pomona hyatt place hotel project · pomona hyatt place hotel project executive summary draft...

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Draft Environmental Impact Report

Prepared for:The City of Pomona

505 S. Garey AvenuePomona, CA 91766

Prepared by:Applied Planning, Inc.

5817 Pine Avenue, Suite AChino Hills, CA 91709

May 2016

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

for the

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project

Prepared for:

City of Pomona 505 S. Garey Avenue Pomona, CA 91766

Prepared by:

Applied Planning, Inc. 5817 Pine Avenue, Suite A

Chino Hills, CA 91709

May 2016

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Table of Contents Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page i

Table of Contents

Section Page

1.0 Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 Project Elements ................................................................................................ 1-2

1.3 Project Opening Year ...................................................................................... 1-16

1.4 Project Objectives ............................................................................................ 1-17

1.5 Discretionary Approvals and Permits ......................................................... 1-18

1.6 Initial Study ...................................................................................................... 1-19

1.7 Impacts Not Found to be Potentially Significant ....................................... 1-19

1.8 Areas of Concern or Controversy ................................................................. 1-43

1.9 EIR Topical Issues ........................................................................................... 1-45

1.10 Summary of Significant Project Impacts ...................................................... 1-45

1.11 Alternatives to the Project.............................................................................. 1-46

1.12 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ......................................... 1-47

2.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 2-1

2.1 Overview ............................................................................................................ 2-1

2.2 Authorization .................................................................................................... 2-2

2.3 Lead and Responsible Agencies ...................................................................... 2-2

2.4 Project Applicant ............................................................................................... 2-3

2.5 The EIR Process ................................................................................................. 2-3

2.6 EIR Content and Format .................................................................................. 2-5

2.7 Intended Use of this EIR .................................................................................. 2-7

2.8 Documents Incorporated By Reference ......................................................... 2-7

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Table of Contents Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page ii

Section Page

3.0 Project Description ...................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Overview ............................................................................................................ 3-1

3.2 Project Location ................................................................................................. 3-1

3.3 Background ........................................................................................................ 3-3

3.4 Vicinity Land Uses ............................................................................................ 3-3

3.5 Project Elements ................................................................................................ 3-5

3.6 Project Opening Year ...................................................................................... 3-20

3.7 Project Objectives ............................................................................................ 3-20

3.8 Discretionary Approvals and Permits ......................................................... 3-21

4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis ................................................................................ 4-1

4.1 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................. 4.1-1

4.2 Transportation/Traffic ................................................................................... 4.2-1

4.3 Air Quality ...................................................................................................... 4.3-1

4.4 Global Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................ 4.4-1

4.5 Noise ................................................................................................................ 4.5-1

4.6 Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................................................... 4.6-1

4.7 Public Services ................................................................................................ 4.7-1

5.0 Other CEQA Considerations ..................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Cumulative Impact Analysis ........................................................................... 5-1

5.2 Alternatives Analysis ..................................................................................... 5-13

5.3 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Action .................................... 5-27

5.4 Significant Environmental Effects ................................................................ 5-29

5.5 Significant and Irreversible Environmental Changes ................................ 5-29

5.6 Energy Conservation ...................................................................................... 5-30

6.0 Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................... 6-1

7.0 References ...................................................................................................................... 7-1

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Table of Contents Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page iii

APPENDICES (Provided on accompanying CD-ROM)

Appendix A: Initial Study, NOP, NOP Responses

Appendix B: Traffic Impact Analysis

Appendix C: Air Quality Impact Analysis

Appendix D: Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis

Appendix E: Noise Impact Analysis

Appendix F: Hydrology Study

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Table of Contents Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page iv

List of Figures Figure Page

1.2-1 Site Plan Concept .......................................................................................................... 1-3

1.2-2 View Orientation Map .................................................................................................. 1-5

1.2-3 Design Concept – View 1 ............................................................................................. 1-6




3.2-1 Project Location ............................................................................................................. 3-2

3.4-1 Vicinity Land Uses ........................................................................................................ 3-4

3.5-1 Site Plan Concept .......................................................................................................... 3-6

3.5-2 View Orientation Map .................................................................................................. 3-8


3.5-4 Design Concept – View 2 ........................................................................................... 3-10



4.1-1 Vicinity Land Uses ..................................................................................................... 4.1-3

4.1-2 General Plan Place Types .......................................................................................... 4.1-8

4.2-1 Study Area .................................................................................................................. 4.2-4

4.2-2 Existing Transit Services ......................................................................................... 4.2-11

4.2-3 Existing Sidewalks/Pedestrian Crossings ............................................................. 4.2-12

4.2-4 Pomona Bicycle Plan ................................................................................................ 4.2-13

4.3-1 Receptor Locations ................................................................................................... 4.3-58

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Table of Contents Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page v

Figure Page

4.5-1 Typical Noise Levels .................................................................................................. 4.5-4

4.5-2 Existing Receptors .................................................................................................... 4.5-11

4.5-3 Ambient Noise Measurement Locations ................................................................ 4.5-4

4.5-4 Noise Receiver Locations ........................................................................................ 4.5-30

4.6-1 Existing Hydrology Map .......................................................................................... 4.6-6

4.6-2 Stormwater Management Concept ....................................................................... 4.6-30

4.7-1 Nearest Fire and Police Facilities ............................................................................. 4.7-3

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Table of Contents Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page vi

List of Tables

Table Page

1.8-1 List of NOP Respondents and Summary of NOP Comments .............................. 1-43

1.12-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation ....................................................................... 1-48

4.1-1 General Plan Goals and Policies Consistency ...................................................... 4.1-14

4.1-2 Consistency with SCAG Regional Goals .............................................................. 4.1-16

4.2-1 Study Area Intersections ........................................................................................... 4.2-3

4.2-2 Study Area Roadway Segments .............................................................................. 4.2-5

4.2-3 Signalized Intersection LOS Descriptors ................................................................ 4.2-6

4.2-4 Roadway Segment LOS Criteria .............................................................................. 4.2-8

4.2-5 General Plan Objectives and Policies/Programs Consistency ........................... 4.2-23

4.3-1 Criteria Pollutant Standards, Effects, & Sources ................................................. 4.3-14

4.3-2 SCAB Attainment Status ......................................................................................... 4.3-16

4.3-3 Project Air Quality Monitoring Summary (2012-2014)....................................... 4.3-17

4.3-4 Maximum Daily Emissions Thresholds (Regional) ............................................. 4.3-24

4.3-5 Project Construction Schedule ............................................................................... 4.3-30

4.3-6 Summary of Construction Equipment Use by Activity ..................................... 4.3-31

4.3-7 Maximum Daily Construction-Source Emissions (without mitigation) .......... 4.3-31

4.3-8 Maximum Daily Construction-Source Emissions (with mitigation) ................ 4.3-33

4.3-9 Maximum Daily Operational-Source Emissions (without mitigation) ............ 4.3-36

4.3-10 Construction-Source Emissions LST Analysis ..................................................... 4.3-40

4.3-11 Operational-Source Emissions LST Analysis ....................................................... 4.3-41

4.3-12 2003 Los Angeles Study-Hot Spot Model Results ............................................... 4.3-43

4.3-13 2003 Los Angeles Study-Peak Hour Intersection Traffic Volumes ................... 4.3-43

4.3-14 Project Peak Hour Intersection Traffic Volumes ................................................. 4.3-44

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Table of Contents Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page vii

Table Page

4.4-1 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes ..................................... 4.4-4

4.4-2 Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................................... 4.4-9

4.4-3 City of Pomona Year 2007 GHG Baseline Emissions Inventory ....................... 4.4-10

4.4-4 CARB Scoping Plan BAU; Annual GHG Emissions Summaries ...................... 4.4-32

4.4-5 Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Summary .................................................... 4.4-33

4.5-1 Ambient Noise Level Measurements .................................................................... 4.5-14

4.5-2 Operational/Area-Source Exterior Noise Standards ........................................... 4.5-18

4.5-3 Construction Noise Standards ............................................................................... 4.5-19

4.5-4 Construction Vibration Standard .......................................................................... 4.5-19

4.5-5 Summary of Significance Thresholds .................................................................... 4.5-26

4.5-6 Construction Noise Levels ...................................................................................... 4.5-32

4.5-7 Existing Off-Site Project-Related Traffic Noise Impacts ..................................... 4.5-35

4.5-8 Year 2018 Off-Site Project-Related Traffic Noise Impacts .................................. 4.5-36

4.5-9 Year 2040 Off-Site Project-Related Traffic Noise Impacts .................................. 4.5-36

4.5-10 Exterior Noise Levels (CNEL) ................................................................................ 4.5-37

4.5-11 Operational Noise Level Compliance ................................................................... 4.5-42

4.5-12 Daytime Operational Noise Level Contributions................................................ 4.5-44

4.5-13 Nighttime Operational Noise Level Contributions............................................. 4.5-45

4.5-14 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels ........................................................... 4.5-48

5.2-1 Comparative Trip Generation - Project and Reduced Intensity Alternative...... 5-19

5.2-2 Comparative Operational-Source Emissions - Project and Reduced

Intensity Alternative ................................................................................................... 5-21

5.6-1 Construction-Source Fuel Consumption Estimates ............................................... 5-43

5.6-2 Project-Generated Traffic Annual Fuel Consumption ........................................... 5-46

5.6-3 Project Annual Operational Energy Demand Summary ...................................... 5-47

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Executive Summary Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 1-1

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this

Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR or EIR) evaluates and discloses the potential

environmental effects resulting from construction and operation of the proposed

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project (the Project). Primary uses proposed by the Project

include:

• A 6-story, 200-room Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel with conference facilities and

supporting amenities totaling approximately 159,000 square feet; and

• A free-standing, 3-story office building totaling approximately 75,000 square feet.

The Project is located within the Pomona Ranch Plaza (Plaza) in the City of Pomona.

The Plaza comprises approximately 71 acres formed by the intersection of State Route 60

(SR-60), State Route 71 (SR-71), and Rio Rancho Road (please refer to EIR Section 3.0,

Project Description; Figure 3.2-1, Project Location). Uses proposed by the Project would be

constructed on approximately 14.88 acres located at the southerly limits of the Plaza site.

With the exception of the Project site, the remainder of the Plaza is substantively

developed with commercial/retail and office uses and associated parking fields.

This Section of the EIR summarizes relevant Project background issues, provides a brief

description of the Project and its Objectives, and summarizes potential environmental

impacts of the proposal. The “Summary of Impacts and Mitigation” Table presented at

the conclusion of this Section, lists these impacts and presents the mitigation measures

recommended to eliminate or reduce the effects of those impacts which have been

8 2016 Applied Planning, Inc.


determined to be potentially significant. Alternatives to the Project which could reduce

the extent or severity of the Project’s significant environmental impacts are also

summarized within this Section. For a full description of the Project, its impacts,

recommended mitigation measures, and considered Alternatives, please refer to EIR

Sections 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 respectively.

1.2 PROJECT ELEMENTS

1.2.1 Site Preparation

The Project site is a vacant, disturbed property comprising approximately 14.88 acres.

Site preparation activities would involve excavation, fill, and grading. Preliminary

grading/development concepts indicate that approximately 41,800 cubic yards of fill

material would be imported to the Project site.1 Imported fill would be obtained from a

vacant, approximately 1.61-acre lot located adjacent to and opposite the Project site,

across Rancho Camino Drive.

1.2.2 Development Concept 1.2.2.1 Site Plan Concept The Project Site Plan Concept, Figure 1.2-1, indicates the location and orientation of hotel and office uses proposed by the Project. The hotel use would be constructed in the southerly portion of the Project site and a two-level parking structure would be constructed easterly adjacent to the hotel. The proposed office building would be constructed westerly of the proposed hotel. Areas northerly of the hotel and office building would be developed with supporting parking areas. Access to the Project facilities would be provided by a STOP-controlled circular driveway connecting to Rancho Camino Drive along the Project site’s northerly boundary.

1 The former, circa 1940–1950 Phillips Ranch Landfill Site (also referred to as the Pomona Ranch Disposal Site, or PRDS) is located within the Pomona Ranch Plaza, and underlies proposed Project surface parking areas located northerly of the proposed Hotel uses. Plans and permitting for remediation and capping of the Landfill have been previously approved by CalRecycle (the administrative permitting agency), and remediation and capping of the landfill will be accomplished by others prior to implementation of the Project.



Figure 1.2-1 Site Plan Concept (to be provided)



1.2.2.2 Architectural Design Concepts

A view orientation map and rendered views of the design concepts for the hotel and

office uses proposed by the Project are presented at Figures 1.2-2 through 1.2-6. The

Project hotel and office building designs express contemporary urban elements and

architectural features. Overall building designs would be consistent on all sides

regardless of building size, location, or orientations. Varied combinations of material

would be represented, allowing for flexibility and compatibility with

geographical/regional locations and local settings. Fire rated construction and fully

automatic sprinkler systems would be provided for all Project buildings. All final

building designs would be subject to review and approval by the City.

1.2.3 Project Facilities

Primary facilities proposed by the Project are summarized and described below.

1.2.3.1 Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel

The Project proposes a 6-story, approximately 75-foot high, 200-room Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel, totaling approximately 159,000 square feet including ancillary supporting facilities and amenities. Hotel facilities would include the following primary elements:

• Hyatt Place (short-term hotel occupancies) - 115 keys; • Hyatt House (extended-stay hotel occupancies) - 85 keys; • Outdoor swimming pool; • Conference/meeting rooms; • Ballrooms; • Kitchen; • Bar/café; • Lounge areas; • Fitness room; • Business center; • Office/administrative areas; and • Various storage, electrical equipment, mechanical equipment, housekeeping,

vestibule and lobby areas.



Figure 1.2-2 View Orientation Map



Figure 1.2-3 View 1



Figure 1.2-4 View 2



Figure 1.2-5 View 3



Figure 1.2-6 View 4



1.2.3.2 Office Building A 3-story, 75,000-square-foot office building is proposed in the southwesterly portion of the Project site, westerly adjacent to the proposed Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel. Specific tenants for the proposed office building have not as yet been identified.

1.2.4 Access and Circulation

Primary access to Pomona Ranch Plaza is currently provided by two (2) signalized

driveways off Rio Rancho Road, one each at Lone Ridge Road and Rancho Camino

Drive. Internal to the Plaza, access to the Project site would be provided by a

STOP-controlled circular driveway connecting to Rancho Camino Drive.

1.2.5 Parking

In support of the proposed Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel, a total of 468 parking spaces

would be provided - configured as 208 surface parking spaces and 260 parking spaces to

be provided within an easterly adjacent two-level parking structure. Additional surface

parking spaces would be provided in support of the proposed office building in

quantities and configurations required by the City. Parking areas would be shared

between uses to the extent practicable. Unless otherwise noted herein, or otherwise

specified by the City, all parking areas to include parking stalls, drive aisles, parking lot

landscaping and hardscaping, would be designed and constructed pursuant to City

requirements as outlined at City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance.

1.2.6 Site Landscaping

Perimeter and internal landscaping would be provided consistent with provisions of the

City Municipal Code. The implemented landscape concept would enhance the

appearance of parking areas, provide shade and visual interest, define entry/access

points, accentuate site and architectural features, accommodate water quality treatment

features (bioretention/biofiltration areas) and provide screening.



1.2.7 Streetscape

Within the Plaza, the Project driveways would connect to Rancho Camino Drive. The

Project would construct or re-construct Rancho Camino Drive sidewalks and

landscape/streetscape areas along the Project frontage, continuing existing sidewalks

and landscape/streetscape features, or as otherwise required by the City through Project

Conditions of Approval.

1.2.8 Infrastructure/Utilities

Infrastructure and utilities that would serve the Project site are summarized below.

1.2.8.1 Water/Sewer Services

Water and sewer services would be provided to the Project by the City of Pomona Water

& Wastewater Operations Division. Water service extensions to the Project site would

connect to existing facilities located in the abutting Rancho Camino Drive right-of-way.

Sanitary sewer services to the Project would similarly be provided by connection to the

existing sewer main located within Rancho Camino Drive. Alignment of service lines,

and connection to existing services would be as required by the City. Wastewater would

be conveyed from the Project for treatment at the Pomona Water Reclamation Plant

(PWRP).

1.2.8.2 Storm Water Management Systems

The Project stormwater management systems comprehensively include proposed

drainage improvements, and facilities and programs which act to control and treat

stormwater pollutants. Under the Project Stormwater Management System Concept,

existing drainage patterns would be generally maintained. Under post-development

conditions, stormwater discharges from the Project site would be conveyed to the

existing 66-inch RCP located northeasterly of the Project site at the terminus of the

Rancho Camino Drive cul-de-sac. This 66-inch RCP has been designed to convey runoff

from future commercial buildout of the Pomona Ranch Plaza, including stormwater

discharges resulting from development of the Project site.



Developed stormwater within the Project site would be collected via surface inlets and

internal secondary drain lines and would be directed to two main storm drain lines “A”

and “B.” Proposed storm drain lines A and B would be aligned along the Project site

perimeter; and would confluence at the northeasterly limits of the Project site prior to

connection with the existing 24-inch RCP at the south edge of the Rancho Camino Drive

cul-de-sac. This 24-inch RCP would then connect northerly to the previously noted

66-inch RCP discharging northeasterly to the 12-foot x 12-foot RCB culvert underlying

the SR-71 freeway.

The Project would also implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP),

and Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) consistent with City

requirements. In this manner, the Project would also comply with requirements of the

City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and other

water quality requirements or storm water management programs specified by the

Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In combination, implementation of the

Project SWPPP, SUSMP, and compliance with NPDES Permit and RWQCB requirements

act to protect City and regional water quality by preventing or minimizing potential

stormwater pollutant discharges to the watershed.

1.2.8.3 Solid Waste Management

It is anticipated that Project-generated solid waste would be conveyed by existing service

providers to either the El Sobrante Landfill in Riverside County, or to the Mid-Valley

Sanitary Landfill in San Bernardino County. The California Integrated Waste

Management Act under the Public Resources Code required that local jurisdictions

divert at least 50% of all solid waste generated by January 1, 2000. The City remains

committed to continuing its existing waste reduction and minimization efforts with the

programs that are available through the City. Additionally, as of July 1, 2012, the State of

California required that all businesses that generate four cubic yards or more of refuse

per week implement a recycling program. This requirement is set forth in Assembly Bill

341, which was passed by the California legislation in October 2011. The Project would



comply with the California Integrated Waste Management Act and AB 341 as

implemented by the City.

