768793.7, 285.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446257.4, 3768793.7, 285.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446307.4, 3768793.7, 285.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446357.4, 3768793.7, 285.5, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446407.4, 3768793.7, 285.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446457.4, 3768793.7, 285.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446507.4, 3768793.7, 285.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446557.4, 3768793.7, 285.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446607.4, 3768793.7, 286.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446657.4, 3768793.7, 286.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768793.7, 286.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.4, 3768793.7, 287.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768793.7, 287.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446857.4, 3768793.7, 288.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446907.4, 3768793.7, 288.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446957.4, 3768793.7, 288.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447007.4, 3768793.7, 287.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447057.4, 3768793.7, 287.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447107.4, 3768793.7, 287.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447157.4, 3768793.7, 287.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447207.4, 3768793.7, 286.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447257.4, 3768793.7, 286.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447307.4, 3768793.7, 286.3, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 447357.4, 3768793.7, 286.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446732.3, 3768243.8, 279.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446757.3, 3768243.8, 279.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446782.2, 3768243.8, 279.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.3, 3768218.9, 279.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768194.0, 279.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446807.4, 3768169.2, 278.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446707.4, 3768169.2, 276.1, 3068.2, 0.0); T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 12 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) (METERS) ( 446707.4, 3768218.9, 278.6, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446732.3, 3768143.7, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446782.2, 3768143.7, 276.2, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446725.4, 3768225.6, 278.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446789.2, 3768225.6, 279.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446789.2, 3768161.9, 276.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446725.5, 3768161.9, 275.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446725.6, 3768183.1, 276.7, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446725.6, 3768204.3, 277.8, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446789.2, 3768183.1, 277.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446789.2, 3768204.3, 278.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446746.8, 3768225.5, 278.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446768.0, 3768225.5, 279.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446746.8, 3768161.9, 276.0, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446768.0, 3768161.9, 276.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446725.4, 3768225.6, 1278.9, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446789.2, 3768225.6, 279.1, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446789.2, 3768161.9, 276.4, 3068.2, 0.0); ( 446725.5, 3768161.9, 275.9, 3068.2, 0.0); T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 13 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** METEOROLOGICAL DAYS SELECTED FOR PROCESSING *** (1=YES; 0=NO) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NOTE: METEOROLOGICAL DATA ACTUALLY PROCESSED WILL ALSO DEPEND ON WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE DATA FILE. *** UPPER BOUND OF FIRST THROUGH FIFTH WIND SPEED CATEGORIES *** (METERS/SEC) 1.54, 3.09, 5.14, 8.23, 10.80, T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 14 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** UP TO THE FIRST 24 HOURS OF METEOROLOGICAL DATA *** Surface file: K0NT_v9.SFC Met Version: 16216 Profile file: KONT v9.PFL Surface format: FREE Profile format: FREE Surface station no. : 3102 Upper air station no. : 3190 Name: UNKNOWN Name: UNKNOWN Year: 2012 Year: 2012 First 24 hours of scalar data YR MO DY JDY HR H0 U* W* DT/DZ ZICNV ZIMCH M-0 LEN Z0 BOWEN ALBEDO REF WS WD HT REF TA HT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12 01 01 1 01 -16.4 0.171 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 170. 32.3 0.09 1.12 1.00 2.03 43. 7.9 285.9 2.0 12 01 01 1 02 -18.8 0.194 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 205. 41.3 0.09 1.12 1.00 2.28 34. 7.9 285.4 2.0 12 01 01 1 03 -17.8 0.182 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 187. 36.5 0.09 1.12 1.00 2.15 24. 7.9 282.0 2.0 12 01 01 1 04 -9.4 0.128 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 110. 19.6 0.09 1.12 1.00 1.55 41. 7.9 283.1 2.0 12 01 01 1 05 -16.9 0.173 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 173. 33.0 0.09 1.12 1.00 2.05 39. 7.9 280.4 2.0 12 01 01 1 06 -8.0 0.117 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 97. 17.8 0.09 1.12 1.00 1.43 21. 7.9 282.0 2.0 12 01 01 1 07 -7.6 0.115 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 93. 17.4 0.09 1.12 1.00 1.40 31. 7.9 282.5 2.0 12 01 01 1 08 -13.6 0.184 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 190. 40.5 0.09 1.12 0.54 2.16 34. 7.9 284.2 2.0 12 01 01 1 09 28.4 0.126 0.300 0.011 33. 108. -6.2 0.09 1.12 0.32 1.03 29. 7.9 289.2 2.0 12 01 01 1 10 79.8 0.133 0.607 0.010 99. 116. -2.6 0.09 1.12 0.25 0.94 173. 7.9 292.5 2.0 12 01 01 1 11 115.8 0.137 0.932 0.006 246. 121. -2.0 0.09 1.12 0.22 0.92 172. 7.9 295.4 2.0 12 01 01 1 12 133.7 0.139 1.197 0.005 453. 125. -1.8 0.09 1.12 0.21 0.92 146. 7.9 297.5 2.0 12 01 01 1 13 133.2 0.160 1.354 0.005 657. 153. -2.7 0.09 1.12 0.21 1.14 117. 7.9 299.9 2.0 12 01 01 1 14 113.5 0.159 1.454 0.005 955. 151. -3.1 0.09 1.12 0.23 1.16 285. 7.9 300.9 2.0 12 01 01 1 15 76.2 0.166 1.350 0.005 1138. 163. -5.3 0.09 1.12 0.26 1.33 72. 7.9 302.0 2.0 12 01 01 1 16 23.5 0.175 0.925 0.005 1183. 175. -19.9 0.09 1.12 0.35 1.65 107. 7.9 301.4 2.0 12 01 01 1 17 -6.1 0.107 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 86. 18.0 0.09 1.12 0.63 1.31 107. 7.9 298.1 2.0 12 01 01 1 18 -11.1 0.141 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 127. 22.1 0.09 1.12 1.00 1.69 86. 7.9 293.1 2.0 12 01 01 1 19 -3.2 0.076 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 51. 11.8 0.09 1.12 1.00 0.91 64. 7.9 292.0 2.0 12 01 01 1 20 -2.3 0.066 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 41. 11.2 0.09 1.12 1.00 0.74 73. 7.9 288.8 2.0 12 01 01 1 21 -10.0 0.133 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 116. 20.5 0.09 1.12 1.00 1.60 14. 7.9 288.1 2.0 12 01 01 1 22 -19.4 0.201 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 216. 44.5 0.09 1.12 1.00 2.36 22. 7.9 287.5 2.0 12 01 01 1 23 -23.7 0.246 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 293. 66.5 0.09 1.12 1.00 2.86 40. 7.9 287.0 2.0 12 01 01 1 24 -12.3 0.147 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 139. 23.8 0.09 1.12 1.00 1.76 40. 7.9 283.8 2.0 First hour of profile data YR MO DY HR HEIGHT F WDIR WSPD AMB_TMP sigmaA sigmaW sigmaV 12 01 01 01 7.9 1 43. 2.03 286.0 99.0 -99.00 -99.00 F indicates top of profile (=1) or below (=0) T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 15 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 446157.37 3767593.72 2.51799 446207.37 3767593.72 2.71982 446257.37 3767593.72 2.91576 446307.37 3767593.72 3.09554 446357.37 3767593.72 3.25594 446407.37 3767593.72 3.35894 446457.37 3767593.72 3.39648 446507.37 3767593.72 3.35528 446557.37 3767593.72 3.24631 446607.37 3767593.72 3.07631 446657.37 3767593.72 2.89845 446707.37 3767593.72 2.70129 446757.37 3767593.72 2.49744 446807.37 3767593.72 2.30099 446857.37 3767593.72 2.11529 446907.37 3767593.72 1.96886 446957.37 3767593.72 1.81322 447007.37 3767593.72 1.67546 447057.37 3767593.72 1.54606 447107.37 3767593.72 1.42388 447157.37 3767593.72 1.30487 447207.37 3767593.72 1.19547 447257.37 3767593.72 1.09807 447307.37 3767593.72 1.00801 447357.37 3767593.72 0.93140 446157.37 3767643.72 2.63678 446207.37 3767643.72 2.87833 446257.37 3767643.72 3.12043 446307.37 3767643.72 3.34203 446357.37 3767643.72 3.55594 446407.37 3767643.72 3,71405 446457.37 3767643'72 3.78187 446507.37 3767643.72 3.78134 446557'37 3767643.72 3'70750 446607'37 3767643.72 3'55452 446657.37 3767643.72 3'35998 446707'37 3767643'72 3'14242 446757.37 3767643.72 2'90542 446807'37 3767643.72 2.65966 446857'37 3767643'72 2.43042 446907.37 3767643.72 2.23046 446957'37 3767643'72 2.05054 447007.37 3767643'72 1.87097 447057.37 3767643.72 I.71287 447107.37 3767643'72 1'55804 447157'37 3767643.72 1'41570 447207'37 3767643'72 1'28908 447257'37 3767643'72 1'17944 447307'37 3767643.72 1.08175 447357.37 3767643'72 0'99770 446257.37 3767693.72 2.77192 446207.37 3767693'72 3'03676 446257.37 3767693.72 3.36685 446307.37 3767693.72 3'72875 446357'37 3767693'72 4'04349 446407'37 3767693.72 4'31524 446457'37 3767693'72 4'50274 446507.37 3767693.72 4'58621 446557'37 3767693.72 4.53227 446607.37 3767693'72 4.34596 446657.37 3767693.72 4.07431 446707'37 3767693'72 3'75026 446757.37 3767693.72 3'41496 446807'37 3767693'72 3'10929 446857'37 3767693'72 2'81590 446907.37 3767693.72 2'56110 446957.37 3767693.72 2.32729 447007.37 3767693'72 2.11234 447057.37 3767693.72 1.00943 447107'37 3767693'72 1.71833 447157.37 3767693'72 1'54910 447207.37 3767693.72 1'39871 447257'37 3767693'72 1'27730 447307.37 3767693.72 1'17147 447357'37 3767693.72 1.08124 446157.37 3767743'72 2'88211 446287.37 3767743.72 3.24846 446257'37 3767743'72 3'61068 446307'37 3767743'72 4'85826 446357.37 3767743.72 4'48835 ob *** 4ERM0D - VERSION 19191 [:\Lakes\AERM0D View\NAZOP\NAIOP,isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 16 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 446407.37 3767743.72 4.89347 446457.37 3767743.72 5.22409 446507.37 3767743.72 5.42579 446557.37 3767743.72 5.45199 446607.37 3767743.72 5.28860 446657.37 3767743.72 4.96199 446707.37 3767743.72 4.53550 446757.37 3767743.72 4.08122 446807.37 3767743.72 3.68005 446857.37 3767743.72 3.30915 446907.37 3767743.72 2.97296 446957.37 3767743.72 2.66527 447007.37 3767743.72 2.38175 447057.37 3767743.72 2.12093 447107.37 3767743.72 1.89539 447157.37 3767743.72 1.69566 447207.37 3767743.72 1.52442 447257.37 3767743.72 1.38906 447307.37 3767743.72 1.27771 447357.37 3767743.72 1.18222 446157.37 3767793.72 2.96033 446207.37 3767793.72 3.37309 446257.37 3767793.72 3.80912 446307.37 3767793.72 4.35150 446357.37 3767793.72 4.92305 446407.37 3767793.72 5.50572 446457.37 3767793.72 6.04157 446507.37 3767793.72 6.44690 446557.37 3767793.72 6.63140 446607.37 3767793.72 6.53501 446657.37 3767793.72 6.16545 446707.37 3767793.72 5.60968 446757.37 3767793.72 4.99108 446807.37 3767793.72 4.44180 446857.37 3767793.72 3.95562 446907.37 3767793.72 3.49476 446957.37 3767793.72 3.08211 447007.37 3767793.72 2.70708 447057.37 3767793.72 2.37716 447107.37 3767793.72 2.09909 447157.37 3767793.72 1.86892 447207.37 3767793.72 1.68139 447257.37 3767793.72 1.53214 447307.37 3767793.72 1.41184 447357.37 3767793.72 1.31097 446157.37 3767843.72 3.00348 446207.37 3767843.72 3.45830 446257.37 3767843.72 3.96116 446307.37 3767843.72 4.59897 446357.37 3767843.72 5.32493 446407.37 3767843.72 6.12597 446457.37 3767843.72 6.94633 446507.37 3767843.72 7.67606 446557.37 3767843.72 8.16018 446607.37 3767843.72 8.24550 446657.37 3767843.72 7.87417 446707.37 3767843.72 7.14562 446757.37 3767843.72 6.27242 446807.37 3767843.72 5.45134 446857.37 3767843.72 4.81216 446907.37 3767843.72 4.16414 446957.37 3767843.72 3.59648 447007.37 3767843.72 3.10148 447057.37 3767843.72 2.68669 447107.37 3767843.72 2.35580 447157.37 3767843.72 2.09299 447207.37 3767843.72 1.88479 447257.37 3767843.72 1.72178 447307.37 3767843.72 1.59127 447357.37 3767843.72 1.48105 446157.37 3767893.72 3.00915 446207.37 3767893.72 3.48396 446257.37 3767893.72 4.05068 446307.37 3767893.72 4.77509 446357.37 3767893.72 5.65410 446407.37 3767893.72 6.70012 446457.37 3767893.72 7.88303 446507.37 3767893.72 9.09641 446557.37 3767893.72 10.11836 446607.37 3767893.72 10.63601 T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 17 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 446657.37 3767893.72 10.40005 446707.37 3767893.72 9.45558 446757.37 3767893.72 8.16468 446807.37 3767893.72 6.90891 446857.37 3767893.72 5.98533 446907.37 3767893.72 5.04602 446957.37 3767893.72 4.25382 447007.37 3767893.72 3.59371 447057.37 3767893.72 3.07910 447107.37 3767893.72 2.69284 447157.37 3767893.72 2.39582 447207.37 3767893.72 2.16430 447257.37 3767893.72 1.98318 447307.37 3767893.72 1.83717 447357.37 3767893.72 1.71140 446157.37 3767943.72 2.98197 446207.37 3767943.72 3.46112 446257.37 3767943.72 4.07375 446307.37 3767943.72 4.86274 446357.37 3767943.72 5.87034 446407.37 3767943.72 7.15336 446457.37 3767943.72 8.74889 446507.37 3767943.72 10.61766 446557.37 3767943.72 12.53738 446607.37 3767943.72 13.99823 446657.37 3767943.72 14.30980 446707.37 3767943.72 13.17318 446757.37 3767943.72 11.15505 446807.37 3767943.72 9.12404 446857.37 3767943.72 7.66211 446907.37 3767943.72 6.23549 446957.37 3767943.72 5.10816 447007.37 3767943.72 4.24771 447057.37 3767943.72 3.62248 447107.37 3767943.72 3.17527 447157.37 3767943.72 2.83643 447207.37 3767943.72 2.57130 447257.37 3767943.72 2.36088 447307.37 3767943.72 2.18776 447357.37 3767943.72 2.03601 446157.37 3767993.72 2.92092 446207.37 3767993.72 3.40647 446257.37 3767993.72 4.02547 446307.37 3767993.72 4.84987 446357.37 3767993.72 5.94082 446407.37 3767993.72 7.40806 446457.37 3767993.72 9.39131 446507.37 3767993.72 12.01923 446557.37 3767993.72 15.27051 446607.37 3767993.72 18.61266 446657.37 3767993.72 20.62175 446707.37 3767993.72 19.71140 446757.37 3767993.72 16.34362 446807.37 3767993.72 12.70240 446857.37 3767993.72 10.17700 446907.37 3767993.72 7.92044 446957.37 3767993.72 6.32772 447007.37 3767993.72 5.22536 447057.37 3767993.72 4.46704 447107.37 3767993.72 3.96945 447157.37 3767993.72 3.55279 447207.37 3767993.72 3.20691 447257.37 3767993.72 2.94443 447307.37 3767993.72 2.70400 447357.37 3767993.72 2.49856 446157.37 3768043.72 2.82616 446207.37 3768043.72 3.29455 446257.37 3768043.72 3.90841 446307.37 3768043.72 4.73503 446357.37 3768043.72 5.85036 446407.37 3768043.72 7.40889 446457.37 3768043.72 9.65270 446507.37 3768043.72 12.95478 446557.37 3768043.72 17.79124 446607.37 3768043.72 24.35034 446657.37 3768043.72 31.01077 446707.37 3768043.72 32.69113 446757.37 3768043.72 26.72704 446807.37 3768043.72 19.08737 446857.37 3768043.72 14.21106 T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 18 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 446907.37 3768043.72 10.59162 446957.37 3768043.72 8.38944 447007.37 3768043.72 6.99854 447057.37 3768043.72 6.03759 447107.37 3768043.72 5.31308 447157.37 3768043.72 4.72901 447207.37 3768043.72 4.25091 447257.37 3768043.72 3.82939 447307.37 3768043.72 3.47213 447357.37 3768043.72 3.16364 446157.37 3768093.72 2.69410 446207.37 3768093.72 3.15142 446257.37 3768093.72 3.74759 446307.37 3768093.72 4.53297 446357.37 3768093.72 5.60786 446407.37 3768093.72 7.13495 446457.37 3768093.72 9.42120 446507.37 3768093.72 13.03462 446557.37 3768093.72 19.07039 446607.37 3768093.72 29.59962 446657.37 3768093.72 46.70237 446707.37 3768093.72 62.49789 446757.37 3768093.72 53.32266 446807.37 3768093.72 33.30705 446857.37 3768093.72 21.99465 446907.37 3768093.72 16.24684 446957.37 3768093.72 12.99020 447007.37 3768093.72 10.75737 447057.37 3768093.72 9.08516 447107.37 3768093.72 7.77164 447157.37 3768093.72 6.72910 447207.37 3768093.72 5.89107 447257.37 3768093.72 5.18698 447307.37 3768093.72 4.60376 447357.37 3768093.72 4.11530 446157.37 3768143.72 2.53308 446207.37 3768143.72 2.95440 446257.37 3768143.72 3.49842 446307.37 3768143.72 4.21322 446357.37 3768143.72 5.18912 446407.37 3768143.72 6.57582 446457.37 3768143.72 8.68282 446507.37 3768143.72 12.08606 446557.37 3768143.72 18.12296 446607.37 3768143.72 30.30807 446657.37 3768143.72 59.46966 446707.37 3768143.72 134.76263 446757.37 3768143.72 161.44702 446807.37 3768143.72 83.42628 446857.37 3768143.72 49.72609 446907.37 3768143.72 33.99792 446957.37 3768143.72 24.70989 447007.37 3768143.72 18.77376 447057.37 3768143.72 14.75609 447107.37 3768143.72 11.91470 447157.37 3768143.72 9.83593 447207.37 3768143.72 8.28690 447257.37 3768143.72 7.07658 447307.37 3768143.72 6.12359 447357.37 3768143.72 5.35643 446157.37 3768193.72 2.33634 446207.37 3768193.72 2.70881 446257.37 3768193.72 3.18630 446307.37 3768193.72 3.81001 446357.37 3768193.72 4.65428 446407.37 3768193.72 5.83415 446457.37 3768193.72 7.60446 446507.37 3768193.72 10.40854 446557.37 3768193.72 15.30203 446607.37 3768193.72 25.21348 446657.37 3768193.72 51.40835 446707.37 3768193.72 169.03643 446857.37 3768193.72 139.41626 446907.37 3768193.72 72.77853 446957.37 3768193.72 44.98754 447007.37 3768193.72 30.80446 447057.37 3768193.72 22.53928 447107.37 3768193.72 17.30316 447157.37 3768193.72 13.73786 447207.37 3768193.72 11.20123 T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 19 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 447257.37 3768193.72 9.32995 447307.37 3768193.72 7.90531 447357.37 3768193.72 6.79309 446157.37 3768243.72 2.12226 446207.37 3768243.72 2.43822 446257.37 3768243.72 2.83855 446307.37 3768243.72 3.35554 446357.37 3768243.72 4.03941 446407.37 3768243.72 4.97270 446457.37 3768243.72 6.30927 446507.37 3768243.72 8.31382 446557.37 3768243.72 11.55295 446607.37 3768243.72 17.32708 446657.37 3768243.72 29.23746 446707.37 3768243.72 59.94472 446757.37 3768243.72 156.67565 446807.37 3768243.72 213.90135 446857.37 3768243.72 138.73390 446907.37 3768243.72 86.39828 446957.37 3768243.72 56.42877 447007.37 3768243.72 39.16809 447057.37 3768243.72 28.63238 447107.37 3768243.72 21.82278 447157.37 3768243.72 17.17331 447207.37 3768243.72 13.86789 447257.37 3768243.72 11.44579 447307.37 3768243.72 9.61396 447357.37 3768243.72 8.19388 446157.37 3768293.72 1.90394 446207.37 3768293.72 2.16498 446257.37 3768293.72 2.48768 446307.37 3768293.72 2.89568 446357.37 3768293.72 3.41943 446407.37 3768293.72 4.10575 446457.37 3768293.72 5.03209 446507.37 3768293.72 6.31765 446557.37 3768293.72 8.17868 446607.37 3768293.72 11.00514 446657.37 3768293.72 15.35450 446707.37 3768293.72 21.88522 446757.37 3768293.72 32.42438 446807.37 3768293.72 48.78287 446857.37 3768293.72 58.82452 446907.37 3768293.72 56.03725 446957.37 3768293.72 46.30047 447007.37 3768293.72 36.63699 447057.37 3768293.72 28.90258 447107.37 3768293.72 23.06604 447157.37 3768293.72 18.66477 447207.37 3768293.72 15.33765 447257.37 3768293.72 12.79479 447307.37 3768293.72 10.81640 447357.37 3768293.72 9.25492 446157.37 3768343.72 1.69596 446207.37 3768343.72 1.90524 446257.37 3768343.72 2.16172 446307.37 3768343.72 2.47519 446357.37 3768343.72 2.86384 446407.37 3768343.72 3.35182 446457.37 3768343.72 3.97536 446507.37 3768343.72 4.78278 446557.37 3768343.72 5.85798 446607.37 3768343.72 7.28152 446657.37 3768343.72 9.15335 446707.37 3768343.72 11.45299 446757.37 3768343.72 14.57274 446807.37 3768343.72 18.86546 446857.37 3768343.72 23.90192 446907.37 3768343.72 28.15899 446957.37 3768343.72 28.83728 447007.37 3768343.72 26.88895 447057.37 3768343.72 23.85611 447107.37 3768343.72 20.61334 447157.37 3768343.72 17.66118 447207.37 3768343.72 15.10347 447257.37 3768343.72 12.96781 447307.37 3768343.72 11.19561 447357.37 3768343.72 9.72728 446157.37 3768393.72 1.50418 446207.37 3768393.72 1.67247 + *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Cakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 20 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 446257.37 3768393.72 1.87182 446307.37 3768393.72 2.10967 446357.37 3768393.72 2.39532 446407.37 3768393.72 2.74161 446457.37 3768393.72 3.16524 446507.37 3768393.72 3.68887 446557.37 3768393.72 4.34016 446607.37 3768393.72 5.13020 446657.37 3768393.72 6.04067 446707.37 3768393.72 7.08474 446757.37 3768393.72 8.42157 446807.37 3768393.72 10.16737 446857.37 3768393.72 12.19367 446907.37 3768393.72 14.60559 446957.37 3768393.72 16.51953 447007.37 3768393.72 17.39022 447057.37 3768393.72 17.13619 447107.37 3768393.72 16.15439 447157.37 3768393.72 14.85862 447207.37 3768393.72 13.39230 447257.37 3768393.72 11.99371 447307.37 3768393.72 10.69093 447357.37 3768393.72 9.52253 446157.37 3768443.72 1.33617 446207.37 3768443.72 1.47040 446257.37 3768443.72 1.62568 446307.37 3768443.72 1.80607 446357.37 3768443.72 2.01803 446407.37 3768443.72 2.26796 446457.37 3768443.72 2.56402 446507.37 3768443.72 2.91519 446557.37 3768443.72 3.32710 446607.37 3768443.72 3.79831 446657.37 3768443.72 4.30588 446707.37 3768443.72 4.86006 446757.37 3768443.72 5.56522 446807.37 3768443.72 6.43938 446857.37 3768443.72 7.07332 446907.37 3768443.72 8.64789 446957.37 3768443.72 9.87065 447007.37 3768443.72 10.93162 447057.37 3768443.72 11.55800 447107.37 3768443.72 11.69816 447157.37 3768443.72 11.47321 447207.37 3768443.72 10.95245 447257.37 3768443.72 10.27485 447307.37 3768443.72 9.51091 447357.37 3768443.72 8.73908 446157.37 3768493.72 1.18817 446207.37 3768493.72 1.29538 446257.37 3768493.72 1.41774 446307.37 3768493.72 1.55629 446357.37 3768493.72 1.71570 446407.37 3768493.72 1.90055 446457.37 3768493.72 2.11271 446507.37 3768493.72 2.35623 446557.37 3768493.72 2.62837 446607.37 3768493.72 2.92242 446657.37 3768493.72 3.22610 446707.37 3768493.72 3.54883 446757.37 3768493.72 3.95054 446807.37 3768493.72 4.29055 446857.37 3768493.72 4.82554 446907.37 3768493.72 5.36220 446957.37 3768493.72 6.35995 447007.37 3768493.72 7.09151 447057.37 3768493.72 7.73886 447107.37 3768493.72 8.20677 447157.37 3768493.72 8.44886 447207.37 3768493.72 8.47160 447257.37 3768493.72 8.31424 447307.37 3768493.72 7.99835 447357.37 3768493.72 7.59788 446157.37 3768543.72 1.05902 446207.37 3768543.72 1.14491 446257.37 3768543.72 1.24178 446307.37 3768543.72 1.34993 446357.37 3768543.72 1.47252 446407.37 3768543.72 1.61232 446457.37 3768543.72 1.77041 T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 21 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 446507.37 3768543.72 1.94379 446557.37 3768543.72 2.12752 446607.37 3768543.72 2.31790 446657.37 3768543.72 2.51057 446707.37 3768543.72 2.72013 446757.37 3768543.72 2.97347 446807.37 3768543.72 3.16012 446857.37 3768543.72 3.51138 446907.37 3768543.72 3.83499 446957.37 3768543.72 4.22016 447007.37 3768543.72 4.59995 447057.37 3768543.72 5.37990 447107.37 3768543.72 5.79919 447157.37 3768543.72 6.14845 447207.37 3768543.72 6.37634 447257.37 3768543.72 6.48755 447307.37 3768543.72 6.46512 447357.37 3768543.72 6.33679 446157.37 3768593.72 0.94704 446207.37 3768593.72 1.01669 446257.37 3768593.72 1.09424 446307.37 3768593.72 1.18086 446357.37 3768593.72 1.27750 446407.37 3768593.72 1.38516 446457.37 3768593.72 1.50345 446507.37 3768593.72 1.62916 446557.37 3768593.72 1.75791 446607.37 3768593.72 1.88429 446657.37 3768593.72 2.01294 446707.37 3768593.72 2.15604 446757'37 3768593'72 2.26761 446807'37 3768503.72 2'44352 446857'37 3768593.72 2'67484 446907.37 3768593.72 2'90093 446957.37 3768593.72 3.27672 447007.37 3768593'72 3.30841 447057.37 3768593.72 3.67861 447107'37 3768593'72 3.93595 447157.37 3768593'72 4.32533 447207'37 3768593'72 4.51234 447257.37 3768593'72 4.98690 447307.37 3768593'72 5'11062 447357'37 3768593'72 5.14171 446157.37 3768643.72 0'83689 446207'37 3768643'72 0'89231 446257.37 3768643.72 0'95488 446307'37 3768643.72 1'02507 446357.37 3768643.72 1'11886 446407'37 3768643.72 1'20288 446457'37 3768643.72 I'29266 446507'37 3768643.72 1.38472 446557'37 3768643.72 1.47706 446607.37 3768643'72 1.56497 446657.37 3768643.72 1.62538 446707.37 3768643'72 1.71203 446757.37 3768643.72 1'82614 446807.37 3768643'72 1'95617 446857'37 3768643.72 2'11088 446907'37 3768643.72 2'27682 446957'37 3768643'72 2'46869 447007'37 3768643.72 2.63741 447857'37 3768643'7I 2.81043 447107'37 3768643.72 2.97503 447157.37 3768643'7I 3.15134 447207.37 ]76864]'72 3.36587 447257.37 3768643.72 3.58109 447307.37 3768643'72 4'00170 447357.37 3768643.72 4'11558 446157.37 3768693'72 0'75506 446207.37 3768693.72 0'80124 446257.37 3768693.72 0'85394 446307'37 3768603'72 0'91121 446357'37 3768693.72 0.97496 446407'37 3768633'72 1.04380 446457'37 3768693.72 1.11374 446507.37 3768693.72 1.18214 446557'37 3768693'72 1.25932 446607.37 3768693.72 I.303I7 446657.37 3768693'72 1'35917 446707.37 3768693,72 1'42075 * *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** [:\Lakes\4ERMOD View\N4IOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 22 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN AD7_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 446757.37 3768693.72 1.50262 446807.37 3768693.72 1.60456 446857.37 3768693.72 1.71174 446907.37 3768693.72 1.85180 446957.37 3768693.72 1.99341 447007.37 3768693.72 2.11340 447057.37 3768693.72 2.21976 447107.37 3768693.72 2.32480 447157.37 3768693.72 2.44591 447207.37 3768693.72 2.59659 447257.37 3768693.72 2.76484 447307.37 3768693.72 2.92899 447357.37 3768693.72 3.09222 446157.37 3768743.72 0.68356 446207.37 3768743.72 0.72391 446257.37 3768743.72 0.76919 446307.37 3768743.72 0.81754 446357.37 3768743.72 0.87038 446407.37 3768743.72 0.92442 446457.37 3768743.72 0.97788 446507.37 3768743.72 1.02718 446557.37 3768743.72 1.07313 446607.37 3768743.72 1.11432 446657.37 3768743.72 1.15659 446707.37 3768743.72 1.20434 446757.37 3768743.72 1.26197 446807.37 3768743.72 1.33418 446857.37 3768743.72 1.41901 446907.37 3768743.72 1.52589 446957.37 3768743.72 1.64007 447987.37 3768743.72 1.73882 447057.37 3768743.72 1'82134 447107.37 3768743.72 1'89579 447157.37 3768743'72 1.97494 447207.37 3768743'72 2'87003 447257'37 3768743'72 2.18096 447307'37 3768743'72 2.30572 447357.37 3768743'72 2.44022 446157'37 3768793.72 0.62585 446207.37 3768793.72 0'66006 446257.37 3768793.72 0.69763 446307.37 3768793.72 0'73666 446357.37 3768793.72 0'77983 446407'37 3768793.72 0'82314 446457.37 3768793'72 0'86384 446507.37 3768793.72 0'89969 446557.37 3768793'72 0'93202 446607.37 3768793'72 0.96438 446657.37 3768793'72 0'99690 446707.37 3768793.72 1.03450 446757'37 3768793.72 1.07729 446807'37 3768793.72 1'I3172 446857.37 3768793.72 1.19794 446097.37 3768793.72 1.28085 446957.37 3768793.72 1'37484 447007.37 3768799.72 1.45856 447057.37 3768793'72 1'52776 447107.37 3768793.72 1.58657 447157'37 3768793'72 1.64286 447207'37 3768793'72 1.70487 447257.37 3768793.72 1.77565 447307.37 3768793.73 1'86366 447357.37 3768793.72 1'96243 446733.27 3768243.84 95'32518 446757.26 3768243'81 155'72715 446782.24 3768243.79 207.64449 446807'29 3768218'91 390'71470 446807'36 3768194'85 387.55035 446807'42 3768169.20 226.33248 446707'37 3768169'20 173.40126 446787.37 3768218.91 115.51467 446732.27 3768143.72 173'21286 446782.24 3768143.72 114.77109 446725.42 3768225.57 178.80460 446789.24 3768225'57 508'57382 446789.18 3768161'95 225.46772 446725'45 3768161'95 275'79787 446725'56 3768183.12 335'47569 446725.56 3768204.32 317.71407 446789.18 3768183.12 495'25129 w *** AERM0D - VERSION 19191 *** *** [:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAI0P\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 23 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** THE PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** INCLUDING SOURCE(S) : AREA , *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 446789.18 3768204.32 600.31206 446746.77 3768225.53 398.59064 446767.97 3768225.53 509.51987 446746.77 3768161.91 346.40901 446767.97 3768161.91 331.42021 446725.42 3768225.57 178.00460 446789.24 3768225.57 508.57382 446789.18 3768161.95 225.46772 446725.45 3768161.95 275.79787 T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 24 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** THE SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM PERIOD ( 43848 HRS) RESULTS *** ** CONC OF PM_10 IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** NETWORK GROUP ID AVERAGE CONC RECEPTOR (XR, YR, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) OF TYPE GRID-ID - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ALL 1ST HIGHEST VALUE IS 600.31206 AT ( 446789.18, 3768204.32, 278.09, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 2ND HIGHEST VALUE IS 509.51987 AT ( 446767.97, 3768225.53, 278.99, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 3RD HIGHEST VALUE IS 508.57382 AT ( 446789.24, 3768225.57, 279.09, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 4TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 508.57382 AT ( 446789.24, 3768225.57, 279.09, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 5TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 495.25129 AT ( 446789.18, 3768183.12, 277.09, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 6TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 398.59064 AT ( 446746.77, 3768225.53, 278.92, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 7TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 390.71470 AT ( 446807.29, 3768218.91, 279.74, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 8TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 387.55035 AT ( 446807.36, 3768194.05, 279.16, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 9TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 346.40901 AT ( 446746.77, 3768161.91, 276.03, 3068.19, 0.00) DC 10TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 335.47569 AT ( 446725.56, 3768183.12, 276.68, 3068.19, 0.00) DC *** RECEPTOR TYPES: GC = GRIDCART GP = GRIDPOLR DC = DISCCART DP = DISCPOLR T *** AERMOD - VERSION 19191 *** *** C:\Lakes\AERMOD View\NAIOP\NAIOP.isc *** 10/02/20 *** AERMET - VERSION 16216 *** *** *** 12:03:00 PAGE 25 *** MODELOPTs: RegDFAULT CONC ELEV URBAN ADJ_U* *** Message Summary : AERMOD Model Execution *** --------- Summary of Total Messages -------- A Total of 0 Fatal Error Message(s) A Total of 2 Warning Message(s) A Total of 1628 Informational Message(s) A Total of 43848 Hours Were Processed A Total of 1278 Calm Hours Identified A Total of 350 Missing Hours Identified ( 0.80 Percent) ******** FATAL ERROR MESSAGES ******** *** NONE *** ******** WARNING MESSAGES ******** ME W186 67 MEOPEN: THRESH_1MIN 1-min ASOS wind speed threshold used 0.50 ME W187 67 MEOPEN: AD7_U* Option for Stable Low Winds used in AERMET ************************************ *** AERMOD Finishes Successfully *** ************************************ NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California APPENDIX B HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS List of Tables Table 13-1: Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year2000 Table B-2: Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year2023 Table B-3: Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 Table B-4: Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factorl,X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R01 446,157.37 3,767,593.72 2.52 0.0176 5.61E-06 R02 446,207.37 3,767,593.72 2.72 0.0190 6.06E-06 R03 446,257.37 3,767,593.72 2.92 0.0204 6.49E-06 R04 446,307.37 3,767,593.72 3.10 0.0216 6.89E-06 R05 446,357.37 3,767,593.72 3.26 0.0227 7.25E-06 R06 446,407.37 3,767,593.72 3.36 0.0235 7.48E-06 R07 446,457.37 3,767,593.72 3.40 0.0237 7.56E-06 R08 446,507.37 3,767,593.72 3.36 0.0234 7.47E-06 R09 446,557.37 3,767,593.72 3.25 0.0227 7.23E-06 R10 446,607.37 3,767,593.72 3.08 0.0215 6.85E-06 R11 446,657.37 3,767,593.72 2.90 0.0202 6.45E-06 R12 446,707.37 3,767,593.72 2.70 0.0189 6.02E-06 R13 446,757.37 3,767,593.72 2.50 0.0174 5.56E-06 R14 446,807.37 3,767,593.72 2.30 0.0161 5.12E-06 R15 446,857.37 3,767,593.72 2.12 0.0148 4.71E-06 R16 446,907.37 3,767,593.72 1.97 0.0137 4.38E-06 R17 446,957.37 3,767,593.72 1.81 0.0127 4.04E-06 R18 447,007.37 3,767,593.72 1.68 0.0117 3.73E-06 R19 447,057.37 3,767,593.72 1.55 0.0108 3.44E-06 R20 447,107.37 3,767,593.72 1.42 0.0099 3.17E-06 R21 447,157.37 3,767,593.72 1.30 0.0091 2.91E-06 R22 447,207.37 3,767,593.72 1.20 0.0083 2.66E-06 R23 447,257.37 3,767,593.72 1.10 0.0077 2.45E-06 R24 447,307.37 31767,593.72 1.01 0.0070 2.24E-06 R25 447,357.37 3,767,593.72 0.93 0.0065 2.07E-06 R26 446,157.37 3,767,643.72 2.64 0.0184 5.87E-06 R27 446,207.37 3,767,643.72 2.88 0.0201 6.41E-06 R28 446,257.37 3,767,643.72 3.12 0.0218 6.95E-06 R29 446,307.37 3,767,643.72 3.34 0.0233 7.44E-06 R30 446,357.37 3,767,643.72 3.56 0.0248 7.92E-06 R31 446,407.37 3,767,643.72 3.71 0.0259 8.27E-06 R32 446,457.37 3,767,643.72 3.78 0.0264 8.42E-06 R33 446,507.37 3,767,643.72 3.78 0.0264 8.42E-06 R34 446,557.37 3,767,643.72 3.71 0.0259 8.26E-06 R35 446,607.37 3,767,643.72 3.55 0.0248 7.92E-06 R36 446,657.37 3,767,643.72 3.36 0.0235 7.48E-06 R37 446,707.37 3,767,643.72 3.14 0.0219 7.00E-06 R38 446,757.37 3,767,643.72 2.91 0.0203 6.47E-06 R39 446,807.37 3,767,643.72 2.66 0.0186 5.92E-06 R40 446,857.37 3,767,643.72 2.43 0.0170 5.41E-06 R41 446,907.37 3,767,643.72 2.23 0.0156 4.97E-06 R42 446,957.37 3,767,643.72 2.05 0.0143 4.57E-06 R43 447,007.37 3,767,643.72 1.88 0.0131 4.19E-06 R44 447,057.37 3,767,643.72 1.71 0.0120 3.81E-06 R45 447,107.37 3,767,643.72 1.56 0.0109 3.47E-06 R46 447,157.37 3,767,643.72 1.42 0.0099 3.15E-06 R47 447,207.37 3,767,643.72 1.29 0.0090 2.87E-06 R48 447,257.37 3,767,643.72 1.18 0.0082 2.63E-06 R49 447,307.37 3,767,643.72 1.08 0.0076 2.41E-06 Page 1 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q ConcentrationZ Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (I19/m3)/(9/s) (µ9/m3) MICR R50 447,357.37 3,767,643.72 1.00 0.0070 2.22E-06 R51 446,157.37 3,767,693.72 2.77 0.0194 6.17E-06 R52 446,207.37 3,767,693.72 3.04 0.0212 6.76E-06 R53 446,257.37 3,767,693.72 3.37 0.0235 7.50E-06 R54 446,307.37 3,767,693.72 3.73 0.0260 8.30E-06 R55 446,357.37 3,767,693.72 4.04 0.0282 9.00E-06 R56 446,407.37 3,767,693.72 4.32 0.0301 9.61E-06 R57 446,457.37 3,767,693.72 4.50 0.0314 1.00E-05 R58 446,507.37 3,767,693.72 4.59 0.0320 1.02E-05 R59 446,557.37 3,767,693.72 4.53 0.0316 1.01E-05 R60 446,607.37 3,767,693.72 4.35 0.0303 9.68E-06 R61 446,657.37 3,767,693.72 4.07 0.0284 9.07E-06 R62 446,707.37 3,767,693.72 3.75 0.0262 8.35E-06 R63 446,757.37 3,767,693.72 3.41 0.0238 7.60E-06 R64 446,807.37 3,767,693.72 3.11 0.0217 6.92E-06 R65 446,857.37 3,767,693.72 2.82 0.0197 6.27E-06 R66 446,907.37 3,767,693.72 2.56 0.0179 5.70E-06 R67 446,957.37 3,767,693.72 2.33 0.0163 5.18E-06 R68 447,007.37 3,767,693.72 2.11 0.0147 4.70E-06 R69 447,057.37 3,767,693.72 1.91 0.0133 4.25E-06 R70 447,107.37 3,767,693.72 1.72 0.0120 3.83E-06 R71 447,157.37 3,767,693.72 1.55 0.0108 3.45E-06 R72 447,207.37 3,767,693.72 1.40 0.0098 3.11E-06 R73 447,257.37 3,767,693.72 1.28 0.0089 2.84E-06 R74 447,307.37 3,767,693.72 1.17 0.0082 2.61E-06 R75 447,357.37 3,767,693.72 1.08 0.0075 2.41E-06 R76 446,157.37 3,767,743.72 2.88 0.0201 6.42E-06 R77 446,207.37 3,767,743.72 3.25 0.0227 7.23E-06 R78 446,257.37 3,767,743.72 3.61 0.0252 8.04E-06 R79 446,307.37 3,767,743.72 4.06 0.0283 9.04E-06 R80 446,357.37 3,767,743.72 4.49 0.0313 9.99E-06 R81 446,407.37 3,767,743.72 4.89 0.0342 1.09E-05 R82 446,457.37 3,767,743.72 5.22 0.0365 1.16E-05 R83 446,507.37 3,767,743.72 5.43 0.0379 1.21E-05 R84 446,557.37 3,767,743.72 5.45 0.0381 1.21E-05 R85 446,607.37 31767,743.72 5.29 0.0369 1.18E-05 R86 446,657.37 3,767,743.72 4.96 0.0346 1.10E-05 R87 446,707.37 3,767,743.72 4.54 0.0317 1.01E-05 R88 446,757.37 3,767,743.72 4.08 0.0285 9.09E-06 R89 446,807.37 3,767,743.72 3.68 0.0257 8.19E-06 R90 446,857.37 3,767,743.72 3.31 0.0231 7.37E-06 R91 446,907.37 3,767,743.72 2.97 0.0208 6.62E-06 R92 446,957.37 3,767,743.72 2.67 0.0186 5.93E-06 R93 447,007.37 3,767,743.72 2.38 0.0166 5.30E-06 R94 447,057.37 3,767,743.72 2.12 0.0148 4.72E-06 R95 447,107.37 3,767,743.72 1.90 0.0132 4.22E-06 R96 447,157.37 3,767,743.72 1.70 0.0118 3.78E-06 R97 447,207.37 3,767,743.72 1.52 0.0106 3.39E-06 R98 447,257.37 3,767,743.72 1.39 0.0097 3.09E-06 Page 2 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R99 447,307.37 3,767,743.72 1.28 0.0089 2.85E-06 R100 447,357.37 3,767,743.72 1.18 0.0083 2.63E-06 R101 446,157.37 3,767,793.72 2.96 0.0207 6.59E-06 R102 446,207.37 3,767,793.72 3.37 0.0236 7.51E-06 R103 446,257.37 3,767,793.72 3.81 0.0266 8.48E-06 R104 446,307.37 3,767,793.72 4.35 0.0304 9.69E-06 R105 446,357.37 3,767,793.72 4.92 0.0344 1.10E-05 R106 446,407.37 3,767,793.72 5.51 0.0384 1.23E-05 R107 446,457.37 3,767,793.72 6.04 0.0422 1.35E-05 R108 446,507.37 3,767,793.72 6.45 0.0450 1.44E-05 R109 446,557.37 3,767,793.72 6.63 0.0463 1.48E-05 R110 446,607.37 3,767,793.72 6.54 0.0456 1.46E-05 R111 446,657.37 3,767,793.72 6.17 0.0430 1.37E-05 R112 446,707.37 3,767,793.72 5.61 0.0392 1.25E-05 R113 446,757.37 3,767,793.72 4.99 0.0348 1.11E-05 R114 446,807.37 3,767,793.72 4.44 0.0310 9.89E-06 R115 446,857.37 3,767,793.72 3.96 0.0276 8.81E-06 R116 446,907.37 3,767,793.72 3.49 0.0244 7.78E-06 R117 446,957.37 3,767,793.72 3.08 0.0215 6.86E-06 R118 447,007.37 3,767,793.72 2.71 0.0189 6.03E-06 R119 447,057.37 3,767,793.72 2.38 0.0166 5.29E-06 R120 447,107.37 3,767,793.72 2.10 0.0147 4.67E-06 R121 447,157.37 3,767,793.72 1.87 0.0130 4.16E-06 R122 447,207.37 3,767,793.72 1.68 0.0117 3.74E-06 R123 447,257.37 3,767,793.72 1.53 0.0107 3.41E-06 R124 447,307.37 3,767,793.72 1.41 0.0099 3.14E-06 R125 447,357.37 3,767,793.72 1.31 0.0092 2.92E-06 R126 446,157.37 3,767,843.72 3.00 0.0210 6.69E-06 R127 446,207.37 3,767,843.72 3.46 0.0241 7.70E-06 R128 446,257.37 3,767,843.72 3.96 0.0277 8.82E-06 R129 446,307.37 3,767,843.72 4.60 0.0321 1.02E-05 R130 446,357.37 3,767,843.72 5.32 0.0372 1.19E-05 R131 446,407.37 3,767,843.72 6.13 0.0428 1.36E-05 R132 446,457.37 3,767,843.72 6.95 0.0485 1.55E-05 R133 446,507.37 3,767,843.72 7.68 0.0536 1.71E-05 R134 446,557.37 3,767,843.72 8.16 0.0570 1.82E-05 R135 446,607.37 3,767,843.72 8.25 0.0576 1.84E-05 R136 446,657.37 3,767,843.72 7.87 0.0550 1.75E-05 R137 446,707.37 3,767,843.72 7.15 0.0499 1.59E-05 R138 446,757.37 3,767,843.72 6.27 0.0438 1.40E-05 R139 446,807.37 3,767,843.72 5.45 0.0381 1.21E-05 R140 446,857.37 3,767,843.72 4.81 0.0336 1.07E-05 R141 446,907.37 3,767,843.72 4.16 0.0291 9.27E-06 R142 446,957.37 3,767,843.72 3.60 0.0251 8.01E-06 R143 447,007.37 3,767,843.72 3.10 0.0217 6.91E-06 R144 447,057.37 3,767,843.72 2.69 0.0188 5.98E-06 R145 447,107.37 3,767,843.72 2.36 0.0164 5.25E-06 R146 447,157.37 3,767,843.72 2.09 0.0146 4.66E-06 R147 1 447,207.37 3,767,843.72 1.88 0.0132 4.20E-06 Page 3 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µ9/m3)/(9/s) (R9/m3) MICR R148 447,257.37 3,767,843.72 1.72 0.0120 3.83E-06 R149 447,307.37 3,767,843.72 1.59 0.0111 3.54E-06 R150 447,357.37 3,767,843.72 1.48 0.0103 3.30E-06 R151 446,157.37 3,767,893.72 3.01 0.0210 6.70E-06 R152 446,207.37 3,767,893.72 3.48 0.0243 7.76E-06 R153 446,257.37 3,767,893.72 4.05 0.0283 9.02E-06 R154 446,307.37 3,767,893.72 4.78 0.0333 1.06E-05 R155 446,357.37 31767,893.72 5.65 0.0395 1.26E-05 R156 446,407.37 3,767,893.72 6.70 0.0468 1.49E-05 R157 446,457.37 3,767,893.72 7.88 0.0550 1.76E-05 R158 446,507.37 3,767,893.72 9.10 0.0635 2.03E-05 R159 446,557.37 3,767,893.72 10.12 0.0707 2.25E-05 R160 446,607.37 31767,893.72 10.64 0.0743 2.37E-05 R161 446,657.37 3,767,893.72 10.40 0.0726 2.32E-05 R162 446,707.37 3,767,893.72 9.46 0.0660 2.11E-05 R163 446,757.37 3,767,893.72 8.16 0.0570 1.82E-05 R164 446,807.37 3,767,893.72 6.91 0.0482 1.54E-05 R165 446,857.37 31767,893.72 5.99 0.0418 1.33E-05 R166 446,907.37 3,767,893.72 5.05 0.0352 1.12E-05 R167 446,957.37 3,767,893.72 4.25 0.0297 9.47E-06 R168 447,007.37 3,767,893.72 3.59 0.0251 8.00E-06 R169 447,057.37 3,767,893.72 3.08 0.0215 6.86E-06 R170 447,107.37 31767,893.72 2.69 0.0188 6.00E-06 R171 447,157.37 3,767,893.72 2.40 0.0167 5.33E-06 R172 447,207.37 3,767,893.72 2.16 0.0151 4.82E-06 R173 447,257.37 3,767,893.72 1.98 0.0138 4.42E-06 R174 447,307.37 3,767,893.72 1.84 0.0128 4.09E-06 R175 447,357.37 3,767,893.72 1.71 0.0119 3.81E-06 R176 446,157.37 3,767,943.72 2.98 0.0208 6.64E-06 R177 446,207.37 3,767,943.72 3.46 0.0242 7.71E-06 R178 446,257.37 3,767,943.72 4.07 0.0284 9.07E-06 R179 446,307.37 3,767,943.72 4.86 0.0340 1.08E-05 R180 446,357.37 3,767,943.72 5.87 0.0410 1.31E-05 R181 446,407.37 3,767,943.72 7.15 0.0499 1.59E-05 R182 446,457.37 3,767,943.72 8.75 0.0611 1.95E-05 R183 446,507.37 3,767,943.72 10.62 0.0741 2.36E-05 R184 446,557.37 3,767,943.72 12.54 0.0875 2.79E-05 R185 446,607.37 3,767,943.72 14.00 0.0977 3.12E-05 R186 446,657.37 3,767,943.72 14.31 0.0999 3.19E-05 R187 446,707.37 3,767,943.72 13.17 0.0920 2.93E-05 R188 446,757.37 3,767,943.72 11.16 0.0779 2.48E-05 R189 446,807.37 3,767,943.72 9.12 0.0637 2.03E-05 R190 446,857.37 3,767,943.72 7.66 0.0535 1.71E-05 R191 446,907.37 3,767,943.72 6.24 0.0435 1.39E-05 R192 446,957.37 3,767,943.72 5.11 0.0357 1.14E-05 R193 447,007.37 3,767,943.72 4.25 0.0297 9.46E-06 R194 447,057.37 3,767,943.72 3.62 0.0253 8.07E-06 R195 447,107.37 3,767,943.72 3.18 0.0222 7.07E-06 R196 447,157.37 1 3,767,943.72 2.84 0.0198 6.32E-06 Page 4 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (Rg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R197 447,207.37 3,767,943.72 2.57 0.0180 5.73E-06 R198 447,257.37 3,767,943.72 2.36 0.0165 5.26E-06 R199 447,307.37 3,767,943.72 2.19 0.0153 4.87E-06 R200 447,357.37 3,767,943.72 2.04 0.0142 4.53E-06 R201 446,157.37 3,767,993.72 2.92 0.0204 6.50E-06 R202 446,207.37 3,767,993.72 3.41 0.0238 7.59E-06 R203 446,257.37 3,767,993.72 4.03 0.0281 8.96E-06 R204 446,307.37 31767,993.72 4.85 0.0339 1.08E-05 R205 446,357.37 3,767,993.72 5.94 0.0415 1.32E-05 R206 446,407.37 3,767,993.72 7.41 0.0517 1.65E-05 R207 446,457.37 3,767,993.72 9.39 0.0656 2.09E-05 R208 446,507.37 3,767,993.72 12.02 0.0839 2.68E-05 R209 446,557.37 3,767,993.72 15.27 0.1066 3.40E-05 R210 446,607.37 3,767,993.72 18.61 0.1300 4.14E-05 R211 446,657.37 3,767,993.72 20.62 0.1440 4.59E-05 R212 446,707.37 3,767,993.72 19.71 0.1376 4.39E-05 R213 446,757.37 3,767,993.72 16.34 0.1141 3.64E-05 R214 446,807.37 3,767,993.72 12.70 0.0887 2.83E-05 R215 446,857.37 3,767,993.72 10.18 0.0711 2.27E-05 R216 446,907.37 3,767,993.72 7.92 0.0553 1.76E-05 R217 446,957.37 3,767,993.72 6.33 0.0442 1.41E-05 R218 447,007.37 3,767,993.72 5.23 0.0365 1.16E-05 R219 447,057.37 3,767,993.72 4.47 0.0312 9.95E-06 R220 447,107.37 3,767,993.72 3.97 0.0277 8.84E-06 R221 447,157.37 3,767,993.72 3.55 0.0248 7.91E-06 R222 447,207.37 3,767,993.72 3.21 0.0224 7.14E-06 R223 447,257.37 3,767,993.72 2.94 0.0206 6.56E-06 R224 447,307.37 3,767,993.72 2.70 0.0189 6.02E-06 R225 447,357.37 3,767,993.72 2.50 0.0174 5.56E-06 R226 446,157.37 3,768,043.72 2.83 0.0197 6.29E-06 R227 446,207.37 3,768,043.72 3.29 0.0230 7.34E-06 R228 446,257.37 3,768,043.72 3.91 0.0273 8.70E-06 R229 446,307.37 3,768,043.72 4.74 0.0331 1.05E-05 R230 446,357.37 3,768,043.72 5.85 0.0408 1.30E-05 R231 446,407.37 3,768,043.72 7.41 0.0517 1.65E-05 R232 446,457.37 3,768,043.72 9.65 0.0674 2.15E-05 R233 446,507.37 3,768,043.72 12.95 0.0905 2.88E-05 R234 446,557.37 3,768,043.72 17.79 0.1242 3.96E-05 R235 446,607.37 3,768,043.72 24.35 0.1700 5.42E-05 R236 446,657.37 3,768,043.72 31.01 0.2165 6.91E-05 R237 446,707.37 3,768,043.72 32.69 0.2283 7.28E-05 R238 446,757.37 3,768,043.72 26.73 0.1866 5.95E-05 R239 446,807.37 3,768,043.72 19.09 0.1333 4.25E-05 R240 446,857.37 3,768,043.72 14.21 0.0992 3.16E-05 R241 446,907.37 3,768,043.72 10.59 0.0740 2.36E-05 R242 446,957.37 3,768,043.72 8.39 0.0586 1.87E-05 R243 447,007.37 3,768,043.72 7.00 0.0489 1.56E-05 R244 447,057.37 3,768,043.72 6.04 0.0422 1.34E-05 R245 447,107.37 3,768,043.72 5.31 0.0371 1.18E-05 Page 5 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R246 447,157.37 3,768,043.72 4.73 0.0330 1.05E-05 R247 447,207.37 3,768,043.72 4.25 0.0297 9.47E-06 R248 447,257.37 3,768,043.72 3.83 0.0267 8.53E-06 R249 447,307.37 3,768,043.72 3.47 0.0242 7.73E-06 R250 447,357.37 3,768,043.72 3.16 0.0221 7.04E-06 R251 446,157.37 3,768,093.72 2.69 0.0188 6.00E-06 R252 446,207.37 3,768,093.72 3.15 0.0220 7.02E-06 R253 446,257.37 3,768,093.72 3.75 0.0262 8.35E-06 R254 446,307.37 3,768,093.72 4.53 0.0317 1.01E-05 R255 446,357.37 3,768,093.72 5.61 0.0392 1.25E-05 R256 446,407.37 3,768,093.72 7.13 0.0498 1.59E-05 R257 446,457.37 3,768,093.72 9.42 0.0658 2.10E-05 R258 446,507.37 3,768,093.72 13.03 0.0910 2.90E-05 R259 446,557.37 3,768,093.72 19.07 0.1332 4.25E-05 R260 446,607.37 3,768,093.72 29.60 0.2067 6.59E-05 R261 446,657.37 3,768,093.72 46.70 0.3261 1.04E-04 R262 446,707.37 3,768,093.72 62.50 0.4364 1.39E-04 R263 446,757.37 3,768,093.72 53.32 0.3723 1.19E-04 R264 446,807.37 3,768,093.72 33.31 0.2326 7.42E-05 R265 446,857.37 3,768,093.72 21.99 0.1536 4.90E-05 R266 446,907.37 3,768,093.72 16.25 0.1134 3.62E-05 R267 446,957.37 31768,093.72 12.99 0.0907 2.89E-05 R268 447,007.37 3,768,093.72 10.76 0.0751 2.40E-05 R269 447,057.37 3,768,093.72 9.09 0.0634 2.02E-05 R270 447,107.37 3,768,093.72 7.77 0.0543 1.73E-05 R271 447,157.37 3,768,093.72 6.73 0.0470 1.50E-05 R272 447,207.37 3,768,093.72 5.89 0.0411 1.31E-05 R273 447,257.37 3,768,093.72 5.19 0.0362 1.16E-05 R274 447,307.37 3,768,093.72 4.60 0.0321 1.03E-05 R275 447,357.37 3,768,093.72 4.12 0.0287 9.16E-06 R276 446,157.37 3,768,143.72 2.53 0.0177 5.64E-06 R277 446,207.37 3,768,143.72 2.95 0.0206 6.58E-06 R278 446,257.37 3,768,143.72 3.50 0.0244 7.79E-06 R279 446,307.37 3,768,143.72 4.21 0.0294 9.38E-06 R280 446,357.37 3,768,143.72 5.19 0.0362 1.16E-05 R281 446,407.37 3,768,143.72 6.58 0.0459 1.46E-05 R282 446,457.37 3,768,143.72 8.68 0.0606 1.93E-05 R283 446,507.37 3,768,143.72 12.09 0.0844 2.69E-05 R284 446,557.37 3,768,143.72 18.12 0.1265 4.04E-05 R285 446,607.37 3,768,143.72 30.31 0.2116 6.75E-05 R286 446,657.37 3,768,143.72 59.47 0.4152 1.32E-04 R287 446,707.37 31768,143.72 134.76 0.9410 3.00E-04 R288 446,757.37 3,768,143.72 161.45 1.1273 3.60E-04 R289 446,807.37 3,768,143.72 83.43 0.5825 1.86E-04 R290 446,857.37 3,768,143.72 49.73 0.3472 1.11E-04 R291 446,907.37 3,768,143.72 34.00 0.2374 7.57E-05 R292 446,957.37 3,768,143.72 24.71 0.1725 5.50E-05 R293 447,007.37 3,768,143.72 18.77 0.1311 4.18E-05 R294 447,057.37 3,768,143.72 14.76 0.1030 3.29E-05 Page 6 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q ConcentrationZ Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R295 447,107.37 3,768,143.72 11.91 0.0832 2.65E-05 R296 447,157.37 3,768,143.72 9.84 0.0687 2.19E-05 R297 447,207.37 3,768,143.72 8.29 0.0579 1.85E-05 R298 447,257.37 3,768,143.72 7.08 0.0494 1.58E-05 R299 447,307.37 3,768,143.72 6.12 0.0428 1.36E-05 R300 447,357.37 3,768,143.72 5.36 0.0374 1.19E-05 R301 446,157.37 3,768,193.72 2.34 0.0163 5.20E-06 R302 446,207.37 3,768,193.72 2.71 0.0189 6.03E-06 R303 446,257.37 3,768,193.72 3.19 0.0222 7.10E-06 R304 446,307.37 3,768,193.72 3.81 0.0266 8.48E-06 R305 446,357.37 3,768,193.72 4.65 0.0325 1.04E-05 R306 446,407.37 3,768,193.72 5.83 0.0407 1.30E-05 R307 446,457.37 3,768,193.72 7.60 0.0531 1.69E-05 R308 446,507.37 3,768,193.72 10.41 0.0727 2.32E-05 R309 446,557.37 3,768,193.72 15.30 0.1068 3.41E-05 R310 446,607.37 3,768,193.72 25.21 0.1761 5.61E-05 R311 446,657.37 3,768,193.72 51.41 0.3590 1.14E-04 R312 446,707.37 3,768,193.72 169.04 1.1803 3.76E-04 R313 446,857.37 3,768,193.72 139.42 0.9735 3.10E-04 R314 446,907.37 3,768,193.72 72.78 0.5082 1.62E-04 R315 446,957.37 3,768,193.72 44.99 0.3141 1.00E-04 R316 447,007.37 3,768,193.72 30.80 0.2151 6.86E-05 R317 447,057.37 3,768,193.72 22.54 0.1574 5.02E-05 R318 447,107.37 3,768,193.72 17.30 0.1208 3.85E-05 R319 447,157.37 3,768,193.72 13.74 0.0959 3.06E-05 R320 447,207.37 3,768,193.72 11.20 0.0782 2.49E-05 R321 447,257.37 3,768,193.72 9.33 0.0651 2.08E-05 R322 447,307.37 3,768,193.72 7.91 0.0552 1.76E-05 R323 447,357.37 3,768,193.72 6.79 0.0474 1.51E-05 R324 446,157.37 3,768,243.72 2.12 0.0148 4.73E-06 R325 446,207.37 3,768,243.72 2.44 0.0170 5.43E-06 R326 446,257.37 3,768,243.72 2.84 0.0198 6.32E-06 R327 446,307.37 3,768,243.72 3.36 0.0234 7.47E-06 R328 446,357.37 3,768,243.72 4.04 0.0282 8.99E-06 R329 446,407.37 3,768,243.72 4.97 0.0347 1.11E-05 R330 446,457.37 3,768,243.72 6.31 0.0441 1.40E-05 R331 446,507.37 3,768,243.72 8.31 0.0581 1.85E-05 R332 446,557.37 3,768,243.72 11.55 0.0807 2.57E-05 R333 1 446,607.37 3,768,243.72 17.33 0.1210 3.86E-05 R334 446,657.37 3,768,243.72 29.24 0.2041 6.51E-05 R335 446,707.37 3,768,243.72 59.94 0.4186 1.33E-04 R336 446,757.37 3,768,243.72 156.68 1.0940 3.49E-04 R337 446,807.37 3,768,243.72 213.90 1.4935 4.76E-04 R338 446,857.37 3,768,243.72 138.73 0.9687 3.09E-04 R339 446,907.37 3,768,243.72 86.40 0.6033 1.92E-04 R340 446,957.37 3,768,243.72 56.43 0.3940 1.26E-04 R341 447,007.37 3,768,243.72 39.17 0.2735 8.72E-05 R342 447,057.37 3,768,243.72 28.63 0.1999 6.38E-05 R343 447,107.37 3,768,243.72 21.82 0.1524 4.86E-05 Page 7 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (Iig/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R344 447,157.37 3,768,243.72 17.17 0.1199 3.82E-05 R345 447,207.37 3,768,243.72 13.87 0.0968 3.09E-05 R346 447,257.37 3,768,243.72 11.45 0.0799 2.55E-05 R347 447,307.37 3,768,243.72 9.61 0.0671 2.14E-05 R348 447,357.37 3,768,243.72 8.19 0.0572 1.82E-05 R349 446,157.37 3,768,293.72 1.90 0.0133 4.24E-06 R350 446,207.37 3,768,293.72 2.16 0.0151 4.82E-06 R351 446,257.37 3,768,293.72 2.49 0.0174 5.54E-06 R352 446,307.37 3,768,293.72 2.90 0.0202 6.45E-06 R353 446,357.37 3,768,293.72 3.42 0.0239 7.61E-06 R354 446,407.37 3,768,293.72 4.11 0.0287 9.14E-06 R355 446,457.37 3,768,293.72 5.03 0.0351 1.12E-05 R356 446,507.37 3,768,293.72 6.32 0.0441 1.41E-05 R357 446,557.37 3,768,293.72 8.18 0.0571 1.82E-05 R358 446,607.37 3,768,293.72 11.01 0.0768 2.45E-05 R359 446,657.37 3,768,293.72 15.35 0.1072 3.42E-05 R360 446,707.37 3,768,293.72 21.89 0.1528 4.87E-05 R361 446,757.37 3,768,293.72 32.42 0.2264 7.22E-05 R362 446,807.37 3,768,293.72 48.78 0.3406 1.09E-04 R363 446,857.37 3,768,293.72 58.82 0.4107 1.31E-04 R364 446,907.37 3,768,293.72 56.04 0.3913 1.25E-04 R365 446,957.37 3,768,293.72 46.30 0.3233 1.03E-04 R366 447,007.37 3,768,293.72 36.64 0.2558 8.16E-05 R367 447,057.37 3,768,293.72 28.90 0.2018 6.44E-05 R368 447,107.37 3,768,293.72 23.07 0.1611 5.14E-05 R369 447,157.37 3,768,293.72 18.66 0.1303 4.16E-05 R370 447,207.37 3,768,293.72 15.34 0.1071 3.42E-05 R371 447,257.37 3,768,293.72 12.79 0.0893 2.85E-05 R372 447,307.37 3,768,293.72 10.82 0.0755 2.41E-05 R373 447,357.37 3,768,293.72 9.25 0.0646 2.06E-05 R374 446,157.37 3,768,343.72 1.70 0.0118 3.78E-06 R375 446,207.37 3,768,343.72 1.91 0.0133 4.24E-06 R376 446,257.37 3,768,343.72 2.16 0.0151 4.81E-06 R377 446,307.37 3,768,343.72 2.48 0.0173 5.51E-06 R378 446,357.37 3,768,343.72 2.86 0.0200 6.38E-06 R379 446,407.37 3,768,343.72 3.35 0.0234 7.46E-06 R380 446,457.37 3,768,343.72 3.98 0.0278 8.85E-06 R381 446,507.37 3,768,343.72 4.78 0.0334 1.07E-05 R382 446,557.37 3,768,343.72 5.86 0.0409 1.30E-05 R383 446,607.37 3,768,343.72 7.28 0.0508 1.62E-05 R384 446,657.37 3,768,343.72 9.15 0.0639 2.04E-05 R385 446,707.37 3,768,343.72 11.45 0.0800 2.55E-05 R386 446,757.37 3,768,343.72 14.57 0.1018 3.24E-05 R387 446,807.37 3,768,343.72 18.87 0.1317 4.20E-05 R388 446,857.37 3,768,343.72 