AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT

AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS

HERITAGE SQUARE

Prepared For:

Heritage Square LLC 41391 Kalmia Street, Suite 200

Murrieta, CA 92562

February 5, 2007

G:\2006\06-0061\Air\Air Study.doc

i

WEBB A L B E R T A. A S S O C I A T E S

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ................................................................ 1 PURPOSE AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 1

PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ....................................................................... 1

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 1

SECTION 2 – SETTING .............................................................................................................. 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.......................................................................................................... 2

PHYSICAL SETTING ................................................................................................................ 2

REGULATORY SETTING ......................................................................................................... 7

SECTION 3 – EMISSIONS ESTIMATES ................................................................................. 8 IMPACTS .................................................................................................................................... 8

SHORT-TERM IMPACTS ...................................................................................................... 8

LONG-TERM IMPACTS ...................................................................................................... 10

LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD ANALYSIS ............................................... 11

CO HOTSPOT ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 13

SECTION 4 – FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................. 16

SECTION 5 – REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 17 REFERENCES CITED.............................................................................................................. 17

DOCUMENT PREPARATION STAFF ................................................................................... 18

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1, Site Plan ........................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 2, Wind Rose ....................................................................................................................... 4

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1, Source Receptor Area (SRA) 24, Air Quality Monitoring Summary - 1996–2005 ......... 6

Table 2, SCAQMD CEQA Regional Significance Thresholds ...................................................... 8

Table 3, Estimated Daily Construction Emissions (Regional Significance Thresholds) ................ 9

Table 4, Estimated Daily Project Operation Emissions (Summer) ............................................... 10

Table 5, Estimated Daily Project Operation Emissions (Winter) ................................................. 10

Table 6, Estimated Daily Construction Emissions (Localized Significance Thresholds) ............ 12

Table 7, CO Hotspot Analysis Results .......................................................................................... 15

APPENDICES

A - URBEMIS 2002 for Windows Output Files

B - CALINE4 Modeling Information

1


SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

PURPOSE AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS

The following air quality assessment was prepared to evaluate whether the expected criteria air

pollutant emissions generated as a result of construction and operation of the proposed project

would cause significant impacts to air resources in the project area. This assessment was

conducted within the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, California

Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). The methodology follows the “CEQA Air

Quality Handbook” prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

for quantification of emissions and evaluation of potential impacts to air resources. As

recommended by SCAQMD staff, the URBEMIS 2002 for Windows version 8.7.0 computer

program was used to quantify project-related emissions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The Heritage Square Project (project) site is located on approximately 16 acres at the northwest

corner of the intersection of McCall Boulevard and Menifee Road in the community of Menifee,

within an unincorporated area of Riverside County, California. The project site is bounded by

McCall Boulevard to the south, Junipero Road to the west, and Menifee Road to the east.

The Heritage Square Project consists of the development of an approximately 135,000-square

foot shopping center consisting of a supermarket, drugstore, fast food restaurants, and various

shops.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

The project-specific evaluation presented in the following analysis demonstrates that projected

short-term emissions from construction of the project are below all applicable SCAQMD

recommended daily regional and localized thresholds of significance. Therefore, emissions from

project construction are considered less than significant on both a regional and localized level.

Emissions of all criteria pollutants from project operation are below all applicable SCAQMD

recommended daily regional thresholds of significance in both summer and winter. Since the

main source of project emissions are from project-generated traffic (mobile sources), no

localized threshold analysis is needed. Additionally, no CO hot spots will occur as a result of

project operation. Therefore, emissions from project operation are considered less than

significant on both a regional and localized level.

2


SECTION 2 – SETTING

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Heritage Square Project site is located on approximately 16 acres at the northwest corner of

the intersection of McCall Boulevard and Menifee Road in the community of Menifee, within an

unincorporated area of Riverside County, California. The project site is bounded by McCall

Boulevard to the south, Junipero Road to the west, and Menifee Road to the east.

The Heritage Square Project consists of the development of an approximately 135,000-square

foot shopping center consisting of a supermarket, drugstore, fast food restaurants, and various

shops (Figure 1).