1.2.8.4 Electricity

Electrical service to the Project would be provided by Southern California Edison (SCE).

New lines installed by the Project would be placed underground. Alignment of service

lines and connection to existing services would be as required by SCE. Any necessary

surface-mounted equipment, such as transformers, meters, service cabinets, and the like,

would be screened and would conform to building setback requirements.

It is further noted that to allow for, and facilitate Project construction activities, provision

of temporary SCE electrical services improvements would be required. The scope of such

temporary improvements are considered to be consistent with, and reflected within the

total scope of development proposed by the Project. Similarly, impacts resulting from the

provision of temporary SCE services would not be substantively different from, or

greater than, impacts resulting from development of the Project in total.

1.2.8.5 Natural Gas

Natural gas service would be provided by the Gas Company. Existing service lines

would be extended to the Project uses. Alignment of service lines and connection to

existing services would be as required by the Gas Company.

1.2.8.6 Communications Services

Communications services, including wired and wireless telephone and internet services

are available through numerous private providers and would be provided on an

as-needed basis. As with electrical service lines, all existing and proposed wires,

conductors, conduits, raceways, and similar communications improvements within the

Project area would be installed underground. Any necessary surface-mounted

equipment, e.g., terminal boxes, transformers, meters, service cabinets, etc., would be

screened and would conform to building setback requirements.



1.2.9 Police and Fire Protection Services

Police and fire protection services are currently available to the Plaza and the Project site,

and are listed below.

• Fire Protection Services (Los Angeles County Fire Department); and

• Police Protection Services (City of Pomona Police Department).

1.2.10 Energy Efficiency/Sustainability

Energy-saving and sustainable design features and operational programs would be

incorporated into all facilities developed pursuant to the Project. Notably, the Project

would comply with the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; CCR,

Title 24, Part 11) as implemented by the City of Pomona. The Project also incorporates

and expresses the following design features and attributes promoting energy efficiency

and sustainability.

• Regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and associated vehicular-source emissions are reduced by the following Project design features/attributes:

ο Sidewalks would be constructed along the Project’s Rancho Camino Drive

street frontage providing pedestrian connection to other uses within the Plaza. Sidewalks would also be constructed within the Project site connecting the various uses and activity centers. Facilitating pedestrian access encourages people to walk instead of drive. The Project would not impose barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity.

ο Concentration of mixed uses within a destination center as proposed by the Project acts to reduce travel distances and regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by consolidating trips and reducing requirements for multiple trips.

• To reduce water demands and associated energy use, development proposals

within the Project site would be required to implement a Water Conservation Strategy and demonstrate a minimum 20% reduction in indoor water usage when



compared to baseline water demand (total expected water demand without implementation of the Water Conservation Strategy).2 Development proposals within the Project site would also be required to implement the following: ο Landscaping palette emphasizing drought-tolerant plants consistent with

provisions of the Preserve Specific Plan and/or City of Pomona requirements;

ο Use of water-efficient irrigation techniques consistent with City of Pomona requirements;

ο U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Certified WaterSense labeled or

equivalent faucets, high-efficiency toilets (HETs), and other plumbing fixtures.

1.2.11 Construction Traffic Management Plan Temporary and short-term traffic detours and traffic disruptions could result during Project construction activities including implementation of access and circulation improvements noted above. Accordingly, the Project Applicant would be responsible for the preparation and submittal of a construction area traffic management plan (Plan) to be reviewed and approved by the City. Typical elements and information incorporated in the Plan would include but would not be limited to:

• Name of on-site construction superintendent and contact phone number.

• Identification of Construction Contract Responsibilities - For example, for excavation and grading activities, describe the approximate depth of excavation, and quantity of soil import/export (if any).

2 Reduction of 20% indoor water usage is consistent with the current CalGreen Code performance standards for residential and non-residential land uses. Per CalGreen, the reduction shall be based on the maximum allowable water use per plumbing fixture and fittings as required by the California Building Standards Code.



• Identification and Description of Truck Routes - to include the number of trucks and their staging location(s) (if any).

• Identification and Description of Material Storage Locations (if any).

• Location and Description of Construction Trailer (if any).

• Identification and Description of Traffic Controls - Traffic controls shall be

provided per the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) if the occupation or closure of any traffic lanes, parking lanes, parkways or any other public right-of way is required. If the right-of-way occupation requires configurations or controls not identified in the MUTCD, a separate traffic control plan must be submitted to the City for review and approval. All right-of-way encroachments would require permitting through the City.

• Identification and Description of Parking - Estimate the number of workers and

identify parking areas for their vehicles.

• Identification and Description of Maintenance Measures - Identify and describe measures taken to ensure that the work site and public right-of-way would be maintained (including dust control).

The Plan must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the issuance of the building permit. The Plan and its requirements would also be required to be provided to all contractors as one component of building plan/contract document packages. 1.3 PROJECT OPENING YEAR The proposed Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project in total would be developed in a manner responsive to market conditions and in concert with availability of necessary infrastructure and services. For the purposes of this analysis, the Project Opening Year is defined as 2018.



1.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The primary goal of the Project is the development of the subject site with a productive mix of hotel and office uses. Complementary objectives of the Project include the following:

• Implement land uses that are consistent with the City of Pomona General Plan land use and development density vision for the subject site;

• Support mobility goals and objectives by taking advantage of regional access provided by adjacent SR-71 freeway and local access provided by Rio Rancho Road;

• Take advantage of the site’s visibility from adjacent SR-60 and SR-71 freeways;

• Develop the subject site with high-quality hotel uses offering a unique guest

experience;

• Establish hotel and office uses that are compatible with, and complement, existing uses within the Pomona Ranch Plaza;

• Attract and accommodate new and additional hotel and office development

serving local and regional markets;

• Attract visitors, business travelers, meeting/convention activities, and office tenants to the City of Pomona;

• Transition the Project site from its current unimproved/vacant state to a

commercial development, with resulting new fiscal benefits to the City of Pomona. Benefits would include new sales/room tax revenues and increased property tax revenues; and



• Implement employment-generating land uses that would create new jobs available to City residents.

1.5 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS AND PERMITS Discretionary actions, permits and related consultation(s) necessary to approve and implement the Project include, but are not limited to, the following. 1.5.1 Lead Agency Discretionary Actions and Permits

• CEQA Compliance/EIR Certification. The City must certify the EIR prior to, or concurrent with, any approval of the Project.

• Approval of a Tentative Parcel Map. The Project proposes a commercial parcel

map that would create and/or reconfigure lots for development of the Project facilities. At the direction of the City, the Tentative Parcel Map may also dedicate necessary public rights-of-ways and establish easements.

• Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed hotel use, to include

allowance for on-sale of alcohol ancillary to hotel bar/lounge/banquet activities.

• Various City of Pomona construction, grading, and encroachment permits are required to allow implementation of the Project facilities.

1.5.2 Other Consultation and Permits

CEQA Guidelines Section 15124 also states that the EIR should, to the extent known,

include a list of all the agencies expected to use the EIR in their decision-making

(Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies), and a list of other permits or approvals

required to implement the Project. Based on the current Project design concept,

anticipated permits necessary to realize the proposal would likely include, but are not

limited to, the following:



• Tribal Resources consultation with requesting Tribes as provided for under AB

52, Gatto. Native Americans: California Environmental Quality Act;

• Permitting may be required by/through the Regional Water Quality Control

Board (RWQCB) pursuant to requirements of the City’s National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit;

• Permitting may be required by/through the South Coast Air Quality

Management District (SCAQMD) for certain equipment or land uses that may be

implemented within the Project area; and

• Various construction, grading, and encroachment permits allowing

implementation of the Project facilities.

1.6 INITIAL STUDY

The City of Pomona, through the Initial Study process, has determined that the Project

has the potential to cause or result in significant environmental impacts, and warranted

further analysis, public review, and disclosure through the preparation of an EIR. The

Initial Study (IS) and associated EIR Notice of Preparation (NOP), dated January 2016,

were forwarded to the California Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse

(SCH), and circulated for public review and comment. The State Clearinghouse

established the comment period for the NOP/IS as January 29, 2016 through February

29, 2016. The assigned State Clearinghouse reference for the Project is SCH No.

2016011079. The Initial Study, NOP, and NOP responses are presented at Appendix A of

this Draft EIR.

1.7 IMPACTS NOT FOUND TO BE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT

The following list identifies those environmental issues that have been determined

pursuant to the IS/NOP preparation and public review processes to pose no potentially

significant impacts, or mitigation is proposed within the IS that reduces certain

potentially significant impacts to levels that are less-than-significant. The specific issues



listed are not substantively discussed within the body of this EIR. Please refer also to

related discussions and analyses presented within the Initial Study, EIR Appendix A.

Aesthetics

The Project site is located within an established commercial center and does not propose

elements that would affect scenic vistas or scenic resources within a designated scenic

highway. The only designated scenic highway in the Project vicinity is State Route 57,

approximately three miles westerly of the Project site. No historic buildings currently

exist on or adjacent to the Project site; and development of the Project would not

otherwise affect historic resources.

New construction proposed by the Project would represent a visual improvement of the

currently vacant disturbed former landfill site; would complement architectural styles

evidenced elsewhere in the Plaza; would enhance the visual perception of the Plaza in

total; and would reinforce the Project site and the Plaza in total as a destination place in

the City. Additionally, the Project building forms and Project land use density/intensity

would comport with Transect Zone T6-B Typical Development Types and

Density/Intensity guidelines articulated in the City of Pomona General Plan. The Project

would further comply with any enhanced design and architectural solutions that may

be specified by City staff and incorporated as Project Conditions of Approval (COA).

The Project would establish new sources of lighting, which may include new

building-mounted, wall-mounted, pole-mounted and surface fixtures. The Project

would also provide new illuminated exterior signage. The Project vicinity is currently

developed with urban uses, and it is not anticipated that typical commercial lighting

proposed by the Project would substantively alter area ambient lighting conditions.

Pursuant to City of Pomona Municipal Code Section 503, Property Development Standards

et al., new sources of light proposed by the Project would be shielded and directed away

from off-site land uses thereby avoiding or minimizing potential light overspill. Final

design, configuration, and orientation of Project lighting features and fixtures would be



subject to City review and approval, acting to ensure that Project lighting would be

compatible with, and would complement, Project architectural and site designs; and

further that Project lighting would be compatible with and would not adversely affect

off-site land uses.

Conceptual designs for the Project buildings incorporate non-glare surface materials

acting to ensure that the Project buildings would not create or result in substantive

sources of reflected light and glare.

As supported by the preceding, the Project would have less-than-significant impacts for

the following environmental considerations:

• Substantial adverse effects on a scenic vista;

• Substantial damage to scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rocks,

outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway;

• Substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site and

its surroundings; and

• Creation of a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely

affect the day or nighttime views in the area.

Agriculture and Forest Resources

The Project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of

Statewide Importance. Nor is the Project site or any other City properties zoned for

forest lands, timberlands, or timberland production. There are no agricultural uses,

forestlands or timberlands within the City of Pomona. The Project does not require or

propose other changes to the environment which could result in the conversion of farm

land or forest land to other uses. The site currently accommodates

commercial/retail/office facilities and associated parking areas.



The Project site is currently zoned for Regional Commercial land uses pursuant to the

Phillips Ranch Specific Plan. No Williamson Act contracts are in place for the subject

site. No forest land is located on the Project site or in the vicinity.

Based on the preceding, the Project would have no impacts for the following

environmental considerations:

$ Conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide

Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,

to non-agricultural use;

$ Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract;

• Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or

timberland-zoned “Timberland Production;”

• Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; and

• Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or

nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or

conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

Biological Resources

The Project site is extensively disturbed by human activities, and has been substantially

altered from its natural state. The Project site is devoid of any substantive natural

habitat and evidences no sensitive or valuable biological resources. Nor does the Project

propose uses or activities that would otherwise adversely affect biological resources.

No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community exists within the Project site or

in the Project vicinity. Urbanization of the area has replaced native vegetation with



non-native grasses, hedges, and trees. Any existing vegetation serves as habitat for local

common species that will likely be dispersed to other nearby areas during construction.

No federally-protected wetlands areas exist within the Project site or in surrounding

areas. This environmental concern is thus not applicable to implementation of this

proposal.

The Project site is urbanized and is bordered by roadways and other urban

development. As such, the potential for native wildlife species to use the Project site as a

migratory corridor or nursery site is unlikely.

There are no protected tree species or other biologically significant resources on the

Project site. Nor are there any local or area-wide preservation or conservation plans or

policies applicable to the subject site. The nearest portion of the proposed East San

Gabriel Valley Significant Ecological Area (SEA) is located more than one mile to the

northwest of the Project site, north of Village Loop Road (Pomona General Plan EIR pp.

4.3-14–4.3-16); and at this distance would not be affected by the Project. There are no

other known local ordinances protecting biological resources within the City.

On this basis, the Project would have either no impact, or a less-than-significant impact

for the following environmental considerations:

$ Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat

modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status

species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California

Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW, formerly California Department of Fish

and Game) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

$ Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive

natural community identified in local or regional plans, polices, regulations or by



the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW, formerly California

Department of Fish and Game) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

$ Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal

pool, coastal, etc.) though direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or

other means;

$ Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory

fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife

corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites;

$ Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,

such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; and

• Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural

Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat

conservation plan.

Cultural Resources

There are no known historic structures, archaeological resources, or paleontological

resources located within the Project site, nor would the Project affect any offsite

resources of historical, archaeological, or paleontological significance. Moreover, past

and existing development of the site indicates that whatever resources may have been

previously present, have likely since been disturbed and/or removed. The EIR prepared

for the Pomona Ranch Plaza prior to its development in the mid-1990s indicates that

“No historically or prehistorically significant sites or structures are known to exist”

onsite, and that “No traces of unique cultural resources, or religious or sacred uses have

been identified on-site or in the general vicinity.” (Initial Study, p. 24, in the City of

Pomona Regional Retail Center Environmental Impact Report, SCH# 1993021028, February

22, 1994).



The likelihood of encountering human remains in the course of Project development is

minimal. However, as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5,

should human remains be found, no further disturbance shall occur until the County

Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public

Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find

immediately. If the remains were found to be prehistoric, the coroner would coordinate

with the California Native American Heritage Commission as required by State law.

Based on the preceding, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact for the following environmental considerations:

• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5;

• Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5;

• Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource of site or unique geologic feature; and

• Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

Geology and Soils The Pomona General Plan EIR indicates there are no Earthquake Fault Special Study Zones (formerly Alquist-Priolo Zones) within the City (General Plan EIR, pp. 4.5-7–4.5-8). The Preliminary Project Geotechnical Evaluation (Geotechnical Investigation) confirms this finding for the Project site.3

3 Updated Geotechnical Evaluation for Proposed Hotels, Parking Structure and Parking Area, 41 Rancho Camino Drive, Pomona Ranch Plaza, Pomona, Los Angeles County, California (GeoTek, Inc.) June 18, 2015 (Preliminary Project Geotechnical Evaluation) p. 5. The Preliminary Project Geotechnical Evaluation is available through the City of Pomona.



The Project site is located in a region known to be seismically active, and strong seismic

ground-shaking is anticipated during an earthquake. Potential sources of

groundshaking that could impact the Project site include the following known active

regional faults and fault zones: the San Andreas, Sierra Madre, Whittier-Elsinore, San

Gabriel, Verdugo, Norwalk, Santa Monica, San Fernando, and Newport-Inglewood.

Local faults are also present, including the Indian Hill, Chino, Central Avenue, and San

Jose fault zones. Each of these faults could generate an earthquake of sufficient

magnitude that would damage the Project improvements.

The California Building Code requires design, engineering, and construction methods

that minimize the effects of earthquake on structures. As part of the City’s standard

review and approval of development projects, any new development must provide a

geotechnical study for review and approval by the City Engineer, and comply with the

requirements of the approved geotechnical report, and applicable provisions of the City

of Pomona Building Code and California Building Code (CBC).

Liquefaction and seismically-induced settlement or ground failure are generally

associated with strong seismic shaking in areas where groundwater tables are at

relatively shallow depths (within 50 feet of the ground surface) and/or when the area is

underlain by loose, cohesionless deposits. During a strong groundshaking event,

saturated, cohesionless soils may acquire a degree of mobility to the extent that the

overlying ground surface distorts. In extreme cases, saturated soils become suspended

in groundwater and become fluid-like.

The Preliminary Project Geotechnical Evaluation indicates that the depth to

groundwater in the vicinity of the Project site is greater than 100 feet; and that due to the

depth to groundwater and the presence of relatively dense bedrock at the surface of the

site, that seismically-induced settlement should not be a consideration in the design of

the Project improvements (Preliminary Project Geotechnical Investigation, p. 6).



In addition to the above considerations, the Project would comply with the

requirements of the final City-approved geotechnical report and applicable provisions

of the City of Pomona Building Code and California Building Code. These requirements

may include, but would not be limited to, design- and site-appropriate means to avoid

or minimize any liquefaction or ground-failure concerns that may be encountered or

detected as the Project designs are refined and finalized.

The Project site is considered to be hillside terrain, with elevations ranging from

approximately 795 to 885 mean sea level (msl) (Preliminary Project Geotechnical

Investigation, p. 2.) In order to implement the Project, the existing site terrain would

require modification to include construction of slopes and retaining walls. The

Preliminary Project Geotechnical Evaluation establishes engineering specifications and

performance standards that would ensure that any slopes and/or retaining walls

implemented by the Project would be designed, constructed, and maintained so as to

preclude slope failure and/or landslides (Geotechnical Investigation, pp. 10, 15, 20, et

al.). The Project would comply with the requirements of the final City-approved

geotechnical report and applicable provisions of the City Building Code and CBC. These

requirements may include, but would not be limited to, design- and site-appropriate

means to avoid slope failure and potential landslides.

Project construction activities would temporarily expose underlying soils, thereby

increasing their susceptibility to erosion until the Project is fully implemented. Potential

erosion impacts incurred during construction activities are mitigated below the level of

significance through the Project’s mandated compliance with a City-approved Storm

Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).