23.90 0.1669 5.32E-05 R389 446,907.37 3,768,343.72 28.16 0.1966 6.27E-05 R390 446,957.37 3,768,343.72 28.84 0.2014 6.42E-05 R391 447,007.37 3,768,343.72 26.89 0.1877 5.99E-05 R392 447,057.37 3,768,343.72 23.86 0.1666 5.31E-05 Page 8 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q ConcentrationZ Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µ9/m3) MICR R393 447,107.37 3,768,343.72 20.61 0.1439 4.59E-05 R394 447,157.37 3,768,343.72 17.66 0.1233 3.93E-05 R395 447,207.37 3,768,343.72 15.10 0.1055 3.36E-05 R396 447,257.37 3,768,343.72 12.97 0.0905 2.89E-05 R397 447,307.37 3,768,343.72 11.20 0.0782 2.49E-05 R398 447,357.37 3,768,343.72 9.73 0.0679 2.17E-05 R399 446,157.37 3,768,393.72 1.50 0.0105 3.35E-06 R400 446,207.37 3,768,393.72 1.67 0.0117 3.72E-06 R401 446,257.37 3,768,393.72 1.87 0.0131 4.17E-06 R402 446,307.37 3,768,393.72 2.11 0.0147 4.70E-06 R403 446,357.37 3,768,393.72 2.40 0.0167 5.33E-06 R404 446,407.37 3,768,393.72 2.74 0.0191 6.10E-06 R405 446,457.37 3,768,393.72 3.17 0.0221 7.05E-06 R406 446,507.37 3,768,393.72 3.69 0.0258 8.21E-06 R407 446,557.37 3,768,393.72 4.34 0.0303 9.66E-06 R408 446,607.37 3,768,393.72 5.13 0.0358 1.14E-05 R409 446,657.37 3,768,393.72 6.04 0.0422 1.35E-05 R410 446,707.37 3,768,393.72 7.08 0.0495 1.58E-05 R411 446,757.37 3,768,393.72 8.42 0.0588 1.88E-05 R412 446,807.37 3,768,393.72 10.17 0.0710 2.26E-05 R413 446,857.37 3,768,393.72 12.19 0.0851 2.72E-05 R414 446,907.37 3,768,393.72 14.61 0.1020 3.25E-05 R415 446,957.37 3,768,393.72 16.52 0.1153 3.68E-05 R416 447,007.37 3,768,393.72 17.39 0.1214 3.87E-05 R417 447,057.37 3,768,393.72 17.14 0.1197 3.82E-05 R418 447,107.37 3,768,393.72 16.15 0.1128 3.60E-05 R419 447,157.37 3,768,393.72 14.86 0.1037 3.31E-05 R420 447,207.37 3,768,393.72 13.39 0.0935 2.98E-05 R421 447,257.37 3,768,393.72 11.99 0.0837 2.67E-05 R422 447,307.37 3,768,393.72 10.69 0.0746 2.38E-05 R423 447,357.37 3,768,393.72 9.52 0.0665 2.12E-05 R424 446,157.37 3,768,443.72 1.34 0.0093 2.98E-06 R425 446,207.37 3,768,443.72 1.47 0.0103 3.27E-06 R426 446,257.37 3,768,443.72 1.63 0.0114 3.62E-06 R427 446,307.37 3,768,443.72 1.81 0.0126 4.02E-06 R428 446,357.37 3,768,443.72 2.02 0.0141 4.49E-06 R429 446,407.37 3,768,443.72 2.27 0.0158 5.05E-06 R430 446,457.37 3,768,443.72 2.56 0.0179 5.71E-06 R431 446,507.37 3,768,443.72 2.92 0.0204 6.49E-06 R432 446,557.37 3,768,443.72 3.33 0.0232 7.41E-06 R433 446,607.37 3,768,443.72 3.80 0.0265 8.46E-06 R434 446,657.37 3,768,443.72 4.31 0.0301 9.59E-06 R435 446,707.37 3,768,443.72 4.86 0.0339 1.08E-05 R436 446,757.37 3,768,443.72 5.57 0.0389 1.24E-05 R437 446,807.37 3,768,443.72 6.44 0.0450 1.43E-05 R438 446,857.37 3,768,443.72 7.07 0.0494 1.58E-05 R439 446,907.37 3,768,443.72 8.65 0.0604 1.93E-05 R440 446,957.37 3,768,443.72 9.87 0.0689 2.20E-05 R441 447,007.37 3,768,443.72 10.93 0.0763 2.43E-05 Page 9 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (Rg/m3) MICR R442 447,057.37 3,768,443.72 11.56 0.0807 2.57E-05 R443 447,107.37 3,768,443.72 11.70 0.0817 2.60E-05 R444 447,157.37 31768,443.72 11.47 0.0801 2.55E-05 R445 447,207.37 3,768,443.72 10.95 0.0765 2.44E-05 R446 447,257.37 3,768,443.72 10.27 0.0717 2.29E-05 R447 447,307.37 3,768,443.72 9.51 0.0664 2.12E-05 R448 447,357.37 31768,443.72 8.74 0.0610 1.95E-05 R449 446,157.37 3,768,493.72 1.19 0.0083 2.65E-06 R450 446,207.37 3,768,493.72 1.30 0.0090 2.88E-06 R451 446,257.37 3,768,493.72 1.42 0.0099 3.16E-06 R452 446,307.37 3,768,493.72 1.56 0.0109 3.47E-06 R453 446,357.37 3,768,493.72 1.72 0.0120 3.82E-06 R454 446,407.37 3,768,493.72 1.90 0.0133 4.23E-06 R455 446,457.37 3,768,493.72 2.11 0.0148 4.70E-06 R456 446,507.37 3,768,493.72 2.36 0.0165 5.25E-06 R457 446,557.37 3,768,493.72 2.63 0.0184 5.85E-06 R458 446,607.37 3,768,493.72 2.92 0.0204 6.51E-06 R459 446,657.37 3,768,493.72 3.23 0.0225 7.18E-06 R460 446,707.37 3,768,493.72 3.55 0.0248 7.90E-06 R461 446,757.37 3,768,493.72 3.95 0.0276 8.80E-06 R462 446,807.37 3,768,493.72 4.29 0.0300 9.55E-06 R463 446,857.37 3,768,493.72 4.83 0.0337 1.07E-05 R464 446,907.37 3,768,493.72 5.36 0.0374 1.19E-05 R465 446,957.37 3,768,493.72 6.36 0.0444 1.42E-05 R466 447,007.37 3,768,493.72 7.09 0.0495 1.58E-05 R467 447,057.37 3,768,493.72 7.74 0.0540 1.72E-05 R468 447,107.37 3,768,493.72 8.21 0.0573 1.83E-05 R469 447,157.37 3,768,493.72 8.45 0.0590 1.88E-05 R470 447,207.37 3,768,493.72 8.47 0.0592 1.89E-05 R471 447,257.37 3,768,493.72 8.31 0.0581 1.85E-05 R472 447,307.37 3,768,493.72 8.00 0.0558 1.78E-05 R473 447,357.37 3,768,493.72 7.60 0.0531 1.69E-05 R474 446,157.37 3,768,543.72 1.06 0.0074 2.36E-06 R475 446,207.37 3,768,543.72 1.14 0.0080 2.55E-06 R476 446,257.37 3,768,543.72 1.24 0.0087 2.77E-06 R477 446,307.37 3,768,543.72 1.35 0.0094 3.01E-06 R478 446,357.37 3,768,543.72 1.47 0.0103 3.28E-06 R479 446,407.37 3,768,543.72 1.61 0.0113 3.59E-06 R480 446,457.37 3,768,543.72 1.77 0.0124 3.94E-06 R481 446,507.37 3,768,543.72 1.94 0.0136 4.33E-06 R482 446,557.37 31768,543.72 2.13 0.0149 4.74E-06 R483 446,607.37 3,768,543.72 2.32 0.0162 5.16E-06 R484 446,657.37 3,768,543.72 2.51 0.0175 5.59E-06 R485 446,707.37 3,768,543.72 2.72 0.0190 6.06E-06 R486 446,757.37 3,768,543.72 2.97 0.0208 6.62E-06 R487 446,807.37 3,768,543.72 3.16 0.0221 7.04E-06 R488 446,857.37 3,768,543.72 3.51 0.0245 7.82E-06 R489 446,907.37 3,768,543.72 3.83 0.0268 8.54E-06 R490 446,957.37 1 3,768,543.72 4.22 0.0295 9.40E-06 Page 10 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (Rg/m3) MICR R491 447,007.37 3,768,543.72 4.60 0.0321 1.02E-05 R492 447,057.37 3,768,543.72 5.38 0.0376 1.20E-05 R493 447,107.37 31768,543.72 5.80 0.0405 1.29E-05 R494 447,157.37 3,768,543.72 6.15 0.0429 1.37E-05 R495 447,207.37 3,768,543.72 6.38 0.0445 1.42E-05 R496 447,257.37 3,768,543.72 6.49 0.0453 1.44E-05 R497 447,307.37 3,768,543.72 6.47 0.0451 1.44E-05 R498 447,357.37 3,768,543.72 6.34 0.0442 1.41E-05 R499 446,157.37 3,768,593.72 0.95 0.0066 2.11E-06 R500 446,207.37 3,768,593.72 1.02 0.0071 2.26E-06 R501 446,257.37 3,768,593.72 1.09 0.0076 2.44E-06 R502 446,307.37 3,768,593.72 1.18 0.0082 2.63E-06 R503 446,357.37 3,768,593.72 1.28 0.0089 2.84E-06 R504 446,407.37 3,768,593.72 1.39 0.0097 3.08E-06 R505 446,457.37 3,768,593.72 1.50 0.0105 3.35E-06 R506 446,507.37 3,768,593.72 1.63 0.0114 3.63E-06 R507 446,557.37 3,768,593.72 1.76 0.0123 3.91E-06 R508 446,607.37 3,768,593.72 1.88 0.0132 4.20E-06 R509 446,657.37 3,768,593.72 2.01 0.0141 4.48E-06 R510 446,707.37 3,768,593.72 2.16 0.0151 4.80E-06 R511 446,757.37 3,768,593.72 2.27 0.0158 5.05E-06 R512 446,807.37 3,768,593.72 2.44 0.0171 5.44E-06 R513 446,857.37 3,768,593.72 2.67 0.0187 5.96E-06 R514 446,907.37 3,768,593.72 2.90 0.0203 6.46E-06 R515 446,957.37 3,768,593.72 3.18 0.0222 7.07E-06 R516 447,007.37 3,768,593.72 3.40 0.0237 7.57E-06 R517 447,057.37 3,768,593.72 3.68 0.0257 8.19E-06 R518 447,107.37 3,768,593.72 3.94 0.0275 8.76E-06 R519 447,157.37 31768,593.72 4.23 0.0295 9.41E-06 R520 447,207.37 3,768,593.72 4.51 0.0315 1.00E-05 R521 447,257.37 3,768,593.72 4.99 0.0348 1.11E-05 R522 447,307.37 3,768,593.72 5.11 0.0357 1.14E-05 R523 447,357.37 3,768,593.72 5.14 0.0359 1.14E-05 R524 446,157.37 31768,643.72 0.84 0.0058 1.86E-06 R525 446,207.37 3,768,643.72 0.89 0.0062 1.99E-06 R526 446,257.37 3,768,643.72 0.95 0.0067 2.13E-06 R527 446,307.37 3,768,643.72 1.03 0.0072 2.28E-06 R528 446,357.37 3,768,643.72 1.12 0.0078 2.49E-06 R529 446,407.37 3,768,643.72 1.20 0.0084 2.68E-06 R530 446,457.37 3,768,643.72 1.29 0.0090 2.88E-06 R531 446,507.37 3,768,643.72 1.38 0.0097 3.08E-06 R532 446,557.37 3,768,643.72 1.48 0.0103 3.29E-06 R533 446,607.37 3,768,643.72 1.56 0.0109 3.48E-06 R534 446,657.37 3,768,643.72 1.63 0.0113 3.62E-06 R535 446,707.37 3,768,643.72 1.71 0.0120 3.81E-06 R536 446,757.37 3,768,643.72 1.83 0.0128 4.07E-06 R537 446,807.37 3,768,643.72 1.96 0.0137 4.36E-06 R538 446,857.37 3,768,643.72 2.11 0.0147 4.70E-06 R539 446,907.37 1 3,768,643.72 2.28 0.0159 5.07E-06 Page 11 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (Rg/M3)/(g/s) Glg/m3) MICR R540 446,957.37 3,768,643.72 2.47 0.0172 5.50E-06 R541 447,007.37 3,768,643.72 2.64 0.0184 5.87E-06 R542 447,057.37 3,768,643.72 2.81 0.0196 6.26E-06 R543 447,107.37 3,768,643.72 2.98 0.0208 6.62E-06 R544 447,157.37 3,768,643.72 3.15 0.0220 7.02E-06 R545 447,207.37 3,768,643.72 3.37 0.0235 7.50E-06 R546 447,257.37 3,768,643.72 3.58 0.0250 7.97E-06 R547 447,307.37 31768,643.72 4.00 0.0279 8.91E-06 R548 447,357.37 3,768,643.72 4.12 0.0287 9.16E-06 R549 446,157.37 3,768,693.72 0.76 0.0053 1.68E-06 R550 446,207.37 3,768,693.72 0.80 0.0056 1.78E-06 R551 446,257.37 3,768,693.72 0.85 0.0060 1.90E-06 R552 446,307.37 3,768,693.72 0.91 0.0064 2.03E-06 R553 446,357.37 3,768,693.72 0.97 0.0068 2.17E-06 R554 446,407.37 3,768,693.72 1.04 0.0073 2.32E-06 R555 446,457.37 3,768,693.72 1.11 0.0078 2.48E-06 R556 446,507.37 3,768,693.72 1.18 0.0083 2.63E-06 R557 446,557.37 3,768,693.72 1.26 0.0088 2.80E-06 R558 446,607.37 3,768,693.72 1.30 0.0091 2.90E-06 R559 446,657.37 3,768,693.72 1.36 0.0095 3.03E-06 R560 446,707.37 3,768,693.72 1.42 0.0099 3.16E-06 R561 446,757.37 3,768,693.72 1.50 0.0105 3.35E-06 R562 446,807.37 31768,693.72 1.60 0.0112 3.57E-06 R563 446,857.37 3,768,693.72 1.71 0.0120 3.81E-06 R564 446,907.37 3,768,693.72 1.85 0.0129 4.12E-06 R565 446,957.37 3,768,693.72 1.99 0.0139 4.44E-06 R566 447,007.37 3,768,693.72 2.11 0.0148 4.71E-06 R567 447,057.37 3,768,693.72 2.22 0.0155 4.94E-06 R568 447,107.37 3,768,693.72 2.32 0.0162 5.18E-06 R569 447,157.37 3,768,693.72 2.45 0.0171 5.45E-06 R570 447,207.37 3,768,693.72 2.60 0.0181 5.78E-06 R571 447,257.37 31768,693.72 2.76 0.0193 6.16E-06 R572 447,307.37 3,768,693.72 2.93 0.0205 6.52E-06 R573 447,357.37 3,768,693.72 3.09 0.0216 6.89E-06 R574 446,157.37 3,768,743.72 0.68 0.0048 1.52E-06 R575 446,207.37 3,768,743.72 0.72 0.0051 1.61E-06 R576 446,257.37 3,768,743.72 0.77 0.0054 1.71E-06 R577 446,307.37 3,768,743.72 0.82 0.0057 1.82E-06 R578 446,357.37 3,768,743.72 0.87 0.0061 1.94E-06 R579 446,407.37 3,768,743.72 0.92 0.0065 2.06E-06 R580 446,457.37 3,768,743.72 0.98 0.0068 2.18E-06 R581 446,507.37 3,768,743.72 1.03 0.0072 2.29E-06 R582 446,557.37 3,768,743.72 1.07 0.0075 2.39E-06 R583 446,607.37 3,768,743.72 1.11 0.0078 2.48E-06 R584 446,657.37 3,768,743.72 1.16 0.0081 2.58E-06 R585 446,707.37 3,768,743.72 1.20 0.0084 2.68E-06 R586 446,757.37 3,768,743.72 1.26 0.0088 2.81E-06 R587 446,807.37 3,768,743.72 1.33 0.0093 2.97E-06 R588 446,857.37 3,768,743.72 1.42 0.0099 3.16E-06 Page 12 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R589 446,907.37 3,768,743.72 1.53 0.0107 3.40E-06 R590 446,957.37 3,768,743.72 1.64 0.0115 3.65E-06 R591 447,007.37 3,768,743.72 1.74 0.0121 3.87E-06 R592 447,057.37 3,768,743.72 1.82 0.0127 4.06E-06 R593 447,107.37 3,768,743.72 1.90 0.0132 4.22E-06 R594 447,157.37 3,768,743.72 1.97 0.0138 4.40E-06 R595 447,207.37 3,768,743.72 2.07 0.0145 4.61E-06 R596 447,257.37 31768,743.72 2.18 0.0152 4.86E-06 R597 447,307.37 3,768,743.72 2.31 0.0161 5.13E-06 R598 447,357.37 3,768,743.72 2.44 0.0170 5.43E-06 R599 446,157.37 3,768,793.72 0.63 0.0044 1.39E-06 R600 446,207.37 3,768,793.72 0.66 0.0046 1.47E-06 R601 446,257.37 31768,793.72 0.70 0.0049 1.55E-06 R602 446,307.37 3,768,793.72 0.74 0.0051 1.64E-06 R603 446,357.37 3,768,793.72 0.78 0.0054 1.74E-06 R604 446,407.37 3,768,793.72 0.82 0.0057 1.83E-06 R605 446,457.37 3,768,793.72 0.86 0.0060 1.92E-06 R606 446,507.37 3,768,793.72 0.90 0.0063 2.00E-06 R607 446,557.37 3,768,793.72 0.93 0.0065 2.08E-06 R608 446,607.37 3,768,793.72 0.96 0.0067 2.15E-06 R609 446,657.37 3,768,793.72 1.00 0.0070 2.22E-06 R610 446,707.37 3,768,793.72 1.03 0.0072 2.30E-06 R611 446,757.37 31768,793.72 1.08 0.0075 2.40E-06 R612 446,807.37 3,768,793.72 1.13 0.0079 2.52E-06 R613 446,857.37 3,768,793.72 1.20 0.0084 2.67E-06 R614 446,907.37 3,768,793.72 1.28 0.0089 2.85E-06 R615 446,957.37 3,768,793.72 1.37 0.0096 3.06E-06 R616 447,007.37 3,768,793.72 1.46 0.0102 3.25E-06 R617 447,057.37 3,768,793.72 1.53 0.0107 3.40E-06 R618 447,107.37 3,768,793.72 1.59 0.0111 3.53E-06 R619 447,157.37 3,768,793.72 1.64 0.0115 3.66E-06 R620 447,207.37 3,768,793.72 1.70 0.0119 3.80E-06 R621 447,257.37 3,768,793.72 1.78 0.0124 3.95E-06 R622 447,307.37 3,768,793.72 1.86 0.0130 4.15E-06 R623 447,357.37 3,768,793.72 1.96 0.0137 4.37E-06 R624 446,732.27 3,768,243.84 95.33 0.6656 2.12E-04 R625 446,757.26 3,768,243.81 155.73 1.0873 3.47E-04 R626 446,782.24 3,768,243.79 207.64 1.4498 4.62E-04 R627 446,807.29 3,768,218.91 390.72 2.7281 8.70E-04 R628 446,807.36 3,768,194.05 387.55 2.7060 8.63E-04 R629 446,807.42 3,768,169.20 226.33 1.5803 5.04E-04 R630 446,707.37 3,768,169.20 173.40 1.2108 3.86E-04 R631 446,707.37 3,768,218.91 115.52 0.8066 2.57E-04 R632 446,732.27 3,768,143.72 173.21 1.2094 3.86E-04 R633 446,782.24 3,768,143.72 114.77 0.8014 2.56E-04 R634 446,725.42 3,768,225.57 178.01 1.2429 3.96E-04 R635 446,789.24 3,768,225.57 508.57 3.5511 1.13E-03 R636 446,789.18 3,768,161.95 225.47 1.5743 5.02E-04 R637 446,725.45 3,768,161.95 275.80 1.9257 6.14E-04 Page 13 of 14 Ramboll Table B-1. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (11g/m3) MICR R638 446,725.56 3,768,183.12 335.48 2.3424 7.47E-04 R639 446,725.56 3,768,204.32 317.71 2.2184 7.07E-04 P640 446,789.18 3,768,183.12 495.25 3.4580 1.10E-03 R641 446,789.18 3,768,204.32 600.31 4.1916 1.34E-03 R642 446,746.77 3,768,225.53 398.59 2.7831 8.88E-04 R643 446,767.97 3,768,225.53 509.52 3.5577 1.13E-03 R644 446,746.77 3,768,161.91 346.41 2.4188 7.71E-04 R645 446,767.97 3,768,161.91 331.42 2.3141 7.38E-04 R646 446,725.42 3,768,225.57 178.01 1.2429 3.96E-04 R647 446,789.24 3,768,225.57 508.57 3.5511 1.13E-03 R648 446,789.18 3,768,161.95 225.47 1.5743 5.02E-04 R649 446,725.45 j 3,768,161.95 275.80 1.9257 6.14E-04 Notes: 1 Obtained from AERMOD output in Appendix A. z Estimated using dispersion factors and emission rates shown in Table 4. 3 Estimated using the methodology described in Section 3.3. Abbreviations: µg/m3 - microgram per meter cube g/s- grams per second Q:\N\NAIOP IE\Technical Work\[NAIOP IE HRA Calculations.xlsx]2000_Scenl Page 14 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R01 446,157.37 3,767,593.72 2.52 0.0009 6.90E-07 R02 446,207.37 3,767,593.72 2.72 0.0010 7.45E-07 R03 446,257.37 3,767,593.72 2.92 0.0011 7.98E-07 R04 446,307.37 3,767,593.72 3.10 0.0011 8.48E-07 R05 446,357.37 3,767,593.72 3.26 0.0012 8.92E-07 R06 446,407.37 3,767,593.72 3.36 0.0012 9.20E-07 R07 446,457.37 3,767,593.72 3.40 0.0012 9.30E-07 R08 446,507.37 3,767,593.72 3.36 0.0012 9.19E-07 R09 446,557.37 3,767,593.72 3.25 0.0012 8.89E-07 R10 446,607.37 3,767,593.72 3.08 0.0011 8.42E-07 Rll 446,657.37 3,767,593.72 2.90 0.0011 7.94E-07 R12 446,707.37 3,767,593.72 2.70 0.0010 7.40E-07 R13 446,757.37 3,767,593.72 2.50 0.0009 6.84E-07 R14 446,807.37 3,767,593.72 2.30 0.0008 6.30E-07 R15 446,857.37 3,767,593.72 2.12 0.0008 5.79E-07 R16 446,907.37 3,767,593.72 1.97 0.0007 5.39E-07 R17 446,957.37 3,767,593.72 1.81 0.0007 4.97E-07 R18 447,007.37 3,767,593.72 1.68 0.0006 4.59E-07 R19 447,057.37 3,767,593.72 1.55 0.0006 4.23E-07 R20 447,107.37 3,767,593.72 1.42 0.0005 3.90E-07 R21 447,157.37 31767,593.72 1.30 0.0005 3.57E-07 R22 447,207.37 3,767,593.72 1.20 0.0004 3.27E-07 R23 447,257.37 3,767,593.72 1.10 0.0004 3.01E-07 R24 447,307.37 3,767,593.72 1.01 0.0004 2.76E-07 R25 447,357.37 3,767,593.72 0.93 0.0003 2.55E-07 R26 446,157.37 3,767,643.72 2.64 0.0010 7.22E-07 R27 446,207.37 3,767,643.72 2.88 0.0011 7.88E-07 R28 446,257.37 31767,643.72 3.12 0.0011 8.54E-07 R29 446,307.37 3,767,643.72 3.34 0.0012 9.15E-07 R30 446,357.37 3,767,643.72 3.56 0.0013 9.74E-07 R31 446,407.37 3,767,643.72 3.71 0.0014 1.02E-06 R32 446,457.37 3,767,643.72 3.78 0.0014 1.04E-06 R33 446,507.37 3,767,643.72 3.78 0.0014 1.04E-06 R34 446,557.37 3,767,643.72 3.71 0.0014 1.02E-06 R35 446,607.37 3,767,643.72 3.55 0.0013 9.73E-07 R36 446,657.37 3,767,643.72 3.36 0.0012 9.20E-07 R37 446,707.37 3,767,643.72 3.14 0.0012 8.61E-07 R38 446,757.37 3,767,643.72 2.91 0.0011 7.96E-07 R39 446,807.37 3,767,643.72 2.66 0.0010 7.28E-07 R40 446,857.37 3,767,643.72 2.43 0.0009 6.66E-07 R41 446,907.37 3,767,643.72 2.23 0.0008 6.11E-07 R42 446,957.37 3,767,643.72 2.05 0.0008 5.62E-07 R43 447,007.37 3,767,643.72 1.88 0.0007 5.15E-07 R44 447,057.37 3,767,643.72 1.71 0.0006 4.69E-07 R45 447,107.37 3,767,643.72 1.56 0.0006 4.27E-07 R46 447,157.37 3,767,643.72 1.42 0.0005 3.88E-07 R47 447,207.37 3,767,643.72 1.29 0.0005 3.53E-07 R48 447,257.37 3,767,643.72 1.18 0.0004 3.23E-07 R49 447,307.37 3,767,643.72 1.08 0.0004 2.96E-07 Page 1 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R50 447,357.37 3,767,643.72 1.00 0.0004 2.73E-07 R51 446,157.37 3,767,693.72 2.77 0.0010 7.59E-07 R52 446,207.37 3,767,693.72 3.04 0.0011 8.32E-07 R53 446,257.37 3,767,693.72 3.37 0.0012 9.22E-07 R54 446,307.37 3,767,693.72 3.73 0.0014 1.02E-06 R55 446,357.37 3,767,693.72 4.04 0.0015 1.11E-06 R56 446,407.37 3,767,693.72 4.32 0.0016 1.18E-06 R57 446,457.37 3,767,693.72 4.50 0.0017 1.23E-06 R58 446,507.37 3,767,693.72 4.59 0.0017 1.26E-06 R59 446,557.37 3,767,693.72 4.53 0.0017 1.24E-06 R60 446,607.37 3,767,693.72 4.35 0.0016 1.19E-06 R61 446,657.37 3,767,693.72 4.07 0.0015 1.12E-06 R62 446,707.37 3,767,693.72 3.75 0.0014 1.03E-06 R63 446,757.37 3,767,693.72 3.41 0.0013 9.35E-07 R64 446,807.37 3,767,693.72 3.11 0.0011 8.51E-07 R65 446,857.37 3,767,693.72 2.82 0.0010 7.71E-07 R66 446,907.37 3,767,693.72 2.56 0.0009 7.01E-07 R67 446,957.37 3,767,693.72 2.33 0.0009 6.37E-07 R68 447,007.37 3,767,693.72 2.11 0.0008 5.78E-07 R69 447,057.37 3,767,693.72 1.91 0.0007 5.23E-07 R70 447,107.37 3,767,693.72 1.72 0.0006 4.71E-07 R71 447,157.37 3,767,693.72 1.55 0.0006 4.24E-07 R72 447,207.37 3,767,693.72 1.40 0.0005 3.83E-07 R73 447,257.37 3,767,693.72 1.28 0.0005 3.50E-07 R74 447,307.37 3,767,693.72 1.17 0.0004 3.21E-07 R75 447,357.37 3,767,693.72 1.08 0.0004 2.96E-07 R76 446,157.37 3,767,743.72 2.88 0.0011 7.89E-07 R77 446,207.37 3,767,743.72 3.25 0.0012 8.90E-07 R78 446,257.37 3,767,743.72 3.61 0.0013 9.89E-07 R79 446,307.37 3,767,743.72 4.06 0.0015 1.11E-06 R80 446,357.37 3,767,743.72 4.49 0.0016 1.23E-06 R81 446,407.37 3,767,743.72 4.89 0.0018 1.34E-06 R82 446,457.37 3,767,743.72 5.22 0.0019 1.43E-06 R83 446,507.37 3,767,743.72 5.43 0.0020 1.49E-06 R84 446,557.37 3,767,743.72 5.45 0.0020 1.49E-06 R85 446,607.37 3,767,743.72 5.29 0.0019 1.45E-06 R86 446,657.37 3,767,743.72 4.96 0.0018 1.36E-06 R87 446,707.37 3,767,743.72 4.54 0.0017 1.24E-06 R88 446,757.37 3,767,743.72 4.08 0.0015 1.12E-06 R89 446,807.37 3,767,743.72 3.68 0.0014 1.01E-06 R90 446,857.37 3,767,743.72 3.31 0.0012 9.06E-07 R91 446,907.37 3,767,743.72 2.97 0.0011 8.14E-07 R92 446,957.37 3,767,743.72 2.67 0.0010 7.30E-07 R93 447,007.37 3,767,743.72 2.38 0.0009 6.52E-07 R94 447,057.37 3,767,743.72 2.12 0.0008 5.81E-07 R95 447,107.37 3,767,743.72 1.90 0.0007 5.19E-07 R96 447,157.37 3,767,743.72 1.70 0.0006 4.64E-07 R97 447,207.37 3,767,743.72 1.52 0.0006 4.17E-07 R98 447,257.37 3,767,743.72 1.39 0.0005 3.80E-07 Page 2 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R99 447,307.37 3,767,743.72 1.28 0.0005 3.50E-07 R100 447,357.37 3,767,743.72 1.18 0.0004 3.24E-07 R101 446,157.37 3,767,793.72 2.96 0.0011 8.11E-07 R102 446,207.37 3,767,793.72 3.37 0.0012 9.24E-07 R103 446,257.37 3,767,793.72 3.81 0.0014 1.04E-06 R104 446,307.37 3,767,793.72 4.35 0.0016 1.19E-06 R105 446,357.37 3,767,793.72 4.92 0.0018 1.35E-06 R106 446,407.37 3,767,793.72 5.51 0.0020 1.51E-06 R107 446,457.37 3,767,793.72 6.04 0.0022 1.65E-06 R108 446,507.37 3,767,793.72 6.45 0.0024 1.77E-06 R109 446,557.37 3,767,793.72 6.63 0.0024 1.82E-06 R110 446,607.37 3,767,793.72 6.54 0.0024 1.79E-06 R111 446,657.37 3,767,793.72 6.17 0.0023 1.69E-06 R112 446,707.37 3,767,793.72 5.61 0.0021 1.54E-06 R113 446,757.37 3,767,793.72 4.99 0.0018 1.37E-06 R114 446,807.37 3,767,793.72 4.44 0.0016 1.22E-06 R115 446,857.37 3,767,793.72 3.96 0.0015 1.08E-06 R116 446,907.37 3,767,793.72 3.49 0.0013 9.57E-07 R117 446,957.37 3,767,793.72 3.08 0.0011 8.44E-07 R118 447,007.37 3,767,793.72 2.71 0.0010 7.41E-07 R119 447,057.37 3,767,793.72 2.38 0.0009 6.51E-07 R120 447,107.37 3,767,793.72 2.10 0.0008 5.75E-07 R121 447,157.37 3,767,793.72 1.87 0.0007 5.12E-07 R122 447,207.37 3,767,793.72 1.68 0.0006 4.60E-07 R123 447,257.37 3,767,793.72 1.53 0.0006 4.20E-07 R124 447,307.37 3,767,793.72 1.41 0.0005 3.87E-07 R125 447,357.37 3,767,793.72 1.31 0.0005 3.59E-07 R126 446,157.37 3,767,843.72 3.00 0.0011 8.22E-07 R127 446,207.37 3,767,843.72 3.46 0.0013 9.47E-07 R128 446,257.37 3,767,843.72 3.96 0.0015 1.08E-06 R129 446,307.37 3,767,843.72 4.60 0.0017 1.26E-06 R130 446,357.37 3,767,843.72 5.32 0.0020 1.46E-06 R131 446,407.37 3,767,843.72 6.13 0.0023 1.68E-06 R132 446,457.37 3,767,843.72 6.95 0.0026 1.90E-06 R133 446,507.37 3,767,843.72 7.68 0.0028 2.10E-06 R134 446,557.37 3,767,843.72 8.16 0.0030 2.23E-06 R135 446,607.37 3,767,843.72 8.25 0.0030 2.26E-06 R136 446,657.37 3,767,843.72 7.87 0.0029 2.16E-06 R137 446,707.37 3,767,843.72 7.15 0.0026 1.96E-06 R138 446,757.37 3,767,843.72 6.27 0.0023 1.72E-06 R139 446,807.37 31767,843.72 5.45 0.0020 1.49E-06 R140 446,857.37 3,767,843.72 4.81 0.0018 1.32E-06 R141 446,907.37 3,767,843.72 4.16 0.0015 1.14E-06 R142 446,957.37 3,767,843.72 3.60 0.0013 9.85E-07 R143 447,007.37 3,767,843.72 3.10 0.0011 8.49E-07 R144 447,057.37 3,767,843.72 2.69 0.0010 7.36E-07 R145 447,107.37 3,767,843.72 2.36 0.0009 6.45E-07 R146 447,157.37 3,767,843.72 2.09 0.0008 5.73E-07 R147 1 447,207.37 3,767,843.72 1.88 0.0007 5.16E-07 Page 3 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factors,X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (Pg/m3) MICR R148 447,257.37 3,767,843.72 1.72 0.0006 4.71E-07 R149 447,307.37 3,767,843.72 1.59 0.0006 4.36E-07 R150 447,357.37 3,767,843.72 1.48 0.0005 4.06E-07 R151 446,157.37 3,767,893.72 3.01 0.0011 8.24E-07 R152 446,207.37 3,767,893.72 3.48 0.0013 9.54E-07 R153 446,257.37 3,767,893.72 4.05 0.0015 1.11E-06 R154 446,307.37 3,767,893.72 4.78 0.0018 1.31E-06 R155 446,357.37 3,767,893.72 5.65 0.0021 1.55E-06 R156 446,407.37 3,767,893.72 6.70 0.0025 1.83E-06 R157 446,457.37 3,767,893.72 7.88 0.0029 2.16E-06 R158 446,507.37 3,767,893.72 9.10 0.0033 2.49E-06 R159 446,557.37 3,767,893.72 10.12 0.0037 2.77E-06 R160 446,607.37 3,767,893.72 10.64 0.0039 2.91E-06 R161 446,657.37 3,767,893.72 10.40 0.0038 2.85E-06 R162 446,707.37 3,767,893.72 9.46 0.0035 2.59E-06 R163 446,757.37 3,767,893.72 8.16 0.0030 2.24E-06 R164 446,807.37 3,767,893.72 6.91 0.0025 1.89E-06 R165 446,857.37 3,767,893.72 5.99 0.0022 1.64E-06 R166 446,907.37 3,767,893.72 5.05 0.0019 1.38E-06 R167 446,957.37 3,767,893.72 4.25 0.0016 1.16E-06 R168 447,007.37 3,767,893.72 3.59 0.0013 9.84E-07 R169 447,057.37 3,767,893.72 3.08 0.0011 8.43E-07 R170 447,107.37 3,767,893.72 2.69 0.0010 7.37E-07 R171 447,157.37 3,767,893.72 2.40 0.0009 6.56E-07 R172 447,207.37 3,767,893.72 2.16 0.0008 5.93E-07 R173 447,257.37 3,767,893.72 1.98 0.0007 5.43E-07 R174 447,307.37 3,767,893.72 1.84 0.0007 5.03E-07 R175 447,357.37 3,767,893.72 1.71 0.0006 4.69E-07 R176 446,157.37 3,767,943.72 2.98 0.0011 8.17E-07 R177 446,207.37 3,767,943.72 3.46 0.0013 9.48E-07 R178 446,257.37 3,767,943.72 4.07 0.0015 1.12E-06 R179 446,307.37 3,767,943.72 4.86 0.0018 1.33E-06 R180 446,357.37 3,767,943.72 5.87 0.0022 1.61E-06 R181 446,407.37 3,767,943.72 7.15 0.0026 1.96E-06 R182 446,457.37 3,767,943.72 8.75 0.0032 2.40E-06 R183 446,507.37 3,767,943.72 10.62 0.0039 2.91E-06 R184 446,557.37 3,767,943.72 12.54 0.0046 3.43E-06 R185 446,607.37 3,767,943.72 14.00 0.0051 3.83E-06 R186 446,657.37 3,767,943.72 14.31 0.0053 3.92E-06 R187 446,707.37 3,767,943.72 13.17 0.0048 3.61E-06 R188 446,757.37 3,767,943.72 11.16 0.0041 3.05E-06 R189 446,807.37 3,767,943.72 9.12 0.0034 2.50E-06 R190 446,857.37 3,767,943.72 7.66 0.0028 2.10E-06 R191 446,907.37 3,767,943.72 6.24 0.0023 1.71E-06 R192 446,957.37 3,767,943.72 5.11 0.0019 1.40E-06 R193 447,007.37 3,767,943.72 4.25 0.0016 1.16E-06 R194 447,057.37 3,767,943.72 3.62 0.0013 9.92E-07 R195 447,107.37 3,767,943.72 3.18 0.0012 8.69E-07 R196 447,157.37 1 3,767,943.72 2.84 0.0010 7.77E-07 Page 4 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentrationz Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µ9/m3) MICR R197 447,207.37 3,767,943.72 2.57 0.0009 7.04E-07 R198 447,257.37 3,767,943.72 2.36 0.0009 6.46E-07 R199 447,307.37 31767,943.72 2.19 0.0008 5.99E-07 R200 447,357.37 3,767,943.72 2.04 0.0007 5.58E-07 R201 446,157.37 3,767,993.72 2.92 0.0011 8.00E-07 R202 446,207.37 3,767,993.72 3.41 0.0013 9.33E-07 R203 446,257.37 3,767,993.72 4.03 0.0015 1.10E-06 R204 446,307.37 3,767,993.72 4.85 0.0018 1.33E-06 R205 446,357.37 3,767,993.72 5.94 0.0022 1.63E-06 R206 446,407.37 3,767,993.72 7.41 0.0027 2.03E-06 R207 446,457.37 3,767,993.72 9.39 0.0035 2.57E-06 R208 446,507.37 3,767,993.72 12.02 0.0044 3.29E-06 R209 446,557.37 3,767,993.72 15.27 0.0056 4.18E-06 R210 446,607.37 3,767,993.72 18.61 0.0068 5.10E-06 R211 446,657.37 3,767,993.72 20.62 0.0076 5.65E-06 R212 446,707.37 3,767,993.72 19.71 0.0072 5.40E-06 R213 446,757.37 3,767,993.72 16.34 0.0060 4.48E-06 R214 446,807.37 3,767,993.72 12.70 0.0047 3.48E-06 R215 446,857.37 3,767,993.72 10.18 0.0037 2.79E-06 R216 446,907.37 3,767,993.72 7.92 0.0029 2.17E-06 R217 446,957.37 3,767,993.72 6.33 0.0023 1.73E-06 R218 447,007.37 3,767,993.72 5.23 0.0019 1.43E-06 R219 447,057.37 3,767,993.72 4.47 0.0016 1.22E-06 R220 447,107.37 3,767,993.72 3.97 0.0015 1.09E-06 R221 447,157.37 3,767,993.72 3.55 0.0013 9.73E-07 R222 447,207.37 3,767,993.72 3.21 0.0012 8.78E-07 R223 447,257.37 3,767,993.72 2.94 0.0011 8.06E-07 R224 447,307.37 3,767,993.72 2.70 0.0010 7.40E-07 R225 447,357.37 3,767,993.72 2.50 0.0009 6.84E-07 R226 446,157.37 3,768,043.72 2.83 0.0010 7.74E-07 R227 446,207.37 3,768,043.72 3.29 0.0012 9.02E-07 R228 446,257.37 3,768,043.72 3.91 0.0014 1.07E-06 R229 446,307.37 3,768,043.72 4.74 0.0017 1.30E-06 R230 446,357.37 3,768,043.72 5.85 0.0021 1.60E-06 R231 446,407.37 3,768,043.72 7.41 0.0027 2.03E-06 R232 446,457.37 3,768,043.72 9.65 0.0035 2.64E-06 R233 446,507.37 31768,043.72 12.95 0.0048 3.55E-06 R234 446,557.37 3,768,043.72 17.79 0.0065 4.87E-06 R235 446,607.37 3,768,043.72 24.35 0.0089 6.67E-06 R236 446,657.37 3,768,043.72 31.01 0.0114 8.49E-06 R237 446,707.37 3,768,043.72 32.69 0.0120 8.95E-06 R238 446,757.37 3,768,043.72 26.73 0.0098 7.32E-06 R239 446,807.37 3,768,043.72 19.09 0.0070 5.23E-06 R240 446,857.37 3,768,043.72 14.21 0.0052 3.89E-06 R241 446,907.37 3,768,043.72 10.59 0.0039 2.90E-06 R242 446,957.37 3,768,043.72 8.39 0.0031 2.30E-06 R243 447,007.37 3,768,043.72 7.00 0.0026 1.92E-06 R244 447,057.37 3,768,043.72 6.04 0.0022 1.65E-06 R245 447,107.37 3,768,043.72 5.31 0.0020 1.45E-06 Page 5 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R246 447,157.37 3,768,043.72 4.73 0.0017 1.29E-06 R247 447,207.37 3,768,043.72 4.25 0.0016 1.16E-06 R248 447,257.37 3,768,043.72 3.83 0.0014 1.05E-06 R249 447,307.37 3,768,043.72 3.47 0.0013 9.51E-07 R250 447,357.37 3,768,043.72 3.16 0.0012 8.66E-07 R251 446,157.37 31768,093.72 2.69 0.0010 7.38E-07 R252 446,207.37 3,768,093.72 3.15 0.0012 8.63E-07 R253 446,257.37 3,768,093.72 3.75 0.0014 1.03E-06 R254 446,307.37 3,768,093.72 4.53 0.0017 1.24E-06 R255 446,357.37 3,768,093.72 5.61 0.0021 1.54E-06 R256 446,407.37 3,768,093.72 7.13 0.0026 1.95E-06 R257 446,457.37 3,768,093.72 9.42 0.0035 2.58E-06 R258 446,507.37 3,768,093.72 13.03 0.0048 3.57E-06 R259 446,557.37 3,768,093.72 19.07 0.0070 5.22E-06 R260 446,607.37 3,768,093.72 29.60 0.0109 8.11E-06 R261 446,657.37 3,768,093.72 46.70 0.0172 1.28E-05 R262 446,707.37 3,768,093.72 62.50 0.0230 1.71E-05 R263 446,757.37 3,768,093.72 53.32 0.0196 1.46E-05 R264 446,807.37 3,768,093.72 33.31 0.0122 9.12E-06 R265 446,857.37 3,768,093.72 21.99 0.0081 6.02E-06 R266 446,907.37 3,768,093.72 16.25 0.0060 4.45E-06 R267 446,957.37 3,768,093.72 12.99 0.0048 3.56E-06 R268 447,007.37 3,768,093.72 10.76 0.0040 2.95E-06 R269 447,057.37 3,768,093.72 9.09 0.0033 2.49E-06 R270 447,107.37 3,768,093.72 7.77 0.0029 2.13E-06 R271 447,157.37 3,768,093.72 6.73 0.0025 1.84E-06 R272 447,207.37 3,768,093.72 5.89 0.0022 1.61E-06 R273 447,257.37 3,768,093.72 5.19 0.0019 1.42E-06 R274 447,307.37 3,768,093.72 4.60 0.0017 1.26E-06 R275 447,357.37 31768,093.72 4.12 0.0015 1.13E-06 R276 446,157.37 3,768,143.72 2.53 0.0009 6.94E-07 R277 446,207.37 3,768,143.72 2.95 0.0011 8.09E-07 R278 446,257.37 3,768,143.72 3.50 0.0013 9.58E-07 R279 446,307.37 3,768,143.72 4.21 0.0015 1.15E-06 R280 446,357.37 3,768,143.72 5.19 0.0019 1.42E-06 R281 446,407.37 3,768,143.72 6.58 0.0024 1.80E-06 R282 446,457.37 3,768,143.72 8.68 0.0032 2.38E-06 R283 446,507.37 3,768,143.72 12.09 0.0044 3.31E-06 R284 446,557.37 31768,143.72 18.12 0.0067 4.96E-06 R285 446,607.37 3,768,143.72 30.31 0.0111 8.30E-06 R286 446,657.37 3,768,143.72 59.47 0.0219 1.63E-05 R287 446,707.37 3,768,143.72 134.76 0.0495 3.69E-05 R288 446,757.37 3,768,143.72 161.45 0.0593 4.42E-05 R289 446,807.37 3,768,143.72 83.43 0.0307 2.28E-05 R290 446,857.37 3,768,143.72 49.73 0.0183 1.36E-05 R291 446,907.37 3,768,143.72 34.00 0.0125 9.31E-06 R292 446,957.37 3,768,143.72 24.71 0.0091 6.77E-06 R293 447,007.37 3,768,143.72 18.77 0.0069 5.14E-06 R294 447,057.37 3,768,143.72 14.76 0.0054 4.04E-06 Page 6 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factorl,X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (Pg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R295 447,107.37 3,768,143.72 11.91 0.0044 3.26E-06 R296 447,157.37 3,768,143.72 9.84 0.0036 2.69E-06 R297 447,207.37 3,768,143.72 8.29 0.0030 2.27E-06 R298 447,257.37 3,768,143.72 7.08 0.0026 1.94E-06 R299 447,307.37 3,768,143.72 6.12 0.0023 1.68E-06 R300 447,357.37 3,768,143.72 5.36 0.0020 1.47E-06 R301 446,157.37 3,768,193.72 2.34 0.0009 6.40E-07 R302 446,207.37 3,768,193.72 2.71 0.0010 7.42E-07 R303 446,257.37 3,768,193.72 3.19 0.0012 8.73E-07 R304 446,307.37 3,768,193.72 3.81 0.0014 1.04E-06 R305 446,357.37 3,768,193.72 4.65 0.0017 1.27E-06 R306 446,407.37 3,768,193.72 5.83 0.0021 1.60E-06 R307 446,457.37 3,768,193.72 7.60 0.0028 2.08E-06 R308 446,507.37 3,768,193.72 10.41 0.0038 2.85E-06 R309 446,557.37 3,768,193.72 15.30 0.0056 4.19E-06 R310 446,607.37 3,768,193.72 25.21 0.0093 6.90E-06 R311 446,657.37 3,768,193.72 51.41 0.0189 1.41E-05 R312 446,707.37 3,768,193.72 169.04 0.0621 4.63E-05 R313 446,857.37 3,768,193.72 139.42 0.0512 3.82E-05 R314 446,907.37 3,768,193.72 72.78 0.0267 1.99E-05 R315 446,957.37 3,768,193.72 44.99 0.0165 1.23E-05 R316 447,007.37 3,768,193.72 30.80 0.0113 8.44E-06 R317 447,057.37 3,768,193.72 22.54 0.0083 6.17E-06 R318 447,107.37 3,768,193.72 17.30 0.0064 4.74E-06 R319 447,157.37 3,768,193.72 13.74 0.0050 3.76E-06 R320 447,207.37 3,768,193.72 11.20 0.0041 3.07E-06 R321 447,257.37 3,768,193.72 9.33 0.0034 2.55E-06 R322 447,307.37 3,768,193.72 7.91 0.0029 2.16E-06 R323 447,357.37 3,768,193.72 6.79 0.0025 1.86E-06 R324 446,157.37 3,768,243.72 2.12 0.0008 5.81E-07 R325 446,207.37 3,768,243.72 2.44 0.0009 6.68E-07 R326 446,257.37 3,768,243.72 2.84 0.0010 7.77E-07 R327 446,307.37 3,768,243.72 3.36 0.0012 9.19E-07 R328 446,357.37 3,768,243.72 4.04 0.0015 1.11E-06 R329 446,407.37 3,768,243.72 4.97 0.0018 1.36E-06 R330 446,457.37 3,768,243.72 6.31 0.0023 1.73E-06 R331 446,507.37 3,768,243.72 8.31 0.0031 2.28E-06 R332 446,557.37 3,768,243.72 11.55 0.0042 3.16E-06 R333 446,607.37 3,768,243.72 17.33 0.0064 4.74E-06 R334 446,657.37 3,768,243.72 29.24 0.0107 8.01E-06 R335 446,707.37 3,768,243.72 59.94 0.0220 1.64E-05 R336 446,757.37 3,768,243.72 156.68 0.0576 4.29E-05 R337 446,807.37 3,768,243.72 213.90 0.0786 5.86E-05 R338 446,857.37 3,768,243.72 138.73 0.0510 3.80E-05 R339 446,907.37 3,768,243.72 86.40 0.0318 2.37E-05 R340 446,957.37 3,768,243.72 56.43 0.0207 1.55E-05 R341 447,007.37 3,768,243.72 39.17 0.0144 1.07E-05 R342 447,057.37 3,768,243.72 28.63 0.0105 7.84E-06 R343 447,107.37 3,768,243.72 21.82 0.0080 5.98E-06 Page 7 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R344 447,157.37 3,768,243.72 17.17 0.0063 4.70E-06 R345 447,207.37 3,768,243.72 13.87 0.0051 3.80E-06 R346 447,257.37 3,768,243.72 11.45 0.0042 3.13E-06 R347 447,307.37 3,768,243.72 9.61 0.0035 2.63E-06 R348 447,357.37 3,768,243.72 8.19 0.0030 2.24E-06 R349 446,157.37 3,768,293.72 1.90 0.0007 5.21E-07 R350 446,207.37 3,768,293.72 2.16 0.0008 5.93E-07 R351 446,257.37 3,768,293.72 2.49 0.0009 6.81E-07 R352 446,307.37 3,768,293.72 2.90 0.0011 7.93E-07 R353 446,357.37 3,768,293.72 3.42 0.0013 9.36E-07 R354 446,407.37 3,768,293.72 4.11 0.0015 1.12E-06 R355 446,457.37 3,768,293.72 5.03 0.0018 1.38E-06 R356 446,507.37 3,768,293.72 6.32 0.0023 1.73E-06 R357 446,557.37 3,768,293.72 8.18 0.0030 2.24E-06 R358 446,607.37 3,768,293.72 11.01 0.0040 3.01E-06 R359 446,657.37 3,768,293.72 15.35 0.0056 4.20E-06 R360 446,707.37 3,768,293.72 21.89 0.0080 5.99E-06 R361 446,757.37 3,768,293.72 32.42 0.0119 8.88E-06 R362 446,807.37 3,768,293.72 48.78 0.0179 1.34E-05 R363 446,857.37 3,768,293.72 58.82 0.0216 1.61E-05 R364 446,907.37 3,768,293.72 56.04 0.0206 1.53E-05 R365 446,957.37 3,768,293.72 46.30 0.0170 1.27E-05 R366 447,007.37 3,768,293.72 36.64 0.0135 1.00E-05 R367 447,057.37 3,768,293.72 28.90 0.0106 7.91E-06 R368 447,107.37 3,768,293.72 23.07 0.0085 6.32E-06 R369 447,157.37 3,768,293.72 18.66 0.0069 5.11E-06 R370 447,207.37 3,768,293.72 15.34 0.0056 4.20E-06 R371 447,257.37 3,768,293.72 12.79 0.0047 3.50E-06 R372 447,307.37 3,768,293.72 10.82 0.0040 2.96E-06 R373 447,357.37 3,768,293.72 9.25 0.0034 2.53E-06 R374 446,157.37 3,768,343.72 1.70 0.0006 4.64E-07 R375 446,207.37 3,768,343.72 1.91 0.0007 5.22E-07 R376 446,257.37 3,768,343.72 2.16 0.0008 5.92E-07 R377 446,307.37 3,768,343.72 2.48 0.0009 6.78E-07 R378 446,357.37 3,768,343.72 2.86 0.0011 7.84E-07 R379 446,407.37 3,768,343.72 3.35 0.0012 9.18E-07 R380 446,457.37 3,768,343.72 3.98 0.0015 1.09E-06 R381 446,507.37 3,768,343.72 4.78 0.0018 1.31E-06 R382 446,557.37 3,768,343.72 5.86 0.0022 1.60E-06 R383 446,607.37 3,768,343.72 7.28 0.0027 1.99E-06 R384 446,657.37 3,768,343.72 9.15 0.0034 2.51E-06 R385 446,707.37 3,768,343.72 11.45 0.0042 3.14E-06 R386 446,757.37 3,768,343.72 14.57 0.0054 3.99E-06 R387 446,807.37 3,768,343.72 18.87 0.0069 5.17E-06 R388 446,857.37 3,768,343.72 23.90 0.0088 6.55E-06 R389 446,907.37 3,768,343.72 28.16 0.0103 7.71E-06 R390 446,957.37 3,768,343.72 28.84 0.0106 7.90E-06 R391 447,007.37 3,768,343.72 26.89 0.0099 7.36E-06 R392 447,057.37 3,768,343.72 23.86 0.0088 6.53E-06 Page 8 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/_3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R393 447,107.37 3,768,343.72 20.61 0.0076 5.64E-06 R394 447,157.37 3,768,343.72 17.66 0.0065 4.84E-06 R395 447,207.37 3,768,343.72 15.10 0.0056 4.14E-06 R396 447,257.37 3,768,343.72 12.97 0.0048 3.55E-06 R397 447,307.37 3,768,343.72 11.20 0.0041 3.07E-06 R398 447,357.37 3,768,343.72 9.73 0.0036 2.66E-06 R399 446,157.37 3,768,393.72 1.50 0.0006 4.12E-07 R400 446,207.37 3,768,393.72 1.67 0.0006 4.58E-07 R401 446,257.37 3,768,393.72 1.87 0.0007 5.13E-07 R402 446,307.37 3,768,393.72 2.11 0.0008 5.78E-07 R403 446,357.37 3,768,393.72 2.40 0.0009 6.56E-07 R404 446,407.37 3,768,393.72 2.74 0.0010 7.51E-07 R405 446,457.37 3,768,393.72 3.17 0.0012 8.67E-07 R406 446,507.37 3,768,393.72 3.69 0.0014 1.01E-06 R407 446,557.37 3,768,393.72 4.34 0.0016 1.19E-06 R408 446,607.37 3,768,393.72 5.13 0.0019 1.40E-06 R409 446,657.37 3,768,393.72 6.04 0.0022 1.65E-06 R410 446,707.37 3,768,393.72 7.08 0.0026 1.94E-06 R411 446,757.37 3,768,393.72 8.42 0.0031 2.31E-06 R412 446,807.37 3,768,393.72 10.17 0.0037 2.78E-06 R413 446,857.37 3,768,393.72 12.19 0.0045 3.34E-06 R414 446,907.37 3,768,393.72 14.61 0.0054 4.00E-06 R415 446,957.37 3,768,393.72 16.52 0.0061 4.52E-06 R416 447,007.37 3,768,393.72 17.39 0.0064 4.76E-06 R417 447,057.37 3,768,393.72 17.14 0.0063 4.69E-06 R418 447,107.37 3,768,393.72 16.15 0.0059 4.42E-06 R419 447,157.37 3,768,393.72 14.86 0.0055 4.07E-06 R420 447,207.37 3,768,393.72 13.39 0.0049 3.67E-06 R421 447,257.37 3,768,393.72 11.99 0.0044 3.28E-06 R422 447,307.37 3,768,393.72 10.69 0.0039 2.93E-06 R423 447,357.37 3,768,393.72 9.52 0.0035 2.61E-06 R424 446,157.37 3,768,443.72 1.34 0.0005 3.66E-07 R425 446,207.37 3,768,443.72 1.47 0.0005 4.03E-07 R426 446,257.37 3,768,443.72 1.63 0.0006 4.45E-07 R427 446,307.37 3,768,443.72 1.81 0.0007 4.95E-07 R428 446,357.37 31768,443.72 2.02 0.0007 5.53E-07 R429 446,407.37 3,768,443.72 2.27 0.0008 6.21E-07 R430 446,457.37 3,768,443.72 2.56 0.0009 7.02E-07 R431 446,507.37 3,768,443.72 2.92 0.0011 7.98E-07 R432 446,557.37 3,768,443.72 3.33 0.0012 9.11E-07 R433 446,607.37 3,768,443.72 3.80 0.0014 1.04E-06 R434 446,657.37 3,768,443.72 4.31 0.0016 1.18E-06 R435 446,707.37 3,768,443.72 4.86 0.0018 1.33E-06 R436 446,757.37 3,768,443.72 5.57 0.0020 1.52E-06 R437 446,807.37 3,768,443.72 6.44 0.0024 1.76E-06 R438 446,857.37 3,768,443.72 7.07 0.0026 1.94E-06 R439 446,907.37 3,768,443.72 8.65 0.0032 2.37E-06 R440 446,957.37 3,768,443.72 9.87 0.0036 2.70E-06 R441 447,007.37 1 3,768,443.72 10.93 0.0040 2.99E-06 Page 9 of 14 Ramboil Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R442 447,057.37 3,768,443.72 11.56 0.0042 3.16E-06 R443 447,107.37 3,768,443.72 11.70 0.0043 3.20E-06 R444 447,157.37 3,768,443.72 11.47 0.0042 3.14E-06 R445 447,207.37 3,768,443.72 10.95 0.0040 3.00E-06 R446 447,257.37 3,768,443.72 10.27 0.0038 2.81E-06 R447 447,307.37 3,768,443.72 9.51 0.0035 2.60E-06 R448 447,357.37 3,768,443.72 8.74 0.0032 2.39E-06 R449 446,157.37 3,768,493.72 1.19 0.0004 3.25E-07 R450 446,207.37 3,768,493.72 1.30 0.0005 3.55E-07 R451 446,257.37 3,768,493.72 1.42 0.0005 3.88E-07 R452 446,307.37 3,768,493.72 1.56 0.0006 4.26E-07 R453 446,357.37 3,768,493.72 1.72 0.0006 4.70E-07 R454 446,407.37 3,768,493.72 1.90 0.0007 5.20E-07 R455 446,457.37 3,768,493.72 2.11 0.0008 5.79E-07 R456 446,507.37 3,768,493.72 2.36 0.0009 6.45E-07 R457 446,557.37 3,768,493.72 2.63 0.0010 7.20E-07 R458 446,607.37 3,768,493.72 2.92 0.0011 8.00E-07 R459 446,657.37 3,768,493.72 3.23 0.0012 8.83E-07 R460 446,707.37 3,768,493.72 3.55 0.0013 9.72E-07 R461 446,757.37 3,768,493.72 3.95 0.0015 1.08E-06 R462 446,807.37 3,768,493.72 4.29 0.0016 1.17E-06 R463 446,857.37 3,768,493.72 4.83 0.0018 1.32E-06 R464 446,907.37 3,768,493.72 5.36 0.0020 1.47E-06 R465 446,957.37 3,768,493.72 6.36 0.0023 1.74E-06 R466 447,007.37 3,768,493.72 7.09 0.0026 1.94E-06 R467 447,057.37 3,768,493.72 7.74 0.0028 2.12E-06 R468 447,107.37 3,768,493.72 8.21 0.0030 2.25E-06 R469 447,157.37 3,768,493.72 8.45 0.0031 2.31E-06 R470 447,207.37 3,768,493.72 8.47 0.0031 2.32E-06 R471 447,257.37 3,768,493.72 8.31 0.0031 2.28E-06 R472 447,307.37 3,768,493.72 8.00 0.0029 2.19E-06 R473 447,357.37 3,768,493.72 7.60 0.0028 2.08E-06 R474 446,157.37 3,768,543.72 1.06 0.0004 2.90E-07 R475 446,207.37 3,768,543.72 1.14 0.0004 3.14E-07 R476 446,257.37 3,768,543.72 1.24 0.0005 3.40E-07 R477 446,307.37 3,768,543.72 1.35 0.0005 3.70E-07 R478 446,357.37 3,768,543.72 1.47 0.0005 4.03E-07 R479 446,407.37 3,768,543.72 1.61 0.0006 4.42E-07 R480 446,457.37 3,768,543.72 1.77 0.0007 4.85E-07 R481 446,507.37 3,768,543.72 1.94 0.0007 5.32E-07 R482 446,557.37 3,768,543.72 2.13 0.0008 5.83E-07 R483 446,607.37 3,768,543.72 2.32 0.0009 6.35E-07 R484 446,657.37 3,768,543.72 2.51 0.0009 6.87E-07 R485 446,707.37 3,768,543.72 2.72 0.0010 7.45E-07 R486 446,757.37 3,768,543.72 2.97 0.0011 8.14E-07 R487 446,807.37 3,768,543.72 3.16 0.0012 8.65E-07 R488 446,857.37 3,768,543.72 3.51 0.0013 9.62E-07 R489 446,907.37 3,768,543.72 3.83 0.0014 1.05E-06 R490 446,957.37 1 3,768,543.72 4.22 0.0016 1.16E-06 Page 10 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor",X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R491 447,007.37 3,768,543.72 4.60 0.0017 1.26E-06 R492 447,057.37 3,768,543.72 5.38 0.0020 1.47E-06 R493 447,107.37 3,768,543.72 5.80 0.0021 1.59E-06 R494 447,157.37 3,768,543.72 6.15 0.0023 1.68E-06 R495 447,207.37 3,768,543.72 6.38 0.0023 1.75E-06 R496 447,257.37 3,768,543.72 6.49 0.0024 1.78E-06 R497 447,307.37 3,768,543.72 6.47 0.0024 1.77E-06 R498 447,357.37 3,768,543.72 6.34 0.0023 1.74E-06 R499 446,157.37 3,768,593.72 0.95 0.0003 2.59E-07 R500 446,207.37 3,768,593.72 1.02 0.0004 2.78E-07 R501 446,257.37 3,768,593.72 1.09 0.0004 3.00E-07 R502 446,307.37 3,768,593.72 1.18 0.0004 3.23E-07 R503 446,357.37 3,768,593.72 1.28 0.0005 3.50E-07 R504 446,407.37 3,768,593.72 1.39 0.0005 3.79E-07 R505 446,457.37 3,768,593.72 1.50 0.0006 4.12E-07 R506 446,507.37 3,768,593.72 1.63 0.0006 4.46E-07 R507 446,557.37 3,768,593.72 1.76 0.0006 4.81E-07 R508 446,607.37 3,768,593.72 1.88 0.0007 5.16E-07 R509 446,657.37 3,768,593.72 2.01 0.0007 5.51E-07 R510 446,707.37 31768,593.72 2.16 0.0008 5.90E-07 R511 446,757.37 3,768,593.72 2.27 0.0008 6.21E-07 R512 446,807.37 3,768,593.72 2.44 0.0009 6.69E-07 R513 446,857.37 3,768,593.72 2.67 0.0010 7.32E-07 R514 446,907.37 3,768,593.72 2.90 0.0011 7.94E-07 R515 446,957.37 3,768,593.72 3.18 0.0012 8.70E-07 R516 447,007.37 3,768,593.72 3.40 0.0012 9.31E-07 R517 447,057.37 3,768,593.72 3.68 0.0014 1.01E-06 R518 447,107.37 3,768,593.72 3.94 0.0014 1.08E-06 R519 447,157.37 3,768,593.72 4.23 0.0016 1.16E-06 R520 447,207.37 3,768,593.72 4.51 0.0017 1.24E-06 R521 447,257.37 3,768,593.72 4.99 0.0018 1.37E-06 R522 447,307.37 3,768,593.72 5.11 0.0019 1.40E-06 R523 447,357.37 3,768,593.72 5.14 0.0019 1.41E-06 R524 446,157.37 3,768,643.72 0.84 0.0603 2.29E-07 R525 446,207.37 3,768,643.72 0.89 0.0003 2.44E-07 R526 446,257.37 3,768,643.72 0.95 0.0004 2.61E-07 R527 446,307.37 3,768,643.72 1.03 0.0004 2.81E-07 R528 446,357.37 3,768,643.72 1.12 0.0004 3.06E-07 R529 446,407.37 3,768,643.72 1.20 0.0004 3.29E-07 R530 446,457.37 3,768,643.72 1.29 0.0005 3.54E-07 R531 446,507.37 3,768,643.72 1.38 0.0005 3.79E-07 R532 446,557.37 3,768,643.72 1.48 0.0005 4.04E-07 R533 446,607.37 3,768,643.72 1.56 0.0006 4.29E-07 R534 446,657.37 3,768,643.72 1.63 0.0006 4.45E-07 R535 446,707.37 3,768,643.72 1.71 0.0006 4.69E-07 R536 446,757.37 3,768,643.72 1.83 0.0007 5.00E-07 R537 446,807.37 3,768,643.72 1.96 0.0007 5.36E-07 R538 446,857.37 3,768,643.72 2.11 0.0008 5.78E-07 R539 446,907.37 3,768,643.72 2.28 0.0008 6.23E-07 Page 11 of 14 Ramboli Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factorl,X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R540 446,957.37 3,768,643.72 2.47 0.0009 6.76E-07 R541 447,007.37 3,768,643.72 2.64 0.0010 7.22E-07 R542 447,057.37 3,768,643.72 2.81 0.0010 7.70E-07 R543 447,107.37 3,768,643.72 2.98 0.0011 8.15E-07 R544 447,157.37 3,768,643.72 3.15 0.0012 8.63E-07 R545 447,207.37 3,768,643.72 3.37 0.0012 9.22E-07 R546 447,257.37 3,768,643.72 3.58 0.0013 9.81E-07 R547 447,307.37 3,768,643.72 4.00 0.0015 1.10E-06 R548 447,357.37 3,768,643.72 4.12 0.0015 1.13E-06 R549 446,157.37 3,768,693.72 0.76 0.0003 2.07E-07 R550 446,207.37 3,768,693.72 0.80 0.0003 2.19E-07 R551 446,257.37 3,768,693.72 0.85 0.0003 2.34E-07 R552 446,307.37 3,768,693.72 0.91 0.0003 2.50E-07 R553 446,357.37 3,768,693.72 0.97 0.0004 2.67E-07 R554 446,407.37 3,768,693.72 1.04 0.0004 2.86E-07 R555 446,457.37 3,768,693.72 1.11 0.0004 3.05E-07 R556 446,507.37 3,768,693.72 1.18 0.0004 3.24E-07 R557 446,557.37 3,768,693.72 1.26 0.0005 3.45E-07 R558 446,607.37 3,768,693.72 1.30 0.0005 3.57E-07 R559 446,657.37 3,768,693.72 1.36 0.0005 3.72E-07 R560 446,707.37 3,768,693.72 1.42 0.0005 3.89E-07 R561 446,757.37 3,768,693.72 1.50 0.0006 4.11E-07 R562 446,807.37 3,768,693.72 1.60 0.0006 4.39E-07 R563 446,857.37 3,768,693.72 1.71 0.0006 4.69E-07 R564 446,907.37 3,768,693.72 1.85 0.0007 5.07E-07 R565 446,957.37 3,768,693.72 1.99 0.0007 5.46E-07 R566 447,007.37 3,768,693.72 2.11 0.0008 5.79E-07 R567 447,057.37 3,768,693.72 2.22 0.0008 6.08E-07 R568 447,107.37 3,768,693.72 2.32 0.0009 6.37E-07 R569 447,157.37 3,768,693.72 2.45 0.0009 6.70E-07 R570 447,207.37 3,768,693.72 2.60 0.0010 7.11E-07 R571 447,257.37 3,768,693.72 2.76 0.0010 7.57E-07 R572 447,307.37 3,768,693.72 2.93 0.0011 8.02E-07 R573 447,357.37 3,768,693.72 3.09 0.0011 8.47E-07 R574 446,157.37 3,768,743.72 0.68 0.0003 1.87E-07 R575 446,207.37 3,768,743.72 0.72 0.0003 1.98E-07 R576 446,257.37 3,768,743.72 0.77 0.0003 2.11E-07 R577 446,307.37 3,768,743.72 0.82 0.0003 2.24E-07 R578 446,357.37 3,768,743.72 0.87 0.0003 2.38E-07 R579 446,407.37 3,768,743.72 0.92 0.0003 2.53E-07 R580 446,457.37 3,768,743.72 0.98 0.0004 2.68E-07 R581 446,507.37 3,768,743.72 1.03 0.0004 2.81E-07 R582 446,557.37 3,768,743.72 1.07 0.0004 2.94E-07 R583 446,607.37 3,768,743.72 1.11 0.0004 3.05E-07 R584 446,657.37 3,768,743.72 1.16 0.0004 3.17E-07 R585 446,707.37 3,768,743.72 1.20 0.0004 3.30E-07 R586 446,757.37 3,768,743.72 1.26 0.0005 3.46E-07 R587 446,807.37 3,768,743.72 1.33 0.0005 3.65E-07 R588 446,857.37 3,768,743.72 1.42 0.0005 3.89E-07 Page 12 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R589 446,907.37 3,768,743.72 1.53 0.0006 4.18E-07 R590 446,957.37 3,768,743.72 1.64 0.0006 4.49E-07 R591 447,007.37 3,768,743.72 1.74 0.0006 4.76E-07 R592 447,057.37 3,768,743.72 1.82 0.0007 4.99E-07 R593 447,107.37 3,768,743.72 1.90 0.0007 5.19E-07 R594 447,157.37 3,768,743.72 1.97 0.0007 5.41E-07 R595 447,207.37 31768,743.72 2.07 0.0008 5.67E-07 R596 447,257.37 3,768,743.72 2.18 0.0008 5.97E-07 R597 447,307.37 3,768,743.72 2.31 0.0008 6.31E-07 R598 447,357.37 3,768,743.72 2.44 0.0009 6.68E-07 R599 446,157.37 3,768,793.72 0.63 0.0002 1.71E-07 R600 446,207.37 3,768,793.72 0.66 0.0002 1.81E-07 R601 446,257.37 3,768,793.72 0.70 0.0003 1.91E-07 R602 446,307.37 3,768,793.72 0.74 0.0003 2.02E-07 R603 446,357.37 3,768,793.72 0.78 0.0003 2.14E-07 R604 446,407.37 3,768,793.72 0.82 0.0003 2.25E-07 R605 446,457.37 3,768,793.72 0.86 0.0003 2.37E-07 R606 446,507.37 3,768,793.72 0.90 0.0003 2.46E-07 R607 446,557.37 3,768,793.72 0.93 0.0003 2.55E-07 R608 446,607.37 3,768,793.72 0.96 0.0004 2.64E-07 R609 446,657.37 3,768,793.72 1.00 0.0004 2.73E-07 R610 446,707.37 3,768,793.72 1.03 0.0004 2.83E-07 R611 446,757.37 3,768,793.72 1.08 0.0004 2.95E-07 R612 446,807.37 3,768,793.72 1.13 0.0004 3.10E-07 R613 446,857.37 3,768,793.72 1.20 0.0004 3.28E-07 R614 446,907.37 3,768,793.72 1.28 0.0005 3.51E-07 R615 446,957.37 3,768,793.72 1.37 0.0005 3.76E-07 R616 447,007.37 3,768,793.72 1.46 0.0005 3.99E-07 R617 447,057.37 3,768,793.72 1.53 0.0006 4.18E-07 R618 447,107.37 3,768,793.72 1.59 0.0006 4.34E-07 R619 447,157.37 3,768,793.72 1.64 0.0006 4.50E-07 R620 447,207.37 3,768,793.72 1.70 0.0006 4.67E-07 R621 447,257.37 3,768,793.72 1.78 0.0007 4.86E-07 R622 447,307.37 31768,793.72 1.86 0.0007 5.10E-07 R623 447,357.37 3,768,793.72 1.96 0.0007 5.37E-07 R624 446,732.27 3,768,243.84 95.33 0.0350 2.61E-05 R625 446,757.26 3,768,243.81 155.73 0.0572 4.26E-05 R626 446,782.24 3,768,243.79 207.64 0.0763 5.69E-05 R627 446,807.29 3,768,218.91 390.72 0.1436 1.07E-04 R628 446,807.36 3,768,194.05 387.55 0.1424 1.06E-04 R629 446,807.42 3,768,169.20 226.33 0.0832 6.20E-05 R630 446,707.37 3,768,169.20 173.40 0.0637 4.75E-05 R631 446,707.37 3,768,218.91 115.52 0.0425 3.16E-05 R632 446,732.27 3,768,143.72 173.21 0.0637 4.74E-05 R633 446,782.24 3,768,143.72 114.77 0.0422 3.14E-05 R634 446,725.42 3,768,225.57 178.01 0.0654 4.87E-05 R635 446,789.24 3,768,225.57 508.57 0.1869 1.39E-04 R636 446,789.18 31768,161.95 225.47 0.0829 6.17E-05 R637 446,725.45 3,768,161.95 275.80 0.1014 7.55E-05 Page 13 of 14 Ramboll Table B-2. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 1 - HDT with TRU in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor",X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/rn3)/(g/s) (Rg/m3) MICR R638 446,725.56 3,768,183.12 335.48 0.1233 9.19E-05 R639 446,725.56 3,768,204.32 317.71 0.1168 8.70E-05 R640 446,789.18 3,768,183.12 495.25 0.1820 1.36E-04 R641 446,789.18 3,768,204.32 600.31 0.2206 1.64E-04 R642 446,746.77 3,768,225.53 398.59 0.1465 1.09E-04 R643 446,767.97 3,768,225.53 509.52 0.1872 1.40E-04 R644 446,746.77 3,768,161.91 346.41 0.1273 9.49E-05 R645 446,767.97 3,768,161.91 331.42 0.1218 9.08E-05 R646 446,725.42 3,768,225.57 178.01 0.0654 4.87E-05 R647 446,789.24 3,768,225.57 508.57 0.1869 1.39E-04 R648 446,789.18 3,768,161.95 225.47 0.0829 6.17E-05 R649 446,725.45 3,768,161.95 275.80 0.1014 7.55E-05 Notes: 1 Obtained from AERMOD output in Appendix A. 2 Estimated using dispersion factors and emission rates shown in Table 4. 