PHYSICAL SETTING

The project site is located in the community of Menifee, in unincorporated Riverside County

which is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air

Quality Management District. The SCAB consists of Orange County, together with the coastal

and mountain portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Regionally, the

interaction of land (offshore) and sea (onshore) breezes control local wind patterns in the area.

Daytime winds typically flow from the coast to the inland areas, while this pattern usually

reverses in the evenings, flowing from the inland areas to the ocean (SCAQMD 1993). Air

stagnation may occur during the early evening and early morning due to periods of transition

between day and nighttime flows. The region also experiences periods of hot, dry winds from the

desert, known as Santa Ana winds. Locally, the prevailing wind is generally from West to East

(Figure 2).

Regional and local air quality within the SCAB is affected by topography, atmospheric

inversions, and dominant onshore flows. Topographic features such as the San Gabriel and San

Bernardino Mountains form natural barriers to the dispersion of air contaminants. The presence

of atmospheric inversions limits the vertical dispersion of air pollutants. Due to expansional

cooling, the temperature usually decreases with increasing altitude. However, at some elevation,

this trend reverses and temperature begins to increase as altitude increases, this transition

establishes the effective mixing height of the atmosphere and acts as a barrier to vertical

dispersion of pollutants. A dominant onshore flow provides the driving mechanism for both air

pollution transport and pollutant dispersion.

3


Figure 1, Site Plan

4


Riverside, California – 1981

January 1-December 31; Midnight-11PM

Note: Data taken from the Riverside Monitoring Station in Rubidoux, California, between January 1 and December 31, 1981. Calm winds: 12.12%. Direction of the colored bars show the direction the wind is blowing from, colors represent various wind speeds, and

percentages marked on rings indicate the percentage that the wind blows from that direction and at that particular wind speed.

Figure 2, Wind Rose

Heritage Square Project

Riverside County, California

5


Air pollution generated in coastal areas is transported east to inland receptors by the onshore

flow during the daytime until a natural barrier (the mountains) is reached, limiting the horizontal

dispersion of pollutants. This results in a gradual degradation of air quality from coastal areas to

inland areas, which is most evident with photochemical pollutants like ozone. The greatest ozone

levels are registered at the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s monitoring stations

located at the base of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino mountains, ranging from the city of

Santa Clarita, east to the City of San Bernardino.

The project site is located within SCAQMD Source Receptor Area (SRA) 24. The most recent

published data for SRA 24 is presented in Table 1. This data indicates that the baseline air

quality conditions in the project area include occasional events of very unhealthful air. However,

the frequency of smog alerts has dropped significantly in the last decade. Atmospheric

concentrations of ozone and particulate matter are the two most significant air quality concerns

in the project area. The yearly monitoring records document that prior to 1995, approximately

one-third or more of the days each year experienced a violation of the state hourly ozone

standard, with around ten days annually reaching first stage alert levels of 0.20 parts per million

(ppm) for one hour. It is encouraging to note that ozone levels have decreased in the last few

years with less than one-fifth of the days each year experiencing a violation of the state hourly

ozone standard since 1998. Locally, no second stage alert (0.35 ppm/hour) has been called by

SCAQMD in the last ten years.

Monitoring for PM-2.5 did not begin until 1999. Since then, the annual standard has been

consistently exceeded in SRA 24. The 1997 federal annual average standard for PM-2.5 (15

μg/m3) was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in February 2001. The state standard annual

average standard for PM-2.5 (12 μg/m3) was finalized in 2003 and became effective on July 5,

2003.