The Project would also be required to develop and implement a City-approved

Standard Urban Stormwater Management System (SUSMP). The implemented Project

SUSMP would include structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs)

that would act to control erosion and runoff within the developed Project site. Sample



BMPs would include but would not be limited to: maintenance of drainage structures,

controlled irrigation, and landscape/hardscape maintenance.

The Project site is not subject to or substantively affected by expansive or otherwise

unstable soils (Preliminary Project Geotechnical Evaluation, p. 4). Further, subsidence is

not considered to be a factor with the underlying materials in areas to be developed

with the Project structures (Preliminary Project Geotechnical Evaluation, p. 12).

As with other potential geologic/soils issues, the Project would comply with

requirements of the final City-approved geotechnical report, and applicable provisions

of the City Building Code and CBC, to include design- and site-appropriate means to

avoid or minimize any expansive soils concerns that may be encountered.

The Project site would be provided sanitary sewer services by the City municipal sewer

system. No septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems are proposed.

Based on the preceding, the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts, or

have no impact for the following environmental considerations:

$ Exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,

including the risk of loss, injury or death involving rupture of a known

earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake

Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other

substantial evidence of a known fault; strong seismic ground shaking;

seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or landslides;

$ Substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil;

$ Location on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become

unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site

landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse;



$ Location on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building

Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property; and

$ Soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative

waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of

waste water.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

General Considerations

The Project would not result in or cause exposure(s) to hazards or potentially hazardous

conditions. That is, the Project hotel and office uses are not considered hazardous; nor

consumers, users, or sources of hazards or hazardous materials. During the normal

course of construction and operation activities, there would be limited transport of

potentially hazardous materials (e.g., gasoline, diesel fuel, paints, solvents, fertilizer,

etc.) to and from the Project site. The Project is required to comply with all City and

County Hazardous Materials Management Plans and regulations addressing transport,

use, storage and disposal of these materials. The Project does not propose or require

uses or activities that would result in atypical transportation, use, storage, or disposal of

hazardous or potentially hazardous materials not addressed under current regulations

and policies.

Former Phillips Ranch Landfill

Northerly portions of the Project are underlain by the former Phillips Ranch Landfill

(also referred to as the Philips Ranch Road Disposal Site, or PRDS). Development in this

area of the Project site would be restricted to parking areas or similar unoccupied

improvements, and would be implemented only pursuant to completion of the

approved Remedial Action Plan (RAP) for the Landfill (Final Remedial Action Plan,

Phillips Ranch Landfill Site (URS Dames & Moore) May 9, 2001). Implementation of the

RAP would entail rough grading disturbance(s) of the Landfill area and construction of

a Landfill cap. Project parking lot improvements would be constructed over the capped



Landfill. Plans and permitting for remediation and capping of the Landfill have been

previously approved by CalRecycle (the administrative permitting agency); and

remediation and capping of the Landfill will be accomplished by others prior to

implementation of the Project.

Wells

Because of the potential risk to public health via improperly abandoned water wells, the

State of California and the County of Los Angeles require that all water wells either be

maintained in a useable state or be properly destroyed. Four groundwater monitoring

wells are known to exist at the site, and provide for monitoring of groundwater quality

in areas proximate to the former Phillips Ranch Landfill. Three of these wells would no

longer be used should the Project be implemented; the remaining well would be

protected and maintained on-site to provide for continued monitoring of groundwater

conditions.

Wells would be abandoned and destroyed as part of the site preparation processes,

consistent with DWR and Los Angeles County Department of Public Health

requirements. Please refer also to well abandonment and destruction protocols and

requirements presented in: DWR Bulletin 74-81, California Water Well Standards; Chapter

II. Standards, Part III. Destruction of Wells.4 Destruction/abandonment of wells would be

subject to review and approval by the City as part of the City’s plan check (grading

plan) review processes.

Although a number of schools are located within the general Project vicinity, no existing

or proposed schools are within one-quarter mile of the Project site. The nearest schools,

Lexington Elementary School and Garey High School, are located approximately

three-quarters of a mile northerly of the Project site, across SR-71 and north of Rio

Rancho Road, at 550 W. Lexington Avenue and 321 W. Lexington Avenue, respectively.

The Project proposes conventional hotel and office uses, and does not include elements

4 California DWR, Groundwater Information Center. California Well Standards. Web. July 21, 2015. http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/wells/california_well_standards/well_standards_content.cfm

http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/wells/california_well_standards/well_standards_content.cfm



or aspects that would create or otherwise result in hazardous emissions, and does not

propose or require the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,

substances, or waste.

The Project site is not located within an airport land use plan, nor is it located within

two miles of any airport. Brackett Field, the closest airport/airfield, is located

approximately four miles northwesterly of the Project site. Moreover, it is noted that the

Project does not propose activities or uses that would otherwise affect airports or airport

operations.

The Project does not propose or require designs or activities that would interfere with

an identified emergency response or emergency evacuation plan. Any right-of-way

vacations and realignments required of the Project would be accomplished consistent

with City design and construction requirements, and would not substantively or

adversely alter area traffic patterns and emergency response routes. Temporary

alterations to vehicle circulation routes associated with Project construction are

addressed through the Project construction traffic management plan, as approved by

the City. Ongoing coordination with the local fire and police departments during

construction will ensure that potential interference with emergency response and

evacuation efforts are avoided.

The Project site is located in an area that has been largely urbanized. Moreover, the

Project site and surrounding areas are currently provided fire protection and emergency

response services by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Development impact

fees and taxes paid by the Project would act to offset its incremental demands for fire

protection services.

Based on the preceding, the Project would have either no impact, or a

less-than-significant impact for the following environmental considerations:



• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine

transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;

• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably

foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of

hazardous materials into the environment;

• Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,

substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school;

• Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous material sites

compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5;

• For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has

not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,

result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area;

• For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for

the people residing or working in the project area;

• Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency

response plan or emergency evacuation plan; and

• Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving

wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or

where residences are intermixed with wildlands.

Hydrology and Water Quality

The Project would not contribute to groundwater depletion, nor discernibly interfere

with groundwater recharge. Water is provided throughout the City by the City’s Water

and Wastewater Operations Department (Department). Groundwater consumed by the

Project and the City of Pomona as a whole is recharged pursuant to Department’s



policies and programs. The Project would not impinge on, or otherwise affect,

designated recharge areas.

Direct additions or withdrawals of groundwater are not proposed by the Project.

Further, construction proposed by the Project will not involve substructures or other

intrusive elements at depths that would impair or alter the direction or rate of flow of

groundwater, or affect groundwater quality.

Certain groundwater monitoring wells within the Project site would be abandoned and

destroyed as part of the site preparation processes. Well abandonment and destruction

would comport with DWR and Los Angeles County Department of Public Health

requirements.

The Project does not propose the construction of housing. Further, the site does not lie

within a designated 100-year flood hazard zone. As such, no placement of structures in a

100-year flood hazard zone would occur as a result of Project implementation.

The City of Pomona is located near five (5) reservoirs: the Thompson Creek Reservoir,

the San Antonio Reservoir, the Live Oak Reservoir, the San Dimas Reservoir, and the

Puddingstone Reservoir. Because of the region’s gently sloping topography to the

southwest, both the Live Oak Reservoir and the San Antonio Reservoir could potentially

flood portions of the City in the event of a dam failure. The Project site is, however,

located outside identified potential inundation areas (General Plan EIR Figure 4.7-6).

The Project site is not located near any bodies of water or water storage facilities that

would be considered susceptible to seiche. Nor is the Project site located proximate to

coastal waters, and as such, is not subject to tsunami hazards. No slopes of significance

have been identified on or near the Project site, and the Project site has not historically

been affected by mudflows.



Based on the preceding discussions, the Project would have a less-than-significant

impact or no impact for the following environmental considerations:

• Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with

groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or

a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of the

pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing

land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted);

• Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood

Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation

map;

• Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or

redirect flood flows;

• Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving

flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam; or

• Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

Land Use

The subject site is located within an area designated for and developed with

commercial/retail uses. No “established community” exists within the Project site.

Surrounding residences are approximately 1,000 feet removed from the Project uses. As

such, it is unlikely that Project would directly result in offsite impacts (e.g., traffic, noise

or dust generation) that would disrupt or otherwise adversely affect neighboring

residential land uses.

The Project area, along with the majority of the City of Pomona, is located within an

urbanized setting. There are no existing or proposed conservation plans in place for the



Project area; nor would the Project affect any identified conservation plans. Please refer

also to the previous discussion under Biological Resources.

Based on the preceding, the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact for the

following environmental considerations:

• Physically divide an established community; and

• Conflict with a proposed habitat conservation plan, or other natural community

conservation plans.

Mineral Resources

Broadly, the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) regulations

govern the extraction of mineral resources and eventual reclamation of mining

operations; allowing for the mining of any locally-important mineral resources while

precluding or minimizing potentially adverse environmental effects.

The Pomona General Plan EIR notes that the California Department of Conservation

does not designate the City as being within a Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource

Area nor is it located in an area with active mineral extraction. As a result, no impacts

relating to mineral resource extraction are anticipated (General Plan EIR, p. 5-3).

Based on the preceding, the Project will result in no impacts for the following


$ Loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the

region and to the residents of the state; and

$ Loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site

delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan.



Noise

Brackett Field, the nearest airport/airfield, is located approximately four miles northwesterly of the Project site. While occasional aircraft overflight is expected, no excessive aircraft related noise would affect the Project area. Moreover, it is noted that the Project does not propose activities or uses that would cause or otherwise affect airport activities or airport/aircraft noise sources.

Based on the preceding, the Project would have no impacts for the following


$ For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has


expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels;

and

$ For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose people residing or

working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Population and Housing

The Project does not propose residential development and would not otherwise

substantively contribute to population growth within the City. Additionally, because

the Project is located within an existing retail center, no substantive extension of

infrastructure is required to serve the Project; and the Project’s localized infrastructure

improvements would not facilitate or encourage unanticipated development.

The Project would be implemented within an existing retail center. The Project does not

involve or propose the displacement of any onsite or offsite housing resources.

Based on the preceding, the Project will have either no impact or less-than-significant

impacts for the following population and housing considerations:



$ Induce substantial population growth in the area, either directly (e.g., by

proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through the extension

of roads or other infrastructure);

$ Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction

of replacement housing elsewhere; and

$ Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of

replacement housing elsewhere.

Public Services

Employment opportunities created by the Project may result in increased secondary

impacts to school and park facilities. Increased student population could result from

requests for Intra-District Transfers from employees of the Project wanting to enroll

their children in schools closer to their place of employment. The Project would not

however, contribute substantively to the resident population base using school facilities.

The Project would pay required school impact fees, acting to offset any incremental

effects to area school services and school facilities.

Hotel and office uses proposed by the Project would not introduce new residences to

the area, or otherwise create substantive additional demands for park facilities or park

services.

Development of the Project would require established public agency oversight

including, but not limited to, plan check and permitting actions by the City Planning

Division, City Utility Services Department, City Public Works Department, Pomona

Police Department, and the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Impacts of the project

affecting these other public agencies would fall within routine tasks of these agencies

and are paid for via plan check and inspection fees. Impacts of the Project would

therefore not be of such magnitude that new or physically altered facilities would be

required.



Based on the preceding, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact for the


• Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with new or physically altered

school facilities;

• Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with new or physically altered

park facilities; and

• Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with new or physically “other”

public facilities.

Recreation

The Project does not propose elements (e.g., residential development) that would result

in substantive increased demands for neighborhood or regional parks or other

recreational facilities. Additionally, the construction of recreational facilities is not

included in the Project proposal, nor would the Project require the construction or

expansion of recreational facilities.

Based on the preceding, the Project would have no impact or a less-than-significant

impact for the following environmental considerations:

• Increased demands on neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational

facilities; and

• Require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have

an adverse physical effect on the environment.



Transportation/Traffic

The Project does not propose elements or aspects that would affect air traffic patterns.

The airport located nearest the Project site is Brackett Field, approximately four miles to

the northwest. No other public or private airstrips exist in the vicinity of the Project.

The Project does not propose elements or aspects that would conflict with adopted

alternative transportation policies. On a long-term basis, the Project may result in

increased demands for public transportation.

Existing transit services are available to the Project area. Affected transit agencies

routinely review and adjust their ridership schedules to accommodate public demand.

As part of the City’s standard development review process, the need for and efficacy of

transit services and facilities, including but not limited to bus routing/scheduling, bus

shelters, and bicycle parking, would be coordinated between the City and the Project

Applicant, with input from affected transit providers.

Based on the preceding, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact for the


$ Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic

levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks; and

$ Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit,

bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety

of such facilities.

Utilities and Service Systems

The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD, District) would be responsible for the treatment of additional wastewater generated by the Project. The City of Pomona provides local sewer lines for wastewater conveyance to the District’s Pomona Water Reclamation Plant (PWRP).



Wastewater generated by the Project would be typical of commercial/retail generators, and would not require treatment beyond that provided by existing LACSD facilities. Moreover, the Project would be developed and operated in compliance with the regulations of the City and the standards of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB). As such, Project wastewater would not cause or result in exceedance of the wastewater treatment requirements of the LARWQCB. Water Treatment The majority of the City’s water supply comes from groundwater wells. Groundwater treatment is provided by the City’s network of domestic water treatment facilities, including portable filtration structures located at selected wellheads. Additionally, the Frank G. Pedley Memorial Filtration Plant treats the City’s allocation of surface water collected from San Antonio Canyon and Evey Canyon in the San Gabriel Mountains. The remainder of the water used in the City is delivered by the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California and the Three Valleys Municipal Water District (TVMWD), through the Colorado River Aqueduct and the California State Water Project. Water from these sources is treated at MWD’s Weymouth Water Treatment Plant in the City of La Verne, and at TVMWD’s Miramar Water Treatment Plant in Claremont. Treated water would be provided to the Project via the facilities described above. No additional or non-standard treatment is required to specifically meet the Project’s water demands. Water service and connection fees paid by the Project and other water customers act to fund area water treatment facilities such that treatment capacities and capabilities keep pace with or surpass treatment demands. Wastewater Treatment Wastewater treatment services are provided to the City by the LACSD, as discussed in the preceding discussion. The Project would pay applicable sewer connection and service fees, which act to fund City and LACSD wastewater collection and treatment system improvement plans, operations, and maintenance such that treatment capacities and capabilities keep pace with or surpass treatment demands. The LACSD, as a



regional wastewater treatment provider, would determine when and in what manner treatment facilities will be constructed and/or upgraded to meet increasing demands of areawide development, including the incremental demands of the Project. Project-specific management and conveyance of storm water is adequately and appropriately addressed through local connections to existing municipal storm water drainage systems. No substantive improvement or expansion of stormwater management systems would be required to support the Project. Project stormwater runoff would be collected and treated prior to discharge the municipal stormwater system. The Project would be developed and operated in compliance with all applicable City and LARWQCB regulations and standards. The City of Pomona 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) comprehensively addresses water demand and supply throughout the City through the year 2035. Development proposed by the Project is consistent with development of the area envisioned under the Pomona General Plan. As such, Project water demands are reflected in the UWMP. As documented within the General Plan EIR, water supplies available to the City have been determined sufficient to meet all existing customer demands, and anticipated future customer demands (including the Project’s demands) based on General Plan buildout under normal, single-dry year, and extended drought conditions (General Plan EIR, p. 4.14-6). Even in the event of water supply shortages or water emergencies, the City has in place water shortage contingency plans which ensure provision of priority water services to all its existing and anticipated customers, including the Project. The Project would be designed in compliance with all applicable water conservation programs and policies implemented by the City of Pomona. The scope of the Project (75,000 square feet of office uses; 200-room hotel) does not require preparation of a Water Supply Assessment (WSA).



The Project would result in an increased demand for wastewater treatment. The General Plan EIR determined that wastewater treatment demands associated with the buildout of the General Plan were less-than-significant (General Plan EIR, pp. 4.14-10, 4.14-11). The wastewater increment generated by the Project is reflected in this determination. The City of Pomona is currently served by numerous landfills. Waste generated by the

Project would likely be disposed at either El Sobrante Landfill in Riverside County, or

the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill in San Bernardino County. The General Plan EIR

concludes that adequate capacity exists at landfills serving the City to accommodate

development under General Plan buildout conditions; and further that buildout

pursuant to the General Plan would comply with applicable Federal, State, and local

statutes and regulations related to solid waste (General Plan EIR, pp. 4.14-18, 4.14-19).

The solid waste increment generated by the Project is reflected in these determinations.

Based on the preceding discussion, the Project would have less-than-significant impacts

in regard to the following environmental considerations:

• Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water

Quality Control Board;

• Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment

facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause

significant environmental effects;

• Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or

expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant

environmental effects;

• Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing

entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed;



• Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or

may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected

demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments;

• Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the

Project’s solid waste disposal needs; and

• Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid

waste.

1.8 AREAS OF CONCERN OR CONTROVERSY

Section 15123 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the EIR summary identify areas of

potential concern or controversy known to the lead agency, including issues raised by

other agencies and the public. Issues of concern were identified by the Lead Agency,

through responses to the Project Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (NOP), and other

communications addressing the Project and the Project EIR.

Responses received pursuant to distribution of the NOP are presented at EIR Appendix

A. Table 1.8-1 presents a list of NOP respondents, and a corresponding summary of

NOP comments, indicated by italicized text. Responses to comments, together with

correlating EIR references are indicated in subsequent statements. Unless otherwise

noted, all NOP respondent comments are addressed within the body of the EIR.

Table 1.8-1 List of NOP Respondents and Summary of NOP Comments

Respondent Summary of Comments

State Agencies

State of California Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse (SCH)

SCH provided receipt and record of distribution of the Initial Study (IS)/Notice of Preparation (NOP) and established the NOP review and comment period of January 29, 2016 through February 29, 2016. EIR Appendix A includes a copy of the Project IS/NOP and NOP Responses.



Table 1.8-1 List of NOP Respondents and Summary of NOP Comments

Respondent Summary of Comments

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), District 7

Caltrans provides detailed guidance for preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), referencing their Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. Contact information is also provided. The Project TIA, which is included in its entirety as part of Draft EIR Appendix B, has been prepared in compliance with all applicable State and local recommendations and regulations.