3 Estimated using the methodology described in Section 3.3. Abbreviations: µg/m3 -microgram per meter cube g/s- grams per second Q:\N\NAIOP IE\Technical Work\[NAIOP IE HRA Calculations.xlsx]2023_Scenl Page 14 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q ConcentrationZ Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR RO1 446 157.37 3,767,593.72 2.52 0.0025 8.01E-07 R02 446 207.37 3,767,593.72 2.72 0.0027 8.65E-07 R03 446 257.37 3 767 593.72 2.92 0.0029 9.28E-07 R04 446 307.37 3 767 593.72 3.10 0.0031 9.85E-07 R05 446 357.37 31767,593.72 3.26 0.0032 1.04E-06 R06 446 407.37 3 767 593.72 3.36 0.0034 1.07E-06 R07 446 457.37 3,767,593.72 3.40 0.0034 1.08E-06 R08 446 507.37 3,767,593.72 3.36 0.0033 1.07E-06 R09 446 557.37 3,767,593.72 3.25 0.0032 1.03E-06 R10 446 607.37 31767,593.72 3.08 0.0031 9.79E-07 R11 446 657.37 3,767,593.72 2.90 0.0029 9.22E-07 R12 446 707.37 3 767 593.72 2.70 0.0027 8.59E-07 R13 446 757.37 3,767 593.72 2.50 0.0025 7.94E-07 R14 446 807.37 3,767,593.72 2.30 0.0023 7.32E-07 R15 446 857.37 3,767,593.72 2.12 0.0021 6.73E-07 R16 446 907.37 3,767,593.72 1.97 0.0020 6.26E-07 R17 446 957.37 3,767,593.72 1.81 0.0018 5.77E-07 R18 447 007.37 3,767,593.72 1.68 0.0017 5.33E-07 R19 447 057.37 3,767,593.72 1.55 0.0015 4.92E-07 R20 447 107.37 3,767,593.72 1.42 0.0014 4.53E-07 R21 447 157.37 31767,593.72 1.30 0.0013 4.15E-07 R22 447 207.37 3,767,593.72 1.20 0.0012 3.80E-07 R23 447 257.37 3,767,593.72 1.10 0.0011 3.49E-07 R24 447 307.37 31767,593.72 1.01 0.0010 3.21E-07 R25 447 357.37 3,767,593.72 0.93 0.0009 2.96E-07 R26 446 157.37 3,767,643.72 2.64 0.0026 8.39E-07 R27 446 207.37 3,767,643.72 2.88 0.0029 9.16E-07 R28 446 257.37 3,767,643.72 3.12 0.0031 9.93E-07 R29 446 307.37 31767,643.72 3.34 0.0033 1.06E-06 R30 446 357.37 3,767,643.72 3.56 0.0035 1.13E-06 R31 446 407.37 3,767,643.72 3.71 0.0037 1.18E-06 R32 446 457.37 3,767,643.72 3.78 0.0038 1.20E-06 R33 446 507.37 3,767,643.72 3.78 0.0038 1.20E-06 R34 446 557.37 3,767,643.72 3.71 0.0037 1.18E-06 R35 446 607.37 3,767,643.72 3.55 0.0035 1.13E-06 R36 446 657.37 3,767,643.72 3.36 0.0034 1.07E-06 R37 446 707.37 31767,643.72 3.14 0.0031 1.00E-06 R38 446 757.37 3,767,643.72 2.91 0.0029 9.24E-07 R39 446 807.37 3,767,643.72 2.66 0.0027 8.46E-07 R40 446 857.37 3,767,643.72 2.43 0.0024 7.73E-07 R41 446 907.37 3,767,643.72 2.23 0.0022 7.10E-07 R42 446 957.37 31767,643.72 2.05 0.0020 6.52E-07 R43 447 007.37 3,767,643.72 1.88 0.0019 5.98E-07 R44 447 057.37 3,767,643.72 1.71 0.0017 5.45E-07 R45 447 107.37 3,767,643.72 1.56 0.0016 4.96E-07 R46 447 157.37 31767,643.72 1.42 0.0014 4.50E-07 R47 447 207.37 3,767,643.72 1.29 0.0013 4.10E-07 R48 447 257.37 3,767,643.72 1.18 0.0012 3.75E-07 R49 447 307.37 3,767,643.72 1.08 0.0011 3.44E-07 Page 1 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q ConcentrationZ Cancer Risk'3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R50 447 357.37 3,767,643.72 1.00 0.0010 3.17E-07 R51 446 157.37 3,767,693.72 2.77 0.0028 8.82E-07 R52 446 207.37 3 767 693.72 3.04 0.0030 9.66E-07 R53 446 257.37 3 767 693.72 3.37 0.0034 1.07E-06 R54 446 307.37 31767,693.72 3.73 0.0037 1.19E-06 R55 446 357.37 3,767,693.72 4.04 0.0040 1.29E-06 R56 446 407.37 3,767,693.72 4.32 0.0043 1.37E-06 R57 446 457.37 3,767,693.72 4.50 0.0045 1.43E-06 R58 446 507.37 3,767,693.72 4.59 0.0046 1.46E-06 R59 446 557.37 31767,693.72 4.53 0.0045 1.44E-06 R60 446 607.37 3,767,693.72 4.35 0.0043 1.38E-06 R61 446 657.37 3 767 693.72 4.07 0.0041 1.30E-06 R62 446 707.37 3 767 693.72 3.75 0.0037 1.19E-06 R63 446 757.37 3,767,693.72 3.41 0.0034 1.09E-06 R64 446 807.37 3,767,693.72 3.11 0.0031 9.89E-07 R65 446 857.37 3,767,693.72 2.82 0.0028 8.96E-07 R66 446 907.37 3,767,693.72 2.56 0.0026 8.15E-07 R67 446 957.37 3 767 693.72 2.33 0.0023 7.40E-07 R68 447 007.37 3,767,693.72 2.11 0.0021 6.72E-07 R69 447 057.37 3,767,693.72 1.91 0.0019 6.07E-07 R70 447 107.37 3,767,693.72 1.72 0.0017 5.47E-07 R71 447 157.37 3,767,693.72 1.55 0.0015 4.93E-07 R72 447 207.37 3,767,693.72 1.40 0.0014 4.45E-07 R73 447 257.37 3,767,693.72 1.28 0.0013 4.06E-07 R74 447 307.37 3,767,693.72 1.17 0.0012 3.73E-07 R75 447 357.37 3,767,693.72 1.08 0.0011 3.44E-07 R76 446 157.37 3,767,743.72 2.88 0.0029 9.17E-07 R77 446 207.37 3,767,743.72 3.25 0.0032 1.03E-06 R78 446 257.37 3,767,743.72 3.61 0.0036 1.15E-06 R79 446 307.37 3,767,743.72 4.06 0.0040 1.29E-06 R80 446 357.37 3,767,743.72 4.49 0.0045 1.43E-06 R81 446 407.37 31767,743.72 4.89 0.0049 1.56E-06 R82 446 457.37 3,767,743.72 5.22 0.0052 1.66E-06 R83 446 507.37 3,767,743.72 5.43 0.0054 1.73E-06 R84 446 557.37 3,767,743.72 5.45 0.0054 1.73E-06 R85 446 607.37 3,767,743.72 5.29 0.0053 1.68E-06 R86 446 657.37 31767,743.72 4.96 0.0049 1.58E-06 R87 446 707.37 3,767,743.72 4.54 0.0045 1.44E-06 R88 446 757.37 3,767,743.72 4.08 0.0041 1.30E-06 R89 446 807.37 3,767,743.72 3.68 0.0037 1.17E-06 R90 446 857.37 3,767,743.72 3.31 0.0033 1.05E-06 R91 446 907.37 31767,743.72 2.97 0.0030 9.46E-07 R92 446 957.37 3,767,743.72 2.67 0.0027 8.48E-07 U 47007.37 3 767743.72 2.38 0.0024 7.58E-07 47 057.37 3 767 743.72 2.12 0.0021 6.75E-07 47 107.37 3 767 743.72 1.90 0.0019 6.03E-07 47 157.37 3 767 743.72 1.70 0.0017 5.39E-07 47 207.37 3 767743.72 1.52 0.0015 4.85E-07 47 257.37 3,767,743.72 1.39 0.0014 4.42E-07 Page 2 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R99 447 307.37 31767,743.72 1.28 0.0013 4.06E-07 R100 447 357.37 3,767,743.72 1.18 0.0012 3.76E-07 R101 446 157.37 31767,793.72 2.96 0.0030 9.42E-07 R102 446 207.37 3,767,793.72 3.37 0.0034 1.07E-06 R103 446 257.37 3,767,793.72 3.81 0.0038 1.21E-06 R104 446 307.37 3,767,793.72 4.35 0.0043 1.38E-06 R105 446 357.37 3,767,793.72 4.92 0.0049 1.57E-06 R106 446 407.37 3,767,793.72 5.51 0.0055 1.75E-06 R107 446 457.37 3,767,793.72 6.04 0.0060 1.92E-06 R108 446 507.37 3,767,793.72 6.45 0.0064 2.05E-06 R109 446 557.37 31767,793.72 6.63 0.0066 2.11E-06 R110 446 607.37 3,767,793.72 6.54 0.0065 2.08E-06 Rill 446 657.37 31767,793.72 6.17 0.0061 1.96E-06 R112 446 707.37 3,767,793.72 5.61 0.0056 1.78E-06 R113 446 757.37 3,767,793.72 4.99 0.0050 1.59E-06 R114 446 807.37 3,767,793.72 4.44 0.0044 1.41E-06 R115 446 857.37 31767,793.72 3.96 0.0039 1.26E-06 R116 446 907.37 3,767,793.72 3.49 0.0035 1.11E-06 R117 446 957.37 31767,793.72 3.08 0.0031 9.80E-07 R118 447 007.37 31767,793.72 2.71 0.0027 8.61E-07 R119 447 057.37 3t767,793.72 2.38 0.0024 7.56E-07 R120 447 107.37 3,767,793.72 2.10 0.0021 6.68E-07 R121 447 157.37 3,767,793.72 1.87 0.0019 5.95E-07 R122 447 207.37 3,767,793.72 1.68 0.0017 5.35E-07 R123 447 257.37 3,767,793.72 1.53 0.0015 4.87E-07 R124 447 307.37 3,767,793.72 1.41 0.0014 4.49E-07 R125 447 357.37 3,767,793.72 1.31 0.0013 4.17E-07 R126 446 157.37 3,767,843.72 3.00 0.0030 9.55E-07 R127 446 207.37 3,767,843.72 3.46 0.0034 1.10E-06 R128 446 257.37 3,767,843.72 3.96 0.0040 1.26E-06 R129 446 307.37 3,767,843.72 4.60 0.0046 1.46E-06 R130 446 357.37 3,767,843.72 5.32 0.0053 1.69E-06 R131 446 407.37 3 767 843.72 6.13 0.0061 1.95E-06 R132 446 457.37 3,767,843.72 6.95 0.0069 2.21E-06 R133 446 507.37 3,767,843.72 7.68 0.0077 2.44E-06 R134 446 557.37 3,767,843.72 8.16 0.0081 2.60E-06 R135 446 607.37 31767,843.72 8.25 0.0082 2.62E-06 R136 446 657.37 3 767 843.72 7.87 0.0079 2.50E-06 R137 446 707.37 3,767,843.72 7.15 0.0071 2.27E-06 R138 446 757.37 3,767,843.72 6.27 0.0063 2.00E-06 R139 446 807.37 3,767,843.72 5.45 0.0054 1.73E-06 R140 446 857.37 3,767,843.72 4.81 0.0048 1.53E-06 R141 446 907.37 3,767,843.72 4.16 0.0042 1.32E-06 R142 446 957.37 31767,843.72 3.60 0.0036 1.14E-06 R143 447 007.37 3,767,843.72 3.10 0.0031 9.87E-07 R144 447 057.37 3,767,843.72 2.69 0.0027 8.55E-07 R145 447 107.37 3,767,843.72 2.36 0.0023 7.49E-07 R146 447 157.37 3,767,843.72 2.09 0.0021 6.66E-07 R147 1 447 207.37 3,767,843.72 1.88 0.0019 6.00E-07 Page 3 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HOT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R148 447 257.37 3 767 843.72 1.72 0.0017 5.48E-07 R149 447 307.37 3,767,843.72 1.59 0.0016 5.06E-07 R150 447 357.37 31767,843.72 1.48 0.0015 4.71E-07 R151 446 157.37 3,767,893.72 3.01 0.0030 9.57E-07 R152 446 207.37 3,767,893.72 3.48 0.0035 1.11E-06 R153 446 257.37 3,767,893.72 4.05 0.0040 1.29E-06 R154 446 307.37 3,767,893.72 4.78 0.0048 1.52E-06 R155 446 357.37 3,767,893.72 5.65 0.0056 1.80E-06 R156 446 407.37 3,767,893.72 6.70 0.0067 2.13E-06 R157 446 457.37 3,767,893.72 7.88 0.0079 2.51E-06 R158 446 507.37 31767,893.72 9.10 0.0091 2.89E-06 R159 446 557.37 3,767,893.72 10.12 0.0101 3.22E-06 R160 446 607.37 31767,893.72 10.64 0.0106 3.38E-06 R161 446 657.37 3,767,893.72 10.40 0.0104 3.31E-06 R162 446 707.37 3,767,893.72 9.46 0.0094 3.01E-06 R163 446 757.37 3,767,893.72 8.16 0.0081 2.60E-06 R164 446 807.37 31767,893.72 6.91 0.0069 2.20E-06 R165 446 857.37 3,767,893.72 5.99 0.0060 1.90E-06 R166 446 907.37 3 767 893.72 5.05 0.0050 1.61E-06 R167 446 957.37 3,767 893.72 4.25 0.0042 1.35E-06 R168 447 007.37 3 767 893.72 3.59 0.0036 1.14E-06 I 447 057.37 3 767 893.72 3.08 0.0031 9.79E-07 447 107.37 3 767 893.72 2.69 0.0027 8.57E-07 447 157.37 3 767893.72 2.40 0.0024 7.62E-07 447207.37 3 767 893.72 2.16 0.0022 6.88E-07 447 257.37 3 767893.72 1.98 0.0020 6.31E-07 447 307.37 3 767 893.72 1.84 0.0018 5.84E-07 447 357.37 3 767 893.72 1.71 0.0017 5.44E-07 446 157.37 3 767 943.72 2.98 0.0030 9.49E-07 446 207.37 3 767 943.72 3.46 0.0035 1.10E-06 446 257.37 3 767943.72 4.07 0.0041 1.30E-06 446 307.37 3,767,943.72 4.86 0.0049 1.55E-06 R180 446 357.37 3,767,943.72 5.87 0.0059 1.87E-06 R181 446 407.37 3,767,943.72 7.15 0.0071 2.28E-06 R182 446 457.37 31767,943.72 8.75 0.0087 2.78E-06 R183 446 507.37 3,767,943.72 10.62 0.0106 3.38E-06 R184 446 557.37 3,767,943.72 12.54 0.0125 3.99E-06 R185 446 607.37 31767,943.72 14.00 0.0140 4.45E-06 R186 446 657.37 3,767 943.72 14.31 0.0143 4.55E-06 R187 446 707.37 3,767,943.72 13.17 0.0131 4.19E-06 R188 446 757.37 3,767,943.72 11.16 0.0111 3.55E-06 R189 446 807.37 3,767,943.72 9.12 0.0091 2.90E-06 R190 446 857.37 31767,943.72 7.66 0.0076 2.44E-06 R191 446 907.37 3,767,943.72 6.24 0.0062 1.98E-06 R192 446 957.37 31767,943.72 5.11 0.0051 1.62E-06 R193 447 007.37 3,767,943.72 4.25 0.0042 1.35E-06 R194 447 057.37 3,767,943.72 3.62 0.0036 1.15E-06 R195 447 107.37 3 767 943.72 3.18 0.0032 1.01E-06 R196 447 157.37 1 3,767,943.72 2.84 0.0028 9.02E-07 Page 4 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2- HOT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R197 447 207.37 3,767,943.72 2.57 0.0026 8.18E-07 R198 447 257.37 3,767,943.72 2.36 0.0024 7.51E-07 R199 447 307.37 31767,943.72 2.19 0.0022 6.96E-07 R200 447 357.37 3,767,943.72 2.04 0.0020 6.48E-07 R201 446 157.37 31767,993.72 2.92 0.0029 9.29E-07 R202 446 207.37 3,767,993.72 3.41 0.0034 1.08E-06 R203 446 257.37 3,767,993.72 4.03 0.0040 1.28E-06 R204 446 307.37 31767,993.72 4.85 0.0048 1.54E-06 R205 446 357.37 3,767,993.72 5.94 0.0059 1.89E-06 R206 446 407.37 3,767,993.72 7.41 0.0074 2.36E-06 R207 446 457.37 31767,993.72 9.39 0.0094 2.99E-06 R208 446 507.37 31767,993.72 12.02 0.0120 3.82E-06 R209 446 557.37 3,767,993.72 15.27 0.0152 4.86E-06 R210 446 607.37 3,767,993.72 18.61 0.0186 5.92E-06 R211 446 657.37 3,767,993.72 20.62 0.0206 6.56E-06 R212 446 707.37 3,767,993.72 19.71 0.0197 6.27E-06 R213 446 757.37 3,767,993.72 16.34 0.0163 5.20E-06 R214 446 807.37 31767,993.72 12.70 0.0127 4.04E-06 R215 446 857.37 3,767,993.72 10.18 0.0102 3.24E-06 R216 446 907.37 31767,993.72 7.92 0.0079 2.52E-06 R217 446 957.37 3 767 993.72 6.33 0.0063 2.01E-06 R218 447 007.37 3,767 993.72 5.23 0.0052 1.66E-06 R219 447 057.37 3,767,993.72 4.47 0.0045 1.42E-06 R220 447 107.37 3,767,993.72 3.97 0.0040 1.26E-06 R221 447 157.37 3,767,993.72 3.55 0.0035 1.13E-06 R222 447 207.37 3,767,993.72 3.21 0.0032 1.02E-06 R223 447 257.37 3,767,993.72 2.94 0.0029 9.37E-07 R224 447 307.37 3,767,993.72 2.70 0.0027 8.60E-07 R225 447 357.37 3 767 993.72 2.50 0.0025 7.95E-07 R226 446 157.37 3,768 043.72 2.83 0.0028 8.99E-07 R227 446 207.37 3,768,043.72 3.29 0.0033 1.05E-06 R228 446 257.37 3,768,043.72 3.91 0.0039 1.24E-06 R229 446 307.37 3,768,043.72 4.74 0.0047 1.51E-06 R230 446 357.37 31768,043.72 5.85 0.0058 1.86E-06 R231 446 407.37 3,768,043.72 7.41 0.0074 2.36E-06 R232 446 457.37 3,768,043.72 9.65 0.0096 3.07E-06 R233 446 507.37 31768,043.72 12.95 0.0129 4.12E-06 R234 446 557.37 31768,043.72 17.79 0.0177 5.66E-06 R235 446 607.37 3,768,043.72 24.35 0.0243 7.75E-06 R236 446 657.37 3,768,043.72 31.01 0.0309 9.86E-06 R237 446 707.37 3,768,043.72 32.69 0.0326 1.04E-05 R238 446 757.37 3 768 043.72 26.73 0.0267 8.50E-06 R239 446 807.37 3 768 043.72 19.09 0.0190 6.07E-06 R240 446 857.37 3,768,043.72 14.21 0.0142 4.52E-06 R241 446 907.37 3,768,043.72 10.59 0.0106 3.37E-06 R242 446 957.37 3 768 043.72 8.39 0.0084 2.67E-06 R243 447 007.37 3,768 043.72 7.00 0.0070 2.23E-06 R244 447 057.37 3,768,043.72 6.04 0.0060 1.92E-06 R245 447 107.37 3,768,043.72 5.31 0.0053 1.69E-06 Page 5 of 14 Pamboil Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q ConcentrationZ Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R246 447 157.37 3,768,043.72 4.73 0.0047 1.50E-06 R247 447 207.37 3,768,043.72 4.25 0.0042 1.35E-06 R248 447 257.37 3,768,043.72 3.83 0.0038 1.22E-06 R249 447 307.37 31768,043.72 3.47 0.0035 1.10E-06 R250 447 357.37 31768,043.72 3.16 0.0032 1.01E-06 R251 446 157.37 3,768,093.72 2.69 0.0027 8.57E-07 R252 446 207.37 31768,093.72 3.15 0.0031 1.00E-06 R253 446 257.37 3,768,093.72 3.75 0.0037 1.19E-06 R254 446 307.37 31768,093.72 4.53 0.0045 1.44E-06 R255 446 357.37 3,768,093.72 5.61 0.0056 1.78E-06 R256 446 407.37 31768,093.72 7.13 0.0071 2.27E-06 R257 446 457.37 3,768,093.72 9.42 0.0094 3.00E-06 R258 446 507.37 31768,093.72 13.03 0.0130 4.15E-06 R259 446 557.37 3,768,093.72 19.07 0.0190 6.07E-06 R260 446 607.37 3,768,093.72 29.60 0.0295 9.42E-06 R261 446 657.37 3,768,093.72 46.70 0.0466 1.49E-05 R262 446 707.37 3,768,093.72 62.50 0.0623 1.99E-05 R263 446 757.37 3,768,093.72 53.32 0.0532 1.70E-05 R264 446 807.37 3,768,093.72 33.31 0.0332 1.06E-05 R265 446 857.37 31768,093.72 21.99 0.0219 7.00E-06 R266 446 907.37 3,768,093.72 16.25 0.0162 5.17E-06 R267 446 957.37 31768,093.72 12.99 0.0130 4.13E-06 R268 447 007.37 3,768,093.72 10.76 0.0107 3.42E-06 R269 447 057.37 31768,093.72 9.09 0.0091 2.89E-06 R270 447 107.37 3,768,093.72 7.77 0.0078 2.47E-06 R271 447 157.37 3,768,093.72 6.73 0.0067 2.14E-06 R272 447 207.37 3,768,093.72 5.89 0.0059 1.87E-06 R273 447 257.37 3 768 093.72 5.19 0.0052 1.65E-06 R274 447 307.37 3,768 093.72 4.60 0.0046 1.46E-06 R275 447 357.37 3,768,093.72 4.12 0.0041 1.31E-06 R276 446 157.37 3,768,143.72 2.53 0.0025 8.06E-07 R277 446 207.37 3,768,143.72 2.95 0.0029 9.40E-07 R278 446 257.37 31768,143.72 3.50 0.0035 1.11E-06 R279 446 307.37 3,768,143.72 4.21 0.0042 1.34E-06 R280 446 357.37 3,768,143.72 5.19 0.0052 1.65E-06 R281 446 407.37 31768,143.72 6.58 0.0066 2.09E-06 R282 446 457.37 3,768 143.72 8.68 0.0087 2.76E-06 R283 446 507.37 3,768,143.72 12.09 0.0121 3.84E-06 R284 446 557.37 3,768,143.72 18.12 0.0181 5.77E-06 R285 446 607.37 31768,143.72 30.31 0.0302 9.64E-06 R286 446 657.37 3,768,143.72 59.47 0.0593 1.89E-05 R287 446 707.37 3,768,143.72 134.76 0.1344 4.29E-05 R288 446 757.37 3,768,143.72 161.45 0.1610 5.14E-05 R289 446 807.37 31768,143.72 83.43 0.0832 2.65E-05 R290 446 857.37 3,768 143.72 49.73 0.0496 1.58E-05 R291 446 907.37 3,768,143.72 34.00 0.0339 1.08E-05 R292 446 957.37 3,768,143.72 24.71 0.0246 7.86E-06 R293 447 007.37 3,768,143.72 18.77 0.0187 5.97E-06 R294 447 057.37 3,768,143.72 14.76 0.0147 4.69E-06 Page 6 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HOT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R295 447 107.37 3,768,143.72 11.91 0.0119 3.79E-06 R296 447 157.37 3,768,143.72 9.84 0.0098 3.13E-06 R297 447 207.37 3 768 143.72 8.29 0.0083 2.64E-06 R298 447 257.37 3 768 143.72 7.08 0.0071 2.25E-06 R299 447 307.37 3t768,143.72 6.12 0.0061 1.95E-06 R300 447 357.37 3,768,143.72 5.36 0.0053 1.70E-06 R301 446 157.37 3,768,193.72 2.34 0.0023 7.43E-07 R302 446 207.37 31768,193.72 2.71 0.0027 8.62E-07 R303 446 257.37 3,768,193.72 3.19 0.0032 1.01E-06 R304 446 307.37 31768,193.72 3.81 0.0038 1.21E-06 R305 446 357.37 3,768,193.72 4.65 0.0046 1.48E-06 R306 446 407.37 3 768 193.72 5.83 0.0058 1.86E-06 R307 446 457.37 3,768 193.72 7.60 0.0076 2.42E-06 R308 446 507.37 3,768,193.72 10.41 0.0104 3.31E-06 R309 446 557.37 3,768,193.72 15.30 0.0153 4.87E-06 R310 446 607.37 3,768,193.72 25.21 0.0252 8.02E-06 R311 446 657.37 3,768,193.72 51.41 0.0513 1.64E-05 R312 446 707.37 3,768,193.72 169.04 0.1686 5.38E-05 R313 446 857.37 3,768,193.72 139.42 0.1391 4.43E-05 R314 446 907.37 3,768,193.72 72.78 0.0726 2.32E-05 R315 446 957.37 3,768,193.72 44.99 0.0449 1.43E-05 R316 447 007.37 3,768,193.72 30.80 0.0307 9.80E-06 R317 447 057.37 3,768,193.72 22.54 0.0225 7.17E-06 R318 447 107.37 3,768,193.72 17.30 0.0173 5.50E-06 R319 447 157.37 3,768,193.72 13.74 0.0137 4.37E-06 R320 447 207.37 3,768,193.72 11.20 0.0112 3.56E-06 R321 447 257.37 3,768,193.72 9.33 0.0093 2.97E-06 R322 447 307.37 3,768,193.72 7.91 0.0079 2.51E-06 R323 447 357.37 31768,193.72 6.79 0.0068 2.16E-06 R324 446 157.37 3,768,243.72 2.12 0.0021 6.75E-07 R325 446 207.37 3,768,243.72 2.44 0.0024 7.76E-07 R326 446 257.37 3,768,243.72 2.84 0.0028 9.03E-07 R327 446 307.37 3,768,243.72 3.36 0.0033 1.07E-06 R328 446 357.37 3t768,243.72 4.04 0.0040 1.28E-06 R329 446 407.37 3,768,243.72 4.97 0.0050 1.58E-06 R330 446 457.37 3,768,243.72 6.31 0.0063 2.01E-06 R331 446 507.37 3,768,243.72 8.31 0.0083 2.64E-06 R332 446 557.37 31768,243.72 11.55 0.0115 3.68E-06 R333 446 607.37 3,768,243.72 17.33 0.0173 5.51E-06 R334 446 657.37 3,768,243.72 29.24 0.0292 9.30E-06 R335 446 707.37 3,768,243.72 59.94 0.0598 1.91E-05 R336 446 757.37 3 768 243.72 156.68 0.1563 4.98E-05 R337 446 807.37 3 768 243.72 213.90 0.2134 6.80E-05 R338 446 857.37 3,768,243.72 138.73 0.1384 4.41E-05 R339 446 907.37 3,768,243.72 86.40 0.0862 2.75E-05 R340 446 957.37 31768,243.72 56.43 0.0563 1.80E-05 R341 447 007.37 3,768,243.72 39.17 0.0391 1.25E-05 R342 447 057.37 3,768,243.72 28.63 0.0286 9.11E-06 R343 447 107.37 3,768,243.72 21.82 0.0218 6.94E-06 Page 7 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2- HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor,X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R344 447 157.37 3,768,243.72 17.17 0.0171 5.46E-06 R345 447 207.37 3,768,243.72 13.87 0.0138 4.41E-06 R346 447 257.37 31768,243.72 11.45 0.0114 3.64E-06 R347 447 307.37 3,768,243.72 9.61 0.0096 3.06E-06 R348 447 357.37 31768,243.72 8.19 0.0082 2.61E-06 R349 446 157.37 3,768,293.72 1.90 0.0019 6.06E-07 R350 446 207.37 3,768,293.72 2.16 0.0022 6.89E-07 R351 446 257.37 3,768,293.72 2.49 0.0025 7.91E-07 R352 446 307.37 3,768,293.72 2.90 0.0029 9.21E-07 R353 446 357.37 31768,293.72 3.42 0.0034 1.09E-06 R354 446 407.37 3,768,293.72 4.11 0.0041 1.31E-06 R355 446 457.37 31768,293.72 5.03 0.0050 1.60E-06 R356 446 507.37 3,768,293.72 6.32 0.0063 2.01E-06 R357 446 557.37 3,768,293.72 8.18 0.0082 2.60E-06 R358 446 607.37 3,768,293.72 11.01 0.0110 3.50E-06 R359 446 657.37 3,768,293.72 15.35 0.0153 4.88E-06 R360 446 707.37 3,768,293.72 21.89 0.0218 6.96E-06 R361 446 757.37 31768,293.72 32.42 0.0323 1.03E-05 R362 446 807.37 3,768,293.72 48.78 0.0487 1.55E-05 R363 446 857.37 3,768,293.72 58.82 0.0587 1.87E-05 R364 446 907.37 3,768,293.72 56.04 0.0559 1.78E-05 R365 446 957.37 3,768,293.72 46.30 0.0462 1.47E-05 R366 447 007.37 3,768,293.72 36.64 0.0365 1.17E-05 R367 447 057.37 3,768,293.72 28.90 0.0288 9.19E-06 R368 447 107.37 3,768,293.72 23.07 0.0230 7.34E-06 R369 447 157.37 3,768,293.72 18.66 0.0186 5.94E-06 R370 447 207.37 3,768,293.72 15.34 0.0153 4.88E-06 R371 447 257.37 3,768,293.72 12.79 0.0128 4.07E-06 R372 447 307.37 3 768 293.72 10.82 0.0108 3.44E-06 R373 447 357.37 3 768 293.72 9.25 0.0092 2.94E-06 R374 446 157.37 3,768,343.72 1.70 0.0017 5.40E-07 I 446 207.37 3 768 343.72 1.91 0.0019 6.06E-07 446 257.37 3 768 343.72 2.16 0.0022 6.88E-07 446 307.37 3 768 343.72 2.48 0.0025 7.87E-07 446 357.37 3 768 343.72 2.86 0.0029 9.11E-07 446 407.37 3 768 343.72 3.35 0.0033 1.07E-06 446 457.37 3 768 343.72 3.98 0.0040 1.26E-06 446 507.37 3 768 343.72 4.78 0.0048 1.52E-06 446 557.37 3 768 343.72 5.86 0.0058 1.86E-06 446 607.37 3 768 343.72 7.28 0.0073 2.32E-06 446 657.37 3 768 343.72 9.15 0.0091 2.91E-06 446 707.37 3 768 343.72 11.45 0.0114 3.64E-06 446 757.37 3 768 343.72 14.57 0.0145 4.64E-06 446 807.37 3 768 343.72 18.87 0.0188 6.00E-06 446 857.37 31768,343.72 23.90 0.0238 7.60E-06 R389 446 907.37 31768,343.72 28.16 0.0281 8.96E-06 R390 446 957.37 3,768,343.72 28.84 0.0288 9.17E-06 R391 447 007.37 3,768,343.72 26.89 0.0268 8.55E-06 R392 447 057.37 3,768,343.72 23.86 0.0238 7.59E-06 Page 8 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R393 447 107.37 3,768,343.72 20.61 0.0206 6.56E-06 R394 447 157.37 3,768,343.72 17.66 0.0176 5.62E-06 R395 447 207.37 31768,343.72 15.10 0.0151 4.80E-06 R396 447 257.37 3,768,343.72 12.97 0.0129 4.13E-06 R397 447 307.37 31768,343.72 11.20 0.0112 3.56E-06 R398 447 357.37 3,768,343.72 9.73 0.0097 3.09E-06 R399 446 157.37 3,768,393.72 1.50 0.0015 4.78E-07 R400 446 207.37 3,768,393.72 1.67 0.0017 5.32E-07 R401 446 257.37 3,768,393.72 1.87 0.0019 5.95E-07 R402 446 307.37 31768,393.72 2.11 0.0021 6.71E-07 R403 446 357.37 3,768,393.72 2.40 0.0024 7.62E-07 R404 446 407.37 31768,393.72 2.74 0.0027 8.72E-07 R405 446 457.37 3,768,393.72 3.17 0.0032 1.01E-06 R406 446 507.37 3,768,393.72 3.69 0.0037 1.17E-06 R407 446 557.37 3,768,393.72 4.34 0.0043 1.38E-06 R408 446 607.37 3,768,393.72 5.13 0.0051 1.63E-06 R409 446 657.37 3,768,393.72 6.04 0.0060 1.92E-06 R410 446 707.37 3,768,393.72 7.08 0.0071 2.25E-06 R411 446 757.37 3,768,393.72 8.42 0.0084 2.68E-06 R412 446 807.37 31768,393.72 10.17 0.0101 3.23E-06 R413 446 857.37 3,768,393.72 12.19 0.0122 3.88E-06 R414 446 907.37 3,768,393.72 14.61 0.0146 4.65E-06 R415 446 957.37 3,768,393.72 16.52 0.0165 5.26E-06 R416 447 007.37 3,768,393.72 17.39 0.0173 5.53E-06 R417 447 057.37 3,768,393.72 17.14 0.0171 5.45E-06 R418 447 107.37 3,768,39332 16.15 0.0161 5.14E-06 R419 447 157.37 3,768,393.72 14.86 0.0148 4.73E-06 R420 447 207.37 3,768,393.72 13.39 0.0134 4.26E-06 R421 447 257.37 31768,393.72 11.99 0.0120 3.82E-06 R422 447 307.37 3 768 393.72 10.69 0.0107 3.40E-06 R423 447 357.37 3,768,393.72 9.52 0.0095 3.03E-06 R424 446 157.37 31768,443.72 1.34 0.0013 4.25E-07 R425 446 207.37 3,768,443.72 1.47 0.0015 4.68E-07 R426 446 257.37 3,768,443.72 1.63 0.0016 5.17E-07 R427 446 307.37 3,768,443.72 1.81 0.0018 5.75E-07 R428 446 357.37 3 768 443.72 2.02 0.0020 6.42E-07 R429 446 407.37 31768,443.72 2.27 0.0023 7.21E-07 R430 446 457.37 3,768,443.72 2.56 0.0026 8.16E-07 R431 446 507.37 3,768,443.72 2.92 0.0029 9.27E-07 R432 446 557.37 3,768,443.72 3.33 0.0033 1.06E-06 R433 446 607.37 3,768,443.72 3.80 0.0038 1.21E-06 R434 446 657.37 3,768,443.72 4.31 0.0043 1.37E-06 R435 446 707.37 3,768,443.72 4.86 0.0048 1.55E-06 R436 446 757.37 3,768,443.72 5.57 0.0056 1.77E-06 tR437446807.37 3 768 443.72 6.44 0.0064 2.05E-06 446 857.37 3 768 443.72 7.07 0.0071 2.25E-06 446 907.37 3 768 443.72 8.65 0.0086 2.75E-06 446 957.37 3 768 443.72 9.87 0.0098 3.14E-06 447 007.37 3,768,443.72 10.93 0.0109 3.48E-06 Page 9 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor",X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R442 447 057.37 3,768,443.72 11.56 0.0115 3.68E-06 R443 447 107.37 3,768,443.72 11.70 0.0117 3.72E-06 R444 447 157.37 31768,443.72 11.47 0.0114 3.65E-06 R445 447 207.37 3,768,443.72 10.95 0.0109 3.48E-06 R446 447 257.37 31768,443.72 10.27 0.0102 3.27E-06 R447 447 307.37 3,768,443.72 9.51 0.0095 3.03E-06 R448 447 357.37 3,768,443.72 8.74 0.0087 2.78E-06 R449 446 157.37 31768,493.72 1.19 0.0012 3.78E-07 R450 446 207.37 3,768,493.72 1.30 0.0013 4.12E-07 R451 446 257.37 31768,493.72 1.42 0.0014 4.51E-07 R452 446 307.37 3,768,493.72 1.56 0.0016 4.95E-07 R453 446 357.37 31768,493.72 1.72 0.0017 5.46E-07 R454 446 407.37 3,768,493.72 1.90 0.0019 6.05E-07 R455 446 457.37 3,768,493.72 2.11 0.0021 6.72E-07 R456 446 507.37 31768,493.72 2.36 0.0024 7.50E-07 R457 446 557.37 3,768,493.72 2.63 0.0026 8.36E-07 R458 446 607.37 3,768,493.72 2.92 0.0029 9.30E-07 R459 446 657.37 3,768,493.72 3.23 0.0032 1.03E-06 R460 446 707.37 3,768,493.72 3.55 0.0035 1.13E-06 R461 446 757.37 3,768,493.72 3.95 0.0039 1.26E-06 R462 446 807.37 31768,493.72 4.29 0.0043 1.36E-06 R463 446 857.37 3,768,493.72 4.83 0.0048 1.54E-06 R464 446 907.37 31768,493.72 5.36 0.0053 1.71E-06 R465 446 957.37 3,768,493.72 6.36 0.0063 2.02E-06 R466 447 007.37 3 768 493.72 7.09 0.0071 2.26E-06 R467 447 057.37 3,768,493.72 7.74 0.0077 2.46E-06 R468 447 107.37 31768,493.72 8.21 0.0082 2.61E-06 P469 447 157.37 31768,493.72 8.45 0.0084 2.69E-06 R470 447 207.37 3,768,493.72 8.47 0.0085 2.69E-06 R471 447 257.37 3 768 493.72 8.31 0.0083 2.64E-06 R472 447 307.37 3,768 493.72 8.00 0.0080 2.54E-06 R473 447 357.37 31768,493.72 7.60 0.0076 2.42E-06 R474 446 157.37 3,768,543.72 1.06 0.0011 3.37E-07 R475 446 207.37 3,768,543.72 1.14 0.0011 3.64E-07 R476 446 257.37 3,768,543.72 1.24 0.0012 3.95E-07 R477 446 307.37 31768,543.72 1.35 0.0013 4.29E-07 R478 446 357.37 3,768,543.72 1.47 0.0015 4.68E-07 R479 446 407.37 31768,543.72 1.61 0.0016 5.13E-07 R480 446 457.37 3,768,543.72 1.77 0.0018 5.63E-07 R481 446 507.37 3,768,543.72 1.94 0.0019 6.18E-07 R482 446 557.37 3,768,543.72 2.13 0.0021 6.77E-07 R483 446 607.37 3,768,543.72 2.32 0.0023 7.37E-07 R484 446 657.37 3,768,543.72 2.51 0.0025 7.99E-07 R485 446 707.37 31768,543.72 2.72 0.0027 8.65E-07 R486 446 757.37 3,768,543.72 2.97 0.0030 9.46E-07 R487 446 807.37 3,768,543.72 3.16 0.0032 1.01E-06 R488 446 857.37 3,768,543.72 3.51 0.0035 1.12E-06 R489 446 907.37 3,768,543.72 3.83 0.0038 1.22E-06 R490 446 957.37 3 768 543.72 4.22 0.0042 1.34E-06 Page 10 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID, UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R491 447 007.37 31768,543.72 4.60 0.0046 1.46E-06 R492 447 057.37 3,768,543.72 5.38 0.0054 1.71E-06 R493 447 107.37 3 768 543.72 5.80 0.0058 1.84E-06 R494 447 157.37 31768,543.72 543.72 6.15 0.0061 1.96E-06 R495 447 207.37 3,768,543.72 6.38 0.0064 2.03E-06 R496 447 257.37 3,768,543.72 6.49 0.0065 2.06E-06 R497 447 307.37 3,768,543.72 6.47 0.0064 2.06E-06 R498 447 357.37 3,768,543.72 6.34 0.0063 2.02E-06 R499 446 157.37 3,768,593.72 0.95 0.0009 3.01E-07 R500 446 207.37 3,768,593.72 1.02 0.0010 3.23E-07 R501 446 257.37 31768,593.72 1.09 0.0011 3.48E-07 R502 446 307.37 3,768,593.72 1.18 0.0012 3.76E-07 R503 446 357.37 31768,593.72 1.28 0.0013 4.06E-07 R504 446 407.37 3,768,593.72 1.39 0.0014 4.41E-07 R505 446 457.37 3,768,593.72 1.50 0.0015 4.78E-07 R506 446 507.37 3,768,593.72 1.63 0.0016 5.18E-07 R507 446 557.37 31768,593.72 1.76 0.0018 5.59E-07 R508 446 607.37 3,768,593.72 1.88 0.0019 5.99E-07 R509 446 657.37 31768,593.72 2.01 0.0020 6.40E-07 R510 446 707.37 3 768 593.72 2.16 0.0022 6.86E-07 R511 446 757.37 3 768 593.72 2.27 0.0023 7.21E-07 R512 446 807.37 3,768 593.72 2.44 0.0024 7.77E-07 R513 446 857.37 3,768,593.72 2.67 0.0027 8.51E-07 R514 446 907.37 3,768,593.72 2.90 0.0029 9.23E-07 R515 446 957.37 3,768,593.72 3.18 0.0032 1.01E-06 R516 447 007.37 3,768,593.72 3.40 0.0034 1.08E-06 R517 447 057.37 3,768,593.72 3.68 0.0037 1.17E-06 R518 447 107.37 3,768,593.72 3.94 0.0039 1.25E-06 R519 447 157.37 3,768,593.72 4.23 0.0042 1.34E-06 R520 447 207.37 31768,593.72 4.51 0.0045 1.44E-06 IR533 447 257.37 3,768,593.72 4.99 0.0050 1.59E-06 447 307.37 3,768,593.72 5.11 0.0051 1.63E-06 447 357.37 3,768,593.72 5.14 0.0051 1.64E-06 446 157.37 3,768,643.72 0.84 0.0008 2.66E-07 446 207.37 3,768,643.72 0.89 0.0009 2.84E-07 446 257.37 31768,643.72 0.95 0.0010 3.04E-07 446 307.37 3,768,643.72 1.03 0.0010 3.26E-07 446 357.37 3,768,643.72 1.12 0.0011 3.56E-07 446 407.37 3,768,643.72 1.20 0.0012 3.83E-07 446 457.37 31768,643.72 1.29 0.0013 4.11E-07 446 507.37 3,768,643.72 1.38 0.0014 4.40E-07 446 557.37 3,768,643.72 1.48 0.0015 4.70E-07 446 607.37 31768,643.72 1.56 0.0016 4.98E-07 R534 446 657.37 31768,643.72 1.63 0.0016 5.17E-07 R535 446 707.37 31768,643.72 1.71 0.0017 5.45E-07 R536 446 757.37 3,768,643.72 1.83 0.0018 5.81E-07 R537 446 807.37 3,768,643.72 1.96 0.0020 6.22E-07 R538 446 857.37 3,768,643.72 2.11 0.0021 6.71E-07 R539 446 907.37 3,768,643.72 2.28 0.0023 1 7.24E-07 Page 11 of 14 Ramboli Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q ConcentrationZ Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R540 446 957.37 3,768,643.72 2.47 0.0025 7.85E-07 R541 447 007.37 3,768,643.72 2.64 0.0026 8.39E-07 R542 447 057.37 31768,643.72 2.81 0.0028 8.94E-07 R543 447 107.37 3,768,643.72 2.98 0.0030 9.46E-07 R544 447 157.37 3,768,643.72 3.15 0.0031 1.00E-06 R545 447 207.37 3,768,643.72 3.37 0.0034 1.07E-06 R546 447 257.37 3,768,643.72 3.58 0.0036 1.14E-06 R547 447 307.37 3,768,643.72 4.00 0.0040 1.27E-06 R548 447 357.37 3,768,643.72 4.12 0.0041 1.31E-06 R549 446 157.37 3,768,693.72 0.76 0.0008 2.40E-07 R550 446 207.37 3 768 693.72 0.80 0.0008 2.55E-07 R551 446 257.37 3,768 693.72 0.85 0.0009 2.72E-07 R552 446 307.37 31768,693.72 0.91 0.0009 2.90E-07 R553 446 357.37 3,768,693.72 0.97 0.0010 3.10E-07 R554 446 407.37 3,768,693.72 1.04 0.0010 3.32E-07 R555 446 457.37 3,768,693.72 1.11 0.0011 3.54E-07 R556 446 507.37 3 768 693.72 1.18 0.0012 3.76E-07 R557 446 557.37 3,768 693.72 1.26 0.0013 4.01E-07 R558 446 607.37 3,768,693.72 1.30 0.0013 4.15E-07 R559 446 657.37 31768,693.72 1.36 0.0014 4.32E-07 R560 446 707.37 3,768,693.72 1.42 0.0014 4.52E-07 R561 446 757.37 3,768,693.72 1.50 0.0015 4.78E-07 R562 446 807.37 3,768,693.72 1.60 0.0016 5.10E-07 R563 446 857.37 3,768,693.72 1.71 0.0017 5.45E-07 R564 446 907.37 3,768,693.72 1.85 0.0018 5.89E-07 R565 446 957.37 3,768,693.72 1.99 0.0020 6.34E-07 R566 447 007.37 3,768,693.72 2.11 0.0021 6.72E-07 R567 447 057.37 31768,693.72 2.22 0.0022 7.06E-07 R568 447 107.37 3,768,693.72 2.32 0.0023 7.40E-07 R569 447 157.37 3,768,693.72 2.45 0.0024 7.78E-07 R570 447 207.37 3,768,693.72 2.60 0.0026 8.26E-07 R571 447 257.37 3,768,693.72 2.76 0.0028 8.80E-07 R572 447 307.37 3,768,693.72 2.93 0.0029 9.32E-07 R573 447 357.37 3,768,693.72 3.09 0.0031 9.84E-07 R574 446 157.37 3,768,743.72 0.68 0.0007 2.17E-07 R575 446 207.37 3 768 743.72 0.72 0.0007 2.30E-07 R576 446 257.37 3 768 743.72 0.77 0.0008 2.45E-07 R577 446 307.37 3,768,743.72 0.82 0.0008 2.60E-07 R578 446 357.37 3,768,743.72 0.87 0.0009 2.77E-07 R579 446 407.37 3,768,743.72 0.92 0.0009 2.94E-07 R580 446 457.37 3,768,743.72 0.98 0.0010 3.11E-07 R581 446 507.37 3,768,743.72 1.03 0.0010 3.27E-07 R582 446 557.37 3,768,743.72 1.07 0.0011 3.41E-07 R583 446 607.37 31768,743.72 1.11 0.0011 3.54E-07 R584 446 657.37 3 768 743.72 1.16 0.0012 3.68E-07 R585 446 707.37 3 768 743.72 1.20 0.0012 3.83E-07 R586 446 757.37 3,768,743.72 1.26 0.0013 4.01E-07 R587 446 807.37 3,768,743.72 1.33 0.0013 4.24E-07 R588 446 857.37 1 3,768,743.72 1.42 0.0014 4.51E-07 Page 12 of 14 Ramboll Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R589 446 907.37 3,768,743.72 1.53 0.0015 4.85E-07 R590 446 957.37 3,768,743.72 1.64 0.0016 5.22E-07 R591 447 007.37 3,768,743.72 1.74 0.0017 5.53E-07 R592 447 057.37 3,768,743.72 1.82 0.0018 5.79E-07 R593 447 107.37 31768,743.72 1.90 0.0019 6.03E-07 R594 447 157.37 3,768,743.72 1.97 0.0020 6.28E-07 R595 447 207.37 31768,743.72 2.07 0.0021 6.58E-07 R596 447 257.37 3,768,743.72 2.18 0.0022 6.94E-07 R597 447 307.37 3,768,743.72 2.31 0.0023 7.33E-07 R598 447 357.37 3,768,743.72 2.44 0.0024 7.76E-07 R599 446 157.37 3,768,793.72 0.63 0.0006 1.99E-07 R600 446 207.37 31768,793.72 0.66 0.0007 2.10E-07 R601 446 257.37 3,768,793.72 0.70 0.0007 2.22E-07 R602 446 307.37 31768,793.72 0.74 0.0007 2.34E-07 R603 446 357.37 3,768,793.72 0.78 0.0008 2.48E-07 R604 446 407.37 31768,793.72 0.82 0.0008 2.62E-07 R605 446 457.37 3,768,793.72 0.86 0.0009 2.75E-07 R606 446 507.37 31768,793.72 0.90 0.0009 2.86E-07 R607 446 557.37 3,768,793.72 0.93 0.0009 2.96E-07 R608 446 607.37 3,768,793.72 0.96 0.0010 3.07E-07 R609 446 657.37 3,768,793.72 1.00 0.0010 3.17E-07 R610 446 707.37 31768,793.72 1.03 0.0010 3.29E-07 R611 446 757.37 3,768,793.72 1.08 0.0011 3.43E-07 R612 446 807.37 31768,793.72 1.13 0.0011 3.60E-07 R613 446 857.37 3,768,793.72 1.20 0.0012 3.81E-07 R614 446 907.37 3,768,793.72 1.28 0.0013 4.07E-07 R615 446 957.37 3,768,793.72 1.37 0.0014 4.37E-07 R616 447 007.37 3,768,793.72 1.46 0.0015 4.64E-07 R617 447 057.37 31768,793.72 1.53 0.0015 4.86E-07 R618 447 107.37 3,768,793.72 1.59 0.0016 5.05E-07 R619 447 157.37 3,768,793.72 1.64 0.0016 5.22E-07 R620 447 207.37 3,768,793.72 1.70 0.0017 5.42E-07 R621 447 257.37 3,768,793.72 1.78 0.0018 5.65E-07 R622 447 307.37 31768,793.72 1.86 0.0019 5.93E-07 R623 447 357.37 3,768,793.72 1.96 0.0020 6.24E-07 R624 446 732.27 3,768,243.84 95.33 0.0951 3.03E-05 R625 446 757.26 31768,243.81 155.73 0.1553 4.95E-05 R626 446 782.24 3,768 243.79 207.64 0.2071 6.61E-05 R627 446 807.29 3,768,218.91 390.72 0.3897 1.24E-04 R628 446 807.36 3,768,194.05 387.55 0.3866 1.23E-04 R629 446 807.42 3 768 169.20 226.33 0.2258 7.20E-05 R630 446 707.37 3 768 169.20 173.40 0.1730 5.52E-05 R631 446 707.37 3,768,218.91 115.52 0.1152 3.67E-05 R632 446 732.27 3,768,143.72 173.21 0.1728 5.51E-05 R633 446 782.24 31768,143.72 114.77 0.1145 3.65E-05 R634 446 725.42 3,768,225.57 178.01 0.1776 5.66E-05 R635 446 789.24 3,768,225.57 508.57 0.5073 1.62E-04 R636 446 789.18 3,768,161.95 225.47 0.2249 7.17E-05 R637 446 725.45 3 768 161.95 T 275.80 0.2751 8.77E-05 Page 13 of 14 RamboH Table B-3. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2000 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R638 446 725.56 3,768,183.12 335.48 0.3346 1.07E-04 R639 446 725.56 3,768,204.32 317.71 0.3169 1.01E-04 R640 446 789.18 3,768,183.12 495.25 0.4940 1.58E-04 R641 446 789.18 31768,204.32 600.31 0.5988 1.91E-04 R642 446 746.77 3,768,225.53 398.59 0.3976 1.27E-04 R643 446 767.97 3,768,225.53 509.52 0.5082 1.62E-04 R644 446 746.77 3,768,161.91 346.41 0.3455 1.10E-04 R645 446 767.97 3,768,161.91 331.42 0.3306 1.05E-04 R646 446 725.42 3,768,225.57 178.01 0.1776 5.66E-05 R647 446 789.24 3,768,225.57 508.57 0.5073 1.62E-04 R648 446 789.18 3 768 161.95 225.47 0.2249 7.17E-05 R649 446 725.45 3,768,161.95 161.95 275.80 0.2751 8.77E-05 Notes: 1 Obtained from AERMOD output in Appendix A. 2 Estimated using dispersion factors and emission rates shown in Table 4. 3 Estimated using the methodology described in Section 3.3. Abbreviations: µg/m3 - microgram per meter cube g/s- grams per second Q:\N\NAIOP IE\Technical Work\[NAIOP IE HRA Calculations.xlsx]2000_Scen2 Page 14 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R01 446 157.37 31767,593.72 2.52 0.0001 9.85E-08 R02 446 207.37 3,767,593.72 2.72 0.0001 1.06E-07 R03 446 257.37 31767,593.72 2.92 0.0002 1.14E-07 R04 446 307.37 3,767 593.72 3.10 0.0002 1.21E-07 R05 446 357.37 3,767,593.72 3.26 0.0002 1.27E-07 R06 446 407.37 3,767,593.72 3.36 0.0002 1.31E-07 R07 446 457.37 3,767,593.72 3.40 0.0002 1.33E-07 R08 446 507.37 3,767,593.72 3.36 0.0002 1.31E-07 R09 446 557.37 3,767,593.72 3.25 0.0002 1.27E-07 R10 446 607.37 3,767,593.72 3.08 0.0002 1.20E-07 Ril 446 657.37 3 767 593.72 2.90 0.0002 1.13E-07 R12 446 707.37 3,767,593.72 2.70 0.0001 1.06E-07 R13 446 757.37 31767,593.72 2.50 0.0001 9.77E-08 R14 446 807.37 3,767,593.72 2.30 0.0001 9.00E-08 R15 446 857.37 3,767,593.72 2.12 0.0001 8.27E-08 R16 446 907.37 3,767,593.72 1.97 0.0001 7.70E-08 R17 446 957.37 3,767,593.72 1.81 0.0001 7.09E-08 R18 447 007.37 3,767,593.72 1.68 0.0001 6.55E-08 R19 447 057.37 31767,593.72 1.55 0.0001 6.05E-08 R20 447 107.37 3,767,593.72 1.42 0.0001 5.57E-08 R21 447 157.37 3,767,593.72 1.30 0.0001 5.10E-08 R22 447 207.37 3,767,593.72 1.20 0.0001 4.68E-08 R23 447 257.37 3,767,593.72 1.10 0.0001 4.30E-08 R24 447 307.37 3,767,593.72 1.01 0.0001 3.94E-08 R25 447 357.37 3,767,593.72 0.93 0.0000 3.64E-08 R26 446 157.37 3,767,643.72 2.64 0.0001 1.03E-07 R27 446 207.37 3,767,643.72 2.88 0.0002 1.13E-07 R28 446 257.37 31767,643.72 3.12 0.0002 1.22E-07 R29 446 307.37 3,767,643.72 3.34 0.0002 1.31E-07 R30 446 357.37 3,767,643.72 3.56 0.0002 1.39E-07 R31 446 407.37 3,767,643.72 3.71 0.0002 1.45E-07 R32 446 457.37 3,767,643.72 3.78 0.0002 1.48E-07 R33 446 507.37 3,767,643.72 3.78 0.0002 1.48E-07 R34 446 557.37 3,767,643.72 3.71 0.0002 1.45E-07 R35 446 607.37 3,767,643.72 3.55 0.0002 1.39E-07 R36 446 657.37 31767,643.72 3.36 0.0002 1.31E-07 R37 446 707.37 3,767,643.72 3.14 0.0002 1.23E-07 R38 446 757.37 3,767,643.72 2.91 0.0002 1.14E-07 R39 446 807.37 3,767,643.72 2.66 0.0001 1.04E-07 R40 446 857.37 31767,643.72 2.43 0.0001 9.51E-08 R41 446 907.37 3,767,643.72 2.23 0.0001 8.73E-08 R42 446 957.37 3,767,643.72 2.05 0.0001 8.02E-08 R43 447 007.37 3,767,643.72 1.88 0.0001 7.35E-08 R44 447 057.37 31767,643.72 1.71 0.0001 6.70E-08 R45 447 107.37 3,767,643,72 1.56 0.0001 6.09E-08 R46 447 157.37 3,767,643.72 1.42 0.0001 5.54E-08 R47 447 207.37 3,767,643.72 1.29 0.0001 1 5.05E-08 R48 447 257.37 3,767,643.72 1.18 0.0001 4.61E-08 R49 447 307.37 3,767,643.72 1.08 0.0001 4.23E-08 Page 1 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R50 447 357.37 3,767,643.72 1.00 0.0001 3.90E-08 R51 446 157.37 3,767,693.72 2.77 0.0001 1.08E-07 R52 446 207.37 3 767 693.72 3.04 0.0002 1.19E-07 R53 446 257.37 3 767 693.72 3.37 0.0002 1.32E-07 R54 446 307.37 31767,693.72 3.73 0.0002 1.46E-07 R55 446 357.37 3,767,693.72 4.04 0.0002 1.58E-07 R56 446 407.37 3,767,693.72 4.32 0.0002 1.69E-07 R57 446 457.37 3,767,693.72 4.50 0.0002 1.76E-07 R58 446 507.37 3,767,693.72 4.59 0.0002 1.79E-07 R59 446 557.37 3,767,693.72 4.53 0.0002 1.77E-07 R60 446 607.37 3,767,693.72 4.35 0.0002 1.70E-07 R61 446 657.37 31767,693.72 4.07 0.0002 1.59E-07 R62 446 707.37 3 767 693.72 3.75 0.0002 1.47E-07 R63 446 757.37 3,767,693.72 3.41 0.0002 1.34E-07 R64 446 807.37 3,767,693.72 3.11 0.0002 1.22E-07 R65 446 857.37 3,767,693.72 2.82 0.0001 1.10E-07 R66 446 907.37 31767,693.72 2.56 0.0001 1.00E-07 R67 446 957.37 3,767,693.72 2.33 0.0001 9.10E-08 R68 447 007.37 3,767,693.72 2.11 0.0001 8.26E-08 R69 447 057.37 3,767,693.72 1.91 0.0001 7.47E-08 R70 447 107.37 3 767 693.72 1.72 0.0001 6.72E-08 R71 447 157.37 3,767,693.72 1.55 0.0001 6.06E-08 R72 447 207.37 3,767,693.72 1.40 0.0001 5.47E-08 R73 447 257.37 3,767,693.72 1.28 0.0001 5.00E-08 R74 447 307.37 31767,693.72 1.17 0.0001 4.58E-08 R75 447 357.37 3,767,693.72 1.08 0.0001 4.23E-08 R76 446 157.37 3,767,743.72 2.88 0.0002 1.13E-07 R77 446 207.37 3 767 743.72 3.25 0.0002 1.27E-07 R78 446 257.37 3 767 743.72 3.61 0.0002 1.41E-07 R79 446 307.37 31767,743.72 4.06 0.0002 1.59E-07 R80 446 357.37 3,767,743.72 4.49 0.0002 1.76E-07 R81 446 407.37 3t767,743.72 4.89 0.0003 1.91E-07 R82 446 457.37 3,767,743.72 5.22 0.0003 2.04E-07 R83 446 507.37 3,767,743.72 5.43 0.0003 2.12E-07 R84 446 557.37 31767,743.72 5.45 0.0003 2.13E-07 R85 446 607.37 3,767,743.72 5.29 0.0003 2.07E-07 R86 446 657.37 3,767,743.72 4.96 0.0003 1.94E-07 R87 446 707.37 31767,743.72 4.54 0.0002 1.77E-07 R88 446 757.37 3,767 743.72 4.08 0.0002 1.60E-07 R89 446 807.37 3,767,743.72 3.68 0.0002 1.44E-07 R90 446 857.37 3,767,743.72 3.31 0.0002 1.29E-07 R91 446 907.37 3,767,743.72 2.97 0.0002 1.16E-07 R92 446 957.37 31767,743.72 2.67 0.0001 1.04E-07 R93 447 007.37 3,767 743.72 2.38 0.0001 9.32E-08 R94 447 057.37 3,767,743.72 2.12 0.0001 8.30E-08 R95 447 107.37 3,767,743.72 1.90 0.0001 7.41E-08 R96 447 157.37 3,767,743.72 1.70 0.0001 6.63E-08 R97 447 207.37 31767,743.72 1.52 0.0001 5.96E-08 R98 447 257.37 3,767,743.72 1.39 0.0001 5.43E-08 Page 2 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R99 447 307.37 3,767,743.72 1.28 0.0001 5.00E-08 R100 447 357.37 3,767,743.72 1.18 0.0001 4.62E-08 R101 446 157.37 3 767 793.72 2.96 0.0002 1.16E-07 R102 446 207.37 3,767,793.72 3.37 0.0002 1.32E-07 R103 446 257.37 31767,793.72 3.81 0.0002 1.49E-07 R104 446 307.37 3,767,793.72 4.35 0.0002 1.70E-07 R105 446 357.37 3,767,793.72 4.92 0.0003 1.93E-07 R106 446 407.37 31767,793.72 5.51 0.0003 2.15E-07 R107 446 457.37 3,767,793.72 6.04 0.0003 2.36E-07 R108 446 507.37 3,767,793.72 6.45 0.0003 2.52E-07 R109 446 557.37 3,767,793.72 6.63 0.0003 2.59E-07 R110 446 607.37 3 767 793.72 6.54 0.0003 2.56E-07 R111 446 657.37 3,767 793.72 6.17 0.0003 2.41E-07 R112 446 707.37 3,767,793.72 5.61 0.0003 2.19E-07 R113 446 757.37 3,767,793.72 4.99 0.0003 1.95E-07 R114 446 807.37 3,767,793.72 4.44 0.0002 1.74E-07 R115 446 857.37 31767,793.72 3.96 0.0002 1.55E-07 R116 446 907.37 3,767,793.72 3.49 0.0002 1.37E-07 R117 446 957.37 3,767,793.72 3.08 0.0002 1.21E-07 R118 447 007.37 3,767,793.72 2.71 0.0001 1.06E-07 R119 447 057.37 31767,793.72 2.38 0.0001 9.30E-08 R120 447 107.37 3,767,793.72 2.10 0.0001 8.21E-08 R121 447 157.37 3,767,793.72 1.87 0.0001 7.31E-08 R122 447 207.37 3,767,793.72 1.68 0.0001 6.58E-08 P123 447 257.37 31767,793.72 1.53 0.0001 5.99E-08 R124 447 307.37 3,767,793.72 1.41 0.0001 5.52E-08 R125 447 357.37 3,767,793.72 1.31 0.0001 5.13E-08 R126 446 157.37 31767,843.72 3.00 0.0002 1.17E-07 R127 446 207.37 3,767,843.72 3.46 0.0002 1.35E-07 R128 446 257.37 31767,843.72 3.96 0.0002 1.55E-07 R129 446 307.37 3,767,843.72 4.60 0.0002 1.80E-07 R130 446 357.37 31767,843.72 5.32 0.0003 2.08E-07 R131 446 407.37 3,767,843.72 6.13 0.0003 2.40E-07 R132 446 457.37 3,767,843.72 6.95 0.0004 2.72E-07 R133 446 507.37 31767,843.72 7.68 0.0004 3.00E-07 R134 446 557.37 3,767,843.72 8.16 0.0004 3.19E-07 R135 446 607.37 3,767,843.72 8.25 0.0004 3.23E-07 R136 446 657.37 31767,843.72 7.87 0.0004 3.08E-07 R137 446 707.37 3,767 843.72 7.15 0.0004 2.80E-07 R138 446 757.37 3,767,843.72 6.27 0.0003 2.45E-07 R139 446 807.37 3,767,843.72 5.45 0.0003 2.13E-07 R140 446 857.37 3,767,843.72 4.81 0.0003 1.88E-07 R141 446 907.37 3,767,843.72 4.16 0.0002 1.63E-07 R142 446 957.37 31767,843.72 3.60 0.0002 1.41E-07 R143 447 007.37 3,767,843.72 3.10 0.0002 1.21E-07 R144 447 057.37 31767,843.72 2.69 0.0001 1.05E-07 R145 447 107.37 3,767 843.72 2.36 0.0001 9.22E-08 R146 447 157.37 3,767,843.72 2.09 0.0001 8.19E-08 R147 447 207.37 3,767,843.72 1.88 0.0001 7.37E-08 Page 3 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2- HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R148 447 257.37 3,767,843.72 1.72 0.0001 6.74E-08 R149 447 307.37 3,767,843.72 1.59 0.0001 6.22E-08 R150 447 357.37 31767,843.72 1.48 0.0001 5.79E-08 R151 446 157.37 31767,893.72 3.01 0.0002 1.18E-07 R152 446 207.37 31767,893.72 3.48 0.0002 1.36E-07 R153 446 257.37 3,767,893.72 4.05 0.0002 1.58E-07 R154 446 307.37 3,767,893.72 4.78 0.0003 1.87E-07 R155 446 357.37 3,767,893.72 5.65 0.0003 2.21E-07 R156 446 407.37 3,767,893.72 6.70 0.0004 2.62E-07 R157 446 457.37 3,767,893.72 7.88 0.0004 3.08E-07 R158 446 507.37 3,767,893.72 9.10 0.0005 3.56E-07 R159 446 557.37 31767,893.72 10.12 0.0005 3.96E-07 R160 446 607.37 31767,893.72 10.64 0.0006 4.16E-07 R161 446 657.37 3,767,893.72 10.40 0.0005 4.07E-07 R162 446 707.37 3,767,893.72 9.46 0.0005 3.70E-07 R163 446 757.37 3,767,893.72 8.16 0.0004 3.19E-07 R164 446 807.37 31767,893.72 6.91 0.0004 2.70E-07 R165 446 857.37 3,767,893.72 5.99 0.0003 2.34E-07 R166 446 907.37 3,767,893.72 5.05 0.0003 1.97E-07 R167 446 957.37 3,767,893.72 4.25 0.0002 1.66E-07 R168 447 007.37 3 767 893.72 3.59 0.0002 1.41E-07 R169 447 057.37 3,767 893.72 3.08 0.0002 1.20E-07 R170 447 107.37 3,767,893.72 2.69 0.0001 1.05E-07 R171 447 157.37 3,767,893.72 2.40 0.0001 9.37E-08 R172 447 207.37 31767,893.72 2.16 0.0001 8.47E-08 R173 447 257.37 3,767,893.72 1.98 0.0001 7.76E-08 R174 447 307.37 31767,893.72 1.84 0.0001 7.19E-08 R175 447 357.37 3,767,893.72 1.71 0.0001 6.69E-08 R176 446 157.37 3,767,943.72 2.98 0.0002 1.17E-07 R177 446 207.37 31767,943.72 3.46 0.0002 1.35E-07 R178 446 257.37 3,767,943.72 4.07 0.0002 1.59E-07 R179 446 307.37 3,767,943.72 4.86 0.0003 1.90E-07 R180 446 357.37 3,767,943.72 5.87 0.0003 2.30E-07 R181 446 407.37 3,767,943.72 7.15 0.0004 2.80E-07 R182 446 457.37 31767,943.72 8.75 0.0005 3.42E-07 R183 446 507.37 3,767,943.72 10.62 0.0006 4.15E-07 R184 446 557.37 3,767,943.72 12.54 0.0007 4.90E-07 R185 446 607.37 3,767,943.72 14.00 0.0007 5.48E-07 R186 446 657.37 3,767,943.72 14.31 0.0008 5.60E-07 R187 446 707.37 31767,943.72 13.17 0.0007 5.15E-07 R188 446 757.37 3,767,943.72 11.16 0.0006 4.36E-07 R189 446 807.37 3,767,943.72 9.12 0.0005 3.57E-07 R190 446 857.37 31767,943.72 7.66 0.0004 3.00E-07 R191 446 907.37 3,767,943.72 6.24 0.0003 2.44E-07 R192 446 957.37 3,767,943.72 5.11 0.0003 2.00E-07 R193 447 007.37 3,767,943.72 4.25 0.0002 1.66E-07 R194 447 057.37 3,767,943.72 3.62 0.0002 1.42E-07 R195 447 107.37 31767,943.72 3.18 0.0002 1.24E-07 R196 447 157.37 3,767,943.72 2.84 0.0001 1.11E-07 Page 4 of 14 Ramboli Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor",X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R197 447 207.37 31767,943.72 2.57 0.0001 1.01E-07 R198 447 257.37 3,767,943.72 2.36 0.0001 9.24E-08 R199 447 307.37 31767,943.72 2.19 0.0001 8.56E-08 R200 447 357.37 31767,943.72 2.04 0.0001 7.96E-08 R201 446 157.37 3,767,993.72 2.92 0.0002 1.14E-07 R202 446 207.37 3,767,993.72 3.41 0.0002 1.33E-07 R203 446 257.37 3,767,993.72 4.03 0.0002 1.57E-07 R204 446 307.37 3,767,993.72 4.85 0.0003 1.90E-07 R205 446 357.37 3,767,993.72 5.94 0.0003 2.32E-07 R206 446 407.37 3,767,993.72 7.41 0.0004 2.90E-07 R207 446 457.37 31767,993.72 9.39 0.0005 3.67E-07 R208 446 507.37 3,767,993.72 12.02 0.0006 4.70E-07 R209 446 557.37 3 767 993.72 15.27 0.0008 5.97E-07 R210 446 607.37 3,767 993.72 18.61 0.0010 7.28E-07 R211 446 657.37 31767,993.72 20.62 0.0011 8.07E-07 R212 446 707.37 3,767,993.72 19.71 0.0010 7.71E-07 R213 446 757.37 3,767,993.72 16.34 0.0009 6.39E-07 R214 446 807.37 3,767,993.72 12.70 0.0007 4.97E-07 R215 446 857.37 31767,993.72 10.18 0.0005 3.98E-07 R216 446 907.37 31767,993.72 7.92 0.0004 3.10E-07 R�17 446 957.37 3,767,993.72 6.33 0.0003 2.48E-07 R218 447 007.37 3,767,993.72 5.23 0.0003 2.04E-07 R219 447 057.37 3,767,993.72 4.47 0.0002 1.75E-07 R220 447 107.37 3,767,993.72 3.97 0.0002 1.55E-07 R221 447 157.37 3,767,993.72 3.55 0.0002 1.39E-07 R222 447 207.37 3,767,993.72 3.21 0.0002 1.25E-07 R223 447 257.37 3,767,993.72 2.94 0.0002 1.15E-07 R224 447 307.37 31767,993.72 2.70 0.0001 1.06E-07 R225 447 357.37 3,767,993.72 2.50 0.0001 9.77E-08 R226 446 157.37 3,768,043.72 2.83 0.0001 1.11E-07 R227 446 207.37 3,768,043.72 3.29 0.0002 1.29E-07 R228 446 257.37 3,768,043.72 3.91 0.0002 1.53E-07 R229 446 307.37 31768,043.72 4.74 0.0002 1.85E-07 R230 446 357.37 3,768,043.72 5.85 0.0003 2.29E-07 R231 446 407.37 3,768,043.72 7.41 0.0004 2.90E-07 R232 446 457.37 31768,043.72 9.65 0.0005 3.78E-07 R233 446 507.37 3,768,043.72 12.95 0.0007 5.07E-07 R234 446 557.37 3,768,043.72 17.79 0.0009 6.96E-07 R235 446 607.37 3,768,043.72 24.35 0.0013 9.53E-07 R236 446 657.37 31768,043.72 31.01 0.0016 1.21E-06 R237 446 707.37 3,768,043.72 32.69 0.0017 1.28E-06 R238 446 757.37 3,768,043.72 26.73 0.0014 1.05E-06 R239 446 807.37 3,768,043.72 19.09 0.0010 7.47E-07 R240 446 857.37 31768,043.72 14.21 0.0007 5.56E-07 JRR241 446 907.37 3,768 043.72 10.59 0.0006 4.14E-07 242 446 957.37 3 768 043.72 8.39 0.0004 3.28E-07 243 447 007.37 3 768 043.72 7.00 0.0004 2.74E-07 244 447 057.37 3,768,043.72 6.04 0.0003 2.36E-07 245 447 107.37 3,768,043.72 5.31 0.0003 2.08E-07 Page 5 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R246 447 157.37 3,768,043.72 4.73 0.0002 1.85E-07 R247 447 207.37 3,768,043.72 4.25 0.0002 1.66E-07 R248 447 257.37 3,768,043.72 3.83 0.0002 1.50E-07 R249 447 307.37 3 768 043.72 3.47 0.0002 1.36E-07 R250 447 357.37 3 768 043.72 3.16 0.0002 1.24E-07 R251 446 157.37 3,768,093.72 2.69 0.0001 1.05E-07 R252 446 207.37 31768,093.72 3.15 0.0002 1.23E-07 R253 446 257.37 3,768,093.72 3.75 0.0002 1.47E-07 R254 446 307.37 3,768,093.72 4.53 0.0002 1.77E-07 R255 446 357.37 3,768,093.72 5.61 0.0003 2.19E-07 R256 446 407.37 3,768,093.72 7.13 0.0004 2.79E-07 R257 446 457.37 3,768,093.72 9.42 0.0005 3.69E-07 R258 446 507.37 3,768,093.72 13.03 0.0007 5.10E-07 R259 446 557.37 31768,093.72 19.07 0.0010 7.46E-07 R260 446 607.37 3,768,093.72 29.60 0.0016 1.16E-06 R261 446 657.37 3,768,093.72 46.70 0.0025 1.83E-06 R262 446 707.37 3,768,093.72 62.50 0.0033 2.44E-06 R263 446 757.37 3,768,093.72 53.32 0.0028 2.09E-06 R264 446 807.37 3,768,093.72 33.31 0.0017 1.30E-06 R265 446 857.37 3,768,093.72 21.99 0.0012 8.60E-07 R266 446 907.37 3,768,093.72 16.25 0.0009 6.36E-07 R267 446 957.37 31768,093.72 12.99 0.0007 5.08E-07 R268 447 007.37 3,768 093.72 10.76 0.0006 4.21E-07 R269 447 057.37 3,768,093.72 9.09 0.0005 3.55E-07 R270 447 107.37 3,768,093.72 7.77 0.0004 3.04E-07 R271 447 157.37 3,768,093.72 6.73 0.0004 2.63E-07 R272 447 207.37 3,768,093.72 5.89 0.0003 2.30E-07 R273 447 257.37 3,768,093.72 5.19 0.0003 2.03E-07 R274 447 307.37 3,768,093.72 4.60 0.0002 1.80E-07 R275 447 357.37 3,768,093.72 4.12 0.0002 1.61E-07 R276 446 157.37 31768,143.72 2.53 0.0001 9.91E-08 R277 446 207.37 3,768 143.72 2.95 0.0002 1.16E-07 R278 446 257.37 3,768,143.72 3.50 0.0002 1.37E-07 R279 446 307.37 31768,143.72 4.21 0.0002 1.65E-07 R280 446 357.37 3,768,143.72 5.19 0.0003 2.03E-07 R281 446 407.37 3,768,143.72 6.58 0.0003 2.57E-07 R282 446 457.37 31768,143.72 8.68 0.0005 3.40E-07 R283 446 507.37 3,768,143.72 12.09 0.0006 4.73E-07 R284 446 557.37 3,768,143.72 18.12 0.0010 7.09E-07 R285 446 607.37 3,768,143.72 30.31 0.0016 1.19E-06 R286 446 657.37 3 768 143.72 59.47 0.0031 2.33E-06 R287 446 707.37 3,768 143.72 134.76 0.0071 5.27E-06 R288 446 757.37 3,768,143.72 161.45 0.0085 6.32E-06 R289 446 807.37 3,768,143.72 83.43 0.0044 3.26E-06 R290 446 857.37 31768,143.72 49.73 0.0026 1.95E-06 R291 446 907.37 3,768 143.72 34.00 0.0018 1.33E-06 R292 446 957.37 3,768,143.72 24.71 0.0013 9.67E-07 R293 447 007.37 3,768 143. 