6


Table 1, Source Receptor Area (SRA) 24, Air Quality Monitoring Summary - 1996–2005

Pollutant/Standard

Source: SCAQMD

Monitoring Year

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

No

. D

ay

s E

xce

ed

ed

Ozonea:

Health Advisory - 0.15 ppm -- -- -- -- -- 5 1 1 0 0

California Standard:

1-Hour - 0.09 ppm 95 64 30 10 65 73 59 67 37 11

8-Hour - 0.07 ppm -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 18

Federal Primary Standards:

1-Hour - 0.12 ppm 31 6 8 0 15 19 4 7 2 1

8-Hour - 0.08 ppm a -- 41 28 7 41 58 41 47 19 3

Max 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.18 0.14 0.15 0.11 0.16 0.152 0.147 0.155 0.128 0.126

Max 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) a -- 0.11 0.13 0.10 0.126 0.136 0.117 0.121 0.103 0.103

No

. D

ay

s E

xce

ed

ed Carbon Monoxide

b:


1-Hour - 20 ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8-Hour - 9.0 ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


1-Hour - 35 ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8-Hour - 9.5 ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Max 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 9.0 7.0 6.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 8.0 5 4 3

Max 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 5.0 5.8 4.6 4.4 4.3 3.4 3.0 3.7 3.0 2.6

No

. D

ay

s

Exceed

ed Nitrogen Dioxide

b:


1-Hour - 0.25 ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Federal Standard:

Annual Standard - 0.053 ppm d No No No No No No No No No No

Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.15 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08

No

. D

ay

s

Exceed

ed

Sulfur Dioxide b:

California Standards:

1-Hour – 0.25 ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

24-Hour – 0.04 ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


24-Hour – 0.14 ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annual Standard – 0.03 ppm d No No No No No No No No No No

Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Max. 24-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.004 0.007 0.010 0.011 0.041 0.011 0.002 0.012 0.015 0.011

No

. D

ay

s

Exceed

ed Suspended Particulates (PM10):

California Standards:

24-Hour - 50 g/m3 20 19 14 30 13 16 24 19 15 19


24-Hour – 150 g/m3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annual Arithmetic Mean (g/m3) 40.0 44.5 36.1 50.0 41.1 40.8 45.2 43.9 41.4 39.2

Annual Geometric Mean (g/m3) 35.2 38.5 33.3 44.0 36.8 36.0 41.6 -- -- --

Max. 24-Hour Conc. (g/m3) 87 139 98 112 87 86 100 142 83 80

No

. D

ay

s

Exceed

ed

Suspended Particulates (PM2.5)b,c

:


Annual Standard – 15g/m3 c -- -- -- Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

24-Hour – 65 g/m3 -- -- -- 9 11 19 8 8 5 4

Annual Arithmetic Mean (g/m3)

(g/m3)

-- -- -- 30.9 28.2 31.3 27.5 24.9 22.1 21.0

Max. 24-Hour Conc. (g/m3) -- -- -- 111.2 119.6 98.0 77.6 104.3 91.7 98.7

Note: -- No data available. a 1997 is first year of SCAQMD records for federal 8-hour Ozone standard.

b Metro Riverside County 1 air monitoring station (SRA 23) data summaries used. c 1999 is first year of SCAQMD records for federal 24-hour PM-2.5 standard and data summary. d Yes or No indicating whether or not the standard has been exceeded for that year.

7


REGULATORY SETTING

The federal and California ambient air quality standards (AAQS) establish the context for the

local air quality management plans (AQMP) and for determination of the significance of a

project's contribution to local or regional pollutant concentrations. The California and federal

AAQS are presented in Table 1. The AAQS represent the level of air quality considered safe,

with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. They are designed to

protect those people most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthmatics, the

elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other diseases or illness and persons

engaged in strenuous work or exercise, all referred to as “sensitive receptors.” SCAQMD defines

a "sensitive receptor" as a land use or facility such as residences, schools, child care centers,

athletic facilities, playgrounds, retirement homes, and convalescent homes.

Both federal and state Clean Air Acts require that each non-attainment area prepare a plan to

reduce air pollution to healthful levels. The 1988 California Clean Air Act and the 1990

amendments to the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) established new planning requirements and

deadlines for attainment of the air quality standards within specified time frames, which are

contained in the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Amendments to the SIP have been proposed,

revised, and approved over the past decade. The currently adopted clean air plan for the basin is

the 1999 SIP Amendment, approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in

2000.