County/Regional Agencies

City of Chino The City states that they do not have comments at this time; however, they would like to review the Project traffic study upon availability. The City of Chino remains on the City’s list of persons/organizations receiving notices and information related to the proposed Project. The Project TIA is included in its entirety as part of Draft EIR Appendix B.

County of Los Angeles Fire Department

The County Fire Department’s Land Development Unit provides general development requirements, along with access and water requirements related to Project development. The Department’s Forestry Division identifies their “statutory responsibilities” in regard to archaeological and cultural resources, erosion control and watershed management. The Department’s Health/Hazardous Materials Division identifies concerns related to the landfill adjacent to the site. Fire Department concerns and requirements have been addressed where appropriate in the Draft EIR. Additional concerns related to rare or endangered species, vegetation, and the County’s Oak Tree Ordinance, have been addressed in the Project Initial Study (Draft EIR Appendix A). Additionally, landfill concerns have been addressed in Draft EIR Section 3.0, Project Description.

County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Districts)

The Districts response identifies existing wastewater (sewage) disposal and treatment facilities within the Project vicinity, and provides guidance regarding the EIR’s analysis of wastewater generation, applicable connection fees, and compliance with growth forecasts used by the Districts to size their facilities. The Project’s potential wastewater discharges are comprehensively addressed in Draft EIR Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

SCAQMD provides detailed guidance in regard to the preparation of the Project air quality impact analysis, health risk assessment, and greenhouse gas analysis, and requests an electronic copy of these technical studies to be provided with the EIR. Each of the specific topics referenced by the SCAQMD is addressed in Draft EIR Sections 4.3, Air Quality or 4.4, Global Climate Change (GCC)/Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. In addition, the Project Air Quality Analysis and GHG Impact Analysis are included in their entirety as Draft EIR Appendices C and D. All air quality modeling data files have been provided to the SCAQMD as requested.



1.9 EIR TOPICAL ISSUES

Based upon the Initial Study analysis, comments received pursuant to circulation of the

NOP, and other public/agency input, the EIR analyses address the following topics:

$ Air Quality; $ Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions; $ Hydrology/Water Quality; $ Land Use; $ Noise; $ Public Services (Police and Fire); and $ Transportation/Traffic.

Additionally, EIR Section 5.0, Other CEQA Considerations, presents discussions of other

mandatory CEQA topics including:

• Cumulative Impact Analysis;

• Alternatives Analysis;

• Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Action;

• Significant Environmental Effects;

• Significant and Irreversible Environmental Changes; and

• Energy Conservation.

1.10 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT PROJECT IMPACTS

Implementation of the Project as proposed will result in certain impacts which are

determined to be significant. All potential environmental effects of the Project are

determined to be less-than-significant as substantiated within this EIR and

accompanying Initial Study, or are reduced below levels of significance with

application of mitigation measures identified herein. A summary of all Project impacts

and proposed mitigation measures is presented at EIR Section 1.12, Summary of Impacts

and Mitigation Measures.



1.11 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT

Consistent with provisions of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR Alternatives Analysis (EIR

Section 5.2) presents and evaluates alternatives to the Project that would lessen its

significant environmental effects while allowing for attainment of the basic Project

Objectives. The rationale underlying the selection of alternatives is presented together

with a summary description of each alternative. Merits of the alternatives compared

with the Project are described and evaluated.

Two (2) alternatives to the EIR Project are presented. In addition to the CEQA-mandated

consideration of a “No Project” Alternative, this EIR presents and evaluates a potential

“Reduced Intensity Alternative.” The Alternatives considered in this EIR are

summarized below. Please refer to also to EIR Section 5.2 for the complete Alternatives

Analysis.

1.11.1 No Project Alternative

For the purposes of the EIR Alternatives Analysis, the No Project Alternative is

considered to be equivalent to a “No Build” scenario. That is, if the Project or some

similar development proposal is not implemented on the subject site, there are no other

known or probable scenarios for the subject property, in which case the site would

likely remain in its current state for the foreseeable future. Under the No Project

Alternative, environmental attributes would be as described under the EIR discussions

of existing conditions, as may be influenced by other area development.

1.11.2 Reduced Intensity Alternative

In order to address the Alternatives Assessment requirements of CEQA, and provide

the public and decision-makers a readily-differentiated assessment of an alternative

development scenario for the subject site, a Reduced Intensity Alternative reflecting

elimination of the proposed office uses while retaining the proposed Hyatt Place Hotel

use in its current location and configuration. The reduction in scope under the Reduced

Intensity Alternative would likely result in incrementally improved performance at

Study Area roadways and intersections. Already less-than-significant



traffic/transportation impacts under the Project would likely be further diminished

under the Reduced Intensity Alternative.

Additionally, based on overall reductions in development scope, operational activities

and associated reductions in air pollutant emissions, the already less-than-significant

LST, CO Hot Spot, and GHG impacts occurring under the Project would likely be

further reduced under the Reduced Intensity Alternative.

The Reduced Intensity Alternative evaluated in this EIR would also, to a limited extent,

achieve the basic Project Objectives.

1.11.3 Environmentally Superior Alternative

For the purposes of CEQA, the EIR Alternatives Analysis has identified the Reduced

Intensity Alternative as the environmentally superior alternative. Please refer also to

EIR Section 5.2 for the complete Alternatives Analysis.

1.12 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

Table 1.12-1 summarizes potential impacts resulting from implementation and

operations of the Project. The impacts identified at Table 1.12-1 correspond with

environmental topics and impacts discussed at EIR Section 4.0, Environmental Impact

Analysis. Table 1.12-1 also lists measures proposed to mitigate potentially significant

environmental impacts of the Project, and indicates the level of significance after

application of proposed mitigation.

© 2016 Applied Planning, Inc.


Table 1.12-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation

Impact Level of Significance Without Mitigation Mitigation Measures

Level of Significance With Mitigation

4.1 Land Use Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Less-Than-Significant No mitigation measures are required. Not Applicable

4.2 Traffic and Circulation Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.


Potentially Significant (Horizon Year; Rancho

Camino Drive at Rio Rancho Road only)

4.2.1 Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, the Project Applicant shall extend the westbound left turn pocket at Rancho Camino Drive at Rio Rancho Road to accommodate a minimum 260 feet of vehicle stacking. Signal timing at Rancho Camino Drive at Rio Rancho Road shall be modified accordingly as required by the City of Pomona.

Less-Than-Significant

Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.







Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or Result in inadequate emergency access.


4.3 Air Quality Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.


Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.

Potentially Significant

4.3.1 The following requirements shall be incorporated into Project plans and specifications in order to ensure implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403 and limit fugitive dust emissions: • All clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25 miles per hour; • The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and disturbed areas within the Project site are watered at least three (3) times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in the mid-morning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day; and • The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are limited to 15 miles per hour or less.

Less-Than-Significant.






4.3.2 Only “Zero-Volatile Organic Compounds” paints (no more than 150 grams/liter of VOC) and/or High Pressure Low Volume (HPLV) applications consistent with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1113 shall be used.

Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.


Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.


Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors.


4.4 Global Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas Emissions Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.







4.5 Noise Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. This impact would occur if the Project would create or result in noise exposure at receiving occupied land uses exceeding standards established by the City or other applicable jurisdictions; and/or if Project employees or customers were exposed to adverse noise levels.

Construction-source Less-Than-Significant.

Although Project construction is not expected to exceed City noise standards, mitigation will act to further reduce construction noise levels. Vehicular-source Potentially Significant Operational/Area-source Less-Than-Significant

Construction-source 4.5.1 Prior to approval of grading plans and/or issuance of

building permits, plans shall include a note indicating that noise-generating Project construction activities shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays. The Project construction supervisor shall ensure compliance with the note and the City shall conduct periodic inspection at its discretion.

4.5.2 During all Project site construction, the construction

contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the Project site.

4.5.3 The construction contractor shall locate equipment

staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receivers nearest the Project site during all Project construction.

4.5.4 The construction contractor shall limit haul truck

deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, with no activity

Construction-source Less-Than-Significant

Vehicular-source

Less-Than-Significant

Operational/Area-source Not Applicable






allowed on Sundays and holidays). The Project Applicant shall prepare a haul route exhibit to design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck-related noise.

Vehicular-source 4.5.5 In order to meet the City of Pomona 45 dBA CNEL

interior noise standards, and 2014 California Green Building Standards Code requirements, the final Project architectural designs should incorporate the following (or equivalent) noise attenuation features.

• Windows: All windows and sliding glass doors shall be well fitted, well weather-stripped assemblies and shall have a minimum sound transmission class (STC) rating of 40. • Doors: All exterior hinged and sliding glass doors to habitable rooms that are directly exposed to transportation noise and are facing the source of the noise shall be a door and edge seal assembly with a minimum STC rating of 27. • Roof: Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be well fitted or caulked plywood of at least one-half inch thick. Ceilings shall be well fitted, well sealed gypsum board of at least one-half inch thick. Insulation with at least a rating of R-19 shall be used in the attic space.






• Ventilation: Arrangements for any habitable room shall be such that any exterior door or window can be kept closed when the room is in use. A forced air circulation system (e.g., air conditioning) shall be provided which satisfies the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.

Operational/Area-source No mitigation measures are required.

A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. This condition will occur if the Project temporarily or periodically increases noise levels at receiving occupied land uses in excess of, and for durations longer than, are allowed under applicable City standards.

Construction-source Less-Than-Significant Vehicular-source Less-Than-Significant Operational/Area-source Less-Than-Significant

Construction-source No mitigation measures are required. Vehicular-source No mitigation measures are required. Operational/Area-source No mitigation measures are required.

Construction-source Not Applicable Vehicular-source Not Applicable Operational/Area-source Not Applicable

A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project.

Construction-source Less-Than-Significant Vehicular-source Less-Than-Significant Operational/Area-source Less-Than-Significant

Construction-source No mitigation measures are required. Vehicular-source No mitigation measures are required. Operational/Area-source No mitigation measures are required.

Construction-source Not Applicable Vehicular-source Not Applicable Operational/Area-source Not Applicable






Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.


4.6 Hydrology and Water Quality Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; or Otherwise substantially degrade water quality.


Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding or substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; or Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.







4.7 Public Services Result in or cause substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities; or result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire or police protection services.


2.0 INTRODUCTION

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Introduction Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 2-1

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 OVERVIEW

This Environmental Impact Report (DEIR or EIR) evaluates and discloses potential

environmental impacts of the Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project (the Project). The

Project is located within the Pomona Ranch Plaza (Plaza) in the City of Pomona. Uses

proposed by the Project would be constructed on approximately 14.88 acres located at

the southerly limits of the Plaza site. Elements of the Project are further described at EIR

Section 3.0, Project Description. Primary uses proposed by the Project include:

• A 6-story, 200-room Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel with conference facilities

and supporting amenities totaling approximately 159,000 square feet; and


An EIR is an informational document intended to inform decision-makers and the

general public of potentially significant environmental impacts of a Project. An EIR also

identifies possible ways to preclude or minimize these potentially significant impacts

(referred to as mitigation) and describes reasonable alternatives to the Project that may

also reduce or avoid significant impacts. Having the authority to take action on the

Project, the City of Pomona will consider the information in this EIR in their evaluations

of the proposal. The findings and conclusions of the EIR regarding environmental

impacts do not control the City’s discretion to approve, deny, or modify the Project, but

instead are presented as information to aid the decision-making process.



2.2 AUTHORIZATION

This EIR has been prepared by the City of Pomona in accordance with the Guidelines for

the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines), (Sections

15000-15387 of the California Code of Regulations), and the City CEQA Guidelines. The

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project considered in this EIR is a “Project,” as defined at

Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines. The CEQA Guidelines stipulate that an EIR must

be prepared for any “Project” that may have a significant impact on the environment.

Upon initial environmental review of the Project, the City determined that the Project

may have a significant adverse impact on the environment and, therefore, the

preparation of an EIR was required.

2.3 LEAD AND RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES

CEQA defines a “lead agency” as the public agency which has the principal

responsibility for carrying out or approving a Project which may have a significant

effect upon the environment. Other agencies, e.g., the California Department of

Transportation (Caltrans), the South Coast Air Quality Management District

(SCAQMD) or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), which also have

some authority or responsibility to issue permits for Project implementation, are

designated as “responsible agencies.” Lead agencies and responsible agencies must

consider the information contained in the EIR prior to acting upon or approving the

Project. The City of Pomona is the Lead Agency for the proposed Project.

The City’s address is:

City of Pomona

505 S. Garey Avenue

Pomona, California 91766

Contact Person: Brad Johnson, Planning Manager



2.4 PROJECT APPLICANT

The Project Applicant is:

DMPlA Limited Partnership c/o YK America Group, Inc.

9680 Flair Drive

El Monte, California 91731

Phone: (626) 444-6668 2.5 THE EIR PROCESS When a public agency determines that there is substantial evidence that a Project may have a significant effect on the environment, the agency must prepare an EIR before a decision is made to approve or deny the Project. The purpose of the EIR is to disclose a project’s potential environmental impacts and recommend measures to reduce or avoid significant impacts. The basic content of an EIR includes a description of the project under consideration and its objectives, a description of the existing project site and vicinity environmental conditions, a discussion of the potentially significant environmental effects of the project, recommended measures for reducing these effects, and identification and evaluation of feasible alternatives to the project which may also reduce potentially significant impacts of the proposal. Typically, EIRs comprise two documents: a Draft EIR, distributed by the lead agency for review and comment by the general public and any interested governmental agencies; and a Final EIR, which consists of responses to comments received on, together with any necessary modifications to, the Draft EIR. After the Draft EIR has been circulated for review and the Final EIR has been prepared, the EIR must be certified by the lead agency as having complied with CEQA and considered by the agency’s decision-making body before any action can be taken on a project. When a public agency receives a complete project application or decides to undertake a Project of its own, it first determines if the project is subject to environmental review under CEQA and, if it is, the agency then typically prepares an Initial Study (IS) to



determine if the project has the potential to cause significant adverse environmental effects. The IS serves as a tool to help the agency determine if an EIR is needed and also helps determine what issues should be examined in the EIR. An agency may skip the Initial Study process if it is evident in the preliminary assessment of a project that an EIR will be required. The EIR process is initiated by the distribution of a Notice of Preparation (NOP). Together with the Initial Study, the NOP is sent to agencies and interested individuals to solicit their suggestions for appropriate issues and types of analysis to be included in the Draft EIR. When preparation of the Draft EIR has been completed, it is circulated to responsible agencies, other affected or interested agencies, and interested members of the public for review and comment. The review period for a Draft EIR is typically 45 days. To provide for appropriate consideration in the Final EIR, all comments and concerns regarding the Draft EIR should be received by the lead agency during this 45-day period. Responses to comments received on the Draft EIR are prepared by the lead agency and included in the Final EIR. The Final EIR may also contain some additional information about the project’s potential impacts and minor corrections or modifications to the Draft EIR. The Final EIR must be certified by the lead agency’s decision-making body before, or in conjunction with, any action to approve or deny a project. CEQA requires that an EIR only address significant adverse impacts. The CEQA Guidelines suggest thresholds or standards which define the significance of various types of impacts. The CEQA Guidelines also state that the significance of impacts should be considered in relation to their severity and probability of occurrence. However, ultimately, the determination of the significance of impacts is at the discretion of the lead agency. The identification of significant impacts in the EIR does not prevent an agency from approving a project. A project may be approved if the lead agency determines that impacts cannot be feasibly mitigated below a level of significance and if



the agency determines that there are important overriding considerations, such as social and economic benefits, which are sufficient to justify approval of the considered project. 2.6 EIR CONTENT AND FORMAT This Draft EIR is organized into seven Chapters or Sections, each dealing with a separate aspect of the required content of an EIR as described in the CEQA Guidelines. A summary of the project’s impacts and recommended mitigation measures is included in Chapter 1.0. An introduction and general overview of the environmental process and the format of this EIR can be found within Chapter 2.0. Chapter 3.0 contains a complete description of the Project, including its location, objectives, and physical and operational characteristics. The complete and detailed impact analysis is presented in Chapter 4.0. The topical issues mandated by CEQA dealing with cumulative impacts, alternatives, long-term implications of the Project, and energy conservation are found in Chapter 5.0. Chapter 6.0 lists and defines the acronyms and abbreviations contained in this document. Chapter 7.0 lists the information sources and persons consulted during the environmental analysis process, and presents a list of the persons who prepared the Draft EIR. The Initial Study and responses to the NOP, with supporting technical studies, are appended to the primary EIR document. Chapter 4.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, is the focal component of the Draft EIR. The environmental impact analysis has been organized into a series of sections, each addressing an environmental topic or area of concern identified through the Initial Study process (e.g., Land Use and Planning, Traffic and Circulation, Air Quality, Noise, etc.). To assist the reader in understanding the organization and basis of the analysis, the sections covering each individual environmental topic are typically divided into the following subsections: • Reader’s Abstract: An introductory reader’s abstract, summarizing content and

findings, is provided at the beginning of each topical section.



• Introduction: The introduction summarizes the content of the section and references other important studies and reports, such as technical studies appended to the EIR.

• Setting: This subsection describes environmental conditions at the Project site

and in its vicinity which may be subject to change as a result of implementation of the proposal. Separate descriptions of existing environmental conditions are provided for each environmental topic.

• Existing Policies and Regulations: Various relevant policies, regulations, and

programs related to the environmental topic are briefly described. Often, these existing policies and regulations serve to reduce or avoid potential environmental impacts.

• Standards of Significance: Before potential impacts are evaluated, the standards

which will serve as the basis for judging significance are presented. • Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures: This subsection states and explains

potential impacts caused by the Project. Based on the standards of significance, impacts are categorized as either significant or less-than-significant. If the impacts are considered to be significant, mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the impacts. At the conclusion of each discussion for a significant impact, a determination is made as to whether the impact can be reduced to a less-than-significant level with the application of feasible mitigation measures.

The summary presented in Chapter 1.0 provides a comprehensive overview of the Project’s impacts. For a more detailed description of Project impacts, it is recommended that the reader review the Project description (Chapter 3.0), and then read the sections on the topics of interest in the environmental impact analysis (Chapter 4.0).