22 18.77 0.0010 7.34E-07 R294 447 057.37 3,768,143.72 14.76 0.0008 5.77E-07 Page 6 of 14 Ramboil Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factorl,X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R295 447 107.37 3,768,143.72 11.91 0.0006 4.66E-07 R296 447 157.37 3,768,143.72 9.84 0.0005 3.85E-07 R297 447 207.37 31768,143.72 8.29 0.0004 3.24E-07 R298 447 257.37 3,768,143.72 7.08 0.0004 2.77E-07 R299 447 307.37 3,768,143.72 6.12 0.0003 2.40E-07 R300 447 357.37 31768,143.72 5.36 0.0003 2.10E-07 R301 446 157.37 3,768,193.72 2.34 0.0001 9.14E-08 R302 446 207.37 31768,193.72 2.71 0.0001 1.06E-07 R303 446 257.37 3,768,193.72 3.19 0.0002 1.25E-07 R304 446 307.37 3,768,193.72 3.81 0.0002 1.49E-07 R305 446 357.37 31768,193.72 4.65 0.0002 1.82E-07 R306 446 407.37 3t768,193.72 5.83 0.0003 2.28E-07 R307 446 457.37 3,768,193.72 7.60 0.0004 2.97E-07 R308 446 507.37 3,768,193.72 10.41 0.0005 4.07E-07 R309 446 557.37 31768,193.72 15.30 0.0008 5.99E-07 R310 446 607.37 3,768,193.72 25.21 0.0013 9.86E-07 R311 446 657.37 31768,193.72 51.41 0.0027 2.01E-06 R312 446 707.37 3,768,193.72 169.04 0.0089 6.61E-06 R313 446 857.37 31768,193.72 139.42 0.0073 5.45E-06 R314 446 907.37 3,768,193.72 72.78 0.0038 2.85E-06 R315 446 957.37 3,768,193.72 44.99 0.0024 1.76E-06 R316 447 007.37 3,768,193.72 30.80 0.0016 1.21E-06 R317 447 057.37 31768,193.72 22.54 0.0012 8.82E-07 R318 447 107.37 3,768,193.72 17.30 0.0009 6.77E-07 R319 447 157.37 3,768,193.72 13.74 0.0007 5.37E-07 R320 447 207.37 3,768,193.72 11.20 0.0006 4.38E-07 R321 447 257.37 3,768,193.72 9.33 0.0005 3.65E-07 R322 447 307.37 3t768,193.72 7.91 0.0004 3.09E-07 R323 447 357.37 3 768 193.72 6.79 0.0004 2.66E-07 R324 446 157.37 3,768,243.72 2.12 0.0001 8.30E-08 R325 446 207.37 3,768,243.72 2.44 0.0001 9.54E-08 R326 446 257.37 3,768,243.72 2.84 0.0001 1.11E-07 R327 446 307.37 31768,243.72 3.36 0.0002 1.31E-07 R328 446 357.37 3,768,243.72 4.04 0.0002 1.58E-07 R329 446 407.37 3 768 243.72 4.97 0.0003 1.95E-07 R330 446 457.37 3t768,243.72 6.31 0.0003 2.47E-07 R331 446 507.37 3,768,243.72 8.31 0.0004 3.25E-07 R332 446 557.37 3,768,243.72 11.55 0.0006 4.52E-07 R333 446 607.37 31768,243.72 17.33 0.0009 6.78E-07 R334 446 657.37 3,768,243.72 29.24 0.0015 1.14E-06 R335 446 707.37 3,768,243.72 59.94 0.0031 2.34E-06 R336 446 757.37 3r768,243.72 156.68 0.0082 6.13E-06 R337 446 807.37 3 768 243.72 213.90 0.0112 8.37E-06 R338 446 857.37 3,768,243.72 138.73 0.0073 5.43E-06 R339 446 907.37 3,768,243.72 86.40 0.0045 3.38E-06 R340 446 957.37 3,768,243.72 56.43 0.0030 2.21E-06 R341 447 007.37 3,768,243.72 39.17 0.0021 1.53E-06 R342 447 057.37 31768,243.72 28.63 0.0015 1.12E-06 R343 447 107.37 3,768,243.72 21.82 0.0011 8.54E-07 Page 7 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R344 447 157.37 3,768,243.72 17.17 0.0009 6.72E-07 R345 447 207.37 3,768,243.72 13.87 0.0007 5.43E-07 R346 447 257.37 3,768,243.72 11.45 0.0006 4.48E-07 R347 447 307.37 31768,243.72 9.61 0.0005 3.76E-07 R348 447 357.37 3,768,243.72 8.19 0.0004 3.21E-07 R349 446 157.37 3,768,293.72 1.90 0.0001 7.45E-08 R350 446 207.37 3,768,293.72 2.16 0.0001 8.47E-08 R351 446 257.37 3,768,293.72 2.49 0.0001 9.73E-08 R352 446 307.37 31768,293.72 2.90 0.0002 1.13E-07 R353 446 357.37 3,768,293.72 3.42 0.0002 1.34E-07 R354 446 407.37 31768,293.72 4.11 0.0002 1.61E-07 R355 446 457.37 3,768,293.72 5.03 0.0003 1.97E-07 R356 446 507.37 31768,293.72 6.32 0.0003 2.47E-07 R357 446 557.37 3,768,293.72 8.18 0.0004 3.20E-07 R358 446 607.37 3,768,293.72 11.01 0.0006 4.31E-07 R359 446 657.37 3,768,293.72 15.35 0.0008 6.01E-07 R360 446 707.37 3,768,293.72 21.89 0.0011 8.56E-07 R361 446 757.37 3,768,293.72 32.42 0.0017 1.27E-06 R362 446 807.37 3,768,293.72 48.78 0.0026 1.91E-06 R363 446 857.37 31768,293.72 58.82 0.0031 2.30E-06 R364 446 907.37 3,768,293.72 56.04 0.0029 2.19E-06 R365 446 957.37 31768,293.72 46.30 0.0024 1.81E-06 R366 447 007.37 3,768,293.72 36.64 0.0019 1.43E-06 R367 447 057.37 3,768,293.72 28.90 0.0015 1.13E-06 R368 447 107.37 3,768,293.72 23.07 0.0012 9.02E-07 R369 447 157.37 31768,293.72 18.66 0.0010 7.30E-07 R370 447 207.37 3,768,293.72 15.34 0.0008 6.00E-07 R371 447 257.37 3,768,293.72 12.79 0.0007 5.01E-07 R372 447 307.37 3,768,293.72 10.82 0.0006 4.23E-07 R373 447 357.37 3,768,293.72 9.25 0.0005 3.62E-07 R374 446 157.37 31768,343.72 1.70 0.0001 6.63E-08 R375 446 207.37 3,768,343.72 1.91 0.0001 7.45E-08 R376 446 257.37 31768,343.72 2.16 0.0001 8.46E-08 R377 446 307.37 3,768,343.72 2.48 0.0001 9.68E-08 R378 446 357.37 3,768,343.72 2.86 0.0002 1.12E-07 R379 446 407.37 3,768,343.72 3.35 0.0002 1.31E-07 R380 446 457.37 3 768 343.72 3.98 0.0002 1.56E-07 R381 446 507.37 3 768 343.72 4.78 0.0003 1.87E-07 R382 446 557.37 3,768,343.72 5.86 0.0003 2.29E-07 R383 446 607.37 3,768,343.72 7.28 0.0004 2.85E-07 R384 446 657.37 3,768,343.72 9.15 0.0005 3.58E-07 R385 446 707.37 3,768,343.72 11.45 0.0006 4.48E-07 R386 446 757.37 3,768,343.72 14.57 0.0008 5.70E-07 R387 446 807.37 3,768,343.72 18.87 0.0010 7.38E-07 R388 446 857.37 31768,343.72 23.90 0.0013 9.35E-07 R389 446 907.37 3,768 343.72 28.16 0.0015 1.10E-06 R390 446 957.37 3,768,343.72 28.84 0.0015 1.13E-06 R391 447 007.37 3,768,343.72 26.89 0.0014 1.05E-06 R392 447 057.37 1 3,768,343.72 23.86 0.0013 9.33E-07 Page 8 of 14 Ramboli Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2- HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R393 447 107.37 3,768,343.72 20.61 0.0011 8.06E-07 R394 447 157.37 3,768,343.72 17.66 0.0009 6.91E-07 R395 447 207.37 31768,343.72 15.10 0.0008 5.91E-07 R396 447 257.37 3,768,343.72 12.97 0.0007 5.07E-07 R397 447 307.37 3,768,343.72 11.20 0.0006 4.38E-07 R398 447 357.37 3,768,343.72 9.73 0.0005 3.81E-07 R399 446 157.37 3,768,393.72 1.50 0.0001 5.88E-08 R400 446 207.37 3,768,393.72 1.67 0.0001 6.54E-08 R401 446 257.37 3,768,393.72 1.87 0.0001 7.32E-08 R402 446 307.37 3,768,393.72 2.11 0.0001 8.25E-08 R403 446 357.37 31768,393.72 2.40 0.0001 9.37E-08 R404 446 407.37 3,768,393.72 2.74 0.0001 1.07E-07 R405 446 457.37 31768,393.72 3.17 0.0002 1.24E-07 R406 446 507.37 3,768,393.72 3.69 0.0002 1.44E-07 R407 446 557.37 3,768,393.72 4.34 0.0002 1.70E-07 R408 446 607.37 3,768,393.72 5.13 0.0003 2.01E-07 R409 446 657.37 31768,393.72 6.04 0.0003 2.36E-07 R410 446 707.37 3,768,393.72 7.08 0.0004 2.77E-07 R411 446 757.37 3,768,393.72 8.42 0.0004 3.29E-07 R412 446 807.37 3,768,393.72 10.17 0.0005 3.98E-07 R413 446 857.37 3,768,393.72 12.19 0.0006 4.77E-07 R414 446 907.37 3,768,393.72 14.61 0.0008 5.71E-07 R415 446 957.37 3,768,393.72 16.52 0.0009 6.46E-07 R416 447 007.37 3,768,393.72 17.39 0.0009 6.80E-07 R417 447 057.37 3,768,393.72 17.14 0.0009 6.70E-07 R418 447 107.37 31768,393.72 16.15 0.0008 6.32E-07 R419 447 157.37 3,768,393.72 14.86 0.0008 5.81E-07 R420 447 207.37 3,768,393.72 13.39 0.0007 5.24E-07 R421 447 257.37 31768,393.72 11.99 0.0006 4.69E-07 R422 447 307.37 3,768,393.72 10.69 0.0006 4.18E-07 R423 447 357.37 3,768,393.72 9.52 0.0005 3.73E-07 R424 446 157.37 3,768,443.72 1.34 0.0001 5.23E-08 R425 446 207.37 3,768,443.72 1.47 0.0001 5.75E-08 R426 446 257.37 3,768,443.72 1.63 0.0001 6.36E-08 R427 446 307.37 3,768,443.72 1.81 0.0001 7.07E-08 R428 446 357.37 3 768 443.72 2.02 0.0001 7.89E-08 R429 446 407.37 3,768,443.72 2.27 0.0001 8.87E-08 R430 446 457.37 3,768,443.72 2.56 0.0001 1.00E-07 R431 446 507.37 3,768,443.72 2.92 0.0002 1.14E-07 R432 446 557.37 3,768,443.72 3.33 0.0002 1.30E-07 R433 446 607.37 31768,443.72 3.80 0.0002 1.49E-07 R434 446 657.37 3,768,443.72 4.31 0.0002 1.68E-07 R435 446 707.37 3,768,443.72 4.86 0.0003 1.90E-07 R436 446 757.37 31768,443.72 5.57 0.0003 2.18E-07 R437 446 807.37 3,768,443.72 6.44 0.0003 2.52E-07 R438 446 857.37 31768,443.72 7.07 0.0004 1 2.77E-07 R439 446 907.37 31768,443.72 8.65 0.0005 3.38E-07 R440 446 957.37 3,768,443.72 9.87 0.0005 3.86E-07 R441 447 007.37 3,768,443.72 10.93 0.0006 4.28E-07 Page 9 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R442 447 057.37 3,768,443.72 11.56 0.0006 4.52E-07 R443 447 107.37 3,768,443.72 11.70 0.0006 4.58E-07 R444 447 157.37 3 768 443.72 11.47 0.0006 4.49E-07 R445 447 207.37 3,768,443.72 10.95 0.0006 4.28E-07 R446 447 257.37 31768,443.72 10.27 0.0005 4.02E-07 R447 447 307.37 3,768,443.72 9.51 0.0005 3.72E-07 R448 447 357.37 3,768,443.72 8.74 0.0005 3.42E-07 R449 446 157.37 3,768,493.72 1.19 0.0001 4.65E-08 R450 446 207.37 3,768,493.72 1.30 0.0001 5.07E-08 R451 446 257.37 3,768,493.72 1.42 0.0001 5.55E-08 R452 446 307.37 3,768,493.72 1.56 0.0001 6.09E-08 R453 446 357.37 31768,493.72 1.72 0.0001 6.71E-08 R454 446 407.37 3,768,493.72 1.90 0.0001 7.43E-08 R455 446 457.37 3,768,493.72 2.11 0.0001 8.26E-08 R456 446 507.37 3,768,493.72 2.36 0.0001 9.22E-08 R457 446 557.37 31768,493.72 2.63 0.0001 1.03E-07 R458 446 607.37 3,768,493.72 2.92 0.0002 1.14E-07 R459 446 657.37 31768,493.72 3.23 0.0002 1.26E-07 R460 446 707.37 3,768,493.72 3.55 0.0002 1.39E-07 R461 446 757.37 31768,493.72 3.95 0.0002 1.55E-07 R462 446 807.37 3,768,493.72 4.29 0.0002 1.68E-07 R463 446 857.37 3,768,493.72 4.83 0.0003 1.89E-07 R464 446 907.37 3,768,493.72 5.36 0.0003 2.10E-07 R465 446 957.37 3,768,493.72 6.36 0.0003 2.49E-07 R466 447 007.37 3,768,493.72 7.09 0.0004 2.77E-07 R467 447 057.37 3 768 493.72 7.74 0.0004 3.03E-07 R468 447 107.37 3,768,493.72 8.21 0.0004 3.21E-07 R469 447 157.37 3,768,493.72 8.45 0.0004 3.31E-07 R470 447 207.37 31768,493.72 8.47 0.0004 3.31E-07 R471 447 257.37 31768,493.72 8.31 0.0004 3.25E-07 R472 447 307.37 3,768,493.72 8.00 0.0004 3.13E-07 R473 447 357.37 3,768,493.72 7.60 0.0004 2.97E-07 R474 446 157.37 3,768,543.72 1.06 0.0001 4.14E-08 R475 446 207.37 3,768,543.72 1.14 0.0001 4.48E-08 R476 446 257.37 3,768,543.72 1.24 0.0001 4.86E-08 R477 446 307.37 3,768,543.72 1.35 0.0001 5.28E-08 R478 446 357.37 3,768,543.72 1.47 0.0001 5.76E-08 R479 446 407.37 31768,543.72 1.61 0.0001 6.31E-08 R480 446 457.37 31768,543.72 1.77 0.0001 6.93E-08 R481 446 507.37 3,768,543.72 1.94 0.0001 7.60E-08 R482 446 557.37 3,768,543.72 2.13 0.0001 8.32E-08 R483 446 607.37 3,768,543.72 2.32 0.0001 9.07E-08 R484 446 657.37 3,768,543.72 2.51 0.0001 9.82E-08 R485 446 707.37 3,768,543.72 2.72 0.0001 1.06E-07 R486 446 757.37 3,768,543.72 2.97 0.0002 1.16E-07 R487 446 807.37 31768,543.72 3.16 0.0002 1.24E-07 R488 446 857.37 3,768 543.72 3.51 0.0002 1.37E-07 R489 446 907.37 3,768,543.72 3.83 0.0002 1.50E-07 R490 446 957.37 3,768,543.72 4.22 0.0002 1.65E-07 Page 10 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R491 447 007.37 3,768,543.72 4.60 0.0002 1.80E-07 R492 447 057.37 3,768,543.72 5.38 0.0003 2.10E-07 R493 447 107.37 3,768,543.72 5.80 0.0003 2.27E-07 R494 447 157.37 3,768,543.72 6.15 0.0003 2.41E-07 R495 447 207.37 31768,543.72 6.38 0.0003 2.49E-07 R496 447 257.37 3,768,543.72 6.49 0.0003 2.54E-07 R497 447 307.37 3,768,543.72 6.47 0.0003 2.53E-07 R498 447 357.37 3,768,543.72 6.34 0.0003 2.48E-07 R499 446 157.37 3,768,593.72 0.95 0.0000 3.70E-08 R500 446 207.37 3,768,593.72 1.02 0.0001 3.98E-08 R501 446 257.37 3,768,593.72 1.09 0.0001 4.28E-08 R502 446 307.37 3 768 593.72 1.18 0.0001 4.62E-08 R503 446 357.37 3 768 593.72 1.28 0.0001 5.00E-08 R504 446 407.37 3,768,593.72 1.39 0.0001 5.42E-08 R505 446 457.37 3,768,593.72 1.50 0.0001 5.88E-08 R506 446 507.37 3,768,593.72 1.63 0.0001 6.37E-08 R507 446 557.37 3,768,593.72 1.76 0.0001 6.88E-08 R508 446 607.37 3,768,593.72 1.88 0.0001 7.37E-08 R509 446 657.37 3,768,593.72 2.01 0.0001 7.87E-08 R510 446 707.37 3,768,593.72 2.16 0.0001 8.43E-08 R511 446 757.37 31768,593.72 2.27 0.0001 8.87E-08 R512 446 807.37 3,768,593.72 2.44 0.0001 9.56E-08 R513 446 857.37 3,768,593.72 2.67 0.0001 1.05E-07 R514 446 907.37 3,768,593.72 2.90 0.0002 1.13E-07 R515 446 957.37 3,768,S93.72 3.18 0.0002 1.24E-07 R516 447 007.37 3,768,593.72 3.40 0.0002 1.33E-07 R517 447 057.37 3,768,593.72 3.68 0.0002 1.44E-07 R518 447 107.37 3,768,593.72 3.94 0.0002 1.54E-07 R519 447 157.37 3,768,593.72 4.23 0.0002 1.65E-07 R520 447 207.37 31768,593.72 4.51 0.0002 1.77E-07 R521 447 257.37 3,768,593.72 4.99 0.0003 1.95E-07 R522 447 307.37 3 768 593.72 5.11 0.0003 2.00E-07 R523 447 357.37 3,768 593.72 5.14 0.0003 2.01E-07 R524 446 157.37 3,768,643.72 0.84 0.0000 3.27E-08 R525 446 207.37 31768,643.72 0.89 0.0000 3.49E-08 R526 446 257.37 3,768,643.72 0.95 0.0001 3.74E-08 R527 446 307.37 3,768,643.72 1.03 0.0001 4.01E-08 R528 446 357.37 3,768,643.72 1.12 0.0001 4.38E-08 R529 446 407.37 3,768,643.72 1.20 0.0001 4.71E-08 R530 446 457.37 3,768,643.72 1.29 0.0001 5.06E-08 R531 446 507.37 3,768,643.72 1.38 0.0001 5.42E-08 R532 446 557.37 3,768,643.72 1.48 0.0001 5.78E-08 R533 446 607.37 3 768 643.72 1.56 0.0001 6.12E-08 R534 446 657.37 3,768,643.72 643.72 1.63 0.0001 6.36E-08 R535 446 707.37 3,768,643.72 1.71 0.0001 6.70E-08 R536 446 757.37 3,768,643.72 1.83 0.0001 7.14E-08 R537 446 807.37 3,768,643.72 1.96 0.0001 7.65E-08 R538 446 857.37 3,768,643.72 2.11 0.0001 8.26E-08 R539 1 446 907.37 3,768,643.72 2.28 0.0001 8.91E-08 Page 11 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factorl,X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk,3 ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (1g/m3) MICR R540 446 957.37 3,768,643.72 2.47 0.0001 9.66E-08 R541 447 007.37 3,768,643.72 2.64 0.0001 1.03E-07 R542 447 057.37 3 768 643.72 2.81 0.0001 1.10E-07 R543 447 107.37 3 768 643.72 2.98 0.0002 1.16E-07 R544 447 157.37 3,768,643.72 3.15 0.0002 1.23E-07 R545 447 207.37 3,768,643.72 3.37 0.0002 1.32E-07 R546 447 257.37 3,768,643.72 3.58 0.0002 1.40E-07 R547 447 307.37 31768,643.72 4.00 0.0002 1.57E-07 R548 447 357.37 3,768,643.72 4.12 0.0002 1.61E-07 R549 446 157.37 3,768,693.72 0.76 0.0000 2.95E-08 R550 446 207.37 31768,693.72 0.80 0.0000 3.13E-08 R551 446 257.37 3,768,693.72 0.85 0.0000 3.34E-08 R552 446 307.37 31768,693.72 0.91 0.0000 3.56E-08 R553 446 357.37 3,768,693.72 0.97 0.0001 3.81E-08 R554 446 407.37 31768,693.72 1.04 0.0001 4.08E-08 R555 446 457.37 3,768 693.72 1.11 0.0001 4.36E-08 R556 446 507.37 31768,693.72 1.18 0.0001 4.62E-08 R557 446 557.37 3,768,693.72 1.26 0.0001 4.93E-08 R558 446 607.37 3,768,693.72 1.30 0.0001 5.10E-08 R559 446 657.37 3,768,693.72 1.36 0.0001 5.32E-08 R560 446 707.37 31768,693.72 1.42 0.0001 5.56E-08 R561 446 757.37 3,768,693.72 1.50 0.0001 5.88E-08 R562 446 807.37 3,768,693.72 1.60 0.0001 6.28E-08 R563 446 857.37 3,768,693.72 1.71 0.0001 6.70E-08 R564 446 907.37 3,768,693.72 1.85 0.0001 7.24E-08 R565 446 957.37 3,768,693.72 1.99 0.0001 7.80E-08 R566 447 007.37 3,768,693.72 2.11 0.0001 8.27E-08 R567 447 057.37 3,768,693.72 2.22 0.0001 8.68E-08 R568 447 107.37 3,768,693.72 2.32 0.0001 9.09E-08 R569 447 157.37 3,768,693.72 2.45 0.0001 9.57E-08 R570 447 207.37 3,768,693.72 2.60 0.0001 1.02E-07 R571 447 257.37 3,768,693.72 2.76 0.0001 1.08E-07 R572 447 307.37 31768,693.72 2.93 0.0002 1.15E-07 R573 447 357.37 3,768,693.72 3.09 0.0002 1.21E-07 R574 446 157.37 3,768,743.72 0.68 0.0000 2.67E-08 R575 446 207.37 3,768,743.72 0.72 0.0000 2.83E-08 R576 446 257.37 3 768 743.72 0.77 0.0000 3.01E-08 R577 446 307.37 3,768 743.72 0.82 0.0000 3.20E-08 R578 446 357.37 3,768,743.72 0.87 0.0000 3.40E-08 R579 446 407.37 3,768,743.72 0.92 0.0000 3.62E-08 R580 446 457.37 3,768,743.72 0.98 0.0001 3.83E-08 R581 446 507.37 3,768,743.72 1.03 0.0001 4.02E-08 R582 446 557.37 3,768,743.72 1.07 0.0001 4.20E-08 R583 446 607.37 3,768,743.72 1.11 0.0001 4.36E-08 R584 446 657.37 31768,743.72 1.16 0.0001 4.52E-08 R585 446 707.37 3,768 743.72 1.20 0.0001 4.71E-08 R586 446 757.37 3,768,743.72 1.26 0.0001 4.94E-08 R587 446 807.37 3,768,743.72 1.33 0.0001 5.22E-08 R588 446 857.37 3,768,743.72 1.42 0.0001 5.55E-08 Page 12 of 14 Pamboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HDT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R589 446 907.37 31768,743.72 1.53 0.0001 5.97E-08 R590 446 957.37 3,768,743.72 1.64 0.0001 6.42E-08 R591 447 007.37 31768,743.72 1.74 0.0001 6.80E-08 R592 447 057.37 3,768,743.72 1.82 0.0001 7.12E-08 R593 447 107.37 3,768,743.72 1.90 0.0001 7.42E-08 R594 447 157.37 3,768,743.72 1.97 0.0001 7.73E-08 R595 447 207.37 3,768,743.72 2.07 0.0001 8.10E-08 R596 447 257.37 3,768,743.72 2.18 0.0001 8.53E-08 R597 447 307.37 31768,743.72 2.31 0.0001 9.02E-08 R598 447 357.37 3,768,743.72 2.44 0.0001 9.55E-08 R599 446 157.37 31768,793.72 0.63 0.0000 2.45E-08 R600 446 207.37 3,768,793.72 0.66 0.0000 2.58E-08 R601 446 257.37 31768,793.72 0.70 0.0000 2.73E-08 R602 446 307.37 3,768,793.72 0.74 0.0000 2.88E-08 R603 446 357.37 3,768,793.72 0.78 0.0000 3.05E-08 R604 446 407.37 3,768,793.72 0.82 0.0000 3.22E-08 R605 446 457.37 3,768,793.72 0.86 0.0000 3.38E-08 R606 446 507.37 3,768,793.72 0.90 0.0000 3.52E-08 R607 446 557.37 3,768,793.72 0.93 0.0000 3.65E-08 R608 446 607.37 3,768,793.72 0.96 0.0001 3.77E-08 R609 446 657.37 3,768,793.72 1.00 0.0001 3.90E-08 R610 446 707.37 3,768,793.72 1.03 0.0001 4.05E-08 R611 446 757.37 3,768,793.72 1.08 0.0001 4.21E-08 R612 446 807.37 3,768,793.72 1.13 0.0001 4.43E-08 R613 446 857.37 3 768 793.72 1.20 0.0001 4.69E-08 R614 446 907.37 3 768 793.72 1.28 0.0001 5.01E-08 R615 446 957.37 3,768 793.72 1.37 0.0001 5.38E-08 R616 447 007.37 3,768,793.72 1.46 0.0001 5.71E-08 R617 447 057.37 31768,793.72 1.53 0.0001 5.98E-08 R618 447 107.37 3,768 793.72 1.59 0.0001 6.21E-08 R619 447 157.37 3,768,793.72 1.64 0.0001 6.42E-08 R620 447 207.37 3,768,793.72 1.70 0.0001 6.67E-08 R621 447 257.37 3,768,793.72 1.78 0.0001 6.95E-08 R622 447 307.37 31768,793.72 1.86 0.0001 7.29E-08 R623 447 357.37 3,768,793.72 1.96 0.0001 7.68E-08 R624 446 732.27 3,768,243.84 95.33 0.0050 3.73E-06 R625 446 757.26 3,768,243.81 155.73 0.0082 6.09E-06 R626 446 782.24 31768,243.79 207.64 0.0109 8.12E-06 R627 446 807.29 3,768,218.91 390.72 0.0205 1.53E-05 R628 446 807.36 3,768,194.05 387.55 0.0203 1.52E-05 R629 446 807.42 31768,169.20 226.33 0.0119 8.85E-06 R630 446 707.37 3,768,169.20 173.40 0.0091 6.78E-06 R631 446 707.37 3,768,218.91 115.52 0.0061 4.52E-06 R632 446 732.27 3,768,143.72 173.21 0.0091 6.78E-06 R633 446 782.24 31768,143.72 114.77 0.0060 4.49E-06 R634 446 725.42 31768,225.57 178.01 0.0093 6.96E-06 R635 446 789.24 3,768,225.57 508.57 0.0267 1.99E-05 R636 446 789.18 3,768,161.95 225.47 0.0118 8.82E-06 R637 446 725.45 3,768,161.95 275.80 0.0145 1.08E-05 Page 13 of 14 Ramboll Table B-4. Cancer Risk Estimates at Modeled Receptors for Scenario 2 - HOT Only in Calendar Year 2023 NAIOP Warehouse Siting Evaluation South Coast Air Basin, California Dispersion Ground Level Receptor Factor',X/Q Concentration2 Cancer Risk ID UTMx UTMy (µg/m3)/(g/s) (µg/m3) MICR R638 446 725.56 3,768,183.12 335.48 0.0176 1.31E-05 R639 446 725.56 3,768,204.32 317.71 0.0167 1.24E-05 R640 446 789.18 3 768 183.12 495.25 0.0260 1.94E-05 R641 446 789.18 3,768 204.32 600.31 0.0315 2.35E-05 R642 446 746.77 31768,225.53 398.59 0.0209 1.56E-05 R643 446 767.97 3,768,225.53 509.52 0.0267 1.99E-05 R644 446 746.77 3,768,161.91 346.41 0.0182 1.36E-05 R645 446 767.97 31768,161.91 331.42 0.0174 1.30E-05 R646 446 725.42 3,768,225.57 178.01 0.0093 6.96E-06 R647 446 789.24 3,768,225.57 508.57 0.0267 1.99E-05 R648 446 789.18 3,768,161.95 225.47 0.0118 8.82E-06 R649 446 725.45 3,768,161.95 275.80 0.0145 1.08E-05 Notes: 1 Obtained from AERMOD output in Appendix A. Z Estimated using dispersion factors and emission rates shown in Table 4. 3 Estimated using the methodology described in Section 3.3. Abbreviations: µg/m3- microgram per meter cube g/s-grams per second Q:\N\NAIOP IE\Technical Work\[NAIOP IE HRA Calculations.xlsx]2023_Scen2 Page 14 of 14 Ramboll Cr RANCH O CUCAMONGA Industrial Code Amendment June 16 , 2021 AL BUSINESS • News Commercial Metals shutter Rancho Cucamongasteel mill Warehouse Construction � f� Irk � � Boom Inland Empire Leads as Industrial Development Accelerates 29 % Over Last Year BUSINESS Inland Empire is home to 3 of the nation's 10 biggest industrial developments The warehouse projects will add 4.7 million square feet of industrial space to the regions log istic'S industry. RANCHO f CUCAMONGA Wh ye • I How does explosion in industrial development impact traffic and public services ? • Analysis of traffic impacts by Fehr & Peers • If development patterns continue unabated , certain areas would experience significant traffic impacts • How to address these impacts —Queuing standards —Develop alternate routes —Prohibiting high traffic impact uses —TDM and access improvements k - U AMON A RANCHO SouthIndustrial r A- Ir AV ✓'iffV'f ROlJl2i f4OfY FS' ,aif 1' J . :'Ax Farmland converted to I rt industrial uses decades before ,� a • Large parcels with heavy r , " ra� Mra $ R man ufactu rin /i ndustrialY 8 - µ :. g AguiE�r True Most Citypredate �. incorporation • Largely �unchan ed in over g: IY afl er �Q _. . 40 + years t ' ` • Limited transportation k network to support vehicle � �'. i es ail I �L. I d{ui fdependent uses ' r"star -L ti I r+ " I ' ' s s p arr , — ' • - .e,liou ,a0, San 6ernardina Ave ' San BernSsin Bern. ( RANCHO Foothill Boulevard f CUCAMONGA • South of Foothill ( Haven to Rochester) zoned for industrial • Transitioned over time through overlays to allow commercial development • Public outreach supports more office , commercial or mixed use development along Foothill U AM N A RANCHO Industrial r a . 0. z x -•-�•x - .•�• .r r f '4 '•r. I` 600' withinFoothill - - N=ti• - -- F November 2020 "■F■ ,�._ _. 612. F 1 4- Fi r, J - 1 • n industrialPa use o •. -_= . _ 5} - •� �rl'i�7-F 41 '40 F`#�'1� � * I � ,y` _ ,�-Jz •-_- . 1 - -_ram ' =.r_ .x. � -�. •L7p. �� �+ f �� 1 l i J t��#ILFI dl developm ent -. - - ti _•• - : r_I_ � I����I^ * 111 43 _ .. .. - �.}y._ �,1.{=Lf �F'•;�M1 � : . - Review and develop . *} :� _ 1 ,.1 _.+ ,�.} JM . , .�. -.. { = new standards : ,j _ #�7 _ _R4, , . _ . V � .'_'"ram� t 2f � is 1,0.. .La" '. Nip #. • Engage with industrial -- . : ., .. a ��. * 4 ; � s,f �' # ' f stakeholders ..f*.,. ..� - , � .. 1� _ , 3 4, �� i 1 r FM sm Expires June 30 , 2021 ,__� . � : �_, r ^ 1 � , ._ 31 i■■i . y 41 13l7.9.�-1 '�i� _'�■ � ■-F _ I �' � � - _�y � •. _ k�,r ''• ' +n 1 , •: t�k7,71�riF•�Y- �L. .- `�- Jlifil x� � r;l.'�,l ,: - AIR �k- 'i L1 � 'L P RANCHO What this is f CUCAMONGA • Update of industrial standards dating back to the 1980 ' s • Evolution of new standards and guidelines for industrial development — Significant research/analysis/review with code consultant — Extensive outreach to the industrial development community — Collaboration and final refinements as needed to address community concern • Applies to all industrial development ■ ALAlk , • Available to Review and Participate P P';v P "1VRC • ■ • dip • - - • t 4 i 5 1ly i _ _ - General Pion Update - General Plan Update General Plan Update 2021-2029 Housing • • • • Public Review Draft public Review Draft Public Review Draft Element Public Review Volume 1: Vision Volume 2: Built Volume 3: Environmental Draft The General Plan Update- Public Environment Performance This 2021-2029 Housing Element Review Draft has Keen divided into The-General Plan Update-Public The Oenercl Plan Update-Public represents the City of Rancko three volumes.Volume 1:elision, Review Draft has been divided into Review Draft has been divided into Cucamonga's efforl in fulfilling the includes ckapters on Vision and Core three�olurnes.Volume 2=Bvill three�olurnes.Volume 3= requirements under State Housing Values, Conlext and Admin[Aralion. Environment, includes chapters on Environmental Performance, includes Element law_The California Stale Tfre Draft is available for review and Lond Use&Communily Character, Resource Conservations, Safely and Legislature bus identified Ike comment by the community now Focus Areas, Open Spacer Mobility& Noise_Tke Draft is available for attainment of a decent home and through mid-July 2021. Access, Housings and Public Facilities review and comment by the suitable living environment for every — REVIEW NOW &Services,The Draft is available for community now through mid July Californian as the Slate's mafor review and comment by the 2021_ housing goo Recognizing the community now through mid July importantrole of local planning and 2021 — EW"M ho usi ng programs in Ike pu rsuit of this goal, Ike Legislature has — REVIEW NOW rrrondared thal all cites and counties prepare a housing element as part of the comprekensive General Plan- - REVIEW Now XA HER BE'C-ERR4 &fate ofCr'anf & Almrpiey CreoteM DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Litigation Measures to Comply with tke California Environmental Quality Act • • I • • I In carrying out its du to enforce laws across California the California Attorney g t'1 y Greneral's Bureau of Environmental Justice(Bur,eau)1 regularly reviews proposed warehouse projects for compliance with the Cali foniia Environmental Quality Act(C EQA) and other laws- When necessary, the Bureau submits comment letters to lead agencies, and in rare cases the • • I Bureau has filed litigation to enforce CEQA.2 This document builds upon the Bureau`s comment letters, col Iecting knowledge gained from the Bureau's review of hundred of warehouse projects across the state. It is meant to help lead agencies pursue CE A compliance and promote • , I • environmentally-j ust development as they confront warehouse project proposals_} While CEQA analysis is necessarily project-speci fic, this document provides information on feasible best practices and mitigation measures, the overwhelming majority of which have been adapted frorn actual warehouse projects in California_ • . I • I. Background In recent years, the proliferation of e-corninerce and rising consumer expectations of rapid shipping have contributed to a boom in warehouse development,4 California, With its • I • . • ports, population centers, and transportation network, has found itself at the center of this trend_ For example, in 2014, 40 percent of national container cargo flowed through Southern Cali forma which was home to nearly 1.2 billion square feet of warehouse facil ities_` In the Inland Empire alone, 150 mil lion square feet of new industrial space was built over the last • decade's and 21 of'the largest 100 logistics leases signed in 2019 nationwide were in the Inland I � r • I htps:i/oag_ca.govfenvironm,enVjustice. 2 htips:1/oag_ca.goyfenyironm,enticegafieners, Sozfth Central Neighbors United et ar_ v_ C'ixy of Fresno er a (Super. Ct_ Fresno County, No. 18CECC'r00 90)_ 3 Anyone reyiewing this document to determine C EQA compliance responsibilities should consult their own attorney for legal advice. As used in this document, "warehouse" or"logistics facility'is defined as a facility consisting of one or more buildings that store's cargo, goods, or products on a short or long term basis for later distribution to businesses and/or retail customers- 5 Industrial Warehousing in the SLAG Region, Task 2_ Inventory of Warehousing Facilities(April 2018), http_,"i-;;-�%w_scag,ca_�ov[Do-cumentsrrask2 Facilitylnventor+,r_pdf at 1-1, 2-11_ 6 Los Angeles Times, nen your house ig surrounded by massive warehouses, October 27, 2019, https=r''ww-r_latunes_coiyVcaliforniaistory/2019-10-27rfontarra-califoniia- RANCHO A lication Processin f CUCAMONGA PP g • Public Hearing Notice extended from 660 feet to 1 , 500 feet for indust rial projec ts* • New entitlements expire in 2 years • Applies to all entitlements RANCHO Use Based Entitlement Chan es f CUCAMONGA I g • Minor Use Permit ( MUP ) • Less intense uses with limited impacts • Planning Director Review • Conditional Use Permit ( CUP ) le More intense uses with the potential for greater impacts is Considered by Planning Commission or City Council ■ ■ Alk dustrial Park (IPJ Industrial Park l eneral Indu tdal 1 eo Industrial NI Mi n irnU m I m pa ct Heavy I rid ustri al (M I/H 1) I rid a trial Errs J ent 1 E _ Heavy I rid ustri aI (HI) industrial Employment 1 E ' kxxr•- - tixxxx L7L I F� rhidl .I . � + • a r + r {N a � � f + + • • • • � -P.M1 - .tixxxx �� + + ■ ■ ■ ■ -- n x x x x 1Y I p ICI � I� ■ LMIF I ■ + p Arnow RI. MTF + Q + 9 • + ( R DEL f + r Empire Lrake. r a � � � � • I � � Industrial Opecif c Plan N o LILIiRx Employment :RK .06 rJ'1 1 i R R I�Li LJS�flal � • + �� � x R ii�K x . i R r%%1■]%1 1 1 R R 11 i i F% * ■ ■ ■ + ■ � iR Rr1�T xi RRR� iiiKx ++++I�th f41 I• __ �.. ..�. Mtn 5� JI �J M o N RANCHO LargeWarehouseOverlay • GA I Applies toindustrial tor more iservices isSupporteduIc ■ ■ ■ ■ is Distanced rom sensitive receptors to reduce impacts _ N �'t I � ! 6.L w \ �s-=L 11 rf 11'111l I A? 1 W 14 i ,w on III kr fr{�` RANCHO - f CUCAMONGA Parking • Parking management plan • Provides a custom solution for larger sites • Specific analysis of needed p arking = LE � • Control measures to ensure enforcement of the plan Paz • Annual updates to the city as needed to avoid impacts �' �k - RANCHO Parking CUCAMONGA } • Land buildings • Designed for spec u i ins • Construct to minimumparking _ �� ! i • � R ti■L standards • Allowsof to create more parking . ,.,. . 4 L c i 5 4 N �F . ti. '#� �r �?. �.� "�°� �.�r �� �. �'r � '� � rat• �ti _.. RANCHO ParkingCUCAMONGA • Land banking for buildings • Designed for spec buildings �"- • Construct to minimum parkin 9 standards = - • Allows for conversion of space to _ � [ 1100 create more Parking -gen.., Ile— fr{�` RANCHO Renewable / Clean Energy Infrastructure CUCAMONGA r • Installation of EV charging stations • 10 percent of required parking dedicated for EV' s • 1 charging station for every two EV spaces • On - site renewable energy requirement for new development RANCHO Block Network Standards f CUCAMONGA • Developed based on traffic analysis • Create alternate routes to reduce VIVIT • Public street requirements for large buildings (41`511) , 1) ,) ) sq . ft) • Parameters for intersection spacing • Align intersections where possible RANCHO Land Use Udates f CUCAMONGA p Updated land uses • Minor Use Perm it is Conditional Use Permit Added /updated land uses and definitions • Maker Space • E - com m erce Distribution Lum b er Yard • Manufacturing , Green Technology • Food processing /m anufacturing RANCHO Land Use f CUCAMONGA P Eliminate uses that generate noise , air quality and traffic impacts • Heavy industrial is Scrap recycling is Vehicle dismantling • Parking facilities • Auto and vehicle storage • Fuel storage and distribution • Parcel Hubs `rw r - �J M o N A RANCHO LandUpdates r Industrial within 500 feet Foothill Boulevard • Warehousing and manufacturing no longer permitted • Other light industrial use s stillperm itted : office R &D lim ited com m ercial and others t ti •f .~ 'A i s7..ki " y I ° vy Zar�, L T - r - - ti I r _ � _ RANCHO D e N�m- &-, nt Stan rds CUCAMONGA I - � - - • • - • . - IVD9"9"- Floor Area Ratio Max 50% ( HI ) Max 60% (All Zones) Building Height 75 feet ( higher with CUP) No Change Parking Lot Trees 1 per 3 parking stalls No Change Tree size 15 gal/25% 24-inch box 24-inch box/25% 36-inch box (over 200,000 sq . ft.) * fr{�` RANCHO Development Standards CUCAMONGA • Modified rail service standards • Provides flexibility to develop rail service IF needed • Enhanced site design standards • Create pedestrian connections* • Better screening of ancillary equipment • Minimize visible parking RANCHO Master Plan f CUCAMONGA • Updated Master Plan Requirements • 1::::���Zeq u i red fo r I n d u str i a l b u i l d i n g s ove r 4 5 0 , 0 0 0 sq . ft . • Available for any development • Allows for flexibilityin development standards • Ensure development does not create impacts* • Must be consistent with the General Plan * • Reviewed by City Council RANCHO PlanningCommission CUCAMONGA • April 28 , 2021 • Release of the public draft • Continued collaboration with industrial stakeholders • May 26 , 2021 • Public hearing • Areas of concern identified by stakeholders • Planning Commission recommended approval with continued discussion with stakeholders on identified issues RANCHO f CUCAMONGA Issue # 1 - Truck Queuin g Goal : Eliminate on street truck queuing • 1 on - site queuing space for every dock door � �;� � • Standard was too high • Concerns about queuing in fire lanes • 1 space for every 15 doors sugg ested RANCHO ` Issue # 1 - TruckQueuing *CUCAMONGA Solution : Modify queuing standards • 1 on - site queuing space for every dock doors � �;� � • Minimum of I queuing space • Entry gates set back at least 135 feet from the street �J M o N RANCHO IssueSolarRoof e GA I Goal : Mitigate GHG impacts by providing solar to meet energy n e e d s 75 % was too hi h - oBuilding energy needs coulI, iiillllllllllllllllllillillillillillilljlllIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII be met without 75 % coverar : - • Needs to account for future s F � a t -� n e e d s . .. x Annual Annualized Energy 10 Years of Required Demand for Solar Panel Building Vehicles and Efficient Solar Power Demand y Generation Trucks on Loss Site fr{�` RANCHO Issue # 3 — CUP for Industrial Uses f CUCAMONGA M . I • Impacts to industrial uses — M . . Rerrtable Building Area Number of Units • Nonconforming uses • • • CUP barrier to entry for small businesses �::�ijiiijq oll • Industrial Unit Analysis 1111F� • 75 % of existing units under 50 , 000 sq . ft . , 1 111 • • - Re vised La ncl U se Ta b I e fc rr S ma I I are d Large I ndu atrial Uses • . E-commerceDistribution (small) p p p E-commeroe Distribution (large) N m Wholesale Stage and Distribution, Light smaII p p p Wholesale to r ag a and Distribution, Medium (large) c c p Manufacturing, Light (small) p p p Manufacturing, Light (large) N M m P=P minted by Right, CmCondIfionaM Use P'&rmlit RBgUiFed, M Minor Use Permit_ N=Not Rermitted S marl is defined as units 50,000 square feet of Isss, La rge is deft ned as u n its greater than 50,OW &q uaFe feet RANCHO Issue # 4 — Parkin Lot Landsca in f CUCAMONGA g p g • Concern : • Increased planter width — reduced parking area • Decrease in number of trees required • Removed these standards , the current standards will apply SectionRANCHOA CUCAMONkY._._ • • • • Change 17.76.020(B)(2)(b) Annual demand required to charge fully electric vehicles and trucks, assuming that all vehicles and trucks to the site are fully electric; and 17.36.040(D)(9)(a)(ii) Buildings greater than 450,000 sq. ft. in size shall have public streets on at least 3 sides. 17.36.040(D)(9)(a)(iii) Surface parking stalls for employees and guests may incorporate shade structures that are capable of supporting solar/photovoltaic array systems with a minimum clearance height of 12 feet. 17.64. 100(C) Required loading spaces for industrial uses. All industrial uses shall provide a minimum of one loading space per proposed loading bay. For every 10 loading bays proposed, a minimum of one on -site truck queuing space must be provided. Each on -site truck queuing space shall be a minimum of nine feet in width and 65 feet in length and shall be included on the circulation management plan if required by the approving authority. The truck queuing spaces shall be grouped together in a designated area with clear access to loading bays. The entrance gate to all industrial buildings shall be a minimum of 135 feet from the public right -of-way. Alternative queuing standards less than the minimum required may be considered by the approving authority with a master plan and the development of an approved parking management plan. Table 17.30.030 -1 Amend "Work/Live" use to be prohibited in all zones fr{�` RANCHO Consistencywith General Plan CUCAMONGA Proposed changes are consistent with the 2010 General Plan : • Policy 's LU - 3 .3 , Goal CM - 5 and Policy CM - 5 .2 • Transportation access and infrastructure developm ent • Goa 1 CM - 7 • Efficient goods and freight movement • Policy LU - 3 .4 • Sustainable development limiting impacts to energy and air quality RANCHO Notice f CUCAMONGA • Item was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin as an 1 /8 page legal ad on June 4 th • Agenda for hearing was posted on June 10 , 2021 , fr{�` RANCHO CEQAExemption Section 15061(B ) ( 3 ) CUCAMONGA Greater limitations to industrial development • Consolidation of zoning districts • Entitlement changes • CUP /MUP , Master Plan and Overlay • Elim ination of land uses that generate noise , air quality and traffic impacts • Reduced emissions in future developments • Requirements for solar collector systems • EVcharging infrastructure fr{�` RANCHO CEQAExemption Section 15061(B ) ( 3 ) CUCAMONGA Specific concern raised : VMT/Traffic Response : Code has built in features to reduce VMT/Traffic • Block network standards provide alternate routes reducing congestion • Queuing standards keep trucks off streets • Prohibiting high traffic impact uses RANCHO Recommendation f CUCAMONGA Option 1 : • Discuss and conduct first reading of Ordinance 982 Option 2 : • Continue the hearing to July 7 and direct staff to respond to com m ents received in the last 36 hours rr RANCHO CUCAMONGA Questions CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Linda C. Ceballos, Environmental Programs Manager SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution to Set Residential and Commercial Solid Waste Collection Rates Within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-048) (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution approving the proposed residential and commercial solid waste collection rates within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. BACKGROUND: The City of Rancho Cucamonga's (City) franchise waste hauler, Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. (Burrtec), submitted a written request for a biannual adjustment to the residential and commercial solid waste collection rates to the City on March 29, 2021. The franchise agreement contains specific criteria, deadlines, and rate adjustment methodology that Burrtec must follow to be considered for a biannual rate adjustment. The biannual adjustment is limited to an increase of five percent (5%) compared to the previous rate period. The rate adjustment submittal has been reviewed by staff and additionally by a consultant to ensure it is in accordance with the terms of the franchise agreement. The last solid waste rate adjustment occurred in January 2020. A 45-day notification to the public is required in accordance with Proposition 218. The public hearing notice and proposed rate table were mailed on April 30, 2021. The public hearing was also advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on April 27, 2021. ANALYSIS: The franchise agreement establishes frequency and methodology for rate adjustment requests, this includes reviewing CPI for 2018 and 2019, correctly calculating City fees and Household Hazardous Waste fees, and confirming the rates were calculated correctly. The consultant found that the CPI adjustment factor was correctly calculated. The consultant also found that the City Fees and Hazardous waste fees were correctly calculated, and the correct disposal components were used. The appropriate back-up was provided to confirm disposal fees, green waste and recycling components, and tipping fees. The consultant did find the minor discrepancies listed below in the rate package submitted by Burrtec. These discrepancies were corrected and also verified by City staff prior to the mailing of the public hearing notice. Page 332 The following is a brief summary of the proposed rates. Exhibit `A' includes all of the proposed rates: Residential Rates The proposed adjustment for standard residential barrel service, if approved, would increase the rate by $1.38 per month. The current rate for standard residential service is $27.63 per month, and the proposed rate is $29.01 per month. This represents a five percent (5% increase from the current rate. The proposed adjustment to the senior residential barrel service rate, if approved, would increase the rate by $0.93 per month. Currently, the rate is $18.51 per month, and the proposed rate is $19.44 per month. This represents a five percent (5%) increase from the current rate. Commercial/Industrial Rates The increase for businesses, on average, is five percent (5%). The actual dollar amount increase will vary per customer based on the size of container and frequency of service. As an example, the current rate for a commercial customer with a 3-yard trash and recycle bin serviced one time per week is $197.51 per month, and the proposed rate is $207.38 per month. The other bin sizes and service frequency rates are included in Exhibit `A'. New Proposed Services Burrtec has proposed the following new or expanded services and fees for consideration: 1. New service level and bin size options for residential single and multi-family trash and recycling. 2. New service level and container size option for multi-family and commercial green waste. 3. New 35-gallon barrel size option for residential single family at $23.41 per month. As of June 2, 2021, a total of eight (8) protest letters were received by the City Clerk, and staff answered forty-four (44) inquiries from the community. If approved, the proposed rates would become effective July 1, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT: The City receives a franchise fee from Burrtec, paid quarterly, which equals fifteen percent (15%) of the gross receipts received by Burrtec. The franchise fee payment amount is expected to increase slightly with the proposed rate adjustment. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: This item relates to the Council Core Values by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all, by ensuring that solid waste, organics, and recyclables are being disposed of properly, safely, and within the state and local guidelines, and ensuring a sustainable and healthy community. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Exhibit `A' Proposed Solid Waste Rates Attachment 2 - Resolution 2021-048 Page 2 Page 333 EXHIBIT A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA 2021 PROPOSED SOLID WASTE RATES ALL RATES ARE BILLED MONTHLY UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED Current Proposed Current Proposed Service Type Rate Rate Service Type Rate Rate Residential Barrel Service Commercial Trash with Recycling Bin Service Includes 1 barrel each for trash,recycling,green waste Includes 1 trash&1 recycling bin,same size&frequency Residential customers are billed every 2 months Size Freq Standard $ 27.63 $ 29.01 1.5 yrd 1 $ 135.72 $ 142.50 *Senior $ 18.51 $ 19.44 1.5 yrd 2 $ 211.49 $ 222.07 .Primary acct holder 60yr,of age or older are eligible to apply 1.5 yrd 3 $ 286.15 $ 300.46 35-gallon barrel $ 23.41 New 1.5 yrd 4 $ 361.45 $ 379.53 Multi-Family-Per-Unit $ 26.44 $ 27.76 1.5 yrd 5 $ 436.75 $ 458.59 Additional Trash Barrel $ 7.70 $ 8.09 1.5 yrd 6 $ 512.61 $ 538.24 Additional Recycling Barrel $ 1.55 $ 1.63 2 yrd 1 $ 156.63 $ 164.47 Additional Green Waste Barrel $ 3.98 $ 4.18 2 yrd 2 $ 252.26 $ 264.87 Backyard Pull-Out Service $ 51.75 $ 54.34 2 yrd 3 $ 348.23 $ 365.64 Temporary Bins $ 111.79 $ 117.38 2 yrd 4 $ 442.17 $ 464.27 Temporary Bins Extra Pick Up $ 111.79 $ 117.38 2 yrd 5 $ 536.13 $ 562.93 Bulky Items(in excess of 4 collections/5 items per collection) 2 yrd 6 $ 630.69 $ 662.22 Trip Charge $ 32.38 $ 34.00 3 yrd 1 $ 197.51 $ 207.38 Per Item Charge $ 11.88 $ 12.47 3 yrd 2 $ 324.72 $ 340.96 3 yrd 3 $ 452.65 $ 475.28 3 yrd 4 $ 580.09 $ 609.10 Residential Single&Multi-Family Trash with Recycling Bin Service 3 yrd 5 $ 707.55 $ 742.92 Size Freq 3 yrd 6 $ 835.68 $ 877.46 1.5 yrd 1 $ 142.50 New 4 yrd 1 $ 237.98 $ 249.88 1.5 yrd 2 $ 222.07 New 4 yrd 2 $ 401.66 $ 421.74 1.5 yrd 3 $ 300.46 New 4 yrd 3 $ 565.08 $ 593.33 1.5 yrd 4 $ 379.53 New 4 yrd 4 $ 728.42 $ 764.84 1.5 yrd 5 $ 458.59 New 4 yrd 5 $ 891.72 $ 936.31 1.5 yrd 6 $ 538.24 New 4 yrd 6 $ 1,055.34 $ 1,108.11 2 yrd 1 $ 164.47 New 6 yrd 1 $ 302.28 $ 317.39 2 yrd 2 $ 264.87 New 6 yrd 2 $ 536.75 $ 563.59 2 yrd 3 $ 365.64 New 6 yrd 3 $ 771.24 $ 809.80 2 yrd 4 $ 464.27 New 6 yrd 4 $ 1,006.04 $ 1,056.34 2 yrd 5 $ 562.93 New 6 yrd 5 $ 1,240.52 $ 1,302.55 2 yrd 6 $ 662.22 New 6 yrd 6 $ 1,474.93 $ 1,548.67 3 yrd 1 $ 191.85 $ 201.45 3 yrd 2 $ 321.90 $ 337.99 3 yrd 3 $ 451.98 $ 474.57 Commercial Trash&Recycling Barrel Service 3 yrd 4 $ 557.71 $ 585.60 Rate includes 1 trash&1 recycling barrel 3 yrd 5 $ 680.27 $ 714.28 Size Freq 3 yrd 6 $ 803.53 $ 843.71 95Gal 1 $ 34.05 $ 35.75 4 yrd 1 $ 249.88 New 95Gal 2 $ 55.06 $ 57.82 4 yrd 2 $ 421.74 New 95Gal 3 $ 76.23 $ 80.04 4 yrd 3 $ 593.33 New 95Gal 4 $ 97.28 $ 102.09 4 yrd 4 $ 764.84 New 95Gal 5 $ 118.34 $ 124.11 4 yrd 5 $ 936.31 New 95Gal 6 $ 139.51 $ 146.26 4 yrd 6 $ 1,108.11 New Commercial Compactor Trash with Recycling Bin Service Additional Services/Fees Includes 1 trash&1 recycling bin,same size&frequency Extra Pick-up(Barrel) $ 22.20 $ 23.31 Size Freq Extra Pick-up(Bin) $ 46.84 $ 49.18 3 yrd 1 $ 303.88 $ 319.07 Extra Pick-up(Compactor) $ 93.69 $ 98.37 3 yrd 2 $ 502.40 $ 527.52 Extra Pick-up(FW Barrel) $ 63.57 $ 66.75 3 yrd 3 $ 701.97 $ 737.07 Bin Lock $ 12.33 $ 12.95 3 yrd 4 $ 900.84 $ 945.88 Steam Clean-Per Container $ 175.00 New 3 yrd 5 $ 1,099.63 $ 1,154.61 Contamination Fee $ 46.84 $ 49.18 3 yrd 6 $ 1,299.55 $ 1,364.53 Illegal Hauler Impound Fee-Per Day $ 100.00 $ 105.00 4 yrd 1 $ 367.44 $ 385.81 4 yrd 2 $ 622.91 $ 654.06 Push-Out Rates,per container,per service freguencv 4 yrd 3 $ 878.28 $ 922.19 Distance Freq 4 yrd 4 $ 1,133.48 $ 1,190.15 0-25 ft All N/C N/C 4 yrd 5 $ 1,388.69 $ 1,458.12 26-50 ft 1 $ 42.89 $ 45.03 4 yrd 6 $ 1,644.04 $ 1,726.24 26-50 ft 2 $ 85.77 $ 90.06 6 yrd 1 $ 489.08 $ 513.53 26-50 ft 3 $ 128.67 $ 135.10 6 yrd 2 $ 860.85 $ 903.89 26-50 ft 4 $ 171.56 $ 180.14 6 yrd 3 $ 1,232.52 $ 1,294.15 26-50 ft 5 $ 214.44 $ 225.16 6 yrd 4 $ 1,604.06 $ 1,684.27 26-50 ft 6 $ 257.33 $ 270.20 6 yrd 5 $ 1,975.60 $ 2,074.38 Over 50 ft 1 $ 85.76 $ 90.05 6 yrd 6 $ 2,347.26 $ 2,464.63 Over 50 ft 2 $ 171.54 $ 180.12 Over 50 ft 3 $ 257.30 $ 270.17 Over 50 ft 4 $ 343.07 $ 360.22 Over 50 ft 5 $ 428.83 $ 450.27 Over 50 ft 6 $ 514.61 $ 540.34 Page 334 Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT 1 EXHIBIT A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA 2021 PROPOSED SOLID WASTE RATES ALL RATES ARE BILLED MONTHLY UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED Current Proposed Current Proposed Service Type Rate Rate Service Type Rate Rate Additional Recycling Bin Service-Existing Accounts Only Green Waste Multi Family/Commercial Bin Service Not available to accounts established after 613012017 Size Freq Size Freq 3 1 $ 172.89 $ 181.53 3 yrd 1 $ 61.47 $ 64.53 3 2 $ 275.47 $ 289.24 3 yrd 2 $ 110.40 $ 115.91 3 3 $ 378.81 $ 397.75 3 yrd 3 $ 148.90 $ 156.33 3 4 $ 481.66 $ 505.74 3 yrd 4 $ 188.97 $ 198.41 3 5 $ 584.44 $ 613.67 3 yrd 5 $ 227.97 $ 239.36 3 6 $ 688.00 $ 722.40 3 yrd 6 $ 268.23 $ 281.63 Green Waste Multi Family/Commercial Barrels Size Freq Additional Recvclina Bin Service 95Gal 1 $ 45.14 New Size Freq 95Gal 2 $ 76.94 New 1.5 yrd 1 $ 107.64 $ 113.02 95Gal 3 $ 104.47 New 1.5 yrd 2 $ 155.36 $ 163.13 95Gal 4 $ 132.34 New 1.5 yrd 3 $ 201.95 $ 212.05 95Gal 5 $ 168.47 New 1.5 yrd 4 $ 249.18 $ 261.64 95Gal 6 $ 187.51 New 1.5 yrd 5 $ 296.40 $ 311.22 1.5 yrd 6 $ 344.19 $ 361.40 2 yrd 1 $ 119.20 $ 125.16 Food Waste Service-Bins 2 yrd 2 $ 177.41 $ 186.28 Size Freq 2 yrd 3 $ 235.95 $ 247.75 2 yrd 4 $ 292.47 $ 307.10 1.5 yrd 1 $ 237.46 $ 249.33 2 yrd 5 $ 349.00 $ 366.45 1.5 yrd 2 $ 423.00 $ 443.99 2 yrd 6 $ 406.15 $ 426.46 1.5 yrd 3 $ 598.03 $ 626.52 4 yrd 1 $ 163.13 $ 171.29 1.5 yrd 4 $ 771.69 $ 807.62 4 yrd 2 $ 251.96 $ 264.56 1.5 yrd 5 $ 943.79 $ 987.04 4 yrd 3 $ 340.53 $ 357.55 1.5 yrd 6 $ 1,116.23 $ 1,166.82 4 yrd 4 $ 429.02 $ 450.47 2 yrd 1 $ 297.47 $ 312.34 4 yrd 5 $ 517.48 $ 543.36 2 yrd 2 $ 547.42 $ 574.03 4 yrd 6 $ 606.24 $ 636.56 2 yrd 3 $ 782.10 $ 818.86 6 yrd 1 $ 190.01 $ 199.51 2 yrd 4 $ 1,018.14 $ 1,065.21 6 yrd 2 $ 312.20 $ 327.81 2 yrd 5 $ 1,283.50 $ 1,343.19 6 yrd 3 $ 434.42 $ 455.60 2 yrd 6 $ 1,488.06 $ 1,555.48 6 yrd 4 $ 556.95 $ 583.38 6 yrd 5 $ 679.16 $ 710.79 Food Waste Service-Barrels 6 yrd 6 $ 801.31 $ 838.20 Size Freq 65 Gal 1 $ 76.11 $ 79.92 65 Gal 2 $ 139.68 $ 146.54 Extra Recvclina Barrel Commercial 65 Gal 3 $ 199.22 $ 208.71 Size Freq 65 Gal 4 $ 259.10 $ 271.23 65Gal 1 $1.86 $1.95 65 Gal 5 $ 326.73 $ 342.12 65 Gal 6 $ 378.31 $ 395.67 Trash Roll-Off Service 10 Yard $ 621.42 $ 652.49 20 Yard $ 621.42 $ 652.49 40 Yard $ 621.42 $ 652.49 40 Yard Compactor $ 907.26 $ 952.62 *Roll-Off and compactor service rate is charged per service Recvclina Roll-Off Service 10 Yard-Inert(6Tons) $ 245.90 $ 258.20 40 Yard-C&D(8Tons) $ 192.68 $ 202.31 20/40 Yard-Recycling $ 192.68 $ 202.31 40 Yard-Recycling Compactor $ 192.68 $ 202.31 40 Yard-Wood/Green Waste $ 192.68 $ 202.31 *Roll-Off service rate is charged per service and subject to disposal and processing fees charged by ton.Also subject to Transportation Fee,if customer request haul to specific location Additional Roll Off Services Dry/Run Relocation Fee $ 66.52 $ 69.85 Tilthopper Rental $ 43.14 $ 45.30 End Dump(Hourly Rate) $ 192.82 $ 202.46 *Subject to actual Disposal&Processing Fees *Roll Off Rental Fee $ 26.41 $ 27.73 *Per Day after 7 days if not scheduled for weekly service Flat Bed(Hourly Rate) $ 395.63 New Page 335 Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 21-XXXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING COLLECTION RATES WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has previously adopted Chapter 8.17 of Title 8 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code establishing Solid Waste Service Rules and Regulations and authorizing that the rates, fees and charges arising, directly or indirectly, under said legislation be adopted pursuant to resolution, and thereafter, be amended from time to time by resolution; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Sections 8.17.030 and 8.17.040, and agreements between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Burrtec Waste Industries ("Burrtec") for the collection, disposal, and processing of residential, and commercial refuse, recyclables, and green waste within the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Sections 8.17.040, and the agreements, Burrtec has requested a change in the rates to be charged for residential, and commercial collection services, and has provided the City with the financial, operational, and other information; and WHEREAS, based upon the amount of the rate changes requested and the information provided by Burrtec pursuant to Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Sections 8.17.040 and 8.17.030, the City Council has determined that such changes are justified and appropriate; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. A. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find and resolve as follows: Section 1. The facts set forth in the Recitals, of this Resolution, are true and correct. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby approve the proposed monthly rates for solid waste collection as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 21-XXX - Page 1 of 4 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 336 RESIDENTIAL RATES: Residential Barrel Service Standard $29.01 Additional Green Waste Barrel $4.18 Senior $19.44 Additional Recycling Barrel $1.63 Multi-Family-Per-Unit $27.76 Backyard Pull-Out Service $54.34 Additional Trash Barrel $8.09 35 Gallon Barrel* $23.41 *New Rate Additional Residential Services Temporary Bins $117.38 Temporary Bins-Extra Pick-Up $117.38 Bulky Items: In excess of four collections/five items per collection Trip Charge $34.00 Per Item Charge $12.47 Residential Single and Multi-Family Bin Service *Rate includes one refuse bin and one rec cling bin of the same size and service fre uenc . Bin Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 1.5 CY* $142.50 $222.07 $300.46 $379.53 $458.59 $538.24 2 CY* $164.47 $264.87 $365.64 $464.27 $562.93 $662.22 3 CY $201.45 $337.99 $474.57 $585.60 $714.28 $843.71 4 CY* $249.88 $421.74 $593.33 $764.84 $936.31 $1,108.11 *New Rate COMMERCIAL RATES: Commercial Barrel Service-Trash & Recycling Service Bin Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5x 6X 95 gallon $35.75 $57.82 $80.04 $102.09 $124.11 $146.26 Additional 65 gal $1.95 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Recycling Barrel Commercial Trash and Recycling Bin Service *Rate includes one refuse bin and one rec cling bin of the same size and service fre uenc . Bin Size ix 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 1.5 CY $142.50 $222.07 $300.46 $379.53 $458.59 $538.24 2 CY $164.47 $264.87 $365.64 $464.27 $562.93 $662.22 3 CY $207.38 $340.96 $475.28 $609.10 $742.92 $877.46 4 CY $249.88 $421.74 $593.33 $764.84 $936.31 $1,108.11 6 CY $317.39 1 $563.59 $809.80 $1,056.34 $1,302.55 $1,548.67 Green Waste Multi-Family/Commercial Bins Bin Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 3 CY $181.53 $289.24 $397.75 $505.74 $613.67 $722.40 RESOLUTION NO. 21-XXX - Page 2 of 4 Page 337 Green Waste Multi-Family/Commercial Barrels* Barrel Size 1 X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 95 gallon $45.14 $76.94 $104.47 $132.34 $168.47 $187.51 *New Rate Additional Recycling Bins- Not available for accounts established after June 30, 2017. Bin Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 3 CY $64.53 $115.91 $156.33 $198.41 $239.36 $281.63 Additional Recycling Bin Service-Commercial Accounts Bin Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 1.5 CY $113.02 $163.13 $212.05 $261.64 $311.22 $361.40 2 CY $125.16 $186.28 $247.75 $307.10 $366.45 $426.46 4 CY $171.29 $264.56 $357.55 $450.47 $543.36 $636.56 6 CY $199.51 $327.81 $455.60 $583.38 $710.79 $838.20 Commercial Trash and Recycling Compactor Service Bin Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 3 CY $319.07 $527.52 $737.07 $945.88 $1,154.61 $1,364.53 4 CY $385.81 $654.06 $922.19 $1,190.15 $1,458.12 $1,726.24 6 CY $513.53 $903.89 $1,294.15 $1,684.27 $2,074.38 $2,464.63 ROLL-OFF RATES: Trash Roll-Offs *Roll-off service rate is charged per service and subject to market rate disposal and processing fees charged per ton. 10-yard 20-yard 40-yard 40-yard compactor $652.49 $652.49 $652.49 $952.62 Additional Trash Roll-Off Fees Dry/Run Relocation Fee $69.85 Rental Fee (per day after seven days $27.73 Flatbed (Hourly Rate)* $395.63 New Rate* Recycling Roll-Offs *Roll-off service rate is charged per service and subject to market rate disposal and processing fees charged per ton. 10-yard -Inert 40-yard - C&D 20/40-yard 40-yard 40-yard (6 tons) (8 tons) Recycling Recycling Wood/Green Compactor Waste $258.20 $202.31 $202.31 $202.31 $202.31 RESOLUTION NO. 21-XXX - Page 3 of 4 Page 338 ADDITIONAL MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE RATES: Additional Miscellaneous Services Fees Extra Pick-Up (barrel): $23.31 Extra Pick-Up (bin) $49.18 Extra Pick-Up (compactor): $98.37 Extra Pick-Up (Food Waste Barrel) $66.75 Tilt hopper Rental $45.30 Bin Lock $12.95 Illegal Bin Impound Fee $105.00 Steam Clean (Per Container) $175.00 Push Out Rates, per container, per service frequency. 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 26-50 Feet $45.03 $90.06 $135.10 $180.14 $225.16 $270.20 Over 50 Feet $90.05 $180.12 $270.17 $360.22 $450.27 $540.34 Food Waste Service- Barrels Bin Size 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 65 gallon $79.92 $146.54 $208.71 $271.23 $342.12 $395.67 1.5 CY $249.33 $443.99 $626.52 $807.62 $987.04 $1,166.82 2 CY $312.34 $574.03 1 $818.86 $1,065.21 $1,343.19 $1,555.48 Contamination Fee *One time no charge courtesy collection of contaminated container will be allowed, with the exception of hazardous waste or biohazardous material. Fee $49.18 End Dump *Hourly service rate, and also subject to actual disposal and processing fees. Fee $202.46 Section 3. The proposed rates will become effective July 1, 2021. Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective once adopted. Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16 day of June, 2021. RESOLUTION NO. 21-XXX - Page 4 of 4 Page 339 2021-06-16 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL: ITEM G2-ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE Public Hearing-June 16, 2021 Solid Waste Rate Adjustment Protests Date Name Reason for Protest 1 5/2/2021 Zhitong Sheng Take into consideration those that are low income. 2 5/2/2021 Ankur Khana Made several attempts to contact Burrtec regarding environmental impacts. 3 5/2/2021 Frank Newton The public hearing notice lacks explanation of the other components to the adjustment. 41 5/3/2021 Christina Duarte Ferrari Out of work due to COVID-19. 5 5/6/2021 Kristie Sepulveda-Burchit Public Comment-Discount for disabilities. 6 5/8/2021 Alan Chan Public Comment-Trash does not get full,wants to change service 2x month. 7 5/8/2021 Mary Felberg Retired (fixed income), cannot afford the increase. 8 5/14/2021 Alvaro Montoya The last rate increase was a large increase, approximately 20%. 91 6/7/2021 Tia Marshall on behalf Foothill Marketplace Many issues with Burrtec, including customer service, and billing incorrectly. 10 6/9/2021 Hongzhe Li Single occupant that does not generate a large volume of trash. 11 6/15/2021 Lupita Rowley Does not see this benefits the City, or the rational behind the rate increase. 12 6/15/2021 Michael Alvarez Opposes residential and commercial solid waste rate increase. 