The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the SCAB establishes a program of rules and

regulations directed at attainment of the state and national air quality standards. The AQMP

control measures and related emission reduction estimates are based upon emissions projections

for a future development scenario derived from land use, population, and employment

characteristics defined in consultation with local governments. Accordingly, conformance with

the AQMP for development projects is determined by demonstrating compliance with local land

use plans and/or population projections. The SCAQMD adopted an updated AQMP in August

2003, which outlines the air pollution measures needed to meet federal health-based standards

for ozone by 2010 and for particulates (PM-10) by 2006 (SCAQMD 2003). The AQMP was

forwarded to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and approved on October 23, 2003.

The AQMP was sent to the EPA for its final approval and included as a revision to California’s

SIP on January 9, 2004.

The California Air Resources Board maintains records as to the attainment status of air basins

throughout the state, under both state and federal criteria. The portion of the SCAB within which

the proposed project is located is designated as a non-attainment area for ozone, PM-10, and PM-

2.5 under state standards, and as a non-attainment area for ozone, carbon monoxide, PM-10, and

PM-2.5 under federal standards.

8


SECTION 3 – EMISSIONS ESTIMATES

IMPACTS

Air quality impacts can be described in a short-term and long-term perspective. Short-term

impacts will occur during site grading and project construction. Long-term air quality impacts

will occur once the project is in operation.

SHORT-TERM IMPACTS

Short-term emissions consist of fugitive dust and other particulate matter, as well as exhaust

emissions generated by construction-related vehicles. Short-term impacts will also include

emissions generated during construction as a result of operation of personal vehicles by

construction workers, asphalt degassing, and architectural coating (painting) operations during

construction.

The project will be required to comply with existing SCAQMD rules for the reduction of fugitive

dust emissions. SCAQMD Rule 403 establishes these procedures. Compliance with this rule is

achieved through application of standard best management practices in construction and

operation activities, such as application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils,

covering haul vehicles, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph, sweeping loose

dirt from paved site access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25

mph and establishing a permanent, stabilizing ground cover on finished sites. In addition,

projects that disturb 50 acres or more of soil or move 5,000 cubic yards of materials per day are

required to submit a Fugitive Dust Control Plan or a Large Operation Notification Form to

SCAQMD. Based on the size of this project (approximately 16 acres), a Fugitive Dust Control

Plan or Large Operation Notification would not be required.

REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD ANALYSIS

The thresholds contained in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook are considered regional

thresholds and are shown in Table 2. These regional thresholds were developed based on the

SCAQMD’s treatment of a major stationary source.

Table 2, SCAQMD CEQA Regional Significance Thresholds

Emission Threshold Units ROG NOX CO SOX PM-10 PM-2.5

Daily Threshold - Construction lbs/day 75 100 550 150 150 55

Daily Threshold - Operations lbs/day 55 55 550 150 150 55

9


Short-term emissions were evaluated using the URBEMIS 2002 for Windows version 8.7.0 for

Windows computer program. The model evaluated emissions resulting from site grading and

project construction. The default parameters within URBEMIS were used and these default

values reflect a worse-case scenario, which means that the actual project emissions are expected

to be equal to or less than the estimated construction emissions. In addition to the default values

used, several assumptions relevant to model input for short-term construction emission estimates

are:

The site is currently vacant, so no demolition will be necessary.

Project construction will begin no earlier than June 2007 and will last 18 months, until

December 2008.

The entire project site will be graded at once prior to building construction and will take

approximately 4 months to complete. Approximately 25,000 cubic yards of dirt is expected

to be either imported to or exported from the project site.

The entire project will be operational in 2009.

The construction equipment estimated to be used for each phase is shown in Appendix A. Table

3 summarizes the estimated construction emissions.