2.7 INTENDED USE OF THIS EIR This EIR addresses the potential environmental effects of the implementation and operation of the proposed Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project. The City of Pomona (City) is the Lead Agency for the purposes of CEQA because it has the principal responsibility and authority for deciding whether or not to approve the Project, and how it will be implemented. As the Lead Agency, the City is also responsible for preparing the environmental documentation for the Project in compliance with CEQA. The Lead Agency will employ this EIR in its evaluation of potential environmental impacts resulting from, or associated with, approval and implementation of the Project, to include potential effects of the Project’s component elements. It is anticipated that this EIR may also be employed by various responsible agencies, e.g., the Air Quality Management District(s), Regional Water Quality Control Board(s), et al., for their related or dependent environmental analyses. 2.8 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines permits and encourages an environmental document to incorporate, by reference, other documents that provide relevant data. The documents summarized below are incorporated by reference, and the pertinent material is summarized throughout this EIR, where that information is relevant to the analysis of potential impacts of the Project. All documents incorporated by reference are available for review at, or can be obtained through, the City of Pomona Planning Division. Technical studies cited below were specifically developed in conjunction with the Project, and are included in their entirety in the CD-ROM attached to the EIR’s back cover. 2.8.1 City of Pomona General Plan Update The City of Pomona General Plan Update, Adopted March 2014 (General Plan) outlines a vision for Pomona’s long-range physical evolution, economic development, and resource conservation; and establishes a broad framework to guide related decision making. The General Plan incorporates and relies upon its Implementation Volume to



provide the guidance necessary for successful implementation of General Plan Goals and Policies. The General Plan includes seven functional Elements: “Land Use & Density”; “Economic Development”; “Open Space Network”; “Mobility & Access”; “Conservation”; “Community Design”; and “Noise & Safety.” All proposed development projects (inclusive of the proposed Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel) are evaluated for consistency with the intent and purpose of the applicable General Plan land use designation(s) and related General Plan Goals and Policies. Physical development within the General Plan Area will be shaped by the General Plan’s Goals, Policies and Implementation procedures, integral to each of the General Plan Elements. 2.8.2 City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance

The City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance (Zoning Ordinance) codifies and complements

the City General Plan. The Zoning Ordinance, in effect, provides the mechanism to

implement and enforce the goals and policies articulated in the General Plan. Many of

the potential environmental concerns considered in this EIR are adequately addressed

through application of existing guidelines and regulations contained in the Zoning

Ordinance.

2.8.3 Project Technical Studies/EIR Appendices

Following are summary descriptions of documents and supporting technical studies

which are appended to the main body of the Draft EIR. Working titles of these

documents generically refer to the Project and its physical attributes, and may not

necessarily reflect the currently assigned “Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel” development

title.

2.8.3.1 Initial Study, NOP, and NOP Responses - EIR Appendix A

The EIR Initial Study (IS), Notice of Preparation (NOP) and responses received

pursuant to distribution of the IS/NOP are presented at EIR Appendix A. Based on the

Initial Study and responses to the NOP, the EIR has been focused on the topics of: Land



Use and Planning; Traffic and Transportation; Air Quality; Greenhouse Gas and Global

Climate Change; Noise; Hydrology and Water Quality; and Public Services.

2.8.3.2 Traffic Impact Analysis - EIR Appendix B

The detailed evaluation of potential Project transportation/traffic impacts is

documented in Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Traffic Impact Analysis, City of Pomona

(Urban Crossroads, Inc.) May 2016 (Project TIA). 2.8.3.3 Air Quality Impact Analysis - EIR Appendix C

Detailed analysis of the Project’s potential air quality impacts is presented in Pomona

Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban

Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016 (Project AQIA).

2.8.3.4 Greenhouse Gas Analysis - EIR Appendix D

Detailed analysis of the Project’s potential Greenhouse Gas and Global Climate Change

impacts is presented in Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Greenhouse Gas Analysis, City of

Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016 (Project GHG Analysis).

2.8.3.5 Noise Impact Analysis - EIR Appendix E

Potential noise impacts of the Project, including potential short-term construction noise

impacts and potential long-term operational noise impacts are assessed within Pomona

Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.)

January 14, 2016 (Project Noise Impact Analysis). 2.8.3.6 Hydrology Study - EIR Appendix F

The design of the Project’s stormwater management system is addressed within the

Pomona Ranch Plaza Lot 9 Preliminary Hydrology Report (Incledon Consulting Group)

February 2016 (Project Hydrology Report); and Pomona Ranch Plaza Lot 9 Preliminary

Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (Incledon Consulting Group) February 2016

(Project SUSMP).

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Project Description Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 3-1

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 OVERVIEW

The proposed Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project (the Project), including all facilities proposed within the Project site, on- and off-site supporting improvements, and associated discretionary actions comprise the Project considered in this Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Primary uses proposed by the Project include:

• A 6-story, 200-room Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel with conference facilities and supporting amenities totaling approximately 159,000 square feet; and


3.2 PROJECT LOCATION

The Project is located within the Pomona Ranch Plaza (Plaza) in the City of Pomona. The

Plaza comprises approximately 71 acres formed by the intersection of State Route 60

(SR-60), State Route 71 (SR-71), and Rio Rancho Road. Please refer to Figure 3.2-1, Project

Location. Uses proposed by the Project would be constructed on approximately 14.88

acres located at the southerly limits of the Plaza site. With the exception of the Project

site, the remainder of the Plaza is substantively developed with commercial/retail and

office uses and associated parking fields.



Figure 3.2-1-Project Location



3.3 BACKGROUND

Development of the Pomona Ranch Plaza was envisioned as part of the Phillips Ranch

Specific Plan; initially analyzed under 1994 City of Pomona Regional Retail Center

Environmental Impact Report, SCH #1993021028 (ESA) February 22, 1994 (1994 EIR). The

development analyzed in the 1994 EIR encompassed approximately 595,000 square feet

of commercial/retail uses on an approximately 67.75-acre site. Numerous amendments

to the original, approved Pomona Ranch Plaza concept have been implemented since the

Project’s initial development in the mid-1990s; most recently, the construction of a new

multi-story office building totaling approximately 100,000 square feet along with certain

additional commercial/retail uses.

3.4 VICINITY LAND USES

The Project site is located in the southerly portion of the Pomona Ranch Plaza. As

illustrated at Figure 3.4-1, the Pomona Ranch Plaza site is substantively developed with

commercial/retail and office uses and associated parking fields. Land uses proximate to

the Plaza and the Project site are described below.

• Northerly of the Plaza, across Rio Rancho Road, are single-family residential uses.

Within the Plaza, immediately north of the Project site across Rancho Camino

Drive, are various parking fields and a new restaurant use.

• Easterly of the Plaza, across SR-71, are commercial and single-family residential

uses. Within the Plaza, and easterly adjacent to the Project site, is a multi-story

office building and supporting parking areas.

• Southerly of the Plaza and the Project site, across SR-60, are vacant hillside

properties; single-family residential uses are located further to the south within

the City of Chino Hills.



Figure 3.4-1 Vicinity Land Uses (Aerial of Pomona Ranch Plaza in Context of

Surrounding Land Uses; Location of Project site within Pomona Ranch Plaza)



• Southwesterly adjacent to the Plaza are multi-family residential uses. Within the Plaza, southwesterly of the Project site are multi-story office buildings and supporting parking areas.

3.5 PROJECT ELEMENTS 3.5.1 Site Preparation The Project site is a vacant disturbed property comprising approximately 14.88 acres.

Site preparation activities would involve excavation, fill, and grading. Preliminary

grading/development concepts indicate that approximately 41,800 cubic yards of fill

material would be imported to the Project site.1 Imported fill would be obtained from a

vacant, approximately 1.61 acre lot located adjacent to and opposite the Project site,

across Rancho Camino Drive.

3.5.2 Development Concept 3.5.2.1 Site Plan Concept The Project Site Plan Concept is presented at Figure 3.5-1, indicating the location and orientation of hotel and office uses proposed by the Project. The hotel use would be constructed in the southerly portion of the Project site and a two-level parking structure would be constructed easterly adjacent to the hotel. The proposed office building would be constructed westerly of the proposed hotel. Areas northerly of the hotel and office building would be developed with supporting parking areas. Access to the Project facilities would be provided by a STOP-controlled circular driveway connecting to Rancho Camino Drive along the Project site’s northerly boundary.

1 The former, circa 1940–1950 Phillips Ranch Landfill Site (also referred to as the Pomona Ranch Disposal Site, or PRDS) is located within the Pomona Ranch Plaza, and underlies proposed Project surface parking areas located northerly of the proposed Hotel uses. Plans and permitting for remediation and capping of the Landfill have been previously approved by CalRecycle (the administrative permitting agency), and remediation and capping of the landfill will be accomplished by others prior to implementation of the Project.



Figure 3.5-1 Site Plan Concept (to be provided)



3.5.2.2 Architectural Design Concepts

A view orientation map and rendered views of the design concepts for the hotel and

office uses proposed by the Project are presented at Figures 3.5-2 through 3.5-6. The

Project hotel and office building designs express contemporary urban elements and

architectural features. Overall building designs would be consistent on all sides

regardless of building size, location, or orientations. Varied combinations of material

would be represented, allowing for flexibility and compatibility with

geographical/regional locations and local settings. Fire rated construction and fully

automatic sprinkler systems would be provided for all Project buildings. All final

building designs would be subject to review and approval by the City.



Figure 3.5-2, View Orientation Map (use Site Plan Concept as base)



Figure 3.5-3 View 1



Figure 3.5-4 View 2



Figure 3.5-5 View 3



Figure 3.5-6 View 4



3.5.3 Project Facilities

Primary facilities proposed by the Project are summarized and described below.

3.5.3.1 Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel

The Project proposes a 6-story, approximately 75-foot high, 200-room Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel, totaling approximately 159,000 square feet including ancillary supporting facilities and amenities. Hotel facilities would include the following primary elements:

• Hyatt Place (short-term hotel occupancies) - 115 keys; • Hyatt House (extended-stay hotel occupancies) - 85 keys; • Outdoor swimming pool; • Conference/meeting rooms; • Ballrooms; • Kitchen; • Bar/café; • Lounge areas; • Fitness room; • Business center; • Office/administrative areas; and • Various storage, electrical equipment, mechanical equipment, housekeeping,

vestibule and lobby areas. 3.5.3.2 Office Building A 3-story, 75,000-square-foot office building is proposed in the southwesterly portion of the Project site, westerly adjacent to the proposed Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel. Specific tenants for the proposed office building have not as yet been identified.

3.5.4 Access and Circulation

Primary access to Pomona Ranch Plaza is currently provided by two (2) signalized

driveways off Rio Rancho Road, one each at Lone Ridge Road and Rancho Camino

Drive. Internal to the Plaza, access to the Project site would be provided by a

STOP-controlled circular driveway connecting to Rancho Camino Drive.



3.5.5 Parking

In support of the proposed Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel, a total of 468 parking spaces

would be provided - configured as 208 surface parking spaces and 260 parking spaces

to be provided within an easterly adjacent two-level parking structure. Additional

surface parking spaces would be provided in support of the proposed office building in

quantities and configurations required by the City. Parking areas would be shared

between uses to the extent practicable. Unless otherwise noted herein, or otherwise

specified by the City, all parking areas to include parking stalls, drive aisles, parking lot

landscaping and hardscaping, would be designed and constructed pursuant to City

requirements as outlined at City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance.

3.5.6 Site Landscaping

Perimeter and internal landscaping would be provided consistent with provisions of the

City Municipal Code. The implemented landscape concept would enhance the

appearance of parking areas, provide shade and visual interest, define entry/access

points, accentuate site and architectural features, accommodate water quality treatment

features (bioretention/biofiltration areas) and provide screening.

3.5.7 Streetscape

Within the Plaza, the Project driveways would connect to Rancho Camino Drive. The

Project would construct or re-construct Rancho Camino Drive sidewalks and

landscape/streetscape areas along the Project frontage, continuing existing sidewalks

and landscape/streetscape features, or as otherwise required by the City through Project

Conditions of Approval.

3.5.8 Infrastructure/Utilities

Infrastructure and utilities that would serve the Project site are summarized below.

3.5.8.1 Water/Sewer Services

Water and sewer services would be provided to the Project by the City of Pomona Water

& Wastewater Operations Division. Water service extensions to the Project site would

connect to existing facilities located in the abutting Rancho Camino Drive right-of-way.



Sanitary sewer services to the Project would similarly be provided by connection to the

existing sewer main located within Rancho Camino Drive. Alignment of service lines,

and connection to existing services would be as required by the City. Wastewater would

be conveyed from the Project for treatment at the Pomona Water Reclamation Plant

(PWRP).

3.5.8.2 Storm Water Management Systems

The Project stormwater management systems comprehensively include proposed

drainage improvements, and facilities and programs which act to control and treat

stormwater pollutants. Under the Project Stormwater Management System Concept,

existing drainage patterns would be generally maintained. Under post-development

conditions, stormwater discharges from the Project site would be conveyed to the

existing 66-inch RCP located northeasterly of the Project site at the terminus of the

Rancho Camino Drive cul-de-sac. This 66-inch RCP has been designed to convey runoff

from future commercial buildout of the Pomona Ranch Plaza, including stormwater

discharges resulting from development of the Project site.

Developed stormwater within the Project site would be collected via surface inlets and

internal secondary drain lines and would be directed to two main storm drain lines

“A” and “B.” Proposed storm drain lines A and B would be aligned along the Project site

perimeter; and would confluence at the northeasterly limits of the Project site prior to

connection with the existing 24-inch RCP at the south edge of the Rancho Camino Drive

cul-de-sac. This 24-inch RCP would then connect northerly to the previously noted

66-inch RCP discharging northeasterly to the 12-foot x 12-foot RCB culvert underlying

the SR-71 freeway.

The Project would also implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP),

and Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) consistent with City

requirements. In this manner, the Project would also comply with requirements of the

City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and other

water quality requirements or storm water management programs specified by the

Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In combination, implementation of the



Project SWPPP, SUSMP, and compliance with NPDES Permit and RWQCB requirements

act to protect City and regional water quality by preventing or minimizing potential

stormwater pollutant discharges to the watershed.

3.5.8.3 Solid Waste Management

It is anticipated that Project-generated solid waste would be conveyed by existing

service providers to either the El Sobrante Landfill in Riverside County, or to the

Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill in San Bernardino County. The California Integrated Waste

Management Act under the Public Resources Code required that local jurisdictions

divert at least 50% of all solid waste generated by January 1, 2000. The City remains

committed to continuing its existing waste reduction and minimization efforts with the

programs that are available through the City. Additionally, as of July 1, 2012, the State of

California required that all businesses that generate four cubic yards or more of refuse

per week implement a recycling program. This requirement is set forth in Assembly Bill

341, which was passed by the California legislation in October 2011. The Project would

comply with the California Integrated Waste Management Act and AB 341 as

implemented by the City.

3.5.8.4 Electricity

Electrical service to the Project would be provided by Southern California Edison (SCE).

New lines installed by the Project would be placed underground. Alignment of service

lines and connection to existing services would be as required by SCE. Any necessary

surface-mounted equipment, such as transformers, meters, service cabinets, and the like,

would be screened and would conform to building setback requirements.

It is further noted that to allow for, and facilitate Project construction activities, provision of temporary SCE electrical services improvements would be required. The scope of such temporary improvements are considered to be consistent with, and reflected within the total scope of development proposed by the Project. Similarly, impacts resulting from the provision of temporary SCE services would not be substantively different from, or greater than, impacts resulting from development of the Project in total.



3.5.8.5 Natural Gas Natural gas service would be provided by the Gas Company. Existing service lines would be extended to the Project uses. Alignment of service lines and connection to existing services would be as required by the Gas Company. 3.5.8.6 Communications Services Communications services, including wired and wireless telephone and internet services are available through numerous private providers and would be provided on an as-needed basis. As with electrical service lines, all existing and proposed wires, conductors, conduits, raceways, and similar communications improvements within the Project area would be installed underground. Any necessary surface-mounted equipment, e.g., terminal boxes, transformers, meters, service cabinets, etc., would be screened and would conform to building setback requirements. 3.5.9 Police and Fire Protection Services Police and fire protection services are currently available to the Plaza and the Project site, and are listed below. • Fire Protection Services (Los Angeles County Fire Department); and • Police Protection Services (City of Pomona Police Department).

3.5.10 Energy Efficiency/Sustainability Energy-saving and sustainable design features and operational programs would be incorporated into all facilities developed pursuant to the Project. Notably, the Project would comply with the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; CCR, Title 24, Part 11) as implemented by the City of Pomona. The Project also incorporates and expresses the following design features and attributes promoting energy efficiency and sustainability.

• Regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and associated vehicular-source emissions

are reduced by the following Project design features/attributes:



ο Sidewalks would be constructed along the Project’s Rancho Camino Drive street frontage providing pedestrian connection to other uses within the Plaza. Sidewalks would also be constructed within the Project site connecting the various uses and activity centers. Facilitating pedestrian access encourages people to walk instead of drive. The Project would not impose barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity.

ο Concentration of mixed uses within a destination center as proposed by the Project acts to reduce travel distances and regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by consolidating trips and reducing requirements for multiple trips.


within the Project site would be required to implement a Water Conservation Strategy and demonstrate a minimum 20% reduction in indoor water usage when compared to baseline water demand (total expected water demand without implementation of the Water Conservation Strategy).2 Development proposals within the Project site would also be required to implement the following: ο Landscaping palette emphasizing drought-tolerant plants consistent with

provisions of the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and/or City of Pomona requirements;

ο Use of water-efficient irrigation techniques consistent with City of Pomona requirements;

ο U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Certified WaterSense labeled or equivalent faucets, high-efficiency toilets (HETs), and other plumbing fixtures.




3.5.11 Construction Traffic Management Plan Temporary and short-term traffic detours and traffic disruptions could result during Project construction activities including implementation of access and circulation improvements noted above. Accordingly, the Project Applicant would be responsible for the preparation and submittal of a construction area traffic management plan (Plan) to be reviewed and approved by the City. Typical elements and information incorporated in the Plan would include but would not be limited to:

• Name of on-site construction superintendent and contact phone number.

• Identification of Construction Contract Responsibilities - For example, for excavation and grading activities, describe the approximate depth of excavation, and quantity of soil import/export (if any).

• Identification and Description of Truck Routes - to include the number of trucks

and their staging location(s) (if any).

• Identification and Description of Material Storage Locations (if any).

• Location and Description of Construction Trailer (if any).