13 6/16/2021 Anil Kheraj Issues with billing,service being down, and pick-up times. Burrtec received a large number of recyclables during the pandemic for profit, and not impacted by 14 6/16/2021 J.L. McRae COVID as other businesses and residents have been. Ostos, Marissa Protest 1 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 8:04 AM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Fwd: Prorest for Solid Waste Rates Linda A.Troyan RECEIVED Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: MAY p 1 021 From:007 zhang<zhzitongxiansheng@gmail.com> CITY CLERK Date: May 2, 2021 at 8:14:52 PM PDT CRY OF RANCHO C JCAMIONGA To: City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject: Prorest for Solid Waste Rates CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Linda and government officials: Regarding the Notice of public hearing-Solid Waste Rates, as a low-income family in the community,we would like to express our opinion. We believe that the practical life difficulties of families with very low annual income should be considered (for example: a family with 5 family members contains The annual income of 3 children is less than 40,000 US dollars), I think the charging standards of these families should be treated differently. For example,Southern California Edison Power Company has a Care plan for eligible families. I think we should take full account of the actual situation of our disadvantaged groups to act, rather than blindly increase the charging standard.Thank you for your understanding! Sincerely Zhitong 9098706021 Ostos, Marissa Protest 2 From: Ankur Khanna <ankur.khanna@guardterra.org> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 5:48 PM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Re: Upcoming Solid Waste Rates hearing Evening Ms. Ostos, I would like to submit a public comment,opposing the rate hike. In my initial email, I had dispositioned my response to be neutral, but I take that back. I have reached out to Burrtec several times and never hear back. The rate hike is because China is not accepting contaminated solids, due to that wastes getting routed to landfill has grown exponentially. In the future,when the city sees a need or would like to help bring wellness and environment Preservation, we would love to work with leadership here. Please let me know what the next step is. v ik AnkurKhanna Managing Director 1(909)549-9466 a�� www.guardterra.org 4V-41YW ay(1' On May 19, 2021, at 11:29 AM, Ostos, Marissa <Marissa.Ostos@citvofrc.us>wrote: Good afternoon, Are you interested in submitting a public comment as it relates to the solid waste rate adjustment?We could discuss in the future the different contacts or partnerships that are environmentally beneficial in our community, however, I do not see that the below information as it relates to the attached public hearing notice. Are you in support of the proposed rate adjustment? Can you please clarify? Thank you, Marissa Ostos, MPA I Management Analyst I City of Rancho Cucamonga- Environmental Programs 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 909.774.4025 1 Ostos, Marissa From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 8:07 AM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Fwd: Upcoming Solid Waste Rates hearing Attachments: 100 Boxes_3-01 jpeg; New box_resetreuse-2020-08-26-12-18-20 jpeg; 0 rig inal_GuardTerra_Box_RES ET-RE USE_Executive_Presentation.pdf; PastedGraphic-5.tiff Linda A.Troyan RECEIVED Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: MAY Q IJ021 From:Ankur Khanna<ankur.khanna@guardterra.org> CITY CLERK Date: May 2, 2021 at 5:34:54 PM PDT CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA To: City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject: Upcoming Solid Waste Rates hearing CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good Afternoon, I hope my email finds you well. I am a resident of Rancho and operate a nonprofit. Our nonprofit is about raising awareness among children about our fragile environment and preservation of our communities and planet. You can find details about our vision and mission on our site. www.guardterra.org. The reason for my reach out is finding synergy in our communities goals and what my organization wants to accomplish for the citizens of our city and community. I have been following the petition for solid waste rate hike, before COVID and the reasoning behind it. My goal is not interruption. As our fragile environment is being ravaged by escalating man-made elements of impact,our small team created a program to drastically reduce collection and routing of cardboard waste to landfills, in an attempt to heal our environment in any capacity we can. In my research and confirmed in a publication from Burrtec about previous rate hike, any contaminated recycling material is sent to a landfill as it has no value. We wanted to change that, hence we created BOX RESET-REUSE. We did a lot of ground work and completed a pilot as well. However, my attempts to engage anyone from Burrtec were futile. I never heard back. The program is simple, I am attaching the flyer. We would collect e-commerce shipping boxes, reset them, sell them back to 2nd and 3rd level online resellers and the proceeds from sales will be used to: 1. Operate this nonprofit program 2. Invest back into programs of choice of the partner city to reduce their carbon footprint 3. Purchase commercial composting machines and employ local or citizens from disadvantaged communities within our county. You can imagine the PR value of being the trailblazer in helping us get this program off the ground and taking it to County and State level, and with God's blessing, beyond. The new leadership in the White House has shown keen interest in investing in green initiatives, and believe me,there is nothing like this out there. The State side jobs that will be created, millions of tons of resources saved and emissions reduced every year,dir4ct c figin rnty engagement,the list is impressive. I implore and plead to you as a parent and a fellow human. You are watching the dramatic changes in our environment around us every day. Our children need all the help and support from our generation to make sure the planet has started to heal foritf4erm to)have a,safe existence. Hope to hear back. Stay safe and Well! a Liu w C u LAJ ea copa 1120 LLJ 0- ol C19 w )ft4 V) D w z w w x 0 LLJ z CO Z 0 < U-i -r �:e —Z Z ui Ln LLJ zZ Off z < n, y 3 0 3 4.' 0 x -o 0 m v �o Ca a � o ) Vi O o y C N 0 4-1 Q N xon - o �, C 0 O C o •O in '� E 4-j Ou L O LA L � ,on N L u In 4- Q) aJ O O 4-+ u O11 4- C O N 'E C O U L C o S Vf Din C N 0. .-v E v v v ao L C L p .o C C O 4-+ tC (o O C on L E oao O > C to E on i 4-1 O 3 C u Q' oo N O E fCf cOi► N a V U vQj E "' C: +>+ n' t v E L E o ° E � ° Z O v u C too C C a L- a, w o- on E 004-1 E C O u ^ v rts E a ° a v Q, C >CA E °i O V fCS U }' C V a a Q i- Q w a p � °; o zoo L- • ■ e d L A ■ 1 A O C Q O a ■ i a1 Ln on Ln co v � a--i L- v u V (a > 00 M �� � an v a; � L o u 0- en v o a v V a� Lr) O o on > v °�' «f .c ao O 0 u 00 on 3 0 N M M rM 00 Y 'vf L m 'r- O (uE '> m om cm 3 cn o f u .5 � n v u m 0 v v M 0 0 � u E a a a � 0)L w •nn V ■ l i A O v u t 0 � tC3 A ■ ■ 1 aJ 0 N au N E c > '� 0 N (� 4 J +°'+ O E L° rOa M O s c c� O l a o c c N N O N O ° `� N u a, E Xa }' a1 = > o fo a a o E a c, ono � � N N O '� •>� �--i on c N v p -o c v (uN N =v -0 N ° c " u CL a°i -v c � ° o a E c _ (Uo x u E V� U.J D C O U_ � N f 0 cu tri o > 4-J O L CL E o .� N ton � ,„ E � a E m o c m � N N ° N N i � on N > On= O > M L W M a O 0) X O q Y i a N u w a) 0 O N N jJ a c 0 a•L- O L U u _ u v fa v E N c E o u -°a o o Ln � 0 ° E On Q} u E L E M -a ,F °' v u o 4-1 v 'A ° E fa E 4- Ln C: (U u ; fa 1 a L lU o E -J LA -a O m C aO o 4-1 U �.+ a) E N .oc t rt fu -C - O � U .� 2 Q U (A `1 d a) ~ E *, y co ► ■ ■ ► v ► ■ ■ • u E W ■ ► ba co 09 O $ O W DO LAWN Co O cm Qo CO CL. cc chc CA Y `7 0 r ■ C � Q m 3 y o Wj d =O ~ � J � W o � co C, w � J Q w i C T ppp- C 0 t u 0 N u ALL N •N M n N u U0 W W co � a r" eu wW+ V C U P1 G Y 1� O jW u i � "O•„ l7 �1•' � I �� L � 7 A J L `7 (lei m 0`7 = U 'a8 W nY o IA N o a }� ; u s �n r- m V 2r p m a th a W � " uL Ooa U1 J21 V e .a C7 ?3 c Vnn a;iE c -D 0 O +, N O N U 3 u E EoE3c Z L� o CO 0 0 W o.^ w x E 0 on E c a v w O N O L N u � aEo0—' -5 ro 0 0- 0 L E ro L on 0 doom i O ate., N O Ln QJ U Ln a O •^ J O 4 fCS 4-1 Ln O �--' O O vim- n U4-1 'p U c� aN � 4-1 o •c 3 u N 'p c N Q) O ' 4-1 4L LnE E CU N •� V Q) > O -a E •^ W ° O O .N p 0 N 0 vi O- +� E N (U .O O u cc3 o a) ° ' Q) �n 3 an U on N = _0 � O v N c >> O a) ° N 0 >. .+� vn c +� L c -0 c Q) u o oN Q) O •� Ln L u O E U I- 2 Q c�i� VI E Q) L O �+ =3 0 r N M v N E a c 0 .� >' +J N � :� > v N v -Ile a =3 c L +� u O L o o (U (Ua 4-1O 4-j O N N U X Iru 00 0 0 •� m cr vi , O -, a--� � 3 _A W (U (o 4 r� O E a E On , c a) o 3 a v o vi Rs a � v oN •� O v � �, 4-J 0 C: 0 �. A y =3 v� U Rj -0 O' E fo AIA 0 L c[s O c v� v O cn L � c � On 0 N O > `fa fa c/1 on of E •� L � '^ u fZ a"I E Q1 3 H E u "Wo w a � v � O flas M x LA O .c > O 'o .0 L .^ U u v *' " 3 �^`` O' � O ^ ` o on L W i1 4- o E ?, L - J +4.+ 0- o v� " M N L QJ 0 (U 0 � a.-v in O.v c v cn � -J 4O > E c a v X o Q o. O O U n a � ' � o 3 > O v u co � � �, � V NEB w > U OM M C: � L � E Ln fo W Tc 'Os � L (Ufa O t V u +j � .n N o N v O �+ O a� �^^ O O u A i s a ` L Qj o C a' � o k c _p > v V � E � Y n }; T7 u r'' v o v O O 4 4- � v 3 v v � m E Qj V) > L n D z f- 10 W W U i o 0TV c m � �- > COD WU �� ro aE > a V xa-V 'V hy CL T L ypQ� m O W—Ln W c o0 0 d �+ y o 0 Z > `°� o � dw v t Q :E C V 7 pp W d x@ b i.+ vi In L wo: Q A C O N�i o W Ln G y Aaa im m m y rn a v V1 L L O N N C � � L N o C z N v +I U Q N %+- o o DA, o l-J J 4 _ � [n }' J 0cu ''' L IA LM L N L 4) '1%1 4-1 O O `1 O N O cO .0 L r O 'v •a O ^ a.J 4 J a..� L E Q� L m V N M O O O L � � � E � o c c = °- 4-'0. o c0 a Con 0 N v +J 4-1 L V U N N NLA � � a E- °' on J :3 0 O -o O CA �+ O O O O O N a) N ^ N �+ f� -0 O L L L O Q� C: CL on o CL O O Ln N >+ N N O N �' •41 o E � c -a v 0 -1L U- 0- L E � N ton v O i 0 W 0 C � V am w D w z <L w w cr w X O m to C N a) N N N 'E � O 'E v v u -O E E u w w w c � 0 4-j O E cu o u V � v � v � N u o 3 w V X d z on L O •3 '0 C N co_ .L N O C a-+ � 3v � � U W 4-J v N N +A+ p On ' C -0 .� C 'L N On �7 J -v H vOi �-+ 3Z O •� N N 4-+ V) (n N V - O a LAJ C0i D 0 COD= u C39 LAMI CL w w 0 :04 Z e( H w V) w V) w X O m C O 0 0 0 3 N fC V r 0 L X N = �C C s vJ On v � �' > �° N 0 an L a..i N N N LA N C Vf N L 0 +.+ 0 an L f� L M O N E C a-+ VI=vim_ v 3 3 v � M a 3 -a c C w N C co c0 O on" N one a� o -o = X � N = � � > 4- ftJ Q) 3 -00 E Lw- 0 ' N E a >. 0 c� -o u -' vo a� o °' a� � o. � 3c � }' Q u one M c onaa . c `lu: 0- th c � -0 � N w vL " uvE � LnM5L— c L � � CLU � -0 0 on �n V c� w >, +, >% D E c M �. a c v �' w 3 � •- on 0- v v }' = L u s m 3 p c o o " c am �' 0 a c M •.--, w a, z .0 -0 0. w v, u .0 m i N N V O ■■�� w W� D 0 W H V w C= tA w 104 O z Q N w tA w w x O m O u - V vi v - v � LA 3 (U� 0 o N � O O o N L •� O O N ate+ U N *' -p O .� 1 %fa? Q O >� N O O > a..+ 'L Q •� (U d > - L (Uin •u -° O 3 E N a o ' o t7 X } I- .0 n N N >an 4-J ` N C L N X U C f� .N �• N V1 a- > �O ,� "O E N +J lz = U Z C O N Ln X (U � U u - uu 0 . c*-i O +.+ cn O U O L � a ...■ LU w 0 ! i w U CL 2 tS w w 0 Z Q w V) cm w w tA w X O m } s O N N O 4-J O X '0 LnO .� 4.5 Ovi o- a-J .N L L � Ln =3 v L u c 0 E on � L O � O O L _ � � onv 3 E -v a w C '^ � N Ems' ^ Q > ++ >% O s N E O on O c a� .E v z s c a ^ c E o .on Q }+ O O cn. c = g u ca N CL LnJ .0 a_ N U C � i v, F— a cn 4-- ct E u a Ln W Ln W V O L 0 1..`� w w � " 0 C � w U LAJ tA D w w D z Q w V) C:2 ce w V) w x O m W LU eJ3 " W L C� r� O > V �/} ra W ° o a > _ N � -Z' E u v o Lon E E in c u c Vf L O cL Vf LL 'o +� z 3 s T Q o m w n. vi o o v v c t° c 4 E a aU X o o E c w o -" L fY1 O Q_) m w T .c ' r Q E v E (uo N m o O c a) E O m a c E o +� of O pp V� ._ u Q V o a `Q O au -0 N �O O L RS o a °) v a o o o E 4-1 � Q! N c L pl1 N x E • • o E a o a o v '- v}'i vOi a 0 N O •V- L O c u E�/► ra L- c O u � 'a Qp OV m L 0.) • • (A � Y ru O O�JI N N A E Q N Q u y- i O C 0 O H•� O O c E a) u C c i 3 3 N v o `ivi v v O ro v o cn N w N N E ca v E u u ;_, 3 ° �' �i on U c C ♦ ♦ .+.., ■ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ■ w L cLS om o LL L o e AL A V � a, ■ in A n, N_ :4-A E � Y p = u L N 4Q C N L 4� L }! O 0 C V 3 mo � J u b+1 a) QJ = O E faon a 75 = Q, Z a v =) a 4.j kn Q o 6 L Q 3 3 v a x c 00 on L J > E "- o O m a, o }' u 4 `L v s c E (D � c Z L L ° 7+ y }' 4-1 CA o c c Lv LA i O d O c OL s -n p E c E Ot O � w- c a1 V '° v v u C No N on a a u * Q CS 3 O N �+ > > p Q U -p CU Q N v y- w 4-+ � o 4; v E 14 � t% 'v m U U 2 U U 3 � E ■ ♦ ♦ ■ O G N * C 4-J C � N � u Ld A-+ H C O N LL 3 CU }' O U N _ 1 C7 Z " a D L U Z DJ 4-J N L C O 4-1 3 va-+ _ticO Q -0 .Q O X V _N J LA m +� o N C N C 4-J J u u '^ d1 Q t a� Q v C o v a o -0 M c, w c a -v LA -a c N (Q � iJ C 4.d (6 � w on G) O u * 0 j ' (0 w N (C 'p Q 4., 4;; c E c o > aJ o o a; v +� a� a� a) �•t � v O � u v, u = (a u � � H Q� 3c O cu v o ° a) -J ;v c � n, � N C w+ }, v u i L N _� Z Ln t10 Q of 0 Q. 0- L u EO Z u O o o v L on u N E � a a O � -W o 'o c t on o� c Q .n 3 ° c v ra o o Z °' ° on w o N N 0 4-+ C N 3 i to fa N d r Q) L L d.d r� aJ a O ;> fa 4-1 m O Q. W L OV v v Q .0 V V O A A e ■ A *� 1_W LU W W CO3 " 0 C/2= W � s a E fa c > 0' c 0 Z Q .N Q 0 > h- L w E V to �t11 H ra Nf an L W a a O x an N O c o 'n E �, c N v w E N c o an Rf 7o +L-+ > on v 3 0 N E v c O o aL o L c to tA O L O O O LV Q� on E N O u 4-J E C X H 'E o 0 v o 3 4 V E OBI L L E E oa o o Q O i on Ep d o CA O a w U N O Q U fLC 4 JC W p ' E 'Op L �' f6 L O O L1J Q d t%1 Lfa Ln O m C 3 a, � a, 3 aU o- �'^ m N fC O 0C 'ALon 0 O O O U oN c n is Y E o m a; c 2 �Uc L U fa m °n tz o -j on a u v, n. v � w a Oc R -a o ■ A ■ ■ N ■ • • a) m o 1 V, LL N L M O i IMMM L-U o w Lai C� u a on CO2= crC39 LU c I.1.I U a u a N n E N w o � z E a � w on tA o Q N _ w x Oen N 4-1 Ln o O i- 4-- +J N c > O �+ C Q • .4-1 U N -p > Q O C: 0 C u u a O u CL a u I W v c a. u fo =- on Q c i �.0 r n u V 1 0 � O on V)i O aJ O j C d O L O i L u O O C 0 Oo � V w li a E W ■ e ■ ■ ■ ■ z F�LLI n w Lit P� u 0 C� U oa.. tA w tA Z Q H w own tN W w X 00 a, Y v Q, s U QrL • 4' aJ Q 3 c , O � Y 3 ° m o CA C 0 'Ta Q) o ° N � O ry O ems► O H O p N � O C ra ) ° u � ci aJ Q 0 0 � 0 Q o ° k L E EQ' � c x Q, 3 " o° °+ x o O u V , � 4J .p c = v N H Qj H .O ° t\i� O +.,ty or ° ' O c or U L U Q1 Q) o � ° �' JCL � L 3Q,' Z3 E Q�' NE an ado ° 'v� N "or �O (Z U e► 9.� Qj U �'' a U N L C N w CL vo. N °` o E ° c uLn or 3 u v a Q°, ul v° 3 4° c -- v V1 -c -c N t .c Ln r- -C -c BOX REUSESET - ..���.��, dam,,.,•. « ` Cwwo rem 4epp�+�s..,n:t>e,�...F.,+l..♦.ahgriw+wyrs.�l we Ostos, Marissa Protest 3 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 8:07 AM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Fwd: Notice of Public Hearing - Solid Waste Rates Linda A.Troyan RECEIVED Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: MAY Q 2 4 121 From:fanbn@aol.com CITY CLERK Date: May 2, 2021 at 5:06:08 PM PDT CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA To:City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject: Notice of Public Hearing-Solid Waste Rates Reply-To:fanbn@aol.com CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City of RC: After reading the Notice of Public Hearing- Solid Waste Rates, I am concerned that the stated justification lacks any explanation other than an "adjustment" of the CPI. An informed citizenry would expect that any basic explanation would describe the contractual parameters under which rates could be increased. Such an explanation could have been included in this notice.Then, one could examine the proposal for reasonableness. Without transparency, one might liken this Notice to The Washington Post's slogan that Democracy Dies in Darkness. Please consider this as a PROTEST against the proposed rate increases because of the lack of critical information. Sincerely, Frank Newton 7369 Hinsdale Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 i Ostos, Marissa Protest 4 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 4:37 PM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Fwd: Burrtec Waste Protest Linda A.Troyan Sent from my iPhone RECEUVE.1 Begin forwarded message: MAY 0 3 2021 From:Christina Duarte Ferrari<wc.duarte75@yahoo.com> CITY GLEkn, Date: May 3,2021 at 3:58:05 PM PDT CITY OF RANCHO CUICAMONC., To:City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject:Burrtec Waste Protest Reply-To:Christina Duarte Ferrari<wc.duarte75@yahoo.com> CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachment unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I would like to protest this increase this is really bad timing because of this covid-19 pandemic im out of work my husband is out of work we have 2 young girls. Christina Duarte Ferrari i Ostos, Marissa Protest 5 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 11:42 AM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: FW: Notice of Public Hearing Solid Waste Rates EKED From: aaron2kristie<aaron2kristie@protonmail.com> MAY 4 6 202 1 Sent:Thursday, May 6, 2021 11:41 AM To: City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> CITY CLERK Subject: Notice of Public Hearing Solid Waste Rates WYOF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I would like to submit written public comment. Currently there is a discount on residential barrel service for primary account holder age 60 years old of age or older. I would like there to be a discount rate for those with disabilities in the household, those households with low income similar to SCE Care Program and SoCalGas as well. Thank you. Kristie Sepulveda-Burchit Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. 1 Ostos, Marissa Protest 6 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Saturday, May 8, 2021 3:20 PM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Fwd: Rejection to Solid Rate Rates Increase .-tECEIVED Linda A.Troyan Sent from my iPhone MAY 0 8 2021 Begin forwarded message: J'Y CLERK From:Alan Chan<pvchan66@icloud.com> Date: May 8, 2021 at 1:50:32 PM PDT To:City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject: Rejection to Solid Rate Rates Increase CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, I am a resident of Rancho Cucamonga and recently received the notice of expected solid waste rate increase from Burrtec. My trash doesn't get full once a week and can last the entire month and I have seen rates increase in the past despite my usage has remained the same over time. I am in favor of a new proposal to have my trash pickup every two weeks and with the rates cut into halves. Should I call Burrtec to make this adjustment. The current service doesn't reflect my true needs of the service, although other families may have a different need. There should be various rate plan based on usage. Any proposal must consider the frequency of the need and the usage based on rates. Please response or I will have to speak on Jun 16. Thanks, Alan Sent from my iPhone i Ostos, Marissa Protest 7 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Saturday, May 8, 2021 3:20 PM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Fwd: Solid waste Rates Linda A.Troyan RECEIVED Sent from my Whone Begin forwarded message: MAY 0 a 2021 From: Mary Felberg<maryfelberg@outlook.com> CITY CLERK Date: May 8, 2021 at 11:10:53 AM PDT CITY OF WANCHO CUCAMONGA To:City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject:Solid waste Rates CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I am sending this e-mail to protest the proposed increases based on an adjustment for the consumer Price Index I am a retired citizen and cannot afford to have any increase of any kind at this point in my life. It's expensive enough to live here in Calif. As it is. Please consider the senior citizen when making any changes. Mary Felberg Ostos, Marissa Protest 8 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2021 12:37 PM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Fwd: Solid Waste Proposal to Increase Rates Linda A.Troyan Begin forwarded message: RECEIVE® From:Al Montoya <almontoya76@gmail.com> MAY 14 2021 Date: May 14, 2021 at 4:20:28 PM PDT CITY CLERK To: City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> CITY OF RANCHO CIICAMONGA Subject:Solid Waste Proposal to Increase Rates CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, This is to inform the city council that I am against the proposed rate increase for Solid Waste.The last time they increased the rates for residential customers was by almost 20%.That is absurd! I understand increasing rates but that increase was way too high! I would hate for that to reoccur. Thank you for allowing me to submit my protest. Regards, Alvaro Montoya 1 ,\ TTY rnmanwrnev` Protest 9 ��--� jmANAGEmENT DffCadrudm kx Yi he ner%ll.0 12759 Foothill Blvd,Suite D Fbodl Marld B, u,~ ILL MARKETPLACE Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 11 Blvd, Suite D Rancho Cucamonga 91739 (909)251-0912 Tia Marshall (909)796-6996 ext.610 Property Manager (909)899-2323 Fax tiamarshall@foothill-market.com RECEIVED Thursday, May 27, 2021 JUN 0 7 2021 Dear City Clerk, CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA This letter is in regards to the solid waste increase hearing scheduled for June 16,2021 at 7:OOPM. We would like to protest this increase as we are currently unsatisfied with service from Burrtec. The idea of a rate increase is unbelievable. As a commercial property we've had so many issues with Burrtec ranging from bins not being picked up to incorrect billing. We've also had issues with the new mandatory food waste bins being missing while Burrtec continues to bill for these bins. The list goes on and on. The Service is atrocious and we have no other option for waste management. Burrtec needs a complete overhaul before they should even consider raising their rates. Please stop this rate increase. At one point they charged us for 15 bins even though we only have 7 bins. We had to go through a tremendous hassle to get this corrected;we are currently waiting for the June bill to verify the credit is reflected. Throughout 2020 Burrtec has had to credit our account more than once for billing errors and the problem continues into 2021. Burrtec should improve their service and professionalism before anyone should have to pay a higher rate. No one should have to pay a higher rate for such chaotic service. Please do not approve this rate hike as Burrtec is simply gouging customers but not at all concerned with service or providing solutions for customer issues. r Bfs eg Tia Mars a I Property manager Ostos, Marissa Protest 10 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Wednesday,June 9, 2021 9:03 AM To: Ostos, Marissa RECEIVED Subject: FW: Protest against garbage rate hike JUN 0 9 2021 CITY CLERK From: Hongzhe Li<hongzhe@hotmail.com> �I IF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Sent:Tuesday,June 8, 2021 10:43 PM To:City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject: Protest against garbage rate hike CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear city officials, I am a resident of Rancho Cucamonga, living in the east side of the city, and owning a condominium/townhouse dwelling. I am the single occupant of the property, and travelling often. As you can imaging, I don't generate much solid waste. Nearly 50%of time, I don't send out the garbage bin. When I do push out the bin(s), it is usually just a single and small trash bag. My garbage footprint is very small, or shallow if you will,and already financially take more responsibility to keep a clean environment. As such, I am against further rate hike of household solid waste. Best regards, Hongzhe Li Resident, property owner of the City of RC Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Protest 11 Ostos, Marissa From: Troyan, Linda JUN 15 2021 Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 2:38 PM To: Ostos, Marissa; Ceballos, Linda sad ry CLERK Subject: FW: Solid Waste Rates ry CT RANC"O CUCAMONGA For rate hearing. Will you be including this one and the one I sent over the other day as information for council? Thanks, From:Troyan, Linda Sent:Tuesday,June 15, 2021 2:37 PM To:G L<lupita_rowley@hotmail.com> Subject: RE:Solid Waste Rates Thank you for your email. I am forwarding it to our Environmental Department. They will contact you regarding your question. Also,your email will be provided as part of the records for the public hearing on rates on the June 16, 2021, City Council meeting. Any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. From:G L<lupita rowley@hotmail.com> Sent:Tuesday,June 15, 20212:33 PM To:City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject:Solid Waste Rates CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi I'd like to give my opinion about the upcoming topic on the agenda about Burrtec's proposed rates, which will be discussed according to a letter I received on June 16th at 7 pm. I see that the city is recommending an increase of no more than 5%versus Burrtec's proposal to increase the rate up to an almost 16%. It wasn't long ago that our rates got increased so I'd like for the city of RC to keep the rates as they are, and/or at the most cap them at no more than 5%. Such an increase would generate Burrtec a dollar amount of$204,599.64 and that's only for the city of RC. What are they proposing to do with this money? Any kind of improvement that would benefit the city, and the environment? Like switching to electrical vehicles, increasing the salaries for their drivers, cleaning up the environment, switching to electricity powered facilities, upgrading their recycling aspect of the trash situation in RC? What's the rationale behind their proposal to increase rates? I also have a question about my rates. My current rate is 55.26 every 2 months, which is $27.63 every month. However, when I see the rates sheet on the Rancho Cucamonga's website, I see that I am paying more than the supposedly current rate of$23.26. What am I missing in my interpretation of this rates sheet? Respectfully, G. Ortiz 1 4µM.0 I� aod� Pfo1es1z o� �s� "fVlavnvr�da �.➢n� . �.a+rFb t gyp, gn3o thy°' .xM RECEIVEDRANCHO CUCAMONGA �J Ostos, Marissa Protest 13 From: Ceballos, Linda Sent: Wednesday,June 16, 2021 9:27 AM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: FW: Burrtec Objection to rate in increase proposal -2021 Attachments: image001.png RECEIVED FYI JUN 16 2021 From:Anil Kheraj<nilkheraj@gmail.com> W I'Y CLERK Sent:Wednesday,June 16, 20218:24 AM ;Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA To:Ceballos, Linda<Linda.Ceballos@cityofrc.us>; City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject: Re: Burrtec Objection to rate in increase proposal -2021 Dear City Clerk, Per your notice, may I please register my objection to the latest increase in rates proposed by Burrtec.Their service does not get better; instead,their service is getting worse. Now the recycles pick up is late in the evening making us wait till night to bring back the trash can.Their billing service is not efficient or effective with phone lines down, system down and sending me notices of delinquent payment when I have already paid the bill. Earlier in the year Burtecc would pick up trash on Thursday even if there was a long weekend holiday during the week. Now they don't show up till the next day without any notification that they are coming in later. Last year there was a huge increase in their monthly bill (over 25%) under the excuse that the demand for recyclables is low. Now again another increase just when we are trying to recover from Covid times. Why are we locked in with Burrtec and cannot move to another company?As city leaders,you need to look for the most competitive rates we can get and not enable Burrtec to have a monopoly. For the billing system down, inaccurate billing, late pick up and no options for smaller trash cans, I do not think Burrtec deserves an increase in payment. Please see email discussions below for various issues with them. Regards On Wed, May 26, 2021, 11:39 AM Ceballos, Linda <Linda.CebaIIos a, cityofrc.us>wrote: Hi Anil, Unfortunately Burrtec's system is still down. The City is aware of the issue and Burrtec is doing everything they can to get their system operational. Please be patient and simply hold on to your payment documentation. You mention worsening service. Is your comment related to the billing system or something else? Thanks, Linda Ceballos i Ostos, Marissa Protest 14 From: Troyan, Linda Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 10:15 AM To: Ostos, Marissa Subject: Fwd: Notice of Public Hearing - Solid Waste Rates RECEIVED Linda A. Troyan Begin forwarded message: JUN 16 2021 From:J M <janlmcrae@gmail.com> CITY CLERK Date:June 16, 2021 at 12:47:56 AM PDT Crry of gANCHO CUCAMONGA To: City Clerk<City.Clerk@cityofrc.us> Subject: Re: Notice of Public Hearing-Solid Waste Rates CAUTION:This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. June 14, 2021 TO: Linda A. Troyan, MMC (City Clerk Services Director) REF: Agenda Item regarding "Solid Waste Rates (Burrtec Co.) We do not agree that it is time for another rate increase. Let's take the blue recycling barrel as an example. Before and during this horrible pandemic, UPS, FEDEX, Amazon and various other delivery trucks have been abundant in this middle-class neighborhood. This has resulted in overflowing recycling barrels of packing materials, bottles, cans, etc. which this company recycles for profit and also receives government subsidies for doing so. Our small businesses have been closed (while the leases and utilities bills remain). Gas prices continue to rise, food prices are jumping, and right now is the time for us to "freeze" our local prices for businesses and families who have suffered through it all. This is a good company with good service; however, right now is not the time for another increase. This All-American City needs to reach out a hand to each other as individuals, and as businesses too - especially those businesses, such as Burrtec, that have not been impacted by being closed down during this trying time. Respectfully, J. L. McRae 9082 Hamilton St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91.701. Public Hearing Solid Waste and Recycling Collection Rate Adjustment June 16 , 2021 Rate Adjustment Request • Burrtec Waste Industries submitted a rate adjustment request to the City on March 29 , 2021 • Last increase was approved in November 2019 and went into effect January 1 , 2020 • Franchise Agreement establishes frequency and methodology for rate adjustment requests • Per the agreement Burrtec may request a bi- annual increase of no more than five(5) percent over the prior rate period Rate Adjustment Review • Rate Adjustment Request reviewed by staff and outside consultant and was found to be in accordance with the franchise agreement requirements • Consultant review confirmed : • CPI adjustment factor, city fees, and household hazardous waste fees were correctly calculated • Correct disposal components used • Appropriate back up documents provided for disposal fees, green waste, recycling, and tipping fees. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Tipping Fee 2017 2018 2019 2020 � Increase Tipping Fees (Per Ton) 2019-20 Refuse (Transfer and Disposal) '. Green Waste(Processing, Transfer, $ 42.95 $ 47.97 $ 49.45 . : Recycling and Residual Disposal) Food Waste (Processing, Marketing, :4 Transfer,and Residual Disposal) Recyclables (Processing, Marketing, Transfer, Recycling and Residual Disposal) �r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r Rate om onen s Residential Solid Waste & Recycling Rate Solid Waste Rate Components SOLID WASTE RATE:$29.01 1 ■Service Fee Landfill/Transfer Disposal ■Green Waste Disposal MRF Recycling Fees ■Franchise Fees Hazardous Material Fees Residential Service • Standard Residential Rate — increase of $ 1 . 38/month • Current Rate: $27.63 • Proposed Rate: $29.01 • 5% increase • Senior Rate — increase of $ . 93/month • Current Rate: $18.51 • Proposed Rate: $19.44 • 5% increase CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Commercial Service • Commercial Rates vary based on container size and service frequency • The increase for businesses on average is 5% • Example: 3-yard trash & recycling picked up once a week • Current Rate: $ 197.51 per month • Proposed Rate: $207.38 per month P" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA New Proposed Services • New service levels and bin size options for multi-family solid waste and recycling . • New service level and container size option for multi-family and commercial green waste. • New 35-gallon barrel size option for residential single family at $23 .41 per month . Proposition 218 Requirements 45-day Public Hearing Notice Required • Public Hearing Notices and proposed rate table mailed out on April 30, 2021 • Advertised in Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on April 27, 2021 Response to Notices • Written Protests: 14 • Inquiries: 46 • 30 inquiries were regarding the senior rate • 10 inquiries did not understand the notice, or rate table • 6 Other Recommendation • Staff recommends City Council approve the proposed rate adjustment • If approved , effective date is July 1 , 2021 Questions ?. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 01 DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Fabian Villenas, Principal Management Analyst Deborah Allen, Management Analyst I Leila Shiblak, CivicSpark Fellow SUBJECT: Consideration to Adopt the Electric Vehicle (EV) Readiness Plan. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan. BACKGROUND Since the 1990's, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has proactively supported the Electric Vehicle (EV) community. The Healthy RC initiative was launched in 2008, which, among other things, encompasses the development of policies and programs that promote a clean environment, acknowledging the role that alternative fuel vehicles play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Initiatives which display the City's commitment to the EV community include installing EV charging stations at various city facilities, earning the designation as an EV Friendly City, streamlining the EV permitting process, and offering rebates for EV charger installation. The Healthy RC Sustainable Community Action Plan was adopted by the City Council in 2017, which created a roadmap for advancing environmental sustainability and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This included identifying transportation and mobility goals to increase the use of alternative fuels and electric vehicles. Coupled with this task, the City of Rancho Cucamonga had an opportunity to join the regional EV working group led by the San Bernardino County of Governments (SBCOG). The regional group, consisting of nine cities in San Bernardino County, worked to develop and publish the San Bernardino County Zero-Emission Vehicle Readiness and Implementation Plan which was completed in August 2019 and promotes the deployment of EV charging infrastructure countywide. At the same time, the State of California has been increasingly aggressive with its goals of increasing electric vehicle ownership through numerous Executive Orders establishing electric vehicle targets for 2025 and beyond. Executive Order B-48-18 seeks to put 5 million EVs on the road by 2030 and expand the EV charging network to include the availability of 250,000 public charging stations and 10,000 DC fast chargers statewide. Executive Order N-79-20 mandates the phasing out of internal combustion engine vehicle sales by 2035. ANALYSIS Over the next decade, the electric vehicle market is expected to increase at an exponential rate. It is anticipated there will be a sharp increase in EV sales due to the unveiling of dozens of new, exciting EV models. To meet the needs of every consumer, several automotive manufacturers plan to release an expanded line of electric vehicles. Several automotive manufacturers such as GM, Volvo, and Jaguar have articulated a commitment to completely phasing out gas-powered vehicles over the next 10-15 years. Page 340 The Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan identifies recommended strategies for advancing EV readiness in Rancho Cucamonga. Building off of and aligning with existing documents, such as the Sustainable Community Action Plan and General Plan, the EV Readiness Plan will complement and inform the upcoming General Plan update and Climate Action Plan, which are in the process of being developed. In addition, some of the strategies in the Plan build upon the current California Green Building Code and will be incorporated into the upcoming Development Code update. Encouraging EV adoption is a key strategy for the City to reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. The City's 2018 GHG Inventory Report identified on-road transportation as the largest contributor to GHG emissions, responsible for 51% of the City's overall GHG emissions. Rancho Cucamonga has one of the highest EV adoption rates in San Bernardino County, accounting for 16.8% of the County's total electric vehicles, based on current DMV registration data. Between 2018 and 2020, EV ownership in Rancho Cucamonga has increased by 53%. Over the next ten years, the City expects to see a continuous increase in EV ownership, with an estimated 7,345 EVs by 2025 and 12,129 EVs by 2030. To meet this demand, the community would need to have a total of 272 public EV charging plugs by 2025 and 405 public EV charging plugs by 2030 available for use at destinations such as retail centers and city facilities, multi-family dwellings, and workplaces. As of June 2021, there are 179 Level 2 charging plugs and 27 DC fast charging plugs in Rancho Cucamonga. Public charging stations are typically available for unrestricted use or by intended recipients such as apartment residents, employees and/or specific EV manufacturers such as Tesla. The Plan contains recommended strategies for the rollout of EV charging infrastructure at destinations, multi-family dwellings, and workplaces. Destination charging refers to charging stations at retail locations, shopping centers, gas stations, city facilities, and other sites where a person typically parks for a relatively extended period of time. Multi-family dwellings refer to apartment communities located in the City, where residents face limited at-home EV charging options. Finally, workplace charging offers a solution for EV owners with a long commute time, seeking to "top off' their vehicles before returning home from work. Each location identified in the County's EV Plan in the categories of destinations, multi-family dwellings, and workplaces underwent a more refined, Rancho Cucamonga-specific site suitability analysis. This process utilizes quantitative and qualitative methodologies to identify optimal locations for EV charging infrastructure. The site suitability analysis was developed utilizing a calculated weight scale for various relevant criteria. This includes various data points, for example, at multi-family dwellings, the number of units at a multi-family complex, cost of rent, number of units to parking stalls, and age of the buildings was utilized as criteria for analysis. This criterion is compared against one another to establish a weight scale. Each analyzed site is given a score of 1-100 to determine how feasible the location is for EV charging stations. A higher score indicates the location is optimal and has a higher probability of use by community members. This tool is highly useful as it provides a prioritization strategy by assessing the quality of EV charging station locations. Namely, that EV chargers should not be placed on every corner but rather in strategic and purposeful locations throughout the community to ensure sufficient utilization. This site suitability analysis is a data-based decision-making process to score existing and future locations for EV feasibility. The locations which received high scores will be contacted by city staff and provided an informational toolkit tailored towards encouraging the installation of EV infrastructure at their establishment, with the intent to strategically build out EV charging infrastructure in our community. The Plan also contains recommended policies that expand EV chargin infrastructure at new and existing Page 341 development for the City to consider. These sample policies would be implemented by future action, such as the upcoming Development Code update, and include the following: • Adopt CALGreen's Voluntary Tier 2 Measures o The CALGreen Code contains required and voluntary building measures for the development of EV infrastructure. This includes minimum requirements, as well as Tier 1 and Tier 2 voluntary measures. The current CALGreen Building Code requires multi-family dwellings to allocate 10 percent of parking stalls to be EV Capable (conduit installed), and Tier 2 voluntary measures would increase this allocation to 20 percent. For commercial and industrial developments, the number of EV Ready (conduit with electrical outlet installed) parking stalls depends on the number of total parking stalls available. For example, currently it is required that approximately 6 percent of the parking stalls be EV Ready and Tier 2 would increase this to 12 percent. • Require the Installation of EV Charging Stations at New Construction o For every 10 EV capable or EV ready parking spaces at new commercial, industrial, and multi-family dwelling developments, a minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger must be installed. • Require the Installation of EV Charging Stations at Tenant Improvement Sites o Exterior tenant improvements over a certain valuation should include the installation of EV charging stations. Parking reconfigurations should also encourage the installation of EV chargers. A minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger must be installed. • Ensure Accessibility o Placement of conduit for future EV infrastructure should be placed nearest to American Disability Act (ADA) parking stalls. • Equip Solar Carports with EV Equipment o A condition of a commercial solar carport permit should include the placement of conduit for future EV charging infrastructure. EV charger additions to solar carports are eligible for the permit fee waiver if the charger is installed within one year of the solar carport installation. • Provide EV Infrastructure Signage o Directional signage should be at the street entrances of parking lots to indicate the presence of EV chargers. Commercial advertising on EV charging stations is permitted only when EV charging is offered free of charge. The Plan provides several recommendations geared towards the expansion of the EV charging network at destinations, multi-family dwellings, and workplace locations. These recommendations are tailored to meet the unique needs of the City and better inform the placement of EV infrastructure: • Upgrade City-Owned EV Charging Infrastructure: The current city-owned EV chargers located at various city facilities were installed more than ten years ago. The City's EV charging infrastructure should be consistent with other"smart" public EV chargers in the community. • Explore On-Street Charging: As a strategy for targeted EV charging placement, on-street charging is an approach that should be further explored. It is recommended on-street charging opportunities be identified when reviewing development plans. Considerations to key criteria parameters such as traffic density, projected vehicle trips, and development configuration that could help "flag" development going through the permitting process which could be complimented with on-street charging. For example, Terra Vista is home to thirteen apartment communities, making it a prime location to serve thousands of residents with a "neighborhood" EV charging station. Placing an EV charging station along Elm Avenue would provide access to Terra Vista residents within a 10- minute walk. Page 342 • Equitable Access: In order to ensure equitable access to EV infrastructure, the City's eight affordable housing complexes were analyzed. The placement of an EV charger in these low-income apartment complexes will serve Rancho Cucamonga residents who live within the disadvantaged community. • Other Destination Charging Opportunities: Recommendations include but are not limited to the RC Family Resource Center, Haven City Market, the upcoming High Speed Rail station, and gas stations along the 210 and 15 freeway corridors. • Accommodating EV Trucks with Trailers: The current EV charging network is unable to accommodate EV pickup trucks with attached trailers. As automobile manufacturers begin to unveil new lineups of EV pickup trucks, EV charging stations which are adequately sized to accommodate trucks with trailers, such as RVs and boats, should be developed. With the adoption of the Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan, efforts will be put forth to achieve the various strategies identified. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT By identifying recent accomplishments and possible future initiatives, the EV Readiness Plan serves as an unenforceable analytical framework for the City and community to consult when considering future projects, policies, and programs. While summarizing possible opportunities for the future, this guidance neither authorizes nor mandates any given activity or initiatives on the environment in Rancho Cucamonga and is therefore not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). (Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21065; 14 C.C.R § 15378,) Moreover, for these same reasons, the EV Readiness Plan is covered by the "common sense" CEQA exemption because it can be seen with certainty that the guidance would not result in a significant effect on the environment. (14 C.C.R. § 15061(b)(3).) COUNCIL GOALS ADDRESSED The Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan is consistent with the City Council's Core Values of intentionally embracing and anticipating the future. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan Page 343 4! CLEAN AIR/ VAN POOL s 5.F' I fi �'il Fie(it 1 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Pa e 344 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO II` ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Acknowledgements City Staff: John Gillison, City Manager Elisa Cox, Deputy City Manager Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager Fabian Villenas, Principal Management Analyst Erika Lewis-Huntley, Management Analyst III Deborah Allen, Management Analyst I Leila Shiblak, CivicSpark Fellow Contributors: Fred Lyn, Engineering Department Jason Welday, Engineering Department Jennifer Nakamura, Planning Department Joseph Ramos, Fire Department Justine Garcia, Engineering Department Michael Frasure, Building and Safety Department Zack Neighbors, Building and Safety Department Page 345 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHOQ ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Table of Contents ExecutiveSummary................................................................................................1 Chapter1: Introduction............................................................................................3 Chapter 2: Background............................................................................................5 Chapter 3: Where Are We Now?.............................................................................14 Chapter 4: Where Do We Need to Go?.....................................................................20 Chapter 5: How Do We Get There?.........................................................................27 Conclusion..........................................................................................................41 WorksCited.........................................................................................................42 Appendix A: Siting Analysis Results.......................................................................43 Appendix B: Recommended Policies....................................................................................50 Appendix C: State Laws and Regulations................................................................52 Appendix D: CALGreen Building Code....................................................................64 Page 346 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHOQ ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Tables + Figures Tables Table 2-1: EV Charging Levels Table 3-1: Complete List of EV Charging Stations in Rancho Cucamonga Table 3-2: Charging Plug Type by Location Table 4-1: Adjusted San Bernardino County EV Projections Table 4-2: Rancho Cucamonga EV Projections Table 4-3: 2025 and 2030 EV Charging Infrastructure Projections Table 5-1: Site Suitability Analysis Methodology Table 5-2: MADM Scoring Table 5-3: Criteria Description Table 5-4: Destination Assigned Weight Justification Table 5-5: Top 10 Destination Locations for EV Charging Table 5-6: MFD Assigned Weight Justification Table 5-7: Top 10 MFD Locations for EV Charging Table 5-8: Workplace Assigned Weight Justification Table 5-9: Top 10 Workplace Locations for EV Charging Table 5-10: Potential EV Charging Stations at Gas Stations Table 5-11: EV Purchase Rebates Table 5-12: Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment Incentives Figures Figure 2-1: EV Charging Specifications by Type Figure 2-2: EV Charging Plugs by Type Figure 2-3: Charging Hierarchies Figure 3-1: Charging Sites in Rancho Cucamonga Figure 3-2: EV Registration Density by Travel Analysis Zones Figure 3-3: GHG Emissions in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Figure 4-1: Percentage of Electric Vehicle Registrations Figure 4-2: EV Registration Projections 2020-2030 Figure 4-3: Likelihood of EV Ownership Figure 4-4: Primary Charging Locations Figure 4-5: Availability of Charging Locations Figure 4-6: EV Charging Station Type Figure 4-7: EV Charging Applications Figure 4-8: Factors that Promote EV Ownership Figure 4-9: Electric Vehicle Range Figure 4-10: Daily Commute Figure 5-1: Top 10 Destination Charging Locations Figure 5-2: Top 10 MFD Charging Locations Figure 5-3: Top 10 Workplace Charging Locations Figure 5-4: On-Street Charging Location Figure 5-5: Affordable Housing Locations Figure 5-6: Potential EV Charging Stations at Gas Station Page 347 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO II` ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Key Terms Name Acronym Battery Electric Vehicle BEV California Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program CALeVIP California Energy Commission CEC California Green Building Standards Code CALGreen Code Center for Sustainable Energy CSE Electric Vehicle EV Electric Vehicle Charging Station EVCS Electric Vehicle Infrastructure EVI Greenhouse Gas GHG Multi-Family Dwelling MFD San Bernardino Council of Governments SBCOG Southern California Association of Governments SCAG ppw- ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING SranON =i s Page 348 A Guide to the Plan The Executive Summary summarizes the recommended strategies for advancing electric vehicle (EV) readiness in Rancho Cucamonga. Chapter 1: Introduction explains the purpose of this Plan and contextualizes it in parallel with regional efforts to expand EV charging infrastructure. Chapter 2: Background describes EV charging types, plug types, and introduces the charging hierarchy which prioritizes the locations EV owners prefer to charge their vehicles. Chapter 3: Where Are We Now inventories current EV registration data and existing EV charging opportunities in the city. It also highlights current regional policies that influence EV charging installation. Chapter 4: Where Do We Need to Go evaluates existing EV ownership projections and introduces new EV ownership projections for 2025 and 2030. It also discusses the findings of the EV Readiness Survey and summarizes State goals and financing opportunities for EVs and EV infrastructure. Chapter 5: How Do We Get There provides recommended strategies and development Ipolicies that will guide the development of EV charging infrastructure throughout the city. It also contains the methodology used to identify optimal locations for the placement of EV infrastructure. Appendix A: explains the scoring methodology used to identify optimal locations for EV harging. Appendix B: details recommended policies with the overarching goal of expanding EV infrastructure at destinations, MFDs, and workplaces ' Appendix C: introduces State laws and regulations related to EVs and their infrastructure. Appendix D: summarizes current CALGreen Building Code in relation to EV charging infrastructure. 