Table 3, Estimated Daily Construction Emissions (Regional Significance Thresholds)

Activity/Year Peak Daily Emissions (lb/day)

ROG NOX CO SO2 PM-10 PM-2.5

SCAQMD Daily

Regional Construction

Thresholds

75 100 550 150 150 55

2007

Site Grading 9.59 73.96 75.39 0.02 18.92 6.03

Building Construction 10.22 73.50 78.55 0.00 3.20 2.95

Maximum 1 10.22 73.96 78.55 0.02 18.92 6.03

Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No

2008

Building Construction 10.20 70.17 80.60 0.00 2.90 2.67

Painting 57.00 0.14 2.89 0.00 0.05 0.05

Asphalt 4.09 23.81 34.30 0.00 0.73 0.67

Maximum 2

71.29 94.11 117.80 0.00 3.69 3.39


Notes: See Appendix A for model output report and PM-2.5 calculations. 1 Building construction will not occur until after site grading is complete. Therefore, the maximum

emissions are either from grading alone, or building construction alone. 2 Painting and asphalt could occur concurrently with building construction. Therefore, the maximum

emissions are from all three phases of construction combined.

10


Evaluation of the above table indicates that the criteria pollutant emissions from construction of

this project are below the SCAQMD recommended daily regional thresholds.

LONG-TERM IMPACTS

Long-term emissions are evaluated at build-out for the completed project at the end of

construction (2009). Operational emissions refer to on-road motor vehicle emissions from project

build-out. Area Source emissions include stationary combustion emissions of natural gas used

for space and water heating, and yard and landscape maintenance (assumed to occur throughout

the year in Southern California).

Table 4, Estimated Daily Project Operation Emissions (Summer)



SCAQMD Daily

Operational Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55

Natural Gas 0.09 1.31 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 0.10 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00

Architectural Coatings 1.89 - - - - -

Vehicles 36.46 34.74 361.43 0.22 32.90 31.72

Total 38.54 36.05 363.19 0.22 32.90 31.72


Table 5, Estimated Daily Project Operation Emissions (Winter)



SCAQMD Daily

Operational Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55

Natural Gas 0.09 1.31 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landscaping 0.10 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00

Architectural Coatings 1.89 - - - - -

Vehicles 40.87 49.05 393.00 0.18 32.90 31.72

Total 42.95 50.36 394.76 0.18 32.90 31.72


Emissions from the daily operations of the project will be below the daily regional thresholds set

by SCAQMD in both summer and winter.

11


LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD ANALYSIS

Background

Recently, as part of the SCAQMD’s environmental justice program, attention has been focused

on localized effects of air quality. Staff at SCAQMD has developed localized significance

threshold (LST) methodology that can be used by public agencies to determine whether or not a

project may generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts (both short-term and long-

term). LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to

an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, and

are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area

(SRA).

Methodology

The emissions analyzed under the LST methodology are NO2, CO, and PM-10. For attainment

pollutants, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and CO, the LSTs are derived using an air quality dispersion

model to back-calculate the emissions per day that would cause or contribute to a violation of

any ambient air quality standard for a particular source receptor area. LSTs for NO2 and CO are

derived by adding the incremental emission impacts from the project activity to the peak

background NO2 and CO concentrations and comparing the total concentration to the most

stringent ambient air quality standards. The most stringent standard for NO2 is the 1-hour state

standard of 25 parts per hundred million and for CO it is the 1-hour and 8-hour state standards of

9 parts per million (ppm) and 20 ppm respectively. For PM-10 and PM-2.5, which the SCAB is

non-attainment, the operation LST is derived using an air quality dispersion model to back-

calculate the emissions necessary to make an existing violation in the specific source receptor

area worse, using the allowable change in concentration thresholds approved by the SCAQMD.

For PM-10 and PM-2.5, the concentration thresholds are 10.4 g/m3.

The project site is located in Source Receptor Area (SRA) 24, which has 1 monitoring station.

However, that station does not monitor NO2, CO, or SO2 concentrations based on SCAQMD

input, when there is not applicable monitoring data for one SRA it is customary to use a

neighboring SRA. Background concentrations from the Riverside station in SRA 23 were used

instead of SRA 24 for this analysis.