• Identification and Description of Traffic Controls - Traffic controls shall be provided per the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) if the occupation or closure of any traffic lanes, parking lanes, parkways or any other public right-of way is required. If the right-of-way occupation requires configurations or controls not identified in the MUTCD, a separate traffic control plan must be submitted to the City for review and approval. All right-of-way encroachments would require permitting through the City.

• Identification and Description of Parking - Estimate the number of workers and

identify parking areas for their vehicles.



• Identification and Description of Maintenance Measures - Identify and describe measures taken to ensure that the work site and public right-of-way would be maintained (including dust control).

The Plan must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the issuance of the building permit. The Plan and its requirements would also be required to be provided to all contractors as one component of building plan/contract document packages. 3.6 PROJECT OPENING YEAR The proposed Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project in total would be developed in a manner responsive to market conditions and in concert with availability of necessary infrastructure and services. For the purposes of this analysis, the Project Opening Year is defined as 2018. 3.7 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The primary goal of the Project is the development of the subject site with a productive mix of hotel and office uses. Complementary objectives of the Project include the following:


• Support mobility goals and objectives by taking advantage of regional access

provided by adjacent SR-71 freeway and local access provided by Rio Rancho Road;


• Develop the subject site with high-quality hotel uses offering a unique guest

experience;




• Attract and accommodate new and additional hotel and office development

serving local and regional markets;


• Transition the Project site from its current unimproved/vacant state to a

commercial development, with resulting new fiscal benefits to the City of Pomona. Benefits would include new sales/room tax revenues and increased property tax revenues.

• Implement employment-generating land uses that would create new jobs

available to City residents. 3.8 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS AND PERMITS Discretionary actions, permits and related consultation(s) necessary to approve and implement the Project include, but are not limited to, the following. 3.8.1 Lead Agency Discretionary Actions and Permits

• CEQA Compliance/EIR Certification. The City must certify the EIR prior to, or concurrent with, any approval of the Project.

• Approval of a Tentative Parcel Map. The Project proposes a commercial parcel

map that would create and/or reconfigure lots for development of the Project facilities. At the direction of the City, the Tentative Parcel Map may also dedicate necessary public rights-of-ways and establish easements.



• Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed hotel use, to include allowance for on-sale of alcohol ancillary to hotel bar/lounge/banquet activities. Please refer also to Municipal Code Section .580, Conditional Use Permits.

• Various City of Pomona construction, grading, and encroachment permits are required to allow implementation of the Project facilities.

3.8.2 Other Consultation and Permits CEQA Guidelines Section 15124 also states that the EIR should, to the extent known, include a list of all the agencies expected to use the EIR in their decision-making (Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies), and a list of other permits or approvals required to implement the Project. Based on the current Project design concept, anticipated permits necessary to realize the proposal would likely include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Tribal Resources consultation with requesting Tribes as provided for under AB 52, Gatto. Native Americans: California Environmental Quality Act;

• Permitting may be required by/through the Regional Water Quality Control

Board (RWQCB) pursuant to requirements of the City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit;

• Permitting may be required by/through the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for certain equipment or land uses that may be implemented within the Project area; and

• Various construction, grading, and encroachment permits allowing

implementation of the Project facilities.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Environmental Impact Analysis Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 4-1

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS This chapter of the EIR analyzes and describes the potential environmental impacts

associated with the adoption and implementation of the Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel

Project (Project). The environmental impact analysis has been organized into a series of

sections, each addressing a separate environmental topic. Environmental topics

addressed in this EIR are presented in the following sections:

Section Topic

4.1 Land Use and Planning

4.2 Transportation/Traffic

4.3 Air Quality

4.4 Global Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas Emissions

4.5 Noise

4.6 Hydrology and Water Quality

4.7 Public Services (Police and Fire)

Within each of the above topical Sections, the discussion is typically divided into

subsections which: describe the “setting” or existing environmental conditions; identify

regulations and policies, which through their observance typically resolve many

potential environmental concerns; identify thresholds of significance applicable to

potential environmental effects of the Project; describe the significance of Project-related

environmental effects in the context of applicable significance thresholds; and for

impacts which are potentially significant or significant, recommend mitigation

measures to eliminate or reduce their effects. In this latter regard, it is recognized that

the intent of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is to identify and focus

on significant, or potentially significant adverse effects of the Project—CEQA Guidelines

§15126.2(a); and to identify mitigation measures or reasonable alternatives to the Project



that would reduce or avoid its significant and unavoidable impacts—CEQA Guidelines

§15121 (a). Mitigation is not required for impacts determined to be less-than-

significant—CEQA Guidelines §15126.4 (a) (3).

Before potential impacts are evaluated, the standards or thresholds which will serve as

the basis for judging the relative significance of impacts are presented. Often thresholds

serve as a general guide or gauge for determining an impact’s potential relative

significance, rather than defining its absolute effects. Subsequent to identification of

relevant significance thresholds, potential Project-related environmental impacts are

identified and explained. If an impact is considered to be potentially significant,

mitigation measures are proposed to avoid the impact, or reduce its effects to the extent

feasible. In determining the potential significance of impacts, the adequacy of existing

policies and regulations in addressing each impact is taken into consideration. At the

conclusion of each discussion for a potentially significant impact, a determination is

made as to whether the impact can be reduced to a less-than-significant level with the

application of mitigation measures.

The following terms are used to describe the potential environmental impacts of the

Project:

• Less-Than-Significant Impacts: Minor changes or effects on the environment

caused by the Project which do not meet or exceed the criteria, standards, or

thresholds established to gauge significance are considered to be less-than-

significant impacts. Less-than-significant impacts do not require mitigation. In

some cases, these impacts may appear to be potentially significant. However,

existing public policies, regulations, and procedures adequately address these

potential effects, thereby reducing them to a less-than-significant level, without

the need for additional mitigation.

• Potentially Significant Impacts: Potentially significant impacts are defined as a

substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment. The

CEQA Guidelines and various responsible agencies provide guidance for



determining the significance of impacts. However, the determination of impact

significance is ultimately based on the judgment of the lead agency. Similarly,

the establishment of any criteria to be used in evaluating the significance of

impacts is the responsibility of the lead agency. Feasible mitigation is proposed

in the EIR to avoid or reduce the magnitude of potentially significant impacts.

• Significant and Unavoidable Impacts: Impacts identified in the EIR which

cannot be mitigated below thresholds of significance through the application of

feasible mitigation measures are considered “significant and unavoidable.”

• Cumulative Impacts: A discussion of cumulative impacts is provided at EIR

Section 5.0, Other CEQA Considerations. Cumulative impacts refer to the impacts

of the Project as they are combined or interact with anticipated impacts of other

vicinity projects and physical effects of projected ambient regional growth.

4.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Land Use and Planning Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 4.1-1

4.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING Abstract

This Section identifies and addresses potential impacts that may result from land use and

planning decisions necessary to implement the proposed development. More specifically, the land

use and planning analysis presented here examines whether the Project would:

• Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with

jurisdiction over the Project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,

local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or

mitigating an environmental effect.

As supported by the analysis presented in this Section, the above potential land use and

planning impacts of the Project are less-than-significant.

Additionally, as substantiated in the Initial Study (EIR Appendix A), the Project’s potential

impacts under the following topics were previously determined to have less-than-significant

impacts, and are not further discussed here:

• Potential to physically divide an established community; and

• Potential to conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural

communities conservation plan.

Please refer also to Initial Study Checklist Item XI. Land Use and Planning.



4.1.1 INTRODUCTION

Land use refers to occupation and employment of properties for various purposes such

as commerce, industry, open space, community services, infrastructure, and residential

uses. Local land use plans, policies, and development regulations control the types,

configurations, and intensities of land uses within the community. Changes in land use

patterns resulting from new development can affect overall characteristics of an area,

and may result in physical impacts to the environment. The Land Use and Planning

Section of the EIR focuses on the Project’s consistency with applicable land use plans,

policies and regulations, and its potential incompatibilities with land use districts and

existing and proposed vicinity development.

4.1.2 SETTING

4.1.2.1 Location

The Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project (Project) is located at 41 Rancho Camino Drive,

within the Pomona Ranch Plaza (Plaza), in the southwesterly portion of the City of

Pomona, in eastern Los Angeles County. The Project site in total comprises

approximately 14.88 acres within the approximately 71-acre Plaza. Please refer also to

EIR Section 3.0, Project Description, and Figure 3.2-1, Project Location.

4.1.2.2 Vicinity Land Uses

The Pomona Ranch Plaza, inclusive of the Project site, is located within an area

designated for and developed with commercial, retail and office uses. As illustrated at

Figure 4.1-1, the Pomona Ranch Plaza site is substantively developed with

commercial/retail and office uses and associated parking fields. Land uses proximate to

the Plaza and the Project site are described below.

• Northerly of the Plaza, across Rio Rancho Road, are single-family residential

uses. Within the Plaza, immediately north of the Project site across Rancho

Camino Drive, are various parking fields and a new restaurant use.



Figure 4.1-1, “Vicinity Land Uses”



• Easterly of the Plaza, across SR-71, are commercial and single-family residential

uses. Within the Plaza, and easterly adjacent to the Project site, is a multi-story

office building and supporting parking areas.

• Southerly of the Plaza and the Project site, across SR-60, are vacant hillside

properties; single-family residential uses are located further to the south within

the City of Chino Hills.

• Southwesterly adjacent to the Plaza are multi-family residential uses. Within the

Plaza, southwesterly of the Project site are multi-story office buildings and

supporting parking areas.

4.1.3 LAND USE POLICIES AND REGULATIONS

4.1.3.1 Regional Planning

The proposed Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project is considered a project of regional

significance pursuant to Section 15206 of the CEQA Guidelines. Accordingly, the Project

EIR has been submitted to the State Clearinghouse as required under CEQA Guidelines

Section 15206 (a) (1). As suggested under CEQA Guidelines Section 15206 (a) (1) the EIR

has also been submitted for review and comment by the applicable metropolitan

planning organization; in this case, the Southern California Association of Governments

(SCAG).

SCAG is the federally recognized metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for this

region, which encompasses over 38,000 square miles, and comprises representatives of

Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura counties. SCAG

is a regional planning agency and a forum for addressing regional issues concerning

transportation, the economy, community development, and the environment. SCAG is

also the regional clearinghouse for projects requiring environmental documentation

under federal and state law. In this role, SCAG reviews proposed development and

infrastructure projects to analyze their potential impacts on regional planning

programs. As Southern California’s MPO, SCAG cooperates with the Southern



California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the California Department of

Transportation (Caltrans), and other agencies in preparing regional planning

documents.

In 2012, SCAG adopted the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable

Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS): Towards a Sustainable Future.1 The 2012–2035 RTP/SCS

vision encompasses three principles that collectively work as the key to the region’s

future: mobility, economy, and sustainability. The 2012–2035 RTP/SCS includes a strong

commitment to reduce emissions from transportation sources to comply with Senate

Bill 375, improve public health, and meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

as set forth by the federal Clean Air Act. The 2012–2035 RTP/SCS provides a blueprint

for improving quality of life for residents by providing more choices for where they will

live, work, and play, and how they will move around (SCAG 2011). Project consistency

with RTP/SCS goals is presented subsequently within this Section at Table 4.1-2.

4.1.3.2 Local Planning

City Land Use Goals, Policies and Development Standards/Regulations further the

orderly development of compatible land uses. In many instances, compliance with

existing policies and standards eliminates, or substantially reduces, potential

environmental effects. Existing policies and standards, to some extent, also indicate

community and regional values and prerogatives relative to environmental concerns.

As discussed below, Land Use Goals, Policies, and Development Standards germane to

the Project are articulated within the City of Pomona General Plan Update 2014

(General Plan) and the City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance (Zoning Ordinance).

1 On March 9, 2015, SCAG, as Lead Agency, published a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) for the 2016–2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS).



City of Pomona General Plan

The City of Pomona General Plan outlines a vision for Pomona’s long-range physical

evolution, economic development, and resource conservation; and establishes a broad

framework to guide related decision-making. Applicable to potential land use and

planning impacts of the Project, General Plan Section 6, Pomona Tomorrow . . .

“establishes the overall vision of the future City, as expressed through a physical City

Structure Diagram and the strategy framework to achieve the vision” (General Plan, p.

53).

General Plan Section 7, Plan Components outlines approaches to improve the function of

the City in accordance with elements and attributes that serve the future City structure.

The General Plan at Section 8, Implementation Volume, establishes Goals articulating the

City’s overarching principles and philosophy; and supporting Policy actions,

parameters, and implementation programs that would facilitate realization of the stated

Goals. The following discussions provide a summary of the above-noted General Plan

Sections (6-8), and present the Project within their context.

Pomona Tomorrow

General Plan Chapter 6, Figure 6.3, Pomona Tomorrow, graphically presents the general

configuration and assignment of future City land uses or Place Types. The General Plan

Place Types comprise various centers, districts, corridors, and neighborhoods. The

general form, function, and use mix of each Place Type is also identified. For example, the

Project site’s Transit Oriented District Place Type establishes and promotes a range of

concentrated retail, commercial, residential, and civic uses and complementary

development at appropriate scales; at locations with appropriate market focus; and that

take advantage of available access and/or encourage multi-modal access.



For each Place Type, the General Plan also establishes a Planning Approach and

Strategy that would ultimately facilitate that Place Type’s development (and that of the

City) consistent with the overarching goal and vision of the General Plan to: “improve

the livability and cultural life of the community by creating places in the City ‘defined

by quality, cohesiveness, and human needs’” (General Plan, p.53). The Place Type, and

Planning Approach and Strategy applicable to the Project site are summarized below.

Project Site Place Type, Planning Approach and Strategy

Place Type

As indicated at Figure 4.1-2, the General Plan Land Use Map designates the Project site

as a Transit Oriented District Place Type. Transit Oriented District Place Types are

described in the General Plan as follows:

[Transit Oriented District Place Types are] the most active and walkable districts in the City and they feature development types of greater intensity than surrounding areas. By doing so, they take advantage of transit service (either fixed rail or frequent bus service) by concentrating potential rider populations of residents, workers, and visitors next to stations and creating settings to encourage connectivity. They also feature attractive streetscapes, civic plazas, and small urban open spaces, capitalizing on their role as the most visible districts in the City. These districts also feature a mix of uses – horizontally mixed-use in most cases but vertically mixed-use in the densest locations – typically with retail, commercial and civic activity on the ground floor and housing, lodging or workplace uses above (General Plan, p. 64).

The Project site lies within the SR-60/SR-71 Transit Oriented District. As substantiated subsequently in this Section, the Project hotel and office uses are consistent with development types and forms anticipated within the Transit Oriented District Place Type. Accordingly, the Project does not propose or require amendment of the subject site’s existing Place Type classification.



Figure 4.1-2 General Plan Place Types [from Pomona Walmart Expansion EIR



Transit Oriented Districts Planning Approach and Strategy The General Plan Planning Approach and Strategy for Transit Oriented Districts are as follows: Planning Approach As new development occurs, promote the restructuring of these areas into higher intensity, higher activity, transit oriented districts with a mix of uses in a pedestrian-oriented environment with a wide variety of pedestrian amenities, connected streets, and public spaces. Strategy

• Take full advantage of broader trends of intensification and clustering. Direct both housing and workplace growth and intensity to areas surrounding existing and future train stations / transit hubs.

• Ensure that transit oriented districts are walkable, active, and integrated into the

City.

As substantiated in this Section and within this EIR generally, the Project would

support and implement the above-noted Planning Approach and Strategy within the

context of the SR-60/SR-71 Transit Oriented District. Plan Components

General Plan Section 7, Plan Components, identifies seven (7) General Plan Components

(listed below) that serve the Pomona Tomorrow vision and structure:

• 7-A: Land Use & Density;

• 7-B: Economic Development;

• 7-C: Open Space Network;

• 7-D: Mobility & Access;

• 7-E: Conservation;



• 7-F: Community Design; and

• 7-G: Noise & Safety.

Each General Plan Component includes:

• Background information to establish the context for policies in the element;

• The City’s strategic approach to addressing that component; and

• Definitions, detailed plans, and specifications facilitating realization of General

Plan Goals and Policies.

Germane to the analysis presented here is Component 7-A: Land Use & Density; and

more specifically, the Land Use & Density Component’s retail and office land use

distribution strategies and development intensity standards. As substantiated in this

Section and within this EIR generally, the Project would conform to and support the

Land Use & Density Component’s land use distribution strategies and development

intensity standards.

Goals and Policies

The General Plan at Section 8, Implementation Volume establishes Goals and supporting

Policies that, in concert, would achieve the long-range vision for the City. General Plan

Goals and Policies also act to protect the City’s resources by establishing planning

requirements, programs, standards, and criteria to be employed in the review and

evaluation of development proposals and land use decisions. Project consistency with,

and support of applicable General Plan Goals and Policies is evaluated subsequently at

Section 4.1.5, Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures.

4.1.3.3 City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance

Paralleling the recent General Plan Update, the City of Pomona has initiated a

correlating update of the City Zoning Ordinance. As one component of this update, the

Specific Plan Area encompassing the Pomona Ranch Plaza, inclusive of the Project site,

has been comprehensively amended. The amended Specific Plan, referred to hereafter

as the 2016 Specific Plan, is currently (as of March 2016) being processed by the City and



is anticipated to be adopted by the City within the timeframe of this EIR preparation.

The 2016 Specific Plan comports with the General Plan Update development type and

development intensity envisioned for the Project site and surrounding properties. For

the purposes of this analysis, the 2016 Specific Plan as adopted by the City is assumed to

be in place, and would establish the effective zoning for the Project site.

Project consistency with, and support of, the 2016 Specific Plan requirements and

standards is evaluated subsequently at Section 4.1.5, Potential Impacts and Mitigation

Measures.

4.1.4 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as

adopted by the City of Pomona, indicates a Project will normally have a significant

effect related to land use if it would:

• Physically divide an established community;

• Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency

with jurisdiction over the Project (including, but not limited to the general plan,

specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the

purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; or

• Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities

conservation plan. Any of the above would be considered a potentially significant land use impact.