9 _ Rancho Cucamonga RANCHOQ I ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Executive Summary The Rancho Cucamonga EV Readiness Plan (Plan) envisions a future that supports the increased presence of electric vehicles (EVs)while decreasing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) associated with Rancho Cucamonga's transportation sector. With an increasing number of car manufacturers committing to full lineups of electric vehicles coupled with the public's growing interest, the EV market is expected to increase at an exponential rate over the next several years. To support this growth, the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) is committed to expanding access to EV charging in order to meet current and future charging needs. Rancho Cucamonga can facilitate the development of EV infrastructure, providing prospective EV owners with support in their daily commutes and longer road trips. As EV charging stations become more visible to residents and outside commuters, it could reduce perceived range anxiety concerns and as the cost of EV batteries decline over time, the cost of an electric vehicle itself becomes more attractive. Thus, we will continue to see higher rates of EV adoption over the next decade. In March 2021, President Biden's Administration announced the American Jobs Plan, detailing their support for advancing the nation's infrastructure with considerations to the natural environment. The proposal includes $174 billion dollars to be allocated towards EV sale rebates and tax incentives, encouraging the adoption of EVs. This proposal also seeks to provide grants for states, local governments, and the private sector to establish 500,000 EV charging stations by 2030. The recommended policies and strategies contained in this Plan seek to contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions by promoting the development of EV infrastructure, targeting on- road transportation emissions. As such, this Plan serves as a supplemental document to the city's current and soon to be updated General Plan and accompanying Climate Action Plan. It also builds upon the efforts of the Sustainable Community Action Plan and San Bernardino Council of Governments Zero Emission Vehicle Readiness Plan and will further position the city as a leader in the EV community. The purpose of the Plan is to identify opportunities and strategies, utilizing data and quantitative and qualitative methodologies, for the strategic placement of EV charging stations in Rancho Cucamonga. The goal is to advance the region's EV readiness by providing strategies and recommendations for the placement of EV infrastructure. The Plan provides the following: 1. An assessment of the City's current EV charging infrastructure in relation to EV ownership levels (Where Are We Now). 2. Projected EV ownership and necessary EV charging infrastructure to support EVs (Where Do We Need to Go). 3. A quantitative and qualitative analysis identifying optimal locations for EV infrastructure at workplaces, multi-family dwellings (MFDs), and destinations (How Do We Get There). 4. Identifies development policies and implementation strategies to expand EV charging infrastructure over the next 10 years (How Do We Get There). 1 Page 350 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHOQ I ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Based off of Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) registration data throughout the last three years, the City is projected to have 7,345 Plug-in Electric Vehicles(EVs) by 2025 and 12,129 EVs by 2030. To match the growing ownership of EVs, the community will need to have a total of 272 public charging plugs by 2025, and 405 public charging plugs by 2030. Public charging stations are typically available for unrestricted use, or by intended recipients and includes multifamily dwellings, workplaces, and destination locations. In order to meet this increased demand, the Plan contains a series of recommended strategies to support the community rollout of EV infrastructure. Recommended Strategies 1. Optimal charging sites identified: Quantitative and qualitative siting methodologies for identifying optimal locations for EV charging were developed. Locations considered optimal for EV charging at destinations, workplaces, and multi-family dwellings have been identified for future outreach. 2. Development policy recommendations: Eleven sample development policies for new construction, existing development, and new City facilities are identified for adoption. 3. Upgrade City-owned EV charging infrastructure: The City-owned and operated EV charging stations were installed nearly a decade ago. The charging stations should be upgraded so EV owners will be familiar with and comfortable utilizing these chargers for their vehicles. 4. Explore on-street charging: The City should consider on-street charging when trying to expand charging opportunities in targeted areas. As an example of optimal on-street charging, various locations have been identified within the Terra Vista community, with the possibility of providing convenient access for up to 1,000 apartment units within a 5- minute walk. To identify optimal on-street charging opportunities in current and future development, the Planning and Engineering Services Department should "flag" certain locations when reviewing development plans. 5. Equitable access: Utilizing a modified qualitative and quantitative methodology for identifying optimal locations, a number of affordable housing complexes located within the Disadvantaged Community (DAC), as identified by Cal EnviroScreen, have been identified for EV charging installation. 6. Gas Stations: As gasoline-powered vehicles are phased out over the next 20 years, gas stations along major transportation corridors have been identified as optimal sites for transitioning to EV charging stations. 7. Other destination charging opportunities: The Rancho Cucamonga Family Resource Center, Northtown Community Center, Haven City Market, and future high-speed rail/multi-modal station are also identified as key locations for EV chargers. 8. Accommodate EV Pickup Trucks with Trailers: The current EV charging network is unable to accommodate EV trucks with attached trailers. As automobile manufacturers begin to unveil new lineups of EV trucks, EV charging stations which are adequately sized to accommodate trucks with trailers should be developed. 2 Page 351 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHOQ ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Chapter 1 : Introduction Rancho Cucamonga is located in the western Inland Empire, at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. It is bound by the cities of Upland, Ontario, and Fontana, and parts of the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County. Rancho Cucamonga is supported by major transportation infrastructure including State Route 210, Interstate 15, Interstate 10, Foothill Boulevard (Historical Route 66), the Metrolink train station, and the Ontario International Airport. Rancho Cucamonga holds many notable designations surrounding environmental sustainability, demonstrating the City's commitment to addressing complex environmental issues with innovative solutions. Healthy RC is a City-community partnership comprised of residents, community organizations, and public and private entities dedicated to promoting public health. Through the adoption of policies, strategies, and programs, Healthy RC strives towards advancing environmental sustainability within the city. The Sustainable Community Action Plan adopted in 2017, engaged thousands of Rancho Cucamonga residents and businesses in a meaningful dialogue around strategies to advance the city's social, environmental, and economic environments. Rancho Cucamonga has been recognized for its environmental achievements including the LEED for Cities Silver Level designation, the Cool California Award, the Green Region Award, the Innovation for Green Community Award, the Platinum Level Beacon Spotlight Award, and the Red Tape to Red Carpet Award. As the City continues to advance its environmental sustainability efforts, the growing presence of EVs throughout the state presents an opportunity to prepare our community for this transition. A primary goal of the EV Readiness Plan is to ensure that the City offers substantial support to EV owners throughout the next decade by developing policies and strategies to ensure the expansion of the EV charging network. Electric vehicles are poised to see a sharp increase in sales with dozens of new EV models anticipated to be unveiled within the next several years. The EV market is expected to grow to meet the needs of every type of consumer, with automotive manufacturers like Ford developing an electric F-150 truck and even offering an electric version of its iconic Mustang with the Mach E1. Recently, GM, Volvo, and Jaguar have joined other manufacturers in announcing commitments to phase out gas-powered vehicles within the next 5,10, and 15 years. As more manufacturers continue to transition their vehicles to electric and the prospect of a new round of tax incentives, the cost of purchasing an EV is expected to decrease, making it more accessible to the public. Over time, we can expect the cost of some base level EVs to be less than the cost of their internal combustion counterparts. The electric Ford F-150 Lightning is anticipated to be released in Spring 2022, with a price tag less than its gasoline and hybrid versions after federal and state tax credit. Financial incentives also continue to encourage EV ownership contributing to the EV industry's economic boom. According to EVadoption, by 2025 it is projected that California's EV sales will be at $3.5 million and will account for 67.5% of California's auto sales. Though this Plan solely delves into the passenger EV market, EV adoption in the commercial realm is expected to take flight as well, as more stringent policy regarding air quality and GHG emission reduction goals take effect. 3 Page 352 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Purpose The purpose of the EV Readiness Plan is to identify opportunities within the city, utilizing data and quantitative and qualitative methodologies, for strategic placement of EV charging stations in order to build a robust EV charging infrastructure that will adequately meet the needs of current and future EV owners. The Plan builds upon the City's Sustainable Community Action Plan, adopted in 2017 which provided a road map for advancing environmental sustainability initiatives and identified the facilitation of EV ownership as a key strategy to reducing GHG emissions. The Plan also seeks to address the perceived obstacle of range anxiety by facilitating the expansion of the city's EV infrastructure. Among respondents to a 2019 community survey, 40 percent identified range anxiety as a significant obstacle to purchasing an EV. Supporting the development of EV infrastructure through adopting the Plan's recommendation strategies would alleviate this concern within the city, encouraging drivers to purchase EVs, ultimately leading to the reduction of on-road transportation GHG emissions. Most importantly, the Plan provides a data based decision-making process to be utilized when identifying optimal locations for EV charging stations. The Plan addresses the following questions: • Where Are We Now?: This includes an assessment of the City's current EV charging infrastructure in relation to EV ownership levels. • Where Do We Need to Go?: Projected EV ownership and necessary EV charging infrastructure is estimated. • How Do We Get There?: The Plan includes (a) a quantitative analysis identifying optimal locations for EV infrastructure at workplaces, multi-family dwellings (MFDs), and destinations; and (b) identifies development policies and implementation strategies to expand EV charging infrastructure over the next 10 years. Regional EV Readiness Plan The Rancho Cucamonga EV Readiness Plan builds upon San Bernardino Council of Governments' (SBCOG) regional Zero Emission Vehicle Readiness and Implementation Plan, which was completed in 2019. The countywide plan assesses the current state of EV infrastructure within the county, provides site recommendations for each city within its jurisdiction, and identifies implementation actions to support EVs and its charging infrastructure on a regional basis. Per SBCOG's plan, San Bernardino County is projected to have 44,846 EVs by 2025. The regional plan provided broad data and recommendations for cities to utilize, which in turn allowed for the development of a plan that is unique and responsive to Rancho Cucamonga. For example, the City modified the siting methodology in order to further consider Rancho Cucamonga's unique attributes as a community, thus better informing the recommendations on the placement of EV infrastructure. 4 Page 353 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Chapter 2: Background State Goals and Policies Executive Orders In the last decade, California Governors have signed a number of Executive Orders establishing goals for EV adoption. In 2012, former Governor Jerry Brown issued Executive Order B-16-12 which seeks to put 1.5 million EVs on the road in California by 2025. At the end of 2017, California had 350,000 EVs on the road, 14,000 public charging stations, and 1,500 DC fast chargers. Market trends are showing that California is still on its way to meeting this goal, with a 29% increase in EV sales in the state between October 2016-October 2017. In 2015, Executive Order B-30-15 was issued, which sets the GHG emission reduction target of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. This aggressive benchmark seeks to ensure that the State of California can reach its GHG emission reduction target of 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. On- road transportation and petroleum use in cars and trucks will play a significant role in reaching this goal. In 2018, Executive Order B-48-18 was issued with the goal to put 5 million EVs on the road by 2030 and install 250,000 public charging stations and 10,000 DC fast chargers. The administration proposed a new eight-year initiative to continue the State's clean vehicle rebates and spur more infrastructure investments. In 2020, Executive Order N-79-20 was issued to phase out the sale of new gas-powered cars and trucks by 2035. GHG Emission Reduction Goals AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 requires that the State of California reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. This bill required a sharp reduction GHG emissions and set the stage for a sustainable, low-carbon future. It was the first step to in creating a comprehensive, long-term approach to addressing climate change while maintaining a robust economy. The State exceeded this goal a few years early and subsequent targets have been established. SB 32 California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2016 was passed to build upon existing efforts to significantly reduce GHG emissions. It requires a reduction in GHG emissions to 40% below the 1990 levels by 2030. This ambitious goal is proving to be more difficult. In fact, the State of California is not making large enough strides to meet it according to Next 10, an innovative nonprofit organization concerned with California's economic and environmental future. 5 Page 354 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA California Green (CALGreen) Building Code CALGreen Building Code was developed as a statewide effort to assist with reaching GHG emission reduction goals articulated in Assembly Bill 32. Containing the minimum building requirements with regard to statewide GHG emission reduction goals, CALGreen allows local governments the flexibility to adopt more stringent building standards. CALGreen releases a new edition of the building code every three years by order of California legislature. The current edition of CALGreen Code contains required and voluntary building measures around the development of EV infrastructure. Given that this Plan is concerned with expanding EV infrastructure at destinations, MFDs, and workplaces, CALGreen standards which guide the development of charging stations at these sites are of special interest. Electric Vehicle Terminology Types of Electric Vehicles The Plan distinguishes between two types of EVs which differ by the degree to which electricity is used as their primary energy source; EVs and BEVs, or Battery Electric Vehicles. The umbrella term EVs refer to all vehicles, including BEVs which operate on battery power and recharge from the electrical grid, including plug-in hybrid EVs and BEVs. This distinction is made primarily to assist in determining the number of Level 2 and DC fast charging stations are needed to support the EV community. BEVs run entirely on electricity stored in batteries and have an electric drive motor. BEVs are able to utilize DC fast charging equipment to quickly replenish their batteries, whilst other EVs are restricted to using Level 1 and Level 2 charging stations only. BEVs typically come equipped with a larger electric range, allowing owners to drive longer distances on a single charge. According to EVadoption, a website which monitors and analyzes EV adoption trends, most BEVs have an average range of 216 miles per charge, and can be expected to have an average range of 256 miles per charge by the end of 2021. Examples of BEVs include the BMW i3, Chevy Bolt, Nissan LEAF, Tesla Model S, Tesla X, Tesla Model 3, and Toyota Rav4 EV. EV owners should have convenient, reliable, and affordable access to charging. Eighty percent of EV owners charge their vehicles at home, followed by the workplace, if available. If these options are insufficient, drivers must rely on public charging infrastructure. This is especially critical for residents of multi-family dwelling units, where at-home charging options may not be available. 6 Page 355 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA EV Charging Types A charging station is an element of infrastructure that safely supplies electric energy for the recharging of EVs, also known as Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment(EVSE). Charging an EV is a fairly straightforward process, and many EV owners charge every day at home by plugging into a standard 120-volt wall outlet. EV charging stations come in a variety of designs and are separated into levels based on the amount of electricity that is transferred to a vehicle battery. EV charging stations with increased voltage translates to a faster charge time. There are three main categories used to describe EV charging. Figure 2-1: EV Charging Specifications by Type Charging Types AC Level 1 AC Level 2 DC Fast Charger - far Voltage:12W 1-Phase AC Voltage:206V or 240V 1-Phase AC Voltage:208V or 480V 3-Phase AC Amps:12-16 Amps:12-80 Amps:<125 Amps Charging Load:1.4-1.9 kW Charging Lead:2.5-19.2 kW Charging Load.<90 kW Charge Time:3-5 mile range per hour Charge Time:10-20 mile range per hour Charge Time:804 Charge in 20-30 minutes Level 1 Charging Level 1 charging stations are the most basic and inexpensive form of charging. Level 1 charging uses a standard 120 Volt electrical supply to transfer between 1.4 and 1.9 kW of power from the electrical grid to vehicle batteries, equivalent to the electricity provided by a common wall receptacle. Level 1 charging can also occur through dedicated Level 1 charging equipment built specifically for EVs. Because Level 1 charging involves a fairly low transfer of electricity, it is the easiest to implement, but takes the longest to recharge a vehicle's battery. They provide 3-5 miles of range per hour of charging time. Level 1 charging is most typically done overnight and at one's home. Level 2 Charging Level 2 charging uses a 240 Volt circuit to transfer up to 19.2 kW of power to a vehicle's battery, making it a much faster recharging option than Level 1. This is the equivalent to the electricity required to power an electric dryer or large air conditioner. Because it operates at a higher voltage, Level 2 charging usually requires the purchase and installation of dedicated charging equipment. The majority of publicly available charging equipment across California utilizes Level 2 charging, and EV owners have even installed units in their homes. Level 2 chargers add about 10-20 miles of range per hour of charging time. With a Level 2 charger, a typical EV would require 1-3 hours of charge, while a BEV would require 4-8 hours for a full charge. 7 Page 356 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA DC Fast Charging DC fast chargers offer the fastest battery recharge currently available for EVs, transferring power at a higher voltage, usually between 440 and 480 Volts to deliver from 32 to 100 kW of power using direct current (DC) to vehicle batteries. These chargers are typically located in publicly available locations, usually at major destinations and/or near major transportation corridors to maximize the number of EVs that can access them. This charging option is ideal for long-distance travel, as DC fast chargers add 50-70 miles of range in 20-30 minutes. DC fast chargers are a high-cost charging solution with substantial electrical infrastructure required to sustain a DC fast charger. Types of Charging Plugs There are four types of high-powered EV chargers that are typically tracked. J-plugs (J-1772) are the most common type used with Level 2 chargers that are utilized by all EVs. CHADEMO and SAE chargers are high-powered DC fast chargers that can only be used by BEVs. Tesla Superchargers are also common DC fast chargers but are restricted to Tesla vehicle-use only. In May 2021, data regarding the types of charging plugs within the region were accessed using the EV infrastructure mapping site PlugShare. Of sites with Level 2 charging stations in San Bernardino County, a majority use J-plugs (J-1772). Figure 2-2: EV Charging Plugs by Type 00 ■.- ■ CCS Tesla • Combo supercharger 8 Page 357 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Table 2-1: EV Charging Levels Uses a standard plug- Used specifically for Used specifically for 120 volt (V) EV charging BEV charging. Single phase service 240 V AC split phase Typically requires a with a three-prong service at less than or dedicated circuit of 20-100A electrical outlet at 15- equal to 80 A with a 480V service 20 amperes (A) connection - . Can connect to a J1772 charge port; CHAdeMO; CCS •- standard three-prong Tesla Combo; Tesla Supercharger electrical outlet •• Residential or Residential, workplace, Destinations, rapid charging workplace charging or opportunity charging along major travel corridors Low power delivery Requires additional Can only be used by lengthens charging infrastructure and BEVs. time wiring Provides power much faster than the AC counterparts, but are more expensive to deploy and operate 3 to 5 miles of range 10 to 25 miles of range 50 to 70 miles of range per per 1 hour of per 1 hour of charging. 20 minutes of charging. charging. Depending on Depending on Depending on the vehicle the vehicle battery size, the vehicle battery battery size, BEVs can be EVs can be fully size, EVs can be fully fully charged in 30-60 charged in 2-20 hours. charged in 1-8 hours. minutes. Page 358 Rancho Cucamonga LN RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment Levels Residential and commercial developments can provide three levels of EVSE (electric vehicle supply equipment) readiness: EVSE capable, EVSE ready, and EVSE installed. The most common configuration is EVSE Capable, which designates that a development is equipped with a dedicated ' branch circuit and a raceway that connects the electrical panel to the prospective EV parking spot. CALGreen Building Code requires that 10 percent of parking spaces in new L___ EVSE Capable MFDs be EV capable. Installing the actual EV charging station is not required. Parking stalls that are EVSE Ready indicate that an electrical panel and raceway has been installed, with enough conduit to either terminate in a junction box or a 208/240-volt IL 6ii charging outlet. CALGreen Building Code requires certain qualifying developments to be equipped with EVSE ready parking stalls. The _ J EVSE Ready number of EVSE ready parking stalls required depends on the number of total parking stalls. This is a step above EV Capable, preparing a site for the last step of installation. Installing the actual EV charging station is not required. Lastly, EVSE installed parking stalls represent the EVSE process at its last step EVSE _ installed parking stalls refer to a Level 2 or DC fast charger being installed on site. +� E r EVSE Installed 10 Page 359 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Charging Hierarchies A charging hierarchy helps to focus future infrastructure needs and development priorities for EVSE. The base of the hierarchy indicates the charging locations that should be most numerous and common, and higher up the pyramid represents less frequent charging opportunities. This should not be misinterpreted as one level of the pyramid being more important than the other; having a well-balanced charging infrastructure that provides charging opportunities at all levels of the pyramid is critical. Figure 2-3: Charging Hierarchies DwellingsWor, lace Private/Home At the base of the hierarchy are private, at-home chargers. Single-family homes tend to have BLI. sufficient electrical capacity to support overnight charging, and the installation of the necessary EV supply equipment (EVSE) is straightforward and has a predictable cost. These are typically Level 1 or Level 2 charging but can be DC fast r charging as well. Most electric vehicle owners charge their vehicles at home, according to the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The use of at-home Level 1 charging is a more affordable option for EV owners but takes significantly longer to charge than the use of Level 2 or DC fast chargers. 11 Page 360 Rancho Cucamonga LN RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Multi-Family Dwellings After private charging is multi-family dwelling (MFD) charging, which should be widely implemented for EV owners who live in MFDs. Level 2 charging is ideal for MFD charging. EV owners who live in MFDs face limited at-home charging options due to the complexities of negotiating costs, installation logistics, and liability issues with the landlord or site host. Installing EV chargers in common areas ensures equal access for all tenants and their guests. The barriers to installing charging infrastructure at existing MFDs can be alleviated by offering financial ' incentives to induce property owners to install charging equipment at their apartment complexes. Workplaces EV charging should be available to if i employees via on-site charging facilities, but 1 •1 is not intended to be an EV owners primary charging location. Level 1 or Level 2 `r charging is ideal for EV drivers who are ' using workplace chargers in addition to '' charging at home, or for EV drivers who lack at-home charging options. According to the Alternative Fuels Data Center, the workplace serves as a "second showroom," further acquainting employees with EVs. _ 12 Page 361 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Destinations Destination infrastructure opportunities include retail locations, shopping centers, gas stations, city facilities or other locations where a person typically parks ' for a relatively extended period of time. r' This type of charging is also known as opportunity charging and is suited for Level 2, or DC fast chargers depending on the location and type of site host. Destination charging should be implemented intentionally due to its high installation costs that can range from $10,000 to $91,000. 13 Page 362 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 363 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO II'r ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN COCAMONCA Chapter 3: Where Are We Now? The Current EV Landscape in Rancho Cucamonga According to EV infrastructure mapping tool PlugShare, there are an estimated 31 public charging sites within Rancho Cucamonga, with a total of 206 public charging plugs, including both Level 2 and DC fast chargers. Public charging stations are typically available for unrestricted use or by intended recipients. At MFDs and workplaces, chargers may be utilized for tenants and employees only, however because these chargers are available to these groups, they are considered public chargers. Currently, there is a ratio of 12 registered EVs to one charging plug. Each site has a varied number of chargers, and each charger has either one or two plugs available for use. DC Fast Charger at Rancho Cucamonga Level 2 Charger at Chaffey College Civic Center l _ Figure 3-1 depicts current EV charging sites throughout the City. As a part of the City's efforts to upgrade its EV charging infrastructure, size City-operated charging stations have been identified for permanent removal due to poor placement and subsequent low utilization. Thus, in coming months there will be 25 charging sites rather than the 31 listed in Table 3.1. Figure 3-1: Charging Sites in Rancho Cucamonga r — -----� l IJ I I I ti • L 1 • F:any,ir Se \ ('1 Q 0 Foothif!Fwy � oCf Alfa.;-nrd Grapelantl EfiwapHa U ic Llnc Rtl ij ¢ BE �I 0 ^ � l V V O a iia 5 ,�°,h (�v� �Q �.��• Foo�hi11 Mud- Cuc{rnonOg�D `a>� I Legend o _o I • "°g �e Removed flO -—— —— — ——— 5-sernurdl—A. Page 364 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO II` ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Table 3-1: Complete List of EV Charging Stations in Rancho Cucamonga Location Location Number of Number of Zip Code •- Plugs Plugs Animal Care & Adoption* Destination 1 0 91730 Archibald Library* Destination 1 0 91730 Arte MFD 4 0 91730 Beryl Park West* Destination 1 0 91701 CA Lottery Destination 4 2 91730 Chaffey College Destination 4 0 91727 Fairfield Inn and Suites Destination 6 0 91730 Fire Training Academy* Workplace 1 0 91730 Heritage Community Park* Destination 1 0 91737 Homecoming at Terra Vista MFD 1 0 91730 Inland Empire Health Plan Workplace 82 0 91730 IEHP Mercury Insurance Group Workplace 28 0 91730 Merrill Gardens Destination 4 0 91737 Metrolink Station* Destination 2 0 91730 Najarian Furniture Destination 3 2 91730 Public Safety Facility* Destination 4 0 91730 Public Works Center* Destination 1 0 91730 RC Civic Center* Destination 2 1 91730 RCSports Center* Destination 1 0 91730 Red Hill Community Park* Destination 1 0 91730 Residence Inn by Marriott Destination 6 0 91730 Rite Aid Destination 2 0 91701 Steelscape Workplace 1 0 91730 Tesla Service Center Destination 4 0 91730 Tesla Supercharger Station Destination 0 8 91739 The Resort Destination 2 0 91730 Vehicle Accessory Center Workplace 4 0 91730 Victoria Gardens Destination 4 13 91739 VSPA/Courts Parking Destination 2 0 91730 Walgreens Destination 1 0 91737 Walgreens Alta Loma Destination 1 0 91701 179 27 Total Charge Plugs: 206 *indicates city-owned charging stations Page 365 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO II` ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Usage of City-Owned EV Chargers Most recent data shows that the 17 City-owned charging plugs are being utilized at varying frequency. Between April 2019 and March 2020, the City's Level 2 chargers received a total of 847 visits with the average charging session lasting 1 hour and 56 minutes. The most utilized charging stations are the two Level 2 chargers at the Civic Center, with 394 charges during the same 12-month period. Some chargers experience very little activity, such as the chargers at Public Works Service Center, Archibald Library, and Animal Care and Adoption Center. The City also operates a DC fast charger in the north parking lot of City Hall; and, partnered with an EVgo in the placement of a DC fast charger located at Victoria Gardens in the West parking structure. Both of these chargers have significant usage. During calendar year 2020, the DC fast charger at City Hall received 563 charges with the average session lasting 25 minutes, The DC fast charger at Victoria Gardens is receiving approximately four visits per day, which equates to over 1,500 charging sessions annually. Current EV Ownership EV registration data was accessed through the CA Department of Motor Vehicles, allowing the City to make projections on future trends of EV ownership. As of January 1, 2020, there were 15,203 electric vehicles registered in San Bernardino County. Of the 141,571 vehicles registered in Rancho Cucamonga, there are 2,551, or approximately 1.8%, electric vehicles. Data collected by Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in 2016, as shown in Figure 3-2, depicts the density of EV registrations in alignment with travel analysis zones (TAZ), which is closely aligned with Census tract boundaries. Figure 3-2: EV Registration Density by Travel Analysis Zones '— 11 ILegend F630 IM 31fi5 J ■ 61-75 i , ■ 76 90 1 �v ■ 91* 16 Page 366 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO II` ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Charging Availability in Rancho Cucamonga Currently, there are 179 Level 2 charging plugs and 27 DC fast charging plugs in Rancho Cucamonga. Table 3-2 details the number of Level 2 and DC fast charging plugs at destinations, MFDs, and workplaces. The workplace charging network is the most expansive category, with 116 Level 2 charging plugs. However, a majority of these are concentrated at the Inland Empire Health Plan location. Table 3-2: Charging Plug Type by Location Location Type Level Destination 58 27 Multi-Family Dwelling 5 0 Workplace 116 0 Regional and Local Policy In alignment with the State of California electric vehicle targets, substantial work has been completed at the regional and local level to advance these efforts. Rancho Cucamonga was one of nine cities to participate in a regional working group to develop and publish the San Bernardino Council of Governments' (SBCOG) Zero-Emission Vehicle Readiness and Implementation Plan. The regional plan outlines goals for increasing EV ownership and infrastructure while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Through the California Energy Commission EV infrastructure Projection (EVI-Pro) Model, SBCOG has set the goal of providing 3,980 Level 2 chargers and 377 Level 3 DC fast chargers by 2025. The City of Rancho Cucamonga aims to intentionally embrace and anticipate this future as outlined in our Council's Core Values while ensuring the identified goals, policies and strategies are consistent throughout the various regional and citywide documents. 17 Page 367 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO II` ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA General Plan The City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan sets a long-term vision and provides policy direction and guidance to residents, City staff, decision-makers, and the broader community. It was completed in 2010 and contains goals, policies, and actions that address the various key elements including land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise and safety. There are four policies contained in the General Plan regarding the buildout of electric vehicles and infrastructure listed in the Community and Mobility (CM) Section and Resource Conservation (RC) sections. This includes CM Policy 2.3 to support the use of hybrid, electric, and low/zero emission vehicles, CM Policy 2.4 to replace City vehicles with energy-efficient and alternative fuel source models when replacing vehicles or adding to the City's fleet, CM Policy 2.6 to accommodate charging and fueling stations for alternative fuel vehicles, and put forth strong efforts to have charging facilities provided at employment centers, and Policy RC 5.3 to explore and consider the costs and benefits of alternative fuel vehicles including hybrid, electric, natural gas, and hydrogen powered vehicles when purchasing new City vehicles. The City is in the process of updating its General Plan which includes the development of a Climate Action Plan. Climate action planning is an important part of the General Plan process as Rancho Cucamonga aims to meet state greenhouse gas reduction targets. The General Plan is a master document with overarching guidelines while the EV Readiness Plan provides additional specific details and is closely aligned with the citywide policy documents. Sustainable Community Action Plan Rancho Cucamonga adopted the Sustainable Community Action Plan in 2017, complementing the Healthy RC initiative developed in 2008. Healthy RC is a City-community partnership that develops programs, policies, infrastructure, partnerships, and community events to help build and maintain healthy minds, healthy bodies, and a clean and sustainable earth. The Sustainable Community Action Plan builds upon other planning efforts in RC, prioritizes the `triple bottom line' of economic, health, and environmental benefits, and plans future steps for RC to move towards a more sustainable future. Within the Sustainable Community Action Plan, Policy #4 indicates to increase the use of alternative fuels and EVs. The Transportation and Mobility Action 4.1 supports the development of electric vehicle infrastructure and charging stations at City-owned and private property. The Transportation and Mobility Action 4.2 aims to support efforts to introduce and integrate alternative fuel vehicles and technologies into the transportation network. 18 Page 368 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO II`t ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions The growing utilization of plug-in electric vehicles (EVs)will contribute towards reduced fossil fuel consumption and a reduction in GHG emissions, resulting in cleaner air quality, improved health outcomes, and reduced impact on the climate. A GHG Inventory Report was conducted in 2018, which monitors a list of activities and their GHG emission impact. The largest contributor to GHG emissions is On-road Transportation, emissions which involve the use of vehicles on roadways and freeways to and from the city. The second largest contributor to GHG emissions is Building Energy, referring to the consumption of energy and natural gas to power commercial, residential and industrial buildings. Figure 3-3: GHG Emissions in the City of Rancho Cucamonga GHG Emissions by Sector in 2018 water OR-Road Transportation 0.86% Solid Waste wastewater 1.99% 0.17% Agriculture 0.02% Building Energy 44.12% On-Road Transportation 51.54% •Building Energy •On-Road Transportation •Solid Waste m Water •Off-Road Transportation ■Wastewater ■Agricuture 19 Page 369 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHOQ I ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Chapter 4: Where Do We Need to Go? EV Registrations As of January 2020, Rancho Cucamonga is home to 2,551 total EVs, which is 16.78% of total EVs in San Bernardino County. Approximately, 1.8% of vehicles in Rancho Cucamonga are EVs, which is twice as high as the County's average, at 0.9%. The City has the highest percentage of EVs countywide, and exceeds the State's average of EVs at 1.2%. Figure 4-1: Percentage of Electric Vehicle Registrations 3 00% 250% 2.00% 150% 1.00% 0-50% 0.00% ■Calftmla ■San BemardinD County ■Rancho Cucamonga Adjusted County and City EV Projections The California Energy Commission (CEC) had originally estimated that by 2020, San Bernardino County would have 21,894 EVs. As of January 2020, there were only 15,203 EVs registered in the County of San Bernardino. In order to reflect the current rate of ownership of EVs, the CEC estimates were subsequently adjusted. DMV data was used to calculate the growth of EV ownership within the County between 2018 and 2020. This data was applied to the CEC estimates to determine the estimated EV ownership in the County for 2025 and 2030 (Table 4-1). The City in turn used the County projections for 2025 and 2030 in conjunction with currently having 16.78% of all County EV registrations, to estimate its own projections for 2025 and 2030 (See Table 4-2). Table 4-1: Adjusted San Bernardino County EV Projections Year Total EVs Total BEVs* 2018 8,033 3,019 2019 11,526 4,365 2020 15,203 6,703 2025 (projected) 43,772 23,153 2030 (projected) 72,287 39,603 *EVs include BEVs and plug-in hybrid vehicles 20 Page 370 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Table 4-2: Rancho Cucamonga EV Projections Year Total EVs Total BEVs* 2018 1,353 308 2019 1,895 547 2020 2,551 1,160 2025 (projected) 7,345 3,885 2030 projected 12,129 6,415 *EVs include BEVs and plug-in hybrid vehicles Adjusted County of San Bernardino EV Projections DMV data shows that between 2018 and 2020, the County of San Bernardino has seen an average increase of 37.7% for total EVs, and 49.1% for BEVs. Although the County has not reached the 2020 EV estimate provided by the Commission in SBCOG's ZEV Readiness Plan, the County is on track to reach the 2025 estimate. Adjusted estimates based off of DMV data have been developed and utilized to estimate projections through 2030, as shown on Figure 4-2. Figure 4-2: EV Registration Projections 2020-2030 14,000 12,000 10,000 ,. 8,000 — 6,000 — 4,U0'D January-18 September-20 June-23 March-26 December-M September-31 *PEVs *BEVs 'EVs include BEVs and plug-in hybrid vehicles Future Charging Needs Plug count demands for 2025 and 2030 were found using the recommended EV-to-plug ratios in SBCOG's ZEV Readiness and Implementation Plan and the EV estimates in Table 4-2. Currently the EV-to-plug ratio within the City is 12 to 1. According to this regional guidance, the City should meet or exceed the 11 to 1 EV-to-plug ratio goal by 2025 to adequately meet charging demand. To account for the growing number of EVs within the city, Rancho Cucamonga estimates that the community will need a total of 250 Level 2 charging plugs, and 22 DC fast charging plugs by 2025. As of 2020, we have exceeded the DC fast charger demand with 27. The community should have a total of 380 level 2 charging plugs and 35 DC fast charging plugs to meet charging demand in 2030. 21 Page 371 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Table 4-3: 2025 and 2030 EV Charging Infrastructure Projections ProjectedLevel 2 DC FC Number of EV-to-Plug Projected Number BEV-to-Plug EVs* Ratio Need of of BEVs Ratio - . . -1� 0 Plugs 1111- Plugs 2025 1 7,345 1 11 250 3,885 66 1 22 2030 1 12,129 1 11 380 6,415 66 35 `EVs include BEVs and plug-in hybrid vehicles Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan Survey Results The City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted an informal Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan survey from January to March 2019 with nearly 200 responses received. It was conducted at various special events, online, and through electric vehicle charger station payment providers. The survey was designed to solicit responses from non-EV owners regarding what would encourage them to purchase an EV, as well as those who currently own an EV in order to better assess what their charging needs are. The responses confirm that the City it will continue to see a rapid increase in EV ownership as nearly half of the respondents indicated that they were likely to purchase an electric vehicle in the next three years. EV owners charge their vehicle at a variety of locations, confirming the need for additional EV infrastructure at workplaces, multi-family units, and destinations. The data collected from this survey helped to shape the strategies and polices recommended in this Plan. Likelihood of EV Ownership For those who do not currently own an EV, 10% reported that they would be "Very Likely" to purchase one within the next 3 years, 33% were "Somewhat Likely", and 58% responded that they would be "Not Likely". Between 2019-2020, we have already seen a 23% increase in EV ownership in San Bernardino County. Figure 4-3: Likelihood of EV Ownership Q13 If you do not currently own a plug-in electric vehicle, how likely are you to purchase/lease a plug-in electric vehicle in the next 3 years? AnSrneredi 134 Skipped:63 10 80% 609' 40% 20'N Ox Very Likely Sam hat Likely Na[Likely 22 Page 372 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Primary Charging Locations EV owners charged their vehicles with the highest frequency at single-family homes, with 58% of EV owners reporting that they "Always" charge at home. The second most-commonly used charging location was the workplace, with 17% of respondents saying they "Always" charge at their workplace. Approximately 9% of EV owners reported high usage of a multi-family dwelling (MFD) charging station and 2% reported frequent usage of city-owned charging facilities. There is a significant need to expand the number of EV charging stations within MFDs, since only two MFDs currently offer EV charging. Nearly 60% of EV owners reported that they "Occasionally" charge their vehicles at retail stores and restaurants. Figure 4-4: Primary Charging Locations Q2 Please identify how often you charge your electric vehicle at the following locations Answered:54 Skipped:143 ao% 60% 40% 20% ' . t L ha l -A 0% Single Apartment/Gan Retail Workplace MY family home dominium stores and facilities complex restaurants Always M Frequently 0 Oncaslonally 0 Rarely 0 Never 23 Page 373 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO �`r ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Availability of Charging Locations A total of 43% of respondents said that EV charging stations are typically available, however 22% of respondents articulated that EV chargers were rarely or never available to them. Although this data indicates that the City of Rancho Cucamonga provides adequate charging stations, there will be a greater need to keep up with the rapidly growing market of EVs within the next 10 years. Figure 4-5: Availability of Charging Locations Q4 Are the public electric vehicle charging stations typically available? Answered.SO Skipped 141 AL—ys■ Frequentl G,—i—ll Farely Never 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% W%100% EV Charging Station Type The Level 2 charger was the most utilized public charging level, with 73% of EV owners reporting using Level 2 chargers. Level 2 chargers will continue to be highly utilized since they are cheaper to install and can provide 25-30 miles of charge per hour. The usage of DC fast charging stations should also be noted, which is reflected in the 35% of respondents reporting that they use public DC fast chargers. Figure 4-6: EV Charging Station Type Q3 What type of public electric vehicle charging stations do you use? Answered:50 Skipped:147 100% 80% 60% 40% 2096 0% Level 1 Level 2 DC Fast Charger I do not use any public electric vehicle charging_. 24 Page 374 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO �`r ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA EV Charging Applications ChargePoint's easy to use mobile interface makes it the more desirable option among EV owners. City-owned EV charging stations primarily ran through MobileNow!, which ceased their operations in 2020. Figure 4-7: EV Charging Applications Q5 What public electric vehicle charging application do you use? Answered_50 Skipped._-- 100% BO% 60°A 40% 20% 0°6 ChargePOint EVgo MoUeNo.! Apple/Android Other Pay (please Factors that Promote EV Ownership A total of 65% of respondents reported that financial incentives were the number one factor in increasing their likelihood of purchasing or leasing an EV. Nearly 40% of respondents also indicated that the availability of additional electric vehicle charging stations is important in their decision to purchase an EV. Additional information about EV's and various incentives will be useful for potential EV owners. Figure 4-8: Factors that Promote EV Ownership Q14 Which of the following option(s) will increase your likelihood of purchasing/leasing a plug-in electric vehicle? (select all that apply) Ansvuered:3.3n Skippei 63 Sao% 60% 60% 40% 2095 0% Adoit!ena! Financial More 00er(please electricvehicle iocentives Information specify) Charging abort electric 25 Page 375 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Electric Vehicle Range The vast majority of respondents own EVs with a range of 50-100 miles in a single charge. EV owners with a long daily commute may rely on workplace chargers to return home. Figure 4-9: Electric Vehicle Range Q10 How far is your electric vehicle's electric range? Answered:54 Skipped_143 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 50-100 miles 100-150 miles 150-200 miles 200+miles Daily Commute Approximately 20 percent of EV owners drive over 50 miles round trip during their daily commute. EV owners with lower electric range may rely on charging stations at or near their workplace to return home. Figure 4-10: Daily Commute Q11 How far is your typical daily roundtrip commute? ArkSwered_54 Skipped.143 I u-20 mileg 20-30 miles_ 30-60 miles_ 40.50 mile so.miles_ 0% 10% W14 30% K% SO% 60% 70% 80% M 100% 26 Page 376 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 377 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Chapter 5: How Do We Get There? Recommended Strategies The City is projected to have 7,345 EVs by 2025 and 12,129 EVs by 2030. To match these projections of growing EV ownership, the City will need to have a total of 272 charging plugs by 2025, and 405 charging plugs by 2030. In order to reach these goals, a number of strategies have been identified and are recommended for implementation. 1. Optimal charging sites identified: A quantitative and qualitative siting methodology for identifying optimal locations for EV charging was developed. Locations considered optimal for EV charging at destinations, workplaces, and multi-family dwellings have been identified for future outreach and collaboration. 2. Development policy recommendations: Eleven sample development policies for new construction, existing development, and new City facilities are identified for adoption. 