Short-Term Analysis

For short-term construction emissions, it is estimated that the maximum area to be disturbed

daily for Phase 1 would be no larger than 5 acres, while an area no larger than 2 acres would be

disturbed for Phase 2. The maximum daily construction emissions estimated from URBEMIS

were used in this analysis (Table 3). SCAQMD has provided LST lookup tables (available on the

internet at http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/LST/LST.html) to allow users to readily

determine if the daily emissions for proposed construction or operational activities could result in

significant localized air quality impacts for projects 5 acres or smaller. Although the project site

is larger than 5 acres, it is anticipated that an area no larger than 5 acres would be disturbed on

any one of the plot plan sites during construction. Therefore, the LST lookup tables were used

for construction emissions.

12


The LST thresholds are estimated using the maximum daily disturbed area (in acres) and the

distance of the project to the nearest sensitive receptors (in meters). The nearest sensitive

receptors would be the residents to the east of the project, across Menifee Road (approximately

50 meters away). The results are summarized in Table 6 below.

Table 6, Estimated Daily Construction Emissions (Localized Significance Thresholds)

Construction Activity Maximum Daily

Disturbed Area (acres) NOX CO PM-10 PM-2.5

Threshold 5 365 1,429 40 10

2007 5 73.96 78.55 18.92 6.03

2008 5 94.11 117.80 3.69 3.39

Exceeds Threshold? No No No No

Emissions from construction of the project will be below the localized significance thresholds

established by SCAQMD.

Long-Term Analysis

According to the SCAQMD’s LST methodology, the operational emissions to be analyzed are

from on-site stationary sources and on-site mobile source emissions. Off-site mobile source

emissions should not be included in the analysis. Since the project consists of a shopping center

and the majority of the project’s operational emissions are from off-site mobile source emissions,

no long-term LST analysis is required.

Conclusion

Based on the LST analysis of the project, the short-term construction of the project will not result

in any localized air quality impacts to sensitive receptors in the project vicinity. No long-term

operational analysis is required.

13


CO HOTSPOT ANALYSIS

The Traffic Study for the Heritage Square Project (Webb 2006) indicates that the study

intersections currently operate at LOS ranging from A to F during peak hours. Taking into

account the project development as well as area-wide development with the recommended offsite

improvements, the LOS of study intersections will range from A to D in 2009 (Project Opening

Year). In order to meet the LOS E target set by Riverside County on all County maintained roads

and conventional state highways, traffic signals are warranted at the following intersections:

Menifee Road / McLaughlin Road

Menifee Road / Rouse Road

Menifee Road / Project Driveway (North)

Project Driveway / McCall Boulevard

Antelope Road / McCall Boulevard

Sherman Road / McCall Boulevard

Menifee Road / Simpson Road

Lindenberger Road / Simpson Road

Given the identified traffic improvements needed, the project has the potential to negatively

impact the LOS on adjacent roadways. Where LOS is negatively impacted, CO can become a

localized problem (“hot spot”) requiring additional analysis beyond total project emissions

quantification. A CO hot spot is a localized concentration of CO that is above the state or federal

1-hour or 8-hour ambient air quality standards. Localized high levels of CO are associated with

traffic congestion and idling or slow-moving vehicles. The SCAQMD recommends that projects

with sensitive receptors or projects that could negatively affect LOS of existing roads use the

screening procedures outlined in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD 1993)

to determine the potential to create a CO hot spot.

The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook recommends using CALINE4 (Caltrans 1999) to

estimate 1-hour CO concentration from roadway traffic. Input data for this model includes

meteorology, street network information, vehicle counts on each link, fleet-average CO emission

factors, and receptor locations. CALINE4 can be run with user-input meteorological data or

default worse-case meteorological data. For this study, meteorological data was used. The

average winter temperature and morning humidity were used to represent a worse-case scenario.

The link information required for CALINE4 is in the form of east and north (x,y) coordinates for

the two ends of each link. Up to 20 links can be supplied. For each link, the vehicle counts for

the peak traffic period were taken from the project-specific traffic study (Webb 2006). The fleet

average emission factors for CO are estimated using the EMFAC2007 computer modeling

program (CARB 2006) and the associated BURDEN module.