4.1.5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

4.1.5.1 Introduction

The following discussions focus on those areas where it has been determined that the

Project may result in potentially significant land use and planning impacts, based on the

previous discussions within this Section, and substantiation within the EIR Initial Study

(EIR Appendix A). More specifically, as evaluated within the Initial Study, the Project’s

potential to: physically divide an established community; or conflict with any applicable

habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan are determined to

be less-than-significant. These potential impacts are therefore not substantively

discussed further within this Section. Conversely, as also discussed in the Initial Study,

the potential for the Project to conflict with an applicable land use plan warrants further

evaluation, and is considered herein. Please refer also to Initial Study Checklist Item XI.,

Land Use and Planning.

4.1.5.2 Impact Statements

Potential Impact: Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of

an agency with jurisdiction over the Project (including, but not limited to the general

plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose

of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Impact Analysis: The Project is subject to land use plans, policies, guidelines, and

regulations established by the City of Pomona. These include applicable City General

Plan Goals and Policies; and Regulations and Development Standards established

under the 2016 Specific Plan.

The General Plan establishes Goals and Policies applicable to development and uses

proposed by the Project as a component of the SR-60/SR-71 Transit Oriented District.

More specifically, General Plan Section 8, Implementation Volume identifies a range of

Goals and Policies intended to guide development of the Transit Oriented District (SR-60/



SR-71) Place Types. Under the General Plan Plan Component heading, Goals and Policies

are identified that would guide function and use of Transit Oriented Districts.3

For each stated Goal, the General Plan cross-references applicable supporting Policies,

of which certain Policies correlate to more than one Goal. General Plan Goals and

supporting Policies germane to the Project site Transit Oriented District Place Type are

excerpted at Table 4.1-1. Goal/Policy relevance to the Project, as well as an assessment of

Project consistency with and/or support of the stated Goal/Policy is also provided.

3 City of Pomona General Plan Update, Section 8, Implementation Volume.



Table 4.1-1 General Plan Goals and Policies Consistency

Goals/Policies Applicability/Consistency SR-60/SR-71 Transit Oriented District

Goal 6B.G12 Create evenly spaced and well-distributed activity cluster destinations that anchor the east and west ends of the Holt Avenue corridor and the SR-60/SR-71 to strengthen the gateway function of these locations. Policies

6B.P10 Use regulatory tools to concentrate height and intensity at these gateway locations.

Consistent: The City is currently processing the 2016 Specific Plan for the Pomona Ranch Plaza (2016 Specific Plan). The 2016 Specific plan provides for development of the Project site and the Pomona Ranch in total in a manner that would support site design, building height building massing, and building orientations envisioned under the General Plan. The Project would comport with correlating design guidelines and development standards established under the 2016 Specific Plan, thereby promoting a safe, family-oriented community environment.

7A.P1 Update the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances to be consistent with and implement the vision identified in the Pomona Tomorrow General Plan diagram

Consistent: Please refer to remarks at Policy 6B.P10 above.

7B.P4 Guide new retail investment away from exclusively auto-oriented shopping and toward open-air, amenity driven formats that have both day-time and night-time activity and are clustered at major crossroads.

Consistent: The Project collocates hotel and office uses within the existing Pomona Ranch Plaza commercial/retail center located at the proximate junction of SR-60/ SR-71. The Pomona Ranch Plaza currently accommodates a variety of commercial/retail uses having both day-time and night-time activities. Uses proposed by the Project (the proposed hotel use in specific) would energize existing uses and create new venues for daytime and nighttime activities.

Sources: Goals and Policies from City of Pomona General Plan; remarks by Applied Planning, Inc.



4.1.5.3 City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance Zoning is generally considered the primary tool for implementing a General Plan. In contrast to the long-term, broad-based outlook of the General Plan, zoning is a site-specific device designed to control the locations, densities, and intensities of various land uses. To prevent incompatible land use relationships, the zoning ordinance and accompanying map(s) designate different areas or zones for different types of land uses, and establish standards for development. These standards may specify requirements for lot sizes, lot coverages, building heights, setbacks, parking, landscaping, and other development parameters. The California Government Code section 65860 requires the City zoning designations to be consistent with the City General Plan. The City of Pomona has adopted a recent comprehensive General Plan Update (City of

Pomona 2014 General Plan Update, Pomona Tomorrow, General Plan). In order to realize

goals, implement policies and realize the General Plan vision for the City, the City has

initiated Citywide zoning and subdivision ordinance updates. As one component of

these updates, the Specific Plan Area encompassing the Pomona Ranch Plaza, inclusive

of the Project site, has been amended. The amended Specific Plan, referred to hereafter

as the 2016 Specific Plan, is currently (as of March 2016) being processed by the City and

is anticipated to be adopted by the City within the timeframe of this EIR preparation.

The 2016 Specific Plan comports with the General Plan Update development type and

development intensity envisioned for the Project site and surrounding properties. For

the purposes of this analysis, the 2016 Specific Plan as adopted by the City is assumed to

be in place, and would establish the effective zoning for the Pomona Ranch Plaza,

including the Project site.

Hotel and Office uses proposed by the Project would be permitted or conditionally permitted under the 2016 Specific Plan. Additionally, the 2016 Specific Plan establishes design guidelines and development standards, acting to ensure that development proposals within the Specific Plan Area (including the Project) would be implemented consistent with, and in support of, the General Plan vision for the area.



Development of the Project would result in the transition of undeveloped vacant commercial properties to urban uses. The Project uses and proposed development intensity are consistent with the City’s General Plan Place Type designations (Transit Oriented District) and the 2016 Specific Plan. 4.1.5.4 Project Supports and is Consistent with SCAG RTP and SCS Goals

As demonstrated at Table 4.1-2, the Project is consistent with applicable goals of the

SCAG Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)

for 2012-2035.

Table 4.1-2

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Consistency with SCAG Regional Goals

RTP/SCS Goals Remarks Goal 1: Align the plan investments and policies with improving regional economic development and competitiveness.

Consistent: The Project proposes compatible development of vacant commercial property within a designated Transit Oriented District in the City of Pomona. The Project provides an opportunity for large-scale investment in new hotel and office uses and high quality development that would promote the City of Pomona as a destination place; and would act to improve the City and regional economic development and competitiveness.

Goal 2: Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region.

Consistent: The transportation network in the Project area would be developed and maintained to meet the needs of local and regional transportation, and to ensure efficient mobility. Draft EIR Section 4.2, Traffic and Circulation, addresses local and regional transportation, traffic, and transit in more detail.

Goal 3: Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region.

Consistent: The Project TIA identifies improvements that would promote the safe movement of people and goods, with importance placed on pedestrian safety as well as vehicular safety. All transportation modes within the Project area would be required to follow safety standards set by corresponding regulatory documents. Roadways for motorists, as well as pedestrian walkways and bicycle/equestrian routes must follow safety precautions and standards established by local (e.g., City of Pomona) and regional (e.g., SCAG, Caltrans) agencies.

Goal 4: Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system.

Consistent: The Project TIA assesses all new and existing roadways and identifies required improvements to the existing transportation network. Through participation in the City’s Development Impact Fee program, fees paid by the Project and



Table 4.1-2 Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project

Consistency with SCAG Regional Goals RTP/SCS Goals Remarks

other development within the region would be employed to ensure that existing and future traffic capacities are provided. Mitigation included in this Draft EIR (Section 4.2, Traffic and Circulation) encourages regional coordination of transportation issues in order to preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system.

Goal 5: Maximize the productivity of our transportation system.

Consistent: The local and regional transportation system would be improved and maintained to encourage efficiency and productivity. The City oversees the improvement and maintenance of all aspects of the public right-of-way on an as-needed basis; and strives to maximize productivity of the region’s public transportation system (i.e., bus, bicycle) for residents, visitors, and workers. The Project takes advantage of proximate access to the regional transportation system (e.g., adjacent SR-71) and incorporates transportation system elements and designs necessary to support the Project. Please refer also to the Project TIA (EIR Appendix B).

Goal 6: Protect the environment and health of our residents by improving air quality and encouraging active transportation (non-motorized transportation, such as bicycling and walking).

Consistent: The Project would accommodate and would not interfere with any planned bicycle facilities. The Project would provide a pedestrian access network that internally links all uses and connects to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the Project site.

Goal 7: Actively encourage and create incentives for energy efficiency, where possible.

Consistent: EIR Section 3.0, Project Description, Section 3.5.10, Energy Efficiency/Sustainability, identifies Project design features and operational programs that would encourage conservation of resources generally, and efficient use of energy specifically. These design features and operational programs are summarized below: • Regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and associated

vehicular-source emissions are reduced by the following Project design features/attributes:

o Sidewalks would be constructed along the Project’s

Rancho Camino Drive street frontage providing pedestrian connection to other uses within the Plaza. Sidewalks would also be constructed within the Project site connecting the various uses and activity centers. Facilitating pedestrian access encourages people to walk instead of drive. The Project would not impose barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity.





o Concentration of mixed uses within a destination center as proposed by the Project acts to reduce travel distances and regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by consolidating trips and reducing requirements for multiple trips.

• To reduce water demands and associated energy use,

development proposals within the Project site would be required to implement a Water Conservation Strategy and demonstrate a minimum 20% reduction in indoor water usage when compared to baseline water demand (total expected water demand without implementation of the Water Conservation Strategy).2 Development proposals within the Project site would also be required to implement the following: o Landscaping palette emphasizing drought-tolerant

plants consistent with provisions of the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and/or City of Pomona requirements;

o Use of water-efficient irrigation techniques consistent with City of Pomona requirements;

o U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Certified WaterSense labeled or equivalent faucets, high-efficiency toilets (HETs), and other plumbing fixtures.

Goal 8: Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and non-motorized transportation.

Consistent: The Project is consistent with and supports the City General Plan Transit Oriented District land use vision for the subject site. Through concentration of development at locations provided proximate connections to local and regional transportation networks, the City General Plan Regional Activity Center land uses facilitate and support provision of transit and non-motorized access. Please refer also to remarks at Goal 6.

Goal 9: Maximize the security of our transportation system through improved system monitoring, rapid recovery planning, and coordination with other security agencies.

Consistent: The City of Pomona is responsible for monitoring of existing and newly constructed roadways and transit routes to determine the adequacy and safety of these systems. Other local and regional agencies and organizations (e.g., Pomona Valley Transportation Authority, Foothill Transit, Metrolink, Caltrans, and SCAG) work with the City to manage these systems. Security situations involving transportation systems






and evacuations would be addressed in the City’s emergency management plans (e.g., the City’s Emergency Operations Plan, July 18, 2011) which have been developed in accordance with the state and federal mandated emergency management regulations.

Sources: Goal Statements from: 2012–2035 SCAG Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (2012–2035 RTP/SCS); Remarks by Applied Planning, Inc.

Summary The Project proposes retail commercial land uses and development intensities that are consistent with the site’s existing General Plan Place Type designation (Transit Oriented District). The Project land uses and development types are consistent with, and would support implementation of, the 2016 Specific Plan. Prior to issuance of building permits, the City would review the final Project site plan and facilities designs to ensure consistency with applicable guidelines and requirements established under the 2016 Specific Plan. The 2016 Specific Plan would support, and would not conflict with, implementation of the site’s General Plan Transit Oriented District Place Type. The Project would advance the City’s current process of updating Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances to be consistent with and implement the vision identified in the Pomona Tomorrow General Plan diagram. The Project is consistent with and supports the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS): Towards a Sustainable Future (RTP/SCS). As supported by the preceding discussions, the potential for the Project to conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect is considered less-than-significant. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant.

4.2 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Transportation/Traffic Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 4.2-1

4.2 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC

Abstract

This Section evaluates the Project’s potential transportation/traffic impacts under Existing

(2015) conditions, Opening Year (2018) conditions, and Horizon Year (2040) conditions. Site

access and on-site circulation considerations and recommendations are also presented. More

specifically, this Section of the EIR examines whether the Project would:

• Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of

effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes

of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant

components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets,

highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit;

• Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited

to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established

by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways;

• Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous

intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or

• Result in inadequate emergency access.



Under all of the considered analysis scenarios and for all topics of concern, Project transportation/traffic impacts would be less-than-significant, or would be less-than-significant as mitigated. 4.2.1 INTRODUCTION

The detailed evaluation of potential Project-related traffic and circulation impacts is

documented in: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Traffic Impact Analysis City of Pomona

(Urban Crossroads, Inc.) May 2016 (Project TIA). The Project TIA and supporting data

are presented at EIR Appendix B.

The Scope of Work and Methodology for the Project TIA was developed based on

discussions with the City of Pomona, as well as a review of the City’s guidelines for the

preparation of traffic impact studies. Analyses for Caltrans facilities have been

performed in accordance with the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact

Studies.

Discussions were held with the City of Pomona and the Project Applicant to obtain a

comprehensive understanding of the Project and determine the scope of the Study Area,

and to define the level-of-service (LOS) analysis methodology and the determination of

traffic impact significance. Approved or planned projects (“related” projects) which

would be considered as part of the cumulative development setting were also

identified.

4.2.2 STUDY AREA FACILITIES

4.2.2.1 Study Area Intersections

A total of 9 TIA Study Area (Study Area) intersections were selected for evaluation

based on the City’s TIA preparation guidelines and in consultation with City staff. The

study area includes intersections where the Project is anticipated to contribute 50 or

more peak hour trips. The “50 or more peak hour trips” intersection analytic protocol

employed in the TIA is consistent with standard industry practice, and is consistent



with the methodology employed by other jurisdictions throughout southern California.

The 50 or more peak hour trip protocol generally represents the minimum number of

trips at which a typical intersection would have the potential to be substantively

affected by a given development proposal. Study Area intersections are listed at Table

4.2-1. Intersection jurisdiction and identification of Congestion Management Plan

(CMP)1 facilities are also indicated. The locations of Study Area intersections are

presented at Figure 4.2-1.

Table 4.2-1 Study Area Intersections

ID No.

Intersection Location Jurisdiction CMP

Facility 1 Phillips Ranch Rd. / Rio Rancho Rd. Pomona No

2 Phillips Ranch Rd. / SR-60 Westbound Ramps Caltrans Yes

3 Phillips Ranch Rd. / SR-60 Eastbound Ramps Caltrans Yes

4 Rancho Camino Dr. / Rio Rancho Rd. Pomona No

5 Driveway 1 / Rancho Camino Dr. – Future Intersection Pomona No

6 Driveway 2 / Rancho Camino Dr. – Future Intersection Pomona No

7 Lone Ridge Rd. / Rio Rancho Rd. Pomona No

8 SR-71 Southbound Ramps / Rio Rancho Rd. Caltrans Yes

9 SR-71 Northbound Ramps / Rio Rancho Rd. Caltrans Yes

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Traffic Impact Analysis City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) May 2016.

4.2.2.2 Study Area Roadway Segments Study Area roadway segments comprise those to which the Project is anticipated to contribute 50 or more peak hour trips. Study Area roadway segments are listed at Table 4.2-2, and the location/orientation of Study Area roadway segments are identified at Figure 4.2-1. All Study Area roadway segments are under City jurisdiction. 1 The County of Los Angeles CMP facilitates coordinated land use and transportation planning while promoting reasonable growth. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) monitors the CMP roadway network system to minimize LOS deficiencies. Within the project study area, the SR-60 Freeway and the SR-71 Freeway are recognized as key transportation facilities within the CMP system.



Figure 4.2-1: Study Area Intersections and Roadway Segments



Table 4.2-2 Study Area Roadway Segments

ID No. Roadway Segment

1 Phillips Ranch Rd. Rio Rancho Rd. to SR-60 WB Ramps 2 Rio Rancho Rd. East of Phillips Ranch Rd. 3 Rio Rancho Rd. West of Rancho Camino Dr. 4 Rio Rancho Rd. Rancho Camino Dr. to Lone Ridge Rd. 5 Rio Rancho Rd. Lone Ridge Rd. to SR-71 SB Ramps 6 Rio Rancho Rd. SR-71 SB Ramps to SR-71 NB Ramps 7 Rancho Camino Dr. South of Rio Rancho Rd. 8 Rancho Camino Dr. West of Driveway 1 9 Rancho Camino Dr. Driveway 1 to Driveway 2

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Traffic Impact Analysis City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) May 2016.

4.2.2.3 Study Area Freeway Ramps

A queuing analysis was performed for the off-ramps at the SR-60/Phillips Ranch Road

and at SR-71/Rio Rancho Road interchanges. The analysis evaluates off-ramp vehicle

queues that may potentially result in deficient peak hour operations at the ramp-to-

arterial intersections and could potentially “spill back” onto the freeway mainline.

Locations of these off-ramps (Study Area Intersections 2, 3, 8, and 9) are listed at

previous Table 4.2-1, and identified at previous Figure 4.2-1.

4.2.2.4 Study Area Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Facilities

The off-ramps at the SR-60/Phillips Ranch Road and at SR-71/Rio Rancho Road

interchanges (noted above at Table 4.2-1) are the only evaluated CMP facilities in the

Study Area.

4.2.3 LEVELS OF SERVICE AND TIA METHODOLOGIES

Traffic operations on roadway facilities are described using the term “Level of Service” (LOS). LOS is a qualitative description of traffic flow based on several factors such as speed, travel time, delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels are typically defined, ranging from LOS “A,” which represents free-flow conditions with no congestion, to



LOS “F,” which represents severe congestion with stop-and-go conditions, and is considered to be unsatisfactory. LOS “E” represents operations at or near capacity, an unstable level where vehicles are operating with the minimum spacing for maintaining uniform flow. The following discussions present LOS criteria and their applications for transportation network elements within the Study Area.

4.2.3.1 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria

City of Pomona

The City of Pomona requires that signalized intersection operations be analyzed

pursuant to the methodology described in Chapter 16 of the Highway Capacity Manual

(HCM). In summary, the HCM protocol establishes intersection LOS efficiencies based

on average control delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-

up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. For signalized intersections, LOS is

directly related to the average control delay per vehicle, as indicated at Table 4.2-3.

Table 4.2-3 Signalized Intersection LOS Descriptors

Level of

Service Description Average Control Delay (Seconds)

A Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle length.

0 to 10.00

B Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths.

10.01 to 20.00

C Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear.

20.01 to 35.00

D Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.

35.01 to 55.00

E Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay.

55.01 to 80.00

F Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to over saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths

80.01 and up

Sources: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Traffic Impact Analysis City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) May 2016; Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Chapter 16.