3. Upgrade City-owned EV charging infrastructure: The City-owned and operated EV charging stations were installed nearly a decade ago and are now obsolete. The charging stations should be upgraded EV owners will be familiar with and comfortable utilizing the City's chargers. 4. Explore on-street charging: The City should evaluate an on-street charging approach when trying to expand charging opportunities in targeted areas. An example of a location which has already been identified as optimal for EV charging is the Terra Vista area, providing easy access for up to 1,000 apartment units within a 5-minute walk. Also, to identify optimal on-street charging opportunities in current and future development, the Planning Department should "flag" certain development plans based on pre-established criteria. 5. Equitable access: Utilizing a modified qualitative and quantitative methodology for identifying optimal locations, a number of affordable housing complexes located within the Disadvantaged Community(DAC), as identified by Cal EnviroScreen, have been identified for EV charging installation. The Family Resource Center and the Northtown Community Center, also located in the DAC, are identified as potential charging sites as well. 6. Gas Stations: As gasoline-powered vehicles are phased out for the next 20 years, key gas stations along major transportation corridors have been identified as optimal sites for transitioning to EV chargers. 7. Other destination charging opportunities: The Rancho Cucamonga Family Resource Center, Northtown Community Center, Haven City Market, and future high-speed rail/multi-modal station are also identified as key locations for EV chargers. 8. Accommodate EV Pickup Trucks with Trailers: As automobile manufacturers begin to unveil new lineups of EV pickup trucks, EV charging stations which are adequately sized to accommodate pickup trucks with attached trailers should be developed. The current EV charging network is unable to accommodate EV trucks with attached trailers. 27 Page 378 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Site Selection Analysis for EV Charging Methodology Utilizing a data-based site selection analysis, the top 10 charging locations for each of the following location types were identified: destination, workplace, and multi-unit family dwellings. Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Multi-Attribute Decision Method (MADM), a quantitative analysis was constructed to identify optimal EV charging locations. The methodology utilized a variety of data which included, depending on location type, parking, employee size, distance to nearest charging stations, cost of rent, age of building site, number of units, number of EVs in Rancho Cucamonga zip codes, AM/mid-day EV density, proximity to amenities, and proximity to areas in Rancho Cucamonga that are in need of charging stations. Using data-based decision-making helps ensure that future siting is strategic and focused. This methodology can be applied to any city parcel in order to determine site suitability for EV charging infrastructure. This section describes the methodology used by the City to determine optimal locations for EV infrastructure. Table 5-1: Site Suitability Analysis Methodology �Criterion Step Methodology 1 Assigned parcel based on land use: MFD, Workplace, or Destination. 2) Developed a data set that contained relevant criteria such as: cost of rent, employee size, employment type, number of employees to parking spaces, year built, number of units in an MFD, number of units to parking spaces, location, distance to nearest charger, number of EV's within a zip code, AM/PM EV density, and distance to shopping and other amenities. 3) Applied the Multi-Attribute Decision Making Method (MADM) to weight the im ortance of each data input. 4 Applied Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Multi-Attribute Decision Making (MADM) Scoring MADM involves evaluating the importance of a criterion based on its relation to another. Two criterions at a time are compared to each other using the weights below. Table 5-2: MADM Scoring of •• - Definition 1 Equal Importance 2 Midpoint 3 Moderate Importance 4 Midpoint 5 Strong Importance 6 Midpoint 7 Very Strong Importance 8 Midpoint 9 Extreme Importance 28 Page 379 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) The analytical hierarchy process was used to identify optimal EV infrastructure sites at destinations, MFDs, and workplaces. The process begun with identifying the objective goal, which is to place EV charging stations intentionally, maximizing the opportunity for utilization. Several criteria were then identified based on each location type to flag locations as optimal for EV infrastructure. Next, a hierarchy was constructed between each criterion, and pair-wise comparisons were made. Finally, weights for each criterion were calculated based on this pair- wise comparison. Table 5-3: Criteria Description N- • •aw Amenities Amenities include restrooms, shopping, and restaurants Distance to charger Distance to nearest level 2 or DCFC charging station Mid-day EV density EV density of a parcel during mid-day hours Number of EVs EV ownership within a zip code Cost of rent Average cost of rent for a 2-bedroom apartment at an MFD Number of units Number of units in an MFD Number of units to parking stalls Ratio of units to available parking stalls Age of development Year the workplace/MFD/destination was built Number of employees Number of employees at a workplace Number of employees to parking Ratio of employees to parking stalls stalls AM EV density EV density of a parcel during morning peak hours Office Employment type: office Destinations Destinations consist of retail locations, shopping centers, gas stations, City facilities or other areas with a relatively long dwell time. Optimal charging sites for destinations must include an analysis in consideration of mid-day EV density, distance to nearest charging station, number of EVs within a zip code, and ample amenities nearby. Amenities, such as Wi-Fi, restrooms, and restaurants, are the most important criteria measured because the placement of EV charging in close proximity to these amenities will support the local economy, as well as EV ownership. Fable 5-4: Destination Assigned Weight Justification MIXO Amenities 4• Destinations with amenities such as Wi-Fi, restrooms, and restaurants are optimal for EV charging sites. Distance to 3 Destinations farther than 0.5 miles away from the nearest charging charger stations have a higher need to install one on site. Mid-day EV 2 Destinations with higher midday EV density indicate primal density locations for EV charging stations. Number of EVs 2 The number of EV's registered to a zip code is significant in determining the demand of EV infrastructure for the community. Page 380 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Table 5-5: Top 10 Destination Locations for EV Charging Score'—Name Street Address Rancho Cucamonga Winery Estate Marketplace 7355 Day Creek Blvd 91739 99.1 Four Points Hotel 11960 Foothill Blvd 91739 99.1 99 Ranch 9775 Base Line Rd 91730 96.4 Terra Vista Town Center 10701 Town Center Dr 91730 96.4 Virginia Dare Winery Center 8200 Haven Ave 91730 96.4 Thomas Winery Plaza 8916 Foothill Blvd 91730 96.4 Orchard Plaza 9116 Foothill Blvd 91730 96.4 Central Park 11200 Baseline Rd 91701 92.5 Ralph's 12201 Highland Ave 91739 92.5 Day Creek Marketplace 7200 Day Creek Blvd 91739 92.5 Figure 5-1: Top 10 Destination Charging Locations 7. r jJ I I Foothill Feyr II r goo Q 4 f � � I ro � °t I —— � r- 1 I L- - -- - - -- - - J Multi-Family Dwellings In determining optimal locations for MFD charging sites, an analysis specific to Rancho Cucamonga includes the number of units, cost of rent, number of units to parking stalls, age of MFD, and number of EVs within a zip code. The cost of rent and the number of units within an MFD have been identified as the most important criteria in selecting EV charging locations. Data has shown a correlation between household income and EV ownership. The number of units within an MFD increases the community benefit of having an EV charger on site and increased demand and need. These recommendations do not consider electrical infrastructure capacity or property owner interest, rather, it identifies prime locations for EV charging based on the articulated criteria. Page 381 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Table 5-6: MFD Assigned Weight Justification Cost of rent 3 A study prepared on behalf of the California Air Resources Board displayed a correlation between household income and EV ownership. Number of 3 MFD's with a larger number of units increases the community benefit of units having EV infrastructure on site. Number of 2 ADA guidelines necessitate the loss of two parking spaces to equate to units to one EV charging space. MFD property owners are more willing to install parking EV infrastructure if they have a higher parking space to unit ratio. stalls Age of 1 The age of an MFD correlates to energy capacity, making it easier for development MFD's constructed after 1990 to install EV on site. Number of 1 The number of EV's registered to a zip code is significant in determining EVs the demand of EV infrastructure for the community. Table 5-7: Top 10 MFD Locations for EV Charging Street Address Zip Code � Rancho Cucamonga Score The Reserve 11210 Fourth St 91730 93.3 The Angelica 7828 Day Creek Blvd 91739 91.8 Victoria Arbors 7922 Day Creek Blvd 91739 91.8 Solamonte 9200 Milliken Ave 91730 87.2 Jamboree 10950 Church St 91730 85.1 Carmel 10850 Church St 91730 83.7 The Enclave 11755 Malaga Dr 91730 80.5 Ironwood 11100 Fourth St 91730 76.5 Camino Real 7951 Etiwanda Ave 91739 72.9 Village on 51, 9400 Fairway View PI 91730 72.3 Figure 5-2: Top 10 MFD Charging Locations � I ti L7 41,51 y�y _ L �ii a� YFII• Alfbd,4 xY, 31 Page 382 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Workplaces A workplace parcel analysis that is specific to Rancho Cucamonga includes: employee size, employment type (prioritizing office buildings), AM EV density, and available parking stalls that can be converted to an EV charging station. Employee size is the most significant factor weighted in this analysis since workplaces with a larger number of employees are more equipped to recover costs from EV infrastructure due to higher usage by employees. Table 5-8: Workplace Assigned Weight Justification 16=11 Justification Number of employees 4 Workplaces with a larger pool of employees are better able to justify costs for EV infrastructure due to higher demand and usage by employees. Number of employees 2 Workspaces with larger parking areas can more to parking stalls easily convert mores aces to EV infrastructure. AM EV density 2 AM EV density can tell us where large numbers of EVs are congregated during morning peak hours. Office 1 1 1 The office field is either a yes or no 0 or 1). Table 5-9: Top 10 Workplace Locations for EV Charging Name Street Address • • E6L ••: • •. • Arrow Business Center 11010 Arrow Route 91730 99.6 Realty One 10681 Foothill Blvd 91730 95.6 Rancho Technology Center 9605 E 9th St 91730 95.6 Arrow Business Center#2 9007 Arrow Route 91730 95.6 Amphastar 11570 6th St 91730 91.5 Bradshaw International 9409 Buffalo Ave 91730 90.3 The Executive Suite at Haven 9431 Haven Ave 91730 88.1 Aerotek 9445 Fairway View PI 91730 88.1 Adecco 9227 Haven Ave 91730 84.0 Stone Haven 9500 Haven Ave 91730 82.8 Page 383 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Figure 5-3: Top 10 Workplace Charging Locations I� Y 9anyan St k �S or in.ROaa- h 5 �a L —— —— — —— --. �. —Lin Bernardino Ara Development Policy Recommendations The implementation of development policies that prioritize the need for EV supply equipment for new and existing development plays a crucial role in expanding EV infrastructure. Below are the abbreviated development policies and directives that the Plan recommends adopting to expand EV charging opportunities in the community. The complete list of recommended policies, which can be found in Appendix B, are to be considered in the upcoming Development code update. Actual Development Codes ultimately adopted may vary from what is recommended, however it is expected to meet or exceed the intent of each standard contained in these recommendations. Adopt CALGreen's Tier 2 Voluntary Measures The Plan recommends that CALGreen's Tier 2 voluntary measures be adopted for commercial, industrial, and multi-family dwelling developments, to facilitate the installation of EV charging stations. The current CALGreen Building Code requires multi-family dwellings to allocate 10 percent of parking stalls to be EV Capable (conduit installed), and Tier 2 voluntary measures would increase this allocation to 20 percent. For commercial and industrial developments, the number of EV Ready (conduit with electrical outlet installed) parking stalls depends on the number of total parking stalls available. For example, currently it is required that approximately 6 percent of the parking stalls be EV Ready and Tier 2 would increase this to 12 percent. Future updates to CALGreen Code would guide property owners on the percentage of EV capable parking stalls that shall be installed. 33 Page 384 i, Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Require the Installation of EV Charging Stations at New Construction New commercial, industrial, and multi-family dwelling developments must install a minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger. EV charging station count requirements beyond this are determined by the number of EV capable parking stalls at each site. For every 10 EV capable or EV ready parking spaces provided, a minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger must be installed. All newly constructed City-owned facilities are also subject to installing a minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger. Require the Installation of EV Charging Stations at Tenant Improvement Sites Exterior tenant improvements exceeding a specified valuation will trigger the installation of electric vehicle charging stations. Parking reconfigurations are also subject to the installation of electric vehicle chargers. A minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger must be installed. Ensure Accessibility Currently, there is a disconnect between CALGreen requirements for the placement of EV capable parking stalls and ADA requirements. This causes obstacles during future EV charging station installation process, which requires that the first EV charging space be in compliance with accessibility requirements. To address this gap, the placement of conduit used for EV supply equipment should be provided so that the first EV charger will be placed nearest to ADA stalls. Equip Solar Carports with EVSE Capability A commercial solar carport will be required to install conduit for supporting future EV charging use. If an electric vehicle charger is installed at a solar carport within one year of the solar carport's installation, the permitting fee for the charger will be waived. EV Infrastructure Signage Directional signage must be present at the street entrances of parking lots to indicate the presence of electric vehicle chargers. At the location of each parking stall, restrictive signage must be installed, either by the usage of pole signs, or by way of pavement markings. Commercial advertising on EV charging stations is permitted only when EV charging is offered free of charge. This does not include standard manufacturer labeling of an EV charging product. 34 Page 385 i, Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Upgrade City-Owned EV Infrastructure Currently, a majority of City-owned EV charging stations are older Clipper Creek non-networked models, that do not have communications capabilities. Installed 10 years ago, there is a need to update the City's EV infrastructure, consistent with other "smart" public EV chargers in the community that EV drivers are accustomed to using. w r t 4W Explore On-Street Charging As a strategy for targeted EV charging placement, on-street charging is an approach that should be further explored. Opportunities for installing EV charging infrastructure can be limited in certain areas, especially those that do not currently have access to EV charging stations. On-street charging can serve as a targeted approach in these limited circumstances. For example, the City recommends that a Level 2 EV charger be installed on Elm Avenue or at Spruce Park in the Terra Vista area. Terra Vista is home to thirteen MFDs, making it a prime location to serve multiple apartment communities with a "neighborhood" EV charging station. Elm Avenue, adjacent to Spruce Ave, has been identified as a possible location for on-street EV infrastructure, due to the proximity to Carmel, Jamboree, Evergreen, and Mountainview apartment complexes. Figure 5- 5 depicts two optimal charging locations for EV charging along Elm Ave. The placement of an EV charger within the blue circle would serve a total of 1,071 multi-family units within a quarter mile radius, or a 5-minute walk, with the capacity to place the charger at either side of the street. The purple circle identifies a total of 1,018 units within a quarter mile radius if an EV charging station was placed further east along Elm Avenue. The placement of an on-street charger within the bounds of either of these areas would serve a large number of tenants, encouraging EV adoption in the Terra Vista area. Should neither of these on-street charging opportunities be feasible, Spruce Park, located within the blue radius circle, could also serve as an alternative. For future developments, the Planning Department could identify on-street charging opportunities when reviewing development plans utilizing pre-established criteria. Considerations to key criteria parameters such as traffic density, projected vehicle trips, and development configuration could help "flag" developments going through the permitting process that is complimented with on- street charging. Consideration should especially be taken for minimizing maintenance costs and collision damage as well as access to electrical power. 35 Page 386 i. Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Figure 5-4: On-Street Charging Location LU 'Sfartt Fl4•!Cf % Q '9 y v, Ffulh!vl•js=_rr Y f° Middle Scl,r.,ol m West Greenwa Park conga Water trick r0yvrl�, e nf� a J I. Ralph M.Lewts Park �L Faathlll Bl+td � ss - Equitable Access In order to ensure equitable access to EV infrastructure, the City's eight affordable housing complexes were run through their own modified siting analysis. Villa Del Norte, Monterey Village, and Mountainside were identified as top locations for EV infrastructure. The placement of an EV charger at these low-income apartment complexes will serve Rancho Cucamonga residents who live within the Disadvantaged Community (DAC) and provide equitable access to alternative fuel technology. Figure 5-5: Potential EV Chargers for Affordable Housing MFD's r._.—._._.t I+��._._� ----------------- Foothill Fwy _ -- — V . 1 I Legend 00 � Affordable Ar. O� I Housing MFD, —.—• • Oc I Disadvantaged Community •— — — _ _ —.—.— San Bernardino Av- 36 Page 387 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Gas Stations As many car manufacturers transition their vehicles to all electric over the next 10-15 years, gas stations must adapt as well or face irrelevance. While gas stations may not necessarily fit the Plan's strategy of putting EV charging infrastructure where people live, work and visit, nonetheless, installing EV chargers along major travel corridors would serve long- distance EV drivers that are traveling through Rancho Cucamonga to their destination. Table 5- 10 below identifies gas stations along the 210 and 15 freeway corridors that could serve these long-distance travelers. Table 5-10: Potential EV Charging Stations at Gas Stations Name Street Address . Code 76 6760 Carnelian St 91701 Mobil 10477 Lemon Ave 91737 76 6411 Haven Ave 91737 Mobil 6539 Milliken Ave 91701 ARCO 12280 Highland Ave 91739 Shell 12340 Highland Ave 91739 Chevron 8075 Monet Ave 91701 Chevron 12659 Foothill Blvd 91739 Figure 5-6: Potential EV Charging Stations at Gas Stations J — 7.r,_-r— 11—~ ~--1 I I f � L 1 r Fpotiniu eiYa � .. IArrnr.H- I t r— � 1 Other Destination Charging Opportunities RC Family Resource Center The RC Family Resource Center, a City facility located in Southwest Cucamonga, has the ability to serve EV owners who live in Southwest Cucamonga, and within the Disadvantaged Community. 37 Page 388 i, Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Northtown Community Center Northtown Community Center, located within the Disadvantaged Community, has also been identified as optimal for EV charging. This community center is a hub where residents can enjoy a variety of social and cultural activities. EV charging stations that are placed at this location would be an addition to the number of amenities this facility currently offers to its residents. Haven City Market Haven City Market is home to several different eateries and has proven to be extremely popular. Vehicle trip data was not available to run Haven City Market through the siting analysis, however its popularity, high volume of vehicle trips, and large parking lot makes it an ideal, high- impact location for EV charging. High Speed Rail Station A high-speed rail service is currently under construction from Las Vegas to Apple Valley, connecting Southern California to this popular destination, eventually adding an additional segment linking the speed rail to Rancho Cucamonga's Metrolink station. In addition, there are also efforts to construct the ONT Loop, a tunnel connecting the station to the Ontario International Airport. When built out, this one-of-a-kind transit center will be an ideal location to install substantial EV infrastructure. Accommodate EV Pickup Trucks with Trailers As automobile manufacturers begin to unveil new lineups of EV pickup trucks, EV charging stations which are adequately sized and situated to accommodate pickup trucks with trailers should be developed. Angled or pull-through parking spots with EV charging stations are best suited to accommodate EV pickup trucks. Rancho Cucamonga is situated along travel corridors to popular camping and boating destinations such as Big Bear, Arrowhead Lake, Joshua Tree, Lake Havasu, and Zion National Park to name a few. Funding Opportunities EV Purchase Rebates There are currently three statewide rebates for prospective EV owners. Since 2010, the State of California has distributed $809 million to go towards EV purchasing. Over the past couple of years, the demand for these rebates have exceeded the State budget for each program, so more stringent requirements have been implemented in the application process. These new requirements have set restrictions on income eligibility, allowing people of lower to moderate income to have increased access to statewide EV rebates. 38 Page 389 i, Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Table 5-11: EV Purchase Rebates Rebate Rebate Amount Cligibility Requirements California Clean Up to $1,500 Visit a participating automobile retailer Fuel Reward Clean Vehicle $5,000 Demonstrate California residency, meet household income Assistance eligibility requirements, declare number of people in your Program household Clean Vehicle $1,00047,000 Demonstrate California residency, meet income eligibility Rebate Project requirements, and submit a CVRP rebate application. (CVRP) Note: Funding is exhausted for standard and increased rebate. Qualified applicants on the rebate waitlist may receive a rebate if the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP) receives funding from the State of California. Clean Vehicle Rebate Project I Center for Sustainable Energy Federal Tax $2,500-$7,500 The federal tax credit is dependent on your tax liability. All Credits battery-electric vehicles are eligible for the full $7,500, while other tax credit amounts depend on the capacity of the EVs battery. 39 Page 390 i, Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA EV Supply Equipment Incentives There are several incentives that reduce the financial cost of installing EV chargers. Some of these incentives include grants that cover the cost of EV chargers, and others offer loans for small businesses to acquire EV infrastructure. Among these incentives is an effort by the Southern California Incentive Project to increase EV infrastructure in disadvantaged communities (DAC). Table 5-12: EV Supply Equipment Incentives Incentive Eligibility Requirements Rancho Cucamonga RCMU is offering a rebate, up to $5,000, to be used towards Municipal expanding the charging network. The rebate can be used by Utility (RCMU) Electric Vehicle RCMU's commercial customers to offset costs associated with Commercial Charger Rebate installing a level 2 or a DC fast charger for use by their employees, tenants, or the general public. A rebate for residential customers is currently being explored. CALeVIP EVSE Incentive The California Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Project (CALeVIP) Program Support guides and helps fund EV supply equipment projects to reach the regions need for level 2 and DCFC EV supply equipment. CALeVIP Loan and Rebate The Electric Vehicle Charging Station Financing Program Program provides loans for small businesses in California to install EV supply equipment. Businesses who repay the loan in full or who have been making consistent timely payments on the loan are eligible for a rebate of 50% of the loan loss reserve amount. More information can be found here. EVSE Rebate Southern The Southern California Incentive Project offers rebates of up California to $70,000 per direct current (DC)fast charger for installations at new sites. Installations in disadvantaged communities are eligible to receive up to $80,000 per DC fast charger, up to 80% of the project cost. EVSE Rebate for Businesses: Southern California Edison's (SCE) Charge Ready Southern California Edison Program toward the purchase and installation of a minimum of four Level 1 or Level 2 EV supply equipment, or a minimum of five Level 1 or Level 2 EV supply equipment in disadvantaged communities. 40 Page 391 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Conclusion The Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan provides a clear roadmap to advance the City's EV adoption rates by ensuring that a community-wide EV charging network is in place to secure current and future needs. Periodic reviews will be conducted to evaluate progress. The site suitability analysis will guide future efforts in determining optimal locations for electric vehicle charging. In addition, key policies from the Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan will be incorporated in the General Plan and Development Code update. The policies contained in the Plan seek to advance new construction developments, tenant improvements, and signage standards, equipping them with electric vehicle infrastructure. As the City looks to the future, Rancho Cucamonga will work to align efforts with the State's electric vehicle goals and greenhouse gas reduction targets through 2030 and beyond. 41 Page 392 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 393 �• Rancho Cucamonga LIST RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Works Cited "2019 California Green Building Standards Code." calgreenenergyservices.com/wp/wp- content/u ploads/2019_cal iforn ia_g reen_code.pdf. "California Green Innovation Index." Next 10, www.next10.org/sites/default/files/2020-12/2020- californ ia-green-innovation-index-final_0.pdf. "Charging at Home." Energy.gov, www.energy.gov/eere/electricvehicles/charging-home. Electric Vehicle Infrastructure 2019 Reach Code Language. www.sccgov.org/sites/dpd/DocsForms/Documents/ReachCode_EV.pdf. "Electricity Laws and Incentives in California." Alternative Fuels Data Center. Electricity Laws and Incentives in California, afdc.energy.gov/fuels/laws/ELEC?state=CA. "EV Sales Forecast- US & California -2016-2025." EVAdoption, evadoption.com/ev-sales/ev- sales-forecasts/ev-sales-forecast us-california-2016-2025/. Fuel Type by City as of 11112020. Department of Motor Vehicles. TEV Atlas." ArcGIS Web Application, Southern California Association of Governments , maps.scag.ca.gov/electric_vehicle/index.html. PlugShare. www.plugshare.com/. "Statistics of the Week: Comparing Vehicle Ranges for Gas, BEV and PHEV Models." EVAdoption, 27 Jan. 2018, evadoption.com/statistics-of-the-week- comparing-vehicle-ranges-for-gas-bevs-and- phevs/#:-:text=And%20an%20average%20range%20of,adopters%20and%20early%20 majority%20consumers. UCLA. "Factors Affecting Plug-In Electric Vehicle Sales in California." 23 May 2017, ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//research/apr/past/l 3-303.pdf. "Zero Emission Vehicle Readiness and Implementation Plan." San Bernardino Council of Governments, www.gosbcta.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/SBCOG-ZEV_Final- Online-Version-11619.pdf. 42 Page 394 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 395 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Appendix A: Siting Analysis Results Destination Scoring Criteria Weights Amenities (out .f 3) Weight Distance to Nearest Charger 1 33% 0-0.25 miles 33% 2 66% 0.26-0.49 miles 66% 3 99% 0.5+ miles 99% Mid-Day EV Density Weight Number of EVs by Zip Code —Weight 1-15 33% 449 51% 16-30 66% 490 56% 31+ 99% 723 82% 879 100% Locations Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 15.1% Destinationto •-Day EV Number of by • ,&I[ Nearest CS Densil • • Winery Estate Market 3 of 3 0.8mi 31+ 879 Place 99% 99% 99% 100% 36.3 27.8 19.9 15.1 Total: 99.1 Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 15.1% tination . • Number 9 Nearest CS � Density by • Code Four Points Hotel 3 of 3 0.5 miles 31+ 879 99% 99% 99% 100% 36.3 27.8 19.9 15.1 Total: 99.1 Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 15.1% stination Amenities Distance to Mid-Day E Number of Nearest CS Density by Zip Code 99 Ranch Market 3 of 3 1 mile 31+ 723 99% 99% 99% 82% 36.3 27.8 19.9 12.4 Total: 96.4 43 Page 396 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 15.1% • D. Number . • • • -RTerra Vista Town Center 3 of 3 0.9 ! Density iles 31+ 723 99% 99% 99% 82% 36.3 27.8 19.9 12.4 Total: 96.4 Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 0150.1%• � .Virginia Dare Center 3 of 3 0.6 miles 31+ 99% 99% 99% 82% 36.3 27.8 19.9 12.4 Total: 96.4 Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 15.1% Thomas Winery Plaza 3 of 3 0.9 miles 31+ 723 99% 99% 99% 82% 36.3 27.8 19.9 12.4 Total: 96.4 Weight 36.7% 28. %% 20.1% 15.1% Number of EVs � - • • • • - Orchard Plaza 3 of 3 0.9 miles 31+ 723 99% 99% 990 82% 36.3 27.8 19.9 12.4 Total: 96.4 Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 15.1% Destination Distance to Mid-Day NumberMM,",.Nearest CS D- by Zip Code Central Park 3 of 3 1.9mi 31+ 490 99% 99% 99% 56% 36.3 27.8 19.9 8.5 Total: 92.5 Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 15.1% EB1_.stination Distance to Mid-Day EV Number of EVs I ANA: _S&ALV,%LCS Density by Zip Code Ralph's 3 of 3 2 miles 16-30 879 99% 99% 66% 100% 36.3 27.8 13.3 15.1 Total: 92.5 Page 397 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Weight 36.7% 28.1% 20.1% 15.1% • � . Number by • • • - Day Creek Marketplace 3 of 3 1.1 miles 16-30 879 99% 99% 66% 100% 36.3 27.8 13.3 15.1 Total: 92.5 Multi-Family Dwelling Storing Criteria Number of Units —Weight Cost of Rent (2 bedroom) Weight 100-200 25% $1,600-$1,849 25% 201-300 50% $1,850-$2,100 50% 301-400 75% $2,100-$2,349 75% 401+ 100% $2,350+ 100% Number of Units to Parking Weight Number of EVs by Zip Code Weight Stalls &LL 449 51% 0-0.27 ratio 25% 490 56% 0.28-0.55 ratio 50% 723 82% 0.56-0.83 ratio 75% 1 879 100% 0.84+ ratio 100% MFDs built after 1990 pass the age criteria. Locations Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% • - . . oil , • The Reserve 467 2,537 0.59 15 723 100% 100% 75% Pass 82% 32.8 24.4 14 13 9.1 Total: 93.3 Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% • The Angelica 319 2,425 1.13 15 879 75% 100% 100% Pass 100% 24.6 24.4 18.7 13 11.1 Total: 91.8 Page 398 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1 Number of ALI= Number of Units 111res Victoria Arbors 319 2,524 0.85 14 879 75% 100% 100% Pass 100% 24.6 24.4 18.7 13 11.1 Total: 91.8 Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% LD 1ILNumber of Cost Number of Units to Age Number of I Parking Stalls EVs Solamonte 521 2,250 0.69 18 723 100% 75% 75% Pass 82% 32.8 18.3 14 13 9.1 Total: 87.2 Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% M4mber of Uniff?173W� Number of Jamboree 358 2,493 0.60 18 723 75% 100% 75% Pass 82% 24.6 24.4 14 13 9.1 7 Total: 85.1 Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% L Number ofIF Cost Number of Units to Age Number of hL Units Parking EVs Carmel 306 2,263 0.88 18 723 75% 75% 100% Pass 82% 24.6 18.3 18.7 13 9.1 Total: 83.7 Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% mr 11 0 - * 11111MM I . 0 gnmimpli The Enclave 306 2,985 0.39 18 723 75% 100% 50% Pass 82% 24.6 24.4 9.4 13 9.1 Total: 80.5 46 Page 399 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% Number ofFj 0 M'111 TMM 0 0 . Number of Units 9.N Ironwood 496 2,060 0.50 18 723 100% 50% 50% Pass 82% 32.8 12.2 9.4 13 9.1 Total: 76.5 Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% MFD Number of Cost Number of Units to Age Number of Camino Real 272 2,150 0.68 1 18 879 50% 75% 75% Pass 100% 16.4 18.3 14.1 13 11.1 Total: 72.9 Weight 32.8% 24.4% 18.7% 13% 11.1% I,Wrumber of UniW76 Number of G1 A# I�L-.Parking Stalls jw� EVs Village on 5th 264 2,354 1 0.49 15 723 50% 100% 50% Pass 82% 16.4 24.4 9.4 13 9.1 Total: 72.3 Workplace Scoring Employee to Parking Stalls Weight 0-0.5 ratio 33% 0-50 12.50% 0.51-1 ratio 66% 51-100 25% 1+ ratio 99% 101-150 37.50% 151-200 50% AM EV Density Weight201-250 62.50% 1-15 33% 251-300 1 75% 16-30 66% 301-350 87.50% 31+ 99% 351+ 100% Office buildings were given full points for the office criteria. Locations Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% orkplace . • Number DensityEi Arrow Business 399 Yes 31+ 1.05 Center 100% 100% 99% 99% 42.3 22.7 22.5 12.1 Total: 99.6 47 Page 400 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% Employees 51MM Parking Stalls Realty One Building 389 Yes 31+ .64 100% 100% 99% 66% 42.3 22.7 22.5 8.1 Total: 95.6 Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% Workplace Number of Office AM EV Number of Employees Employees Rancho Technology 735 Yes 31+ .97 Center 100% 100% 99% 66% 42.3 22.7 22.5 8.1 Total: 95.6 Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% 18MEW Arrow Business 449 Yes 31+ .71 Center#2 100% 100% 99% 66% 42.3 22.7 22.5 8.1 Total: 95.6 Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% Workplace Number of Office AM EV Number of Employees to I&Employe - • Stalls Amphastar 1,300 Yes 31+ .35 Pharmaceuticals 100% 100% 99% 33% 42.3 22.7 22.5 4.0 Total: 91.5 Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% 11rkplace I I Number of Office AM EV Number of Employees)OA Employe ILDensity Parking Stalls Bradshaw International 350 Yes 31+ .59 Corps 87.50% 100% 99% 66% 37.0 22.7 22.5 8.1 Total: 90.3 48 Page 401 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% -JEfworkplac,e, ..j, .. • - Employees . . Density The Executive Suite at 399 Yes 16-30 .59 Haven 100% 100% 66% 66% 42.3 22.7 15.0 8.1 Total: 88.1 Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% orkplace Number of r • Employees . . Density Aerotek 434 Yes 16-30 .63 100% 100% 66% 66% 42.3 22.7 15.0 8.1 Total: 88.1 Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% Workplace Number of Office AM EV Number of Employees to Employees Density • Stalls Adecco 693 Yes 16-30 .39 100% 100% 66% 33% 42.3 22.7 15.0 4.0 Total: 84.0 Weight 42.3% 22.7% 22.7% 12.2% 6 Workplace Number of Office AM EV Number of Employees to Employees Density Stone Haven 311 Yes 16-30 .9 87.5 100% 66% 66% 37.0 22.7 15.0 8.1 Total: 82.8 49 Page 402 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 403 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Appendix B: Recommended Policies Development Code The implementation of development policies which extend far beyond required building and development standards will play a crucial role in expanding EV infrastructure in the community. Below are recommended development policies that are to be considered in the upcoming Development Code update. The following sample development policies are provided as recommended strategies, and are subject to change. Development policies ultimately adopted may vary from these recommendations, but should meet or exceed the intent of these policies, with consideration to the overarching goal of expanding EV infrastructure at destinations, MFDs, and workplaces. Policy 1: Require Tier 2 of CALGreen's voluntary measures for qualifying new commercial construction and new industrial construction as they relate to Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment. MC 1.1 New construction commercial and industrial developments are required to have EV ready parking spaces. The number of EV ready parking spaces depends on the number of parking stalls on site. Updates to the CALGreen Code Tier 2 shall guide the developer on what percentage of parking stalls shall be EV ready for supporting future EV supply equipment. MC 1.2 The service panel or subpanel circuit directory shall indicate that the overcurrent protective device is designated for future EV charging purposes. In accordance with California Electrical Code, the receptacle or blank cover shall be identified as "EV CAPABLE". In addition, a marker must be present at the location of conduit to label designated EV capable parking spaces. Policy 2: Require Tier 2 of CALGreen's voluntary measures for qualifying new construction multi- family dwellings as they relate to Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment. MC 2.1 New construction multi-family dwellings are required to have EV capable parking spaces. The number of EV capable parking spaces depends on the number of parking stalls on site. Updates to the CALGreen Code Tier 2 shall guide the owner of a new-construction MFD on what percentage of unreserved parking stalls shall be EV capable for supporting future Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment. MC 2.2 The service panel or subpanel circuit directory shall indicate that the overcurrent protective device is designated for future EV charging purposes. In accordance with California Electrical Code, the receptacle or blank cover shall be identified as "EV CAPABLE". In addition, a marker must be present at the location of conduit to label designated EV capable parking spaces. Policy 3: New commercial, industrial, and multi-family dwelling developments must install a minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger. For every 10 EV capable or EV ready parking spaces provided, a minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger must be installed. For every 30 EV capable or EV ready parking spaces, developers are eligible to install one DC fast charger in lieu of three dual port Level 2 chargers. 50 Page 404 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Policy 4: Exterior tenant improvements over 25,000 square feet initiated by the property owner or anchor store, which exceed $500,000 in assessed value, or the new construction, expansion, reconfiguration, or significant reconstruction of parking lots will trigger the installation of electric vehicle charging stations. A minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger must be installed. Policy 5: Placement of conduit used for future Electric Vehicle infrastructure use must consider accessibility articulated in Chapter 11 of California Building Code. Conduit shall be provided so that the first EV charger will be placed accessible from ADA stalls. Policy 6: All newly constructed City-owned facilities must install a minimum of two dual port Level 2 chargers or one DC fast charger. Policy 7: It shall be a condition of a commercial solar carport PV permit to install at least one listed raceway to accommodate a dedicated 208/240-volt branch circuit. In addition to being in accordance with the mandatory CALGreen measures,the raceway shall not be less than 2-inches in diameter. The placement of conduit shall be placed nearest to ADA parking stalls. The first EV parking space shall be accessible, in accordance with Chapter 11 of California Building Code. Policy 8: When an electric vehicle charger is installed a solar carport that had the additional raceway provided, the permitting fee for the charger will be waived. One dual port Level 2 charger or one DC fast charger must be installed to be eligible for the permit waiver. Electric vehicle charger additions to solar carports are eligible for the waiver if the charger is installed within one year of the solar carport installation. Policy 9: Directional signage must be present at the street entrances of parking lots to indicate the presence of electric vehicle chargers. Signage must be reflectorized, 70 square inches, and with lettering no less than one inch in height. Signage must include the FHWA-approved descriptive wayfinding sign and symbolized EV wayfinding sign. Policy 10: At the location of each parking stall, restrictive signage must be installed, either by the usage of pole signs, or by way of pavement markings. Pole signs must be reflectorized, 70 square inches, with lettering no less than one inch in height. The pole itself must be at least 80 inches tall. Pavement markings must read "EV CHARGING ONLY". Policy 11: Commercial advertising on EV charging stations is permitted only when EV charging is offered free of charge. This does not include standard manufacturer labeling of an EV charging product. 51 Page 405 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Appendix Regulations State Laws and Regulations California Civil Code Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) policies for Residential 1947.6, 1952.7, and and Commercial Renters 6713 The lessor of a dwelling or commercial property must approve written requests from a lessee to install EVSE at a parking space allotted for the lessee on qualified properties. Certain exclusions apply to residential dwellings and commercial properties. All modifications and improvements must comply with federal, state, and local laws and all applicable zoning and land use requirements, covenants, conditions, and restrictions. The lessee of the parking space equipped with EVSE is responsible for the cost of the installation, maintenance, repair, removal, or replacement of the equipment, electricity consumption, as well as any resulting damage to the EVSE or surrounding area. Unless the EVSE is certified by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory and electrical upgrades are performed by a licensed electrician, the lessee must also maintain a personal liability coverage policy in an amount of up to 10 times the annual rent of the dwelling. Any application for approval should be processed by the common interest development association without willful avoidance or delay. The homeowner and each successive homeowner of the parking space or unit equipped with EVSE or a TOU meter is responsible for the cost of the installation, maintenance, repair, removal, or replacement of the equipment, as well as any resulting damage to the EVSE, TOU meter, or surrounding area. The homeowner must also maintain a $1 million umbrella liability coverage policy and name the common interest development as an additional insured entity under the policy. If EVSE or a PEV-dedicated TOU meter is installed in a common area for use by all members of the association, the common interest development must develop terms for use of the EVSE or TOU meter. California Civil Code Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Policies for Multi-Unit 4745 and 6713 Dwellings A common interest development, including a community apartment, condominium, and cooperative development, may not prohibit or restrict the installation or use of EVSE or a plug-in electric vehicle (PEV)- dedicated time-of-use (TOU) meter in a homeowner's designated parking space or unit. These entities may put reasonable restrictions on EVSE, but the policies may not significantly increase the cost of the EVSE or significantly decrease its efficiency or performance. Restrictions may be placed on TOU meter installations if they are based on the structure of or available space in the building. If installation in the homeowner's designated parking space or unit is not possible, with authorization, the homeowner may add EVSE or a PEV-dedicated TOU meter in a common area. The homeowner must obtain appropriate approvals from the common interest development association and agree in writing to comply with applicable architectural standards, 52 Page 406 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA engage a licensed installation contractor, provide a certificate of insurance, and pay for the electricity usage, maintenance, and other costs associated with the EVSE or TOU meter. California Code of Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Billing Requirements Regulations Title 4, EVSE charging rates must be based on a price per megajoule or Section 4001 and kilowatt-hour. All EVSE must be able to indicate the billing rate at any 4002.11 point during a transaction. Existing Level 2 EVSE installed before January 1, 2021, must be updated by January 1, 2031, and Level 2 EVSE installed after January 1, 2021, must comply upon installation. Existing direct current (DC) fast chargers installed before January 1, 2023, must be updated by January 1, 2033, and DCFC installed after January 1, 2023, must comply upon installation. California Code of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Regulations Title 13, Requirement Sections 1963- The California Air Resources Board's (ARB) Advanced Clean Truck 1963.5 and 2012- Program requires all new medium- and heavy-duty vehicles sold in 2012.2 California to be a ZEV by 2045. Zero-emission technologies include all- electric and fuel cell electric vehicles. Beginning in 2024, manufacturers seeking ARB certification for Class 2b through Class 8 chassis or complete vehicles with combustion engines will be required to sell zero- emission trucks as an increasing percentage of their annual California sales. Manufacturers must achieve the following annual sales percentages for medium- and heavy-duty ZEVs sold in California: ZEV Sales Percerrtages Vehicle Class 2b-3 Class Class 6-8, Class 7- Model Year 45 excluding 8 (MY) tractors Tractors 2024 5% 9% 9% 5% 2025 7% 11% 11% 7% 2026 10% 13% 13% 10% 2027 15% 20% 20% 15% 2028 20% 30% 30% 20% 2029 25% 40% 40% 25% 2030 30% 50% 50% 30% 2031 35% 55% 55% 35% 2032 40% 60% 60% 40% 2033 45% 65% 65% 40% 2034 50% 70% 70% 40% 2035 and 55% 75% 75% 40% future years *Excludes pickup trucks for 2024-2026 MYs Additionally, entities with annual gross revenues greater than $50 million, fleet owners with 50 or more medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, and any California government or federal agency with one or more vehicles over 8,500 pounds must report their existing fleet operations to 53 Page 407 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN Cl1CAMONGA ensure fleets are purchasing and placing zero-emission trucks in the correct service locations. For more information, including additional requirements and exemptions, see the ARB Advanced Clean Trucks Pro ram website. California Code of Mobile Source Emissions Reduction Requirements Regulations Title 13, Through its Mobile Sources Program, the California Air Resources 2021-2027 Board (ARB) has developed programs and policies to reduce emissions from on-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles through the installation of verified diesel emission control strategies (VDECS) and vehicle replacements. The on-road heavy-duty diesel vehicle rule (i.e., truck and bus regulation) requires the retrofit and replacement of nearly all privately owned vehicles operated in California with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 14,000 pounds (lbs.). School buses owned by private and public entities and federal government owned vehicles are also included in the scope of the rule. By January 1, 2023, nearly all vehicles must have engines certified to the 2010 engine standard or equivalent. The dravage truck rule regulates heavy-duty diesel-fueled vehicles that transport cargo to and from California's ports and intermodal rail facilities. The rule requires that certain drayage trucks be equipped with VDECS and that all applicable vehicles have engines certified to the 2007 emissions standards. By January 1, 2023, all applicable vehicles must have engines certified to 2010 standards. The solid waste collection vehicle rule regulates solid waste collection vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 lbs. or more that operate on diesel fuel, have 1960 through 2006 engine models, and collect waste for a fee. The fleet rule for public agencies and utilities requires fleets to install VDECS on vehicles or purchase vehicles that run on alternative fuels or use advanced technologies to achieve emissions requirements by specified implementation dates. California Code of Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) Charging Requirements Regulations Title 13, New PEVs must be equipped with a conductive charger inlet port that Section 1962.3 meets the specifications contained in Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) standard J1772. PEVs must be equipped with an on-board charger with a minimum output of 3.3 kilowatts (kW). These requirements do not apply to PEVs that are only capable of Level 1 charging, which has a maximum power of 12 amperes (amps), a branch circuit rating of 15 amps, and continuous power of 1.44 kW. California Code of State Agency Low Carbon Fuel Use Requirement Regulations Title 17, At least 3% of the aggregate amount of bulk transportation fuel Sections 95480- purchased by the state government must be from very low carbon 95486 transportation fuel sources. The required amount of very low carbon transportation fuel purchased will increase by 1% annually until January 1, 2024. Some exemptions may apply, as determined by the California Department of General Services (DGS). Very low carbon fuel is defined as a transportation fuel having no greater than 40% of the carbon intensity of the closest comparable petroleum fuel for that year. California Code of Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Production Requirements Regulations Title 13, The California Air Resources Board (ARB) certifies new passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles as ZEVs if 54 Page 408 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Section 1962- the vehicles produce zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant(or 1962.2 precursor pollutant) under any and all possible operational modes and conditions. Manufacturers with annual sales between 4,501 and 60,000 vehicles may comply with the ZEV requirements through multiple alternative compliance options that include producing low emission vehicles and obtaining ZEV credits. Manufacturers with annual