14


CALINE4 was run for 2006 using the peak morning or evening rush-hour traffic counts in the

project-specific traffic study (Webb 2006) and worse-case meteorology. According to staff at

SCAQMD, intersections where the LOS decreases from LOS C with the project should be

modeled. Incorporation of the mitigation measures contained in the Traffic Study will improve

the LOS of study intersections to between A and D in 2009. Therefore, it was determined that

fourteen intersections fit this criterion and were modeled. The intersections modeled are:

Menifee Road / Ethanac Road (SR-74)

Menifee Road / McLaughlin Road

Menifee Road / Rouse Road

Menifee Road / Project Driveway (North)

Menifee Road / McCall Boulevard

Junipero Road / School- Project Driveway

Antelope Road / McCall Boulevard

Sherman Road / McCall Boulevard

Encanto Drive / McCall Boulevard

I-215 Northbound Ramps / McCall Boulevard

I-215 Southbound Ramps / McCall Boulevard

Bradley Road / McCall Boulevard

Menifee Road / Simpson Road

Lindenberger Road / Simpson Road

Calculations used as well as CALINE4 output files are included in Appendix B.

Emission factors for CO were estimated from EMFAC2007, which estimates emission factors by

vehicle speed and vehicle class within the geographic area. According to the Western Regional

Climate Center (WRCC), the average temperature for Sun City was found to be approximately

52 °F and the relative humidity was approximately 70%. Using these meteorological conditions,

the vehicle emissions were calculated for 2006 and 2009 by EMFAC2007.

Receptors were located a distance of 3 meters from each roadway at the four corners of each

intersection modeled. Although sensitive receptors exist in the project vicinity, the placement of

receptors 3 meters from each roadway represents a worse-case scenario; therefore, no other

sensitive receptors were modeled. In order to ensure a worse-case analysis, a vehicle speed of 1

mile per hour (mph) was used in the analysis.

The predicted peak 1-hour CO concentrations at each receptor were determined by adding the

ambient background 1-hour CO concentrations to the modeled 1-hour CO concentration. The

background CO concentrations were assumed to be the peak 1-hour values observed in the area

in the latest three years (Table 1). The peak 8-hour CO concentration was estimated by

multiplying the peak 1-hour model estimate by the persistence factor for the project and adding

the ambient background 8-hour CO concentration. The persistence factor is the ratio between the

maximum 1-hour and 8-hour measured CO concentration. Since meteorological data is available,

the persistence factor was calculated from data from the latest 3 years in Table 1 and found to be

0.87. Each intersection was run three times to determine the CO emissions from the baseline CO

emissions from existing traffic, the existing traffic plus project-generated traffic, and the

15


cumulative emissions, which includes the baseline, project traffic, and the traffic that will be

generated from anticipated projects in the vicinity. The results are presented in Table 7 by

intersection where the receptor position with the highest CO concentration is shown.

Table 7, CO Hotspot Analysis Results

Intersection

1-Hour

CO Concentration (ppm)

8-Hour

CO Concentration (ppm)

Existing

Project1

Cumulative2

Existing

Project1

Cumulative2

State Threshold 20 20 20 9 9 9

Federal Threshold 35 35 35 9 9 9

Menifee Road /

Ethanac Road (SR-74) 9.1 8.6 9.3 7.9 7.5 8.1

Menifee Road /

McLaughlin Road - 7.5 8.3 - 6.5 7.2

Menifee Road / Rouse

Road 7.6 7.5 8.3 6.6 6.5 7.2

Menifee Road /

Project Driveway

(North)