California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) The Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, along with the traffic

modeling and signal timing optimization package Synchro (Version 8 Build 801), was

employed in analysis of signalized intersections under Caltrans jurisdiction. These

include interchange-to-arterial ramp intersections, such as SR-60 ramps at Phillips

Ranch Road, and SR-71 ramps at Rio Rancho Road.

4.2.3.2 Roadway Segment LOS Criteria

Roadway segment operations have been evaluated using the 2010 Los Angeles County

Congestion Management Program (CMP). The CMP estimates roadway capacities based

on an assumed 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane. Although this value is suitable for

planning purposes, it is not a precise measure of functional roadway capacity. The

ultimate capacity of a roadway is based upon a number of factors. These factors include

the relationships between peak hour and daily traffic volumes, intersections (spacing,

configuration and control features), degree of access control, roadway grades, design

geometrics (horizontal and vertical alignment standards), sight distance, vehicle mix

(truck and bus traffic) and pedestrian/bicycle traffic.

Where the peak hour roadway segment analysis indicates a deficiency (unacceptable

LOS), review of the more detailed peak hour intersection analysis and progression

analysis is undertaken. The more detailed peak hour intersection analysis explicitly

accounts for factors that affect roadway capacity. Roadway segment widening is

typically only recommended if the peak hour intersection analysis indicates the need for

additional through lanes.

Roadway capacity has been assessed based on morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak

hour volumes (totaled for both directions) for each considered Study Area roadway

segment. Levels of service for each Study Area roadway segment have been assigned

based on the daily roadway segment capacity levels presented in Table 4.2-4.



Table 4.2-4 Roadway Segment LOS Criteria

Level of Service Volume to Capacity Ratio

A 0.00 to 0.60

B 0.61 to 0.70

C 0.71 to 0.80

D 0.81 to 0.90

E 0.91 to 1.00

F > 1.00 Sources: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Traffic Impact Analysis City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) May 2016; 2010 Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program

Volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio ranges used for purposes of estimating overall

performance for Study Area roadway segments include the following.

• 0.00 – 0.80: V/C is within capacity, and represents a range of free flow to stable

flow. Individual users range from being virtually unaffected by the presence of

others in the traffic stream, to beginning to become significantly affected by

interactions with others in the traffic stream.

• 0.81 – 1.00: V/C is near capacity, and represents high-density but stable flow,

where speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted at certain times of

the day, and the driver experiences a generally poor level of comfort and

convenience during peak hours. Peak period speeds are reduced to a low, but

relatively uniform value. Small increases in flow will cause breakdowns in traffic

movement during peak hours.

• Greater than 1.00: V/C exceeds capacity. This V/C level is used to define forced or

breakdown flow during peak hours. This condition exists wherever the amount

of peak period traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which can

traverse the point. Queues form behind such locations during peak hours.



4.2.3.3 Freeway Ramp Progression (Queuing) Criteria

The Study Area includes segments of the SR-60 and SR-71 and includes the freeway-to-

arterial interchanges of SR-60 with the Phillips Ranch Road ramps, and SR-71 with the

Rio Rancho Road ramps. Consistent with Caltrans requirements, the progression of

vehicles has been assessed to determine potential queuing impacts at the freeway ramp

intersections on Phillips Ranch Road and Rio Rancho Road.

A vehicle is considered queued whenever it is traveling at less than 10 feet per second.

Storage (turn pocket) length recommendations for queued vehicles at the ramps have

been based upon the 95th percentile queue resulting from the analysis. The “95th-

percentile queue” is defined to be the queue length (in vehicles) that has only a five

percent probability of being exceeded during the analysis time period.

4.2.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS

4.2.4.1 Overview

The following discussions describe the existing Study Area circulation network as well

as other transportation modes that exist within, or are available to, the Study Area.

4.2.4.2 Existing Roadway System

Factors affecting access to the Project site are the location of the site and the efficiency of

the serving roadway system. Efficiency of access is a function of travel time,

convenience, directness, and available capacity of the routes utilized in accessing the

development.

Regional Access

State Route 71 (SR-71) exists in a generally northwest to southeast orientation easterly

adjacent to the Project site. SR-71 provides a north-south connection to Corona and

Orange County.



State Route 60 (SR-60) is a major regional transportation route existing in an east-west

orientation along the southerly boundary of the Project site. SR-60 provides east-west

access to Pomona from Santa Monica and Los Angeles to the west, and Ontario, San

Bernardino and Riverside to the east.

Project Site Access

Access to the Project facilities would be provided by a STOP-controlled circular

driveway connecting to Rancho Camino Drive along the Project site’s northerly

boundary. Rancho Camino Drive connects to Rio Rancho Road approximately 0.2 miles

northerly of the Project site; and Rio Rancho Road interchanges with SR-71,

approximately 0.25 miles to the northeast of the Rancho Camino Drive/Rio Rancho

Road intersection.

4.2.4.3 Alternative Transportation Modes

Transit Services

Transit services available to the City and the Study Area are illustrated at Figure 4.2-2.

The Study Area is currently served by Foothill Transit which provides bus services

along Village Loop Road, Phillips Ranch Road, and Rio Rancho Road via Line 195.

There are also two Metrolink rail service stations in the City of Pomona. The North

Pomona Station is located north of the I-10 Freeway, and the Downtown Station is

located at Garey Avenue and 1st Street. Metrolink’s Riverside line serves the

Downtown Pomona station and Pomona TransCenter and serves destinations between

Downtown Los Angeles and Riverside.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities

The Study Area is predominantly developed and includes sidewalk facilities for

pedestrians. Crosswalks are provided at signalized Study Area intersections. Existing

sidewalks and crosswalks within the Study Area are identified at Figure 4.2-3. Existing

and proposed bicycle facilities in the City of Pomona are depicted at Figure 4.2-4.



Figure 4.2-2 Existing Transit Services (TIA Exhibit 3-3)



Figure 4.2-3 Existing Sidewalks/Pedestrian Crossings (TIA Exhibit 3-6)



Figure 4.2-4 City of Pomona Bicycle Plan (TIA Exhibit 3-5)



4.2.4.4 Existing Traffic Volumes

Existing peak hour traffic volumes within the Study Area were determined by field traffic counts conducted during November 2015, while schools were in session. Weekday morning (AM) peak hour traffic conditions are represented by traffic counts conducted for the two-hour period between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. Weekday evening (PM) peak hour traffic conditions are represented by traffic counts conducted for the two-hour period from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. There were no observations made in the field that would indicate atypical traffic conditions on the count dates, such as construction activity or detour routes and near-by schools were in session and operating on normal schedules. 4.2.4.5 Existing Intersection Operations

Existing peak hour traffic operations were evaluated at Study Area intersections. All

Study Area intersections currently operate at acceptable LOS. Please refer also to TIA

Table 3-1. 4.2.4.6 Existing Roadway Segment Operations

Existing roadway/volume capacities were evaluated for all Study Area roadway

segments. Under Existing conditions, all Study Area roadway segments operate at

acceptable LOS. Please refer also to TIA Table 3-2.

4.2.4.7 Existing Freeway Off-ramp Operations. Existing queueing conditions were evaluated for all Study Area freeway off-ramps. Under existing conditions, all Study Area freeway off-ramps operate acceptably. Please refer also to TIA Table 3-3.




4.2.5.1 Intersections

City of Pomona significance thresholds for the determination of potentially significant

impacts at Study Area intersections are presented below:

• Signalized Intersections – Any study intersection that is operating at an LOS A, B,

C or D for any study scenario without project traffic in which the addition of

project traffic causes the intersection to degrade to an LOS E or F shall mitigate

that impact so as to bring the intersection back to at least LOS D.

OR

• Signalized Intersections – Any study intersection that is operating at an LOS E or

F for any study scenario without project traffic shall mitigate any impacts so as to

bring the intersection back to the overall level of delay established prior to

project traffic being added.

• Unsignalized Intersections – The addition of project-related traffic causes the

intersection to degrade from an LOS D or better without the project to an LOS E

or worse.

OR

• Unsignalized Intersections – The project contributes additional traffic to an

intersection that is already projected to operate at an LOS E or F with

background traffic AND at least one of the following conditions are met: the

project adds ten (10) or more trips to any approach OR the intersection meets the

peak hour traffic signal warrant after the addition of project traffic.

(City of Pomona Traffic Impact Study Guidelines [City of Pomona Public Works

Department] 2012, p. 8)



4.2.5.2 Roadway Segments

Roadway segment operations have been preliminary evaluated employing the 2010 Los

Angeles County CMP lane capacity standard of 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane

(vphpl). Roadway segment impact criteria are however established by the City Traffic

Engineer. More specifically, as identified in the City of Pomona Traffic Impact Study

Guidelines:

• Each [roadway segment] link analyzed shall be reviewed on a case-by-

case basis. Significant impacts will be determined by the City Traffic

Engineer based on various factors including determined LOS; side

frictions; anticipated street improvements; and LOS of link’s critical

intersections. (City of Pomona Traffic Impact Study Guidelines, p. 9)

4.2.5.3 Freeway Ramp Progression (Queuing)

For freeway ramps, queued vehicles should not exceed the available stacking distance

as measured from the intersection stop line back to the gore point (i.e., where the ramp

meets the mainline). The queue reported in this analysis reflects the 95th percentile

queue length, that is, the queue length that could be anticipated 95 percent of the time

during peak travel hours.2 If the calculated 95th percentile queue exceeds the available

stacking distance, vehicles could spill back onto the freeway, and ramp queuing impacts

would be considered potentially significant. If ramp queues already exceed the 95th

percentile criteria, any additional Project traffic would be considered potentially

significant.

4.2.5.4 Access, Circulation and Parking

Access, circulation, and/or parking impacts would be considered significant if access to

the site or design of the proposed internal circulation system would result in unsafe

conditions or otherwise adversely affect other properties or adjacent roadways.

2 The 95th percentile queue is not typically observed, as the 95th percentile queue is statistically expected to be exceeded only five percent of the time. However, in an effort to provide the most conservative results, the 95th percentile queue has been reported in this analysis.



4.2.6 EXISTING (2015), OPENING YEAR (2018), AND HORIZON YEAR (2040) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

4.2.6.1 Overview

The following discussions summarize traffic conditions within the Study Area reflecting

implementation of the Project under Existing (2015), Opening Year (2018), and Horizon

Year (2040) conditions. For each of the considered scenarios, potentially significant

traffic impacts (deficient conditions) are identified. Topics evaluated under each

analysis scenario include:

• Intersection Operations; • Roadway Segment Operations; and • Freeway Ramp Progression (Queuing) Operations.

4.2.6.2 Project Trip Generation

Trips generated by the Project’s proposed land uses have been estimated based on trip

generation rates collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip

Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012. The Project would generate an estimated net total

of 2,689 trip-ends per day on a typical weekday, with approximately 258 net AM peak

hour trips and 283 net PM peak hour trips. Project trip generation assumptions and

methodologies are discussed in greater detail at TIA Section 4.1, Project Trip Generation.

Alternative travel modes (e.g., public transit, walking, or bicycling) may diminish the

Project forecasted traffic volumes. Notwithstanding, the traffic-reducing potentials of

alternative travel modes were not considered in the Project trip generation estimates.

Project traffic volumes considered in this analysis therefore represent the likely

maximum traffic generation and traffic impact condition.

4.2.6.3 Project Trip Distribution

Trip distribution is the process of identifying probable destinations, directions, or traffic

routes that will be utilized by Project traffic. The potential interaction between the



planned land uses and surrounding regional access routes are considered, to identify

the route(s) where Project traffic would be distributed. The trip distribution developed

by the Project TIA was based on anticipated travel patterns to and from the Project site,

and was approved by the City of Pomona staff during the Project scoping process.

Based upon the trip distribution patterns, peak hour trips were assigned at Study Area

intersections, and estimated daily traffic volumes were assigned to Study Area roadway

segments. Please refer to TIA Sections 4.2, Project Trip Distribution and 4.4, Project Trip

Assignment for additional detail regarding trip distribution and assignment processes.

4.2.6.4 Existing (2015) With-Project Traffic Analysis

The Existing With-Project Traffic analysis scenario presents circulation system

conditions that would occur if the Project were implemented under existing conditions.

The Existing With-Project analysis provides an indication of the incremental effects of

the Project in the context of current traffic conditions, and without the addition of

assumed future cumulative traffic growth reflected under the Opening Year and

Horizon Year analysis scenarios. In this manner, impacts that are Project-specific can be

identified. The City requires that all Project-specific impacts to City facilities be

mitigated to levels that are less-than-significant.

For this analysis, no off-site improvements are assumed beyond those that currently

exist with the exception of the intersections and roadways that would be improved by

the Project for access.

Intersection Operations Analysis Summary

All Study Area intersections would operate at acceptable LOS, under Existing With-

Project conditions. No existing deficiencies were identified under existing conditions;

and no additional deficiencies are projected to occur with the addition of Project traffic.

Additional detail is provided at TIA Table 5-1.



Roadway Segment Operations Analysis Summary

Under Existing With-Project conditions, all Study Area roadway segments would

operate acceptably. No existing deficiencies were identified under existing conditions;

and no additional deficiencies are projected to occur with the addition of Project traffic.

Additional detail is provided at TIA Table 5-2.

Freeway Ramp Progression (Queuing) Operations Analysis Summary

Under Existing With-Project conditions, all Study Area freeway ramps would operate

acceptably. No existing deficiencies were identified under existing conditions; and no

additional deficiencies are projected to occur with the addition of Project traffic.

Additional detail is provided in Project TIA Table 5-3.

4.2.6.5 Opening Year (2018) No-Project and With-Project Traffic Analysis

Opening Year traffic volumes and levels of service reflect conditions which could be

expected based on Project completion and opening in the year 2018. The “No-Project”

Opening Year condition reflects current (2015) traffic volumes, plus additional

background traffic that would be generated by generalized ambient growth within the

region, and traffic that would be generated by past, present and reasonably foreseeable

probable future related projects. Ambient generalized background traffic growth is

assumed at 2 percent per year compounded for the period 2015—2018; or 6.12 percent

aggregate growth in ambient background traffic conditions. Traffic from other related

known or probable development projects was then added to the calculated growth in

ambient background traffic conditions. Past, present and reasonably foreseeable

probable future related projects contributing to Study Area traffic impacts are presented

at TIA Appendix 4.1, Cumulative Development Project Research.

The Opening Year roadway network would be similar to the existing conditions

roadway network, with the addition of improvements proposed by the Project. The

“With-Project” Opening Year condition loads Project-generated traffic onto the “No-

Project” Opening Year condition.



Intersection Operations Analysis Summary Under Opening Year No-Project and With-Project Conditions, all Study Area

intersections would operate at acceptable LOS. Please refer to TIA Table 6-1 for

additional detail.


Under Opening Year No-Project and With-Project Conditions, all Study Area roadway

segments would operate at acceptable LOS. Please refer to TIA Table 6-2 for additional

detail.

Freeway Ramp Progression (Queuing) Operations Analysis Summary

Under Opening Year No-Project and With-Project Conditions, all Study Area freeway

ramps would operate acceptably. Please refer to TIA Table 6-3 for additional detail.

4.2.6.6 Horizon Year (2040) No-Project and With-Project Traffic Analysis The Horizon Year analysis scenario reflects long-range transportation/traffic network conditions within the Study Area. Consistent with City requirements, the TIA Horizon Year analysis employs the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) regional transportation plan (RTP) traffic model. The RTP model establishes the basis for Horizon Year No-Project traffic conditions. The “With-Project” Horizon Year condition loads Project-generated traffic onto the “No-Project” Horizon Year condition. The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for Horizon Year conditions includes existing facilities, Project improvements and those facilities assumed to be constructed in support of related development projects. Additionally, the Horizon Year traffic analysis reflects completion of programmed improvement of the SR-71 corridor between SR-60 and I-10. The Project TIA notes that long-range modeled improvements for SR-71 between I-10 and SR-60 include the addition of a mixed-flow lane and a high-occupancy lane (HOV) lane in both directions of travel, and grade separation of SR-71 by Year 2040. A Project Approval/Environmental Document (PAED)



is currently underway for these improvements; however, a preferred design has not yet been identified from the PAED work effort. Intersection Operations Analysis Summary Under Horizon Year No-Project and With-Project Conditions all Study Area intersections would operate at acceptable LOS. Please refer to TIA Table 7-1 for additional detail. In addition to the cited LOS analysis, a queuing analysis was performed at the Project driveways and at the intersection of Rancho Camino Drive at Rio Rancho Road. The analysis indicates that the anticipated 95th percentile queues can be accommodated at the Project driveways. The analysis indicates further that at the intersection of Rancho Camino Drive at Rio Rancho Road the existing 170-foot westbound left turn pocket cannot accommodate the anticipated 95th percentile queue; and that the westbound left turn pocket should be extended to accommodate 260-feet of stacking, with correlating modification of signal timing. This is a potentially significant impact. Please refer also to TIA Appendix 1.2. Level of Significance: Potentially Significant. Mitigation Measure: 4.2.1 Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, the Project Applicant shall extend the westbound left turn pocket at Rancho Camino Drive at Rio Rancho Road to accommodate a minimum 260 feet of vehicle stacking. Signal timing at Rancho Camino Drive at Rio Rancho Road shall be modified accordingly as required by the City of Pomona. Level of Significance after Mitigation: Less-Than-Significant. Extension of the westbound left turn pocket at Rancho Camino Drive at Rio Rancho Road as indicated and signal timing modification(s) would accommodate the anticipated 95th percentile queue, reducing potential queueing impacts to levels that would be less-than-significant.




Under Horizon Year No-Project and With-Project Conditions all Study Area roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS. Please refer to TIA Table 7-2 for additional detail.

Freeway Ramp Progression (Queuing) Operations Analysis Summary Under Horizon Year No-Project and With-Project Conditions all Study Area freeway ramps would operate acceptably. Please refer to TIA Table 7-3 for additional detail. 4.2.7 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

The following discussions focus on those topical traffic/circulation issues areas where it

has been determined that the Project may result in potentially significant impacts, based

on the analysis included within the EIR Initial Study (EIR Appendix A). As

substantiated in the Initial Study, the Project will not result in potentially significant

impacts related to a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic

levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks; nor will the Project

result in conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative

transportation. All other CEQA topics related to potential traffic/circulation impacts of

the