sales of 4,500 vehicles or less are not subject to this regulation. ARB's emissions control program for MY 2017 through 2025 combines the control of smog, soot, and greenhouse gases (GHGs) and requirements for ZEVs into a single package of standards called Advanced Clean Cars. In December 2012,ARB finalized new regulatory requirements that allow vehicle manufacturer compliance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's GHG requirements for MY 2017- 2025 to serve as compliance with California's adopted GHG emissions requirements for those same model years. The accounting procedures for MY 2018-2025 are based on a credit system as shown in the table below. The minimum ZEV requirement for each manufacturer includes the percentage of passenger cars and light- duty trucks produced by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California. The regulation also includes opportunities for compliance with transitional zero emission vehicles, which must demonstrate certain exhaust emissions standards, evaporative emissions standards, on-board diagnostic requirements, and extended warranties. MY ZEV Requirement 2020 9.5% 2021 12% 2022 14.5% 2023 17% 2024 19.5% 2025 and later 22% California Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) Charging Electricity Exemption Government Code Municipalities may not restrict the types of PEVs, such as plug-in hybrid 14678 electric vehicles, that may access a PEV charging station that is public, intended for passenger vehicle use, and funded in any part by the state or utility ratepayers. California State Transportation Plan Government Code The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) must update the 65070-65073 California Transportation Plan (Plan) by December 31, 2020, and every five years thereafter. The Plan must address how the state will achieve maximum feasible emissions reductions, taking into consideration the use of alternative fuels, new vehicle technology, and tailpipe emissions reductions. Caltrans must consult and coordinate with related state agencies, air quality management districts, public transit operators, and regional transportation planning agencies. Caltrans must also provide an opportunity for general public input. Caltrans must submit a final draft 55 Page 409 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA of the Plan to the legislature and governor. A copy of the 2016 report is available on the Caltrans website. Caltrans must also review the Plan and prepare a report for the legislature and governor that includes actionable, programmatic transportation system improvement recommendations every five years. California Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Local Permitting Government Code Policies 65850.7 Cities and counties must adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited and streamlined permitting process for EVSE. Each city or county must consult with the local fire department or district and the utility director to develop the ordinance, which must include a checklist of all requirements for EVSE to be eligible for expedited review. A complete application that is consistent with the city or county ordinance must be approved, and entities submitting incomplete applications must be notified of the necessary required information to be granted expedited permit issuance. California Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) Charging Access Government Code Municipalities may not restrict the types of PEVs, such as plug-in hybrid 65850.9 electric vehicles, that may access a PEV charging station that is public, intended for passenger vehicle use, and funded in any part by the state or utility ratepayers. California Health Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Programs Report and Safety Code The California Air Resources Board (ARB), in partnership with its 43018.1 stakeholders, must complete a report that reviews each of ARB's ZEV- related programs by July 1, 2019. Specifically, the report must include an analysis of the greenhouse gas and air quality goals of each ZEV program, the progress of each program towards meeting its goals, and a cost-benefit analysis of each program. In this report, ARB must also propose recommendations for improvements to these programs and on how to encourage the cost-effective deployment of ZEVs in fleets across the state. For more information, see the ARB ZEV Program website. California Health State Agency Low Carbon Fuel Use Requirement and Safety Code At least 3% of the aggregate amount of bulk transportation fuel 43870 purchased by the state government must be from very low carbon transportation fuel sources. The required amount of very low carbon transportation fuel purchased will increase by 1% annually until January 1, 2024. Some exemptions may apply, as determined by the California Department of General Services (DGS). Very low carbon fuel is defined as a transportation fuel having no greater than 40% of the carbon intensity of the closest comparable petroleum fuel for that year, as measured by the methodology in California Code of Regulations Title 17, Sections 95480-95486. DGS will submit an annual progress report to the California Legislature. California Health Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Initiative and Safety Code The California Air Resources Board's (ARB) Charge Ahead California 44258.4 Initiative was established to help place into service at least 1 million ZEVs and near-zero emission vehicles in California by January 1, 2023. In consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, ARB prepared a funding plan that includes 56 Page 410 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA a market and technology assessment, assessments of existing zero and near-zero emission funding programs, and programs that increase access to disadvantaged, low-income, and moderate-income communities and consumers. Potential programs under the initiative include those involving innovative financing, car sharing, charging infrastructure in multi-unit dwellings located in disadvantaged communities, public transit, and agricultural vanpool programs. The funding plan must be updated at least every three years through January 1, 2023. California Health Alternative Fuel and Vehicle Incentives and Safety Code The California Energy Commission (CEC) administers the Clean 44270-44274.7 Transportation Program (Program) to provide financial incentives for businesses, vehicle and technology manufacturers, workforce training partners, fleet owners, consumers, and academic institutions with the goal of developing and deploying alternative and renewable fuels and advanced transportation technologies. Funding areas include: • Electric vehicles and charging infrastructure; • Hydrogen vehicles and refueling infrastructure; • Medium- and heavy-duty zero emission vehicles; • Natural gas vehicles and refueling infrastructure; • Biofuels; and, • Workforce development. The CEC must prepare and adopt an annual Investment Plan for the Program to establish funding priorities and opportunities that reflect program goals and to describe how program funding will complement other public and private investments. For more information, see the Program website. California Health Plug-In Hybrid and Zero Emission Light-Duty Public Fleet Vehicle and Safety Code Fleet Rebates 44274 and 44258 The Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP) offers rebates to eligible state and local public entities for the purchase of qualified light-duty fleet vehicles. Public fleets located in disadvantaged communities are eligible for increased incentives. Eligible vehicles must be certified by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Rebates are available on a first-come, first-served basis. Manufacturers must apply to ARB to have their vehicles considered for rebate eligibility. Each entity may receive up to 30 rebates annually and cannot receive CVRP incentives for the same vehicle. For more information, including a list of eligible vehicles, locations, and entities, see the For Public Fleets website. California Health Establishment of Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) and Near-ZEV and Safety Code Component Rebates 44274.9 The California Air Resources Board (ARB) will establish the Zero Emission Assurance Project (ZAP) to offer rebates for the replacement of a battery, fuel cell, or other related vehicle component for eligible used ZEVs and near-ZEVs. Rebates will be limited to one per vehicle. By January 1, 2024, ARB must publish a report to the legislature detailing the number of rebates awarded, the emissions benefits of the ZAP, and the impacts of the ZAP on low-income consumer decisions to purchase zero and near-zero emissions vehicles. A ZEV is defined as 57 Page 411 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN Cl1CAMONGA a vehicle that produces no criteria pollutant, toxic air contaminant, or greenhouse gas emissions when stationary or operating. A near-ZEV is a vehicle that uses zero emission technologies, uses technologies that provide a pathway to zero emission operations, or incorporates other technologies that significantly reduce vehicle emissions. Rebates will be available through July 31, 2025. California Health Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Grants and Safety Code The Motor Vehicle Registration Fee Program (Program) provides 44220b funding for projects that reduce air pollution from on- and off-road vehicles. Eligible projects include purchasing AFVs and developing alternative fueling infrastructure. Contact local air districts and see the Program website for more information about available grant funding and distribution from the Program. California Health Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Open Access and Safety Code Requirements 44268 and 44268.2 EVSE service providers may not charge a subscription fee or require membership for use of their public charging stations. In addition, providers must disclose the actual charges for using public EVSE at the point of sale; allow at least two options for payment; and disclose the EVSE geographic location, schedule of fees, accepted methods of payment, and network roaming charges to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Exceptions apply. The California Air Resources Board may adopt interoperability billing standards for network roaming payment methods for EVSE. Providers would be required to meet these standards within one year of adoption. California Health Establishment of a Zero Emission Medium- and Heavy-Duty and Safety Code Vehicle Program 39719.2 The California Clean Truck, Bus, and Off-Road Vehicle and Equipment Technology Program (Program) will provide funding for development, demonstration, pre-commercial pilot, and early commercial implementation projects for zero and near-zero emission trucks, buses, and off-road vehicles and equipment. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, the following: • Technology development, demonstration, pre-commercial pilots, and early commercial implementation projects for zero and near-zero emission truck technology; • Zero and near-zero emission bus technology development, demonstration, pre-commercial pilots, and early commercial deployments, including pilots of multiple vehicles at one site or region; • Purchase incentives for commercially available zero and near-zero emission truck, bus, and off-road vehicle and equipment technologies and fueling infrastructure; and • Projects that support greater commercial motor vehicle and equipment freight efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions reductions, including autonomous vehicles, grid integration technology, and charge management solutions. 58 Page 412 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Remanufactured and retrofitted vehicles meeting warranty and emissions requirements may also qualify for funding. The Program is expected to provide $12 million to $20 million in funding annually through December 31, 2021. At least 20% of allocated funds must go towards early commercial deployment of eligible vehicles and equipment. The California Air Resources Board and the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission will develop and administer the Program. California Health Mandatory Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Building and Safety Code Standards 18941.10 The California Building Standards Commission (Commission) published mandatory building standards for EVSE installation in parking spaces at one- and two-family dwellings with attached private garages, multi- family dwellings, and non-residential developments in the California Green Building Standards Code within the California Building Standards Code. For more information, see the California Building Codes Standards Commission website. California Public Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Parking Incentive Programs Resources Code The California Department of General Services (DGS) and California 25722.9 Department of Transportation (DOT) must develop and implement AFV parking incentive programs in public parking facilities operated by DGS with 50 or more parking spaces and park-and-ride lots owned and operated by DOT. The incentives must provide meaningful and tangible benefits to drivers, such as preferential spaces, reduced fees, and fueling infrastructure. Fueling infrastructure built at park-and-ride lots is not subject to restricted use by those using bicycles, public transit, or ridesharin . California Public Alternative Fuel and Vehicle Policy Development Resources Code The California Energy Commission (CEC) must prepare and submit an 25302 and 25303.5 Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR) to the governor on a biannual basis. The IEPR provides an overview of major energy trends and issues facing the state, including those related to transportation fuels, technologies, and infrastructure. The IEPR also examines potential effects of alternative fuels use, vehicle efficiency improvements, and shifts in transportation modes on public health and safety, the economy, resources, the environment, and energy security. The IEPR's primary purpose is to develop energy policies that conserve resources, protect the environment, ensure energy reliability, enhance the state's economy, and protect public health and safety. For the current IEPR, see the CEC California's Energy Policy website. As of November 1, 2015, and every four years thereafter, the CEC must also include in the IEPR strategies to maximize the benefits of natural gas in various sectors. This includes the use of natural gas as a transportation fuel. For more information, see the 2020 Integrated Energy Policy Report. California Public Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Assessment Resources Code The California State Energy Resources Conservation and Development 25229 Commission (Commission), in partnership with the California Air Resources Board and the California Public Utility Commission, must 59 Page 413 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA publish a statewide assessment of the EVSE infrastructure needed to support the levels of plug-in electric vehicle adoption required for at least five million zero emission vehicles to operate on California roads by 2030. The Commission must consider the EVSE infrastructure needs for all vehicle categories, including on-road, off-road, port, and airport vehicles. In addition, the assessment must analyze the existing and future infrastructure needs across California, including in low-income communities. The assessment must be updated at least once every two ears. California Public Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Location Assessment Resources Code The State Energy Resources Conservation and Development 25231 Commission (Commission), in partnership with the California Air Resources Board (ARB), must assess whether EVSE in California is located disproportionately by population density, geographical area, or population income level. If the Commission and ARB determine that EVSE has been disproportionately installed, the Commission must use funding from the Clean Transportation Program, as well as other funding sources, to proportionately install new EVSE, unless it is determined that the current locations of EVSE are reasonable and further California's energy or environmental policy goals. California Public Fleet Vehicle Procurement Requirements Resources Code When awarding a vehicle procurement contract, every city, county, and 25725-25726 special district, including school and community college districts, may require that 75% of the passenger cars and/or light-duty trucks acquired be energy-efficient vehicles. By definition, this includes hybrid electric vehicles and alternative fuel vehicles that meet California's advanced technology partial zero emission vehicle standards. Vehicle procurement contract evaluations may consider fuel economy and life cycle factors for scoring purposes. California Public Plug-in Electric Vehicle (PEV) Infrastructure Information Resource Resources Code The California Energy Commission, in consultation with the Public 25227 Utilities Commission, must develop and maintain a website containing specific links to electrical corporations, local publicly owned electric utilities, and other websites that contain information specific to PEVs, including the following: • Resources to help consumers determine if their residences will require utility service upgrades to accommodate PEVs; • Basic charging circuit requirements; • Utility rate options; and • Load management techniques. California Public Vehicle Acquisition and Petroleum Reduction Requirements Resource Code The California Department of General Services (DGS) is responsible for 25722.5-25722.11 maintaining specifications and standards for passenger cars and light- and 25724 duty trucks that are purchased or leased for state office, agency, and department use. These specifications include minimum vehicle emissions standards and encourage the purchase or lease of fuel- efficient and alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs). Specifically, DGS must reduce or displace the fleet's consumption of petroleum products b 60 Page 414 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA 20% by January 1, 2020, as compared to the 2003 consumption level. Beginning in fiscal year 2024, DGS must also ensure that at least 50% of the light-duty vehicles purchased by the state are zero emission vehicles (ZEVs). Further, at least 15% of DGS'fleet of new vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 19,000 pounds or more must be ZEVs by 2025, and at least 30% by 2030. On an annual basis, DGS must compile information including, but not limited to, the number of AFVs and hybrid electric vehicles acquired, the locations of the alternative fuel pumps available for those vehicles, and the total amount of alternative fuels used. Vehicles the state owns or leases that are capable of operating on alternative fuel must operate on that fuel unless the alternative fuel is not available. DGS is also required to: • Take steps to transfer vehicles between agencies and departments to ensure that the most fuel-efficient vehicles are used and to eliminate the least fuel-efficient vehicles from the state's motor vehicle fleet; • Submit annual progress reports to the California Department of Finance, related legislative committees, and the general public via the DGS website; • Encourage other agencies to operate AFVs on the alternative fuel for which they are designed, to the extent feasible; • Encourage the development of commercial fueling infrastructure at or near state vehicle fueling or parking sites; • Work with other agencies to incentivize and promote state employee use of AFVs through preferential or reduced-cost parking, access to electric vehicle charging, or other means, to the extent feasible; and • Establish a more stringent fuel economy standard than the 2007 standard. California Public Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) and Infrastructure Support Resources Code The California Energy Resources Conservation and Development 25617 Commission must provide technical assistance and support for the development of zero-emission fuels, fueling infrastructure, and fuel transportation technologies. Technical assistance and support may include the creation of research, development, and demonstration programs. California Public Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Pilot Programs Utilities Code The California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) may provide funding 740.13-740.14 for pilot utility programs to install EVSE at school facilities, other educational institutions, and state parks or beaches. Priority must be given to locations in disadvantaged communities, as defined by the California Environmental Protection Agency. For more information, see the PUC project guidance and the PUC Zero Emission Vehicles website. 61 Page 415 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHOQ ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA California Public Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) Grid Integration Requirements Utilities Code By December 31, 2020, in an existing proceeding, the California Public 740.16 Utilities Commission (PUC) must establish strategies and metrics to maximize the use of PEV grid integration for a ten-year plan. The PUC must also consider how to limit cost increases for all ratepayers. PEV grid integration refers to any action that optimizes when or how a PEV is charged. Electrical corporations and community choice aggregators serving more than 700 gigawatt-hours of annual electrical demand, must provide the PUC with information relating to PEV integration strategies. Additional terms and conditions apply. California Streets Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Signage Authorization and Highway Code on Highways 101.7 EVSE facilities located at roadside businesses are eligible to be included on state highway exit information signs. Signage must be consistent with California's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. California Streets Support for Zero-Emission and Autonomous Vehicle Infrastructure and Highways Code Cities and counties that receive funding from the Road Maintenance 2030 and Rehabilitation Program are encouraged to use funds towards advanced transportation technologies and communication systems, including, but not limited to, zero-emission vehicle fueling infrastructure and infrastructure-to-vehicle communications for autonomous vehicles. California Vehicle Access to Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) Registration Records Code 1808.23 The California Department of Motor Vehicles may disclose to an electrical corporation or local publicly owned utility a PEV owner's address and vehicle type if the information is used exclusively to identify where the PEV is registered. California Vehicle Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV) Parking Space Regulation Code 22511 An individual may not park a motor vehicle within any on- or off-street parking space specifically designated by a local authority for parking and charging PEVs unless the vehicle is a PEV fueled by electricity. Eligible PEVs must be in the process of charging to park in the space. A person found responsible for a violation is subject to traffic violation penalties. PEV parking spaces count as at least one space toward minimum parking requirements. California Vehicle Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Fee Code 9250.6 Effective July 1, 2020, ZEV owners must pay an annual road improvement fee of $100 upon vehicle registration or registration renewal for ZEVs model year 2020 and later. The California Department of Motor Vehicles will increase the fee annually to account for inflation, equal to the increase in the California Consumer Price Index for the prior year. California Vehicle High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) and High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Code 5205.5 and Lane Exemption 21655.9 Compressed natural gas, hydrogen, electric, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles meeting specified California and federal emissions standards and affixed with a California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)Clean Air Vehicle sticker may use HOV lanes regardless of the number of occupants in the vehicle. Effective January 1, 2020, DMV issues Clean 62 Page 416 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Air Vehicle stickers to first-time applicants that have a household income at or below 80% of the state median income. Stickers are valid through the following dates: • Red stickers issued on or after March 1, 2018, for a vehicle that had previously been issued a sticker between January 1, 2017, and March 1, 2018, expire January 1, 2022; • Purple stickers issued between January 1, 2019 and January 1, 2020, expire January 1, 2023; and, • Orange stickers issued on or after January 1, 2020, expire January 1, 2024. The California Department of Transportation must publish a report by June 1, 2023, detailing the number of stickers issued under this program. Vehicles originally issued white or green decals prior to 2017 are no longer eligible to participate in this program. Vehicles with stickers are also eligible for reduced rates on or exemptions from toll charges imposed on HOT lanes. For more information and restrictions, including a list of qualifying vehicles, see the California Air Resources Board Carpool Stickers website. California Vehicle Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) and Near-ZEV Weight Exemption Code 25551 ZEVs and near-ZEVs may exceed the state's gross vehicle weight limits by an amount equal to the difference of the weight of the near-zero emission or zero emission powertrain and the weight of a comparable diesel tank and fueling system, up to 2,000 pounds. A ZEV is defined as a vehicle that produces no criteria pollutant, toxic air contaminant, or greenhouse gas emissions when stationary or operating. A near-ZEV is a vehicle that uses zero emission technologies, uses technologies that provide a pathway to zero emission operations, or incorporates other technologies that significantly reduce vehicle emissions. Page 417 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Appendix D: CALGreen Building Code 2019 CALGreen Building Code CALGreen .•- Oescription Residential •, • Section 4.106.4: EV New construction shall comply with Section 4.106.4.1, 4.106.4.2, or Charging for New 4.106.4.3, to facilitate future installation and use of EV chargers. Electric Construction vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) shall be installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code, Article 625. Some exceptions do apply. Section 4.106.4.1: For each dwelling unit, install a listed raceway to accommodate a New One- and Two- dedicated 208/240-volt branch circuit. The raceway shall not be less than Family Dwellings, trade size 1 (nominal 1-inch inside diameter). The raceway shall originate and Townhouses with at the main service or subpanel and shall terminate into a listed cabinet, an Attached Garage box or other enclosure in close proximity to the proposed location of an EV charger. Raceways are required to be continuous at enclosed, inaccessible or concealed areas and spaces. The service panel and/or subpanel shall provide capacity to install a 40-ampere minimum dedicated branch circuit and space(s) reserved to permit installation of a branch circuit overcurrent protective device. Section 4.106.4.1.1: The service panel or subpanel circuit directory shall identify the Identification overcurrent protective device space(s) reserved for future EV charging as "EV CAPABLE". The raceway termination location shall be permanently and visibly marked as "EV CAPABLE". Section 4.106.4.2: If residential parking is available, ten (10) percent of the total number of New Multi-family parking spaces on a building site, provided for all types of parking Dwellings facilities, shall be electric vehicle charging spaces (EV spaces) capable of supporting future EVSE. Calculations for the required number of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. Section 4.106.4.2.1: Construction documents shall indicate the location of proposed EV EV Charging Space spaces. Where common use parking is provided at least one EV space Locations shall be located in the common use parking area and shall be available for use by all residents. Section When EV chargers are installed, EV spaces required by Section 4.106.4.2.1.1: EV 4.106.4.2.2, Item 3, shall comply with at least one of the following options: Charging Stations 1. The EV space shall be located adjacent to an accessible parking space meeting the requirements of the California Building Code, Chapter 11A, to allow use of the EV charger from the accessible parking space. 2. The EV space shall be located on an accessible route, as defined in the California Building Code, Chapter 2, to the building. Section 4.106.4.2.2: The EV spaces shall be designed to comply with the following: 1. The EV Charging Space minimum length of each EV space shall be 18 feet (5486 mm). 2. The Dimensions minimum width of each EV space shall be 9 feet (2743 mm). 3. One in every 25 EV spaces, but not less than one, shall also have an 8-foot(2438 mm) wide minimum aisle. A 5-foot (1524 mm) wide minimum aisle shall be permitted provided the minimum width of the EV space is 12 feet(3658 mm). 64 Page 418 Rancho Cucamonga RANCHO ' ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Section 4.106.4.2.3: Install a listed raceway capable of accommodating a 208/240-volt Single EV Space dedicated branch circuit. The raceway shall not be less than trade size 1 Required (nominal 1-inch inside diameter). The raceway shall originate at the main service or subpanel and shall terminate into a listed cabinet, box or enclosure in close proximity to the proposed location of the EV space. Construction documents shall identify the raceway termination point. The service panel and/or subpanel shall provide capacity to install a 40- ampere minimum dedicated branch circuit and space(s) reserved to permit installation of a branch circuit overcurrent protective device. Section 4.106.4.2.4: Construction documents shall indicate the raceway termination point and Multiple EV Spaces proposed location of future EV spaces and EV chargers. Construction Required documents shall also provide information on amperage of future EVSE, raceway method(s), wiring schematics and electrical load calculations to verify that the electrical panel service capacity and electrical system, including any on-site distribution transformer(s), have sufficient capacity to simultaneously charge all EVs at all required EV spaces at the full rated amperage of the EVSE. Plan design shall be based upon a 40-ampere minimum branch circuit. Required raceways and related components that are planned to be installed underground, enclosed, inaccessible or in concealed areas and spaces shall be installed at the time of original construction. Section 4.106.4.2.5: The service panel or subpanel circuit directory shall identify the Identification overcurrent protective device space(s) reserved for future EV charging purposes as "EV CAPABLE" in accordance with the California Electrical Code. Section 4.106.4.3: All newly constructed hotels and motels shall provide EV spaces capable New Hotels and of supporting future installation of EVSE. The construction documents Motels shall identify the location of the EVspaces. Section 4.106.4.3.1: The number of required EV spaces shall be based on the total number of Number of Required parking spaces provided for all types of parking facilities in accordance EV Spaces with Table 4.106.4.3.1. Calculations for the required number of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. TABLE 4.106.4.3.1 TOTAL NUMBER OF NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED EV SPACES 0_9 0 1 i--25 1 26-54 2 51-75 4 76-100 5 101-150 7 151-2U4 10 201 and over 6 percent of total Section 4.106.4.3.2: The EV spaces shall be designed to comply with the following: EV Charging Space 1. The minimum length of each EV space shall be 18 feet (5486 mm). Dimensions 2. The minimum width of each EVspace shall be 9 feet 2743 mm . Section 4.106.4.3.3: When a single EV space is required, the EV space shall be designed in Single EV Space accordance with Section 4.106.4.2.3. Required 65 Page 419 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Section 4.106.4.3.4: When multiple EV spaces are required, the EV spaces shall be designed Multiple EV Spaces in accordance with Section 4.106.4.2.4. Required Section 4.106.4.3.5: The service panels or subpanels shall be identified in accordance with Identification Section 4.106.4.2.5. Section 4.106.4.3.6: In addition to the requirements in Section 4.106.4.3, EV spaces for Accessible EV hotels/motels and all EVSE, when installed, shall comply with the Spaces accessibility provisions for EV charging stations in the California Building Code, Chapter 11 B. rDesignated 5.106.5.2: In new construction or additions or alterations that add more than 10 Parking vehicular parking spaces, parking for any combination of low-emission, ean Air fuel-efficient and carpool/vanpool vehicles should have a designated Vehicles number of parking spaces according to the total number of parking spaces available. TABLE 5.106.5.2 TOTAL NUMBER NUMBER OF OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED SPACES 0-9 0 10-25 1 26-50 3 51-75 6 76-100 8 101-150 11 151-200 lb 201 and over At least 8 percent of total Section 5.106.5.2.1: Paint, in the paint used for stall striping, the following characters such that Parking Stall the lower edge of the last word aligns with the end of the stall striping and Marking is visible beneath a parked vehicle: "CLEAN AIR/VANPOOL/EV". Note: Vehicles bearing Clean Air Vehicle stickers from expired HOV lane programs may be considered eligible for designated parking spaces. Section 5.106.5.3: EV Construction shall comply with Section 5.106.5.3.1 or Section 5.106.5.3.2 Charging to facilitate future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment(EVSE). When EVSE(s) is/are installed, it shall be in accordance with the California Building Code. Section 5.106.5.3.1: When only a single charging space is required per Table 5.106.5.3.3, a Single Charging raceway is required to be installed at the time of construction and shall be Space installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code. Construction Requirements plans and specifications shall include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. The type and location of the EVSE. 2. A listed raceway capable of accommodating a 208/240-volt dedicated branch circuit. 3. The raceway shall not be less than trade size 1." 4. The raceway shall originate at a service panel or a subpanel serving the area, and shall terminate in close proximity to the proposed location of the charging equipment and into a listed suitable cabinet, box, enclosure orequivalent. 66 Page 420 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA 5. The service panel or subpanel shall have sufficient capacity to accommodate a minimum 40- ampere dedicated branch circuit for the future installation of the EVSE. Section 5.106.5.3.2: When multiple charging spaces are required per Table 5.106.5.3.3 Multiple Charging raceway(s) is/are required to be installed at the time of construction and Space shall be installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code. Requirements Construction plans and specifications shall include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. The type and location of the EVSE. 2. The raceway(s) shall originate at a service panel or a subpanel(s) serving the area, and shall terminate in close proximity to the proposed location of the charging equipment and into listed suitable cabinet(s), box(es), enclosure(s) or equivalent. 3. Plan design shall be based upon 40-ampere minimum branch circuits. 4. Electrical calculations shall substantiate the design of the electrical system, to include the rating of equipment and any on-site distribution transformers and have sufficient capacity to simultaneously charge all required EVs at its full rated amperage. 5. The service panel or subpanel(s) shall have sufficient capacity to accommodate the required number of dedicated branch circuit(s) for the future installation of the EVSE Section 5.106.5.3.3: Table 5.106.5.3.3 shall be used to determine if single or multiple charging EV Charging Space space requirements apply for the future installation of EVSE. Calculation Exceptions: On a case-by-case basis where the local enforcing agency has determined EV charging and infrastructure is not feasible based upon one or more of the following conditions: 1. Where there is insufficient electrical supply. 2. Where there is evidence suitable to the local enforcing agency substantiating that additional local utility infrastructure design requirements, directly related to the implementation of Section 5.106.5.3, may adversely impact the construction cost of the project. TABLE 5.106.5.3.3 TOTAL NUMBER OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED EV ACTUAL PARKING SPACES CHARGING SPACES 0-9 0 10-25 1 26-50 2 51-75 4 76-100 5 101-150 7 151 200 10 201 and over 6 percent of total' Section 5.106.5.3.4: The service panel or subpanel(s) circuit directory shall identify the Identification reserved overcurrent protective device space(s)for future EV charging as "EV CAPABLE". The raceway termination location shall be permanently and visibly marked as "EV CAPABLE." Section 5.106.5.3.5: Future charging spaces qualify as designated parking as described in Future Charging Section 5.106.5.2 Designated parking for clean air vehicles. Spaces 67 Page 421 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Section A4.106.8: EV New construction shall comply with Sections A4.106.8.1, A4.106.8.2 or Construction for New A4.106.8.3, to facilitate future installation and use of electric vehicle Construction chargers. Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) shall be installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code, Article 625. Section A4.106.8.1: Tier 1 and Tier 2. For each dwelling unit, a dedicated 208/240-volt branch New One and Two- circuit shall be installed in the raceway required by Section 4.106.4.1. The Family Dwellings and branch circuit and associated overcurrent protective device shall be rated Townhouses with at 40 amperes minimum. Other electrical components, including a Attached Garages receptacle or blank cover, related to this section shall be installed in accordance with the California Electrical Code. Section A4.106.8.1.1: The service panel or subpanel circuit directory shall identify the Identification overcurrent protective device designated for future EV charging purposes as "EV READY' in accordance with the California Electrical Code. The receptacle or blank cover shall be identified as "EV READY." Section A4.106.8.2: Tier 1. Fifteen (15) percent of the total number of parking spaces on a New Multifamily building site, provided for all types of parking facilities, but in no case less Dwellings than one, shall be electric vehicle charging spaces (EV spaces) capable of supporting future EVSE. Calculations for the required number of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. Tier 2. Twenty (20) percent of the total number of parking spaces on a building site, provided for all types of parking facilities, but in no case less than one, shall be electric vehicle charging spaces (EV spaces) capable of supporting future EVSE. Calculations for the required number of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. Section A4.106.8.2.1: The EV spaces required by Section A4.106.8.2 shall be designed and Technical constructed in accordance with Sections 4.106.4.2.1, 4.106.4.2.2, Requirements 4.106.4.2.3, 4.106.4.2.4, and 4.106.4.2.5. Section A4.106.8.3: Tier 1. Number of required EV spaces. The number of required EV spaces New Hotels and shall be based on the total number of parking spaces provided for all types Motels of parking facilities in accordance with Table A4.106.8.3.1. Calculations for the required number of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. TABLE A4.106.8.3.1 TOTAL NUMBER OF TIER 1 NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED EV SPACES 0-9 0 10-25 2 26-50 3 51-75 5 76-100 7 101-150 10 151-200 14 201 and over 8 percent of total 68 Page 422 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Tier 2. The number of required EV spaces shall be based on the total number of parking spaces provided for all types of parking facilities in accordance with Table A4.106.8.3.2. Calculations for the required number of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. TABLE A4.106.8.3.2 TOTAL NUMBER OF TIER 2 NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED EV SPACES 0-9 ] 10-25 2G-50 4 51-75 6 76-100 9 101-150 12 151-200 17 201 and over 10 percent of total Section A4.106.8.3.1: The EV spaces required by Section A4.106.8.3 shall be designed and Technical constructed in accordance with Sections 4.106.4.3, 4.106.4.3.2, Re uirements 4,106.4.3.3, 4.106.4.3.4, 4.106.4.3.5, and 4.106.4.3.6. . � •- - - Section Provide designated parking for any combination of low emitting, fuel- A5.106.5.1: Designat efficient and carpool/van pool vehicles as shown in Table A5.106.5.1.1 or ed Parking for Clean A5.106.5.1.2. Air Vehicles Section A5.106.5.1.1: Ten percent of total spaces. [BSCCG] Provide 10 percent of total Tier 1 designated parking spaces for any combination of low-emitting, fuel- efficient and carpool/van pool vehicles as follows: TABLE A5.106.5.1.1 TOTAL NUMBER NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES OF REQUIRED SPACES 0-9 0 10-25 2 26-50 4 51-75 6 76-100 9 101-150 11 151-200 18 201 and over At Ieast 10 pment of total Section A5.106.5.1.2: Provide 12 percent of total designated parking spaces for any Tier 2 combination of low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van pool vehicles as follows: 69 Page 423 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA TABLE A5.106.5.1.2 TOTAL NUMBER NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES OF REQUIRED SPACES 0-9 l 10-25 2 26-50 5 51-75 7 76-100 9 101-150 13 151-200 19 201 and over At least 12 percent of total Section A5.106.5.1.3: Paint, in the paint used for stall striping, the following characters such that Parking Stall the lower edge of the last word aligns with the end of the stall striping and Marking is visible beneath a parked vehicle: CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/EV Note: Vehicles bearing Clean Air Vehicle stickers from expired HOV lane programs may be considered eligible for designated parkingspaces. Section A5.106.5.1.4: Building managers may consult with local community Transit Vehicle Management Associations (TMAs) for methods of designating qualifying Designations vehicles, such as issuing parking stickers. Notes: 1. Information on qualifying vehicles, car labeling regulations and DMV CAV decals may be obtained from the following sources: a. California DriveClean. b. California Air Resources Board. c. U.S. EPA fuel economy regulations and standards. d. DMV Registration Operations. 2. Purchasing policy and refueling sites for low emitting vehicles for state employees use can be found at the Department of General Services. Section A5.106.5.3: Construction shall comply with Section A5.106.5.3.1 and A5.106.5.3.2 to EV Charging facilitate future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). When EVSE(s) is/are installed, it shall be in accordance with the California Building Code and the California Electrical Code and as follows: A5.106.5.3.1 Tier 1. Table A5.106.5.3.1 shall be used to determine the number of multiple charging spaces required for future installation of EVSE. Refer to Section 5.106.5.3.2 for design space requirements. TABLE AS.106.5.3.1 TOTAL NUMBER OF ACTUAL TIER 1 NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES EV CHARGING SPACES 0-9 0 1 U-25 2 26-50 3 51-75 76-100 7 101-150 10 151-200 14 201 and over 8 percent of total 1. Calculation for spaces shall he rounded up to the nearest whole number. 70 Page 424 Rancho Cucamonga ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN RANCHO CUCAMONGA A5.106.5.3.2 Tier 2. Table A5.106.5.3.2 shall be used to determine if single or multiple charging space requirements apply for future installation of EVSE. When a single charging space is required, refer to Section 5.106.5.3.1 for design requirements. When multiple charging spaces are required, refer to Section 5.106.5.3.2 for design requirements. TABLE A5.106.5.3.2 TOTAL NUMBER OF ACTUAL TIER 2 NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES EV CHARGING SPACES 0-9 1 10-25 2 26-50 4 51-75 6 76-100 9 101-150 12 151-200 17 201 and over 10 percent of total' Section A5.106.5.3.3: The service panel or subpanel circuit directory shall identify the reserved Identification overcurrent protective device space(s) for future EV charging as "EV CAPABLE." The raceway termination location shall be permanently and visibly marked as "EV CAPABLE." Section A5.106.5.3.4 Future charging spaces qualify as designated parking as described in Section A5.106.5.1 Designated parking for clean air vehicles. Notes: 1. The California Department of Transportation adopts and publishes the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California MUTCD) to provide uniform standards and specifications for all official traffic control devices in California. Zero Emission Vehicle Signs and Pavement Markings can be found in the New Policies & Directives number 13-01. www.dot.ca.gov/ hq/traffops/policy/13-01.pdf. 2. See Vehicle Code Section 22511 EV charging spaces signage in off- street parking facilities and for use of EV charging spaces. 3. The Governor's Office of Planning and Research published a Zero- Emission Vehicle Community Readiness Guidebook which provides helpful information for local governments, residents and businesses. www.opr.ca.gov/docs/ZEV Guidebook.pdf. 71 Page 425 1.k• . lei ww ADPL 4 Adoption of the Electric Vehicle (EV) Readiness Plan L June 16, 2021 Rancho Cucamonga h- RANCHO ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN CUCAMONGA Why Do We Need an EV Readiness Plan? ■ Prepare for next wave of Electric Vehicles ■ Great community interest in Electric Vehicles ■ Charging infrastructure to support growing EV adoption ■ Equitable access to EV technology j CITY `� rS I l i I ( t 4 1 �+ qqq44 xl r tr �d a 11 V'114� r.L¢S R OF ♦ • CUCAMONGA Plan Overview ■ Where are we now? ■ Where do we need to go? _ - ■ How do we get there? Where Are We Now? ■ 206 charging plugs (31 known charging station locations). ■ As of January 2020, EVs account for 1 .8% of registered vehicles, twice as high as SB County as a whole, and higher than the statewide percentage at 1 .2%. EV Registrations .1.00% 25 2.00% 1�50 1.00% 0-50% 0.00% a CS I ffome a Se n B efriard rro Cou my 0 Rancho Cu c:amo rge Where Do We Need to Go? EV Ownership Projections 018 1 ,353 308 2019 1 ,895 547 2020 2,551 1 ,160 20 (projected) 7.345 3,885 2030 (projected) 12,129 6,415 Note: The EV category consists of all electric vehicles, including full battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrids 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 4,000 2,000 0 «+ January-18 September-20 June-23 March-25 ❑ecember-28 September-31 0 EVs BEVs Where Do We Need to Go? Estimated EV Charging Plug Need for 2025 and 2030 .a jmjn"W��W- DC . Charger Number of iLevel 2 • Fast PlugsEVs* Ratio Needed Plugs Needed 2025 7,345 11 250 3,8 8 5 66 22 030 12,129 11 3806.415 66 3 "EVs include BEVs R11C PILIC-in Vell vles Goal: One Level 2 charging plug for every 11 registered EVs within the City, and one DC fast charging plug for every 66 BEVs registered within the City. How Do We Get There? • A site suitability analysis was developed to identify ideal locations for EV charging stations. ■ Destinations: mid-day EV density, distance to nearest charging station, number of EVs within a zip code, and amenities. ■ Multi-Family Dwellings: cost of rent, age of MFD, number of units, number of units to parking spaces, and the number of EVs within a zip code. ■ Workplaces: employee size, employment type (prioritizing office buildings), AM EV density, and number of available parking stalls. E (j FREE CITY 6 I � OF ♦ • CUCAMONGA How Do We Get There? Recommendation Strategies 1 . Upgrade city-owned EV charging infrastructure 2. Explore on-street charging 3. Ensure equitable access of EV infrastructure 4. Examine EV infrastructure options at gas stations 5. Examine other destination charging opportunities .ir , CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA How Do We Get There? Development Policy Recommendations 1 . Adopt CALGreen voluntary measures 2. Require the installation of EV charging stations at new construction 3. Require the installation of EV charging stations at tenant improvement sites 4. Ensure equitable access of EV infrastructure 5. Equip solar carports with EVSE capability 6. Encourage EV infrastructure signage 7. Accommodate EV trucks with trailers Next Steps Adoption of . Implementation .► UpdateAl General Plan t,r ClimateFNP Development Code Update • • e CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Fri CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA $l DATE: June 16, 2021 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Julie A. Sowles, Library Director SUBJECT: Consideration of the City Council Library Subcommittee's Recommendation to Appoint Members to the Library Board of Trustees. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve the City Council Library Subcommittee's recommendation to appoint Kristen Murrieta-Morales, Eva Miller, and Riley Wells to each serve a three-year term on the Library Board of Trustees. BACKGROUND: As mandated by the California Education Code Sections 18910-18927, municipal public libraries shall have a Board of Trustees appointed by the municipality's governing body. As outlined in the By-laws of the Rancho Cucamonga Public Library Board of Trustees, the Board is mandated to provide oversight to the Library. Terms of office for the Trustees shall be for three years and all Members serve in a volunteer capacity. Three vacancies will be created on the Board on June 30, 2021 when the terms for Board Members Kristen Murrieta Morales, Mary Hannah, and Luella Hairston conclude. Kristen Murrieta-Morales, Eva Miller, and Riley Wells would each be appointed to complete three-year terms concluding June 30, 2024. ANALYSIS: The City Council Library Subcommittee, at their meeting on June 2, 2021, interviewed six applicants for the Library Board of Trustees vacancies. The Subcommittee recommends the appointment of Kristen Murrieta-Morales, Eva Miller, and Riley Wells. All three candidates have demonstrated their passion for public library services in Rancho Cucamonga. FISCAL IMPACT: None. COUNCIL MISSION /VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Providing superior Library Services to residents contributes to a high quality of life in Rancho Cucamonga. ATTACHMENTS: None. Page 426