- 7.6 8.4 - 6.6 7.2

Menifee Road /

McCall Boulevard 7.9 7.8 9.0 6.9 6.8 7.8

Junipero Road /

School-Project

Driveway

7.6 7.4 7.5 6.6 6.4 6.5

Antelope Road /


Sherman Road /


Encanto Drive /


I-215 NB Ramps /


I-215 SB Ramps /


Bradley Road /


Menifee Road /

Simpson Road - 7.3 8.3 - 6.4 7.2

Lindenberger Road /

Simpson Road 8.0 8.1 7.9 7.0 7.0 6.9

1 Includes Existing and Project CO emissions.

2 Includes Existing and Project and Cumulative CO emissions.

16


For all of the intersections modeled, the CO emissions from project-generated traffic are much

less than the California and National (federal) thresholds of significance. Even when the

cumulative impacts are analyzed, the peak CO hotspot concentrations are less than the threshold

values. Therefore, the project will not contribute to an exceedance of either the CAAQS or

NAAQS for CO emissions and will not form any CO hotspots in the project area. There are also

no cumulative impacts for CO hotspots.

SECTION 4 – FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The project-specific evaluation presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that projected

short-term emissions from construction of the project are below all applicable SCAQMD

recommended daily regional and localized thresholds of significance. Therefore, emissions from

project construction are considered less than significant on both a regional and localized level.

Emissions of all criteria pollutants from project operation are below all applicable SCAQMD

recommended daily regional thresholds of significance in both summer and winter. Since the

main source of project emissions are from project-generated traffic (mobile sources), no

localized threshold analysis is needed. Additionally, no CO hot spots will be created as a result

of project operation. Therefore, emissions from project operation are considered less than

significant on both a regional and localized level.

17


SECTION 5 – REFERENCES

REFERENCES CITED

The following documents were referred to as general information sources during preparation of

this document. They are available for public review at the locations abbreviated after each listing

and spelled out at the end of this section. Some of these documents are also available at public

libraries and at other public agency offices.

Caltrans 1997 California Department of Transportation, Transportation Project-

Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol, Revised December 1997.

(Available on the internet at

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/air/coprot.htm)

Caltrans 1998 California Department of Transportation, User’s Guide for CL4: A

User-Friendly Interface for the CALINE4 Model for Transportation

Project Impact Assessments, June 1998. (Available on the internet

at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/air/calinesw.htm)

Caltrans 1999 California Department of Transportation, California Line Source

Dispersion Model CALINE4, Version 1.31. August 1999. (Available

on the internet at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/air/calinesw.htm)

CARB 2006 California Air resources Board, EMFAC2007 Computer model,

November 2006.(Available on the internet at

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/on-road/latest_version.htm)

SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Data,

(Available at SCAQMD or on the internet at

http://ozone.aqmd.gov/smog)

SCAQMD 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality

Handbook, November 1993. (Available at SCAQMD.)

SCAQMD 2002 California Air Resources Control Board, URBEMIS 2002 for

Windows Computer Program and User’s Guide, Version 8.7.0. May

2003. (Available at SCAQMD.)

SCAQMD 2003

South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2003 Air Quality

Management Plan, August, 2003.

(Available at SCAQMD.)

SCAQMD 2006 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final- Methodology

to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM-2.5) and PM-2.5 Significance

Thresholds, October 2006. (Available at SCAQMD.)

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/air/coprot.htm

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/air/calinesw.htm

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/air/calinesw.htm

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/on-road/latest_version.htm

http://ozone.aqmd.gov/smog

18


Webb 2006 Albert A. Webb Associates, Traffic Impact Study Report, Heritage

Square Project, February, 2007. (Available at Riverside County.)

WRCC Western Regional Climate Center, Sun City Station No. 048655,

November 2, 2006. (Available at [email protected])

Location Address

Riverside County 4080 Lemon Street, 9th

Floor

Riverside, CA 92502-1409

SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District

21865 East Copley Drive

Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182

DOCUMENT PREPARATION STAFF

ALBERT A. WEBB ASSOCIATES

3788 McCray Street

Riverside, CA 92506

951.686.1070

Eliza Laws, Assistant Environmental Analyst

mailto:[email protected]

Appendix A


APPENDIX A

URBEMIS 2002 FOR WINDOWS OUTPUT FILES

Appendix B


APPENDIX B

CALINE4 MODELING INFORMATION

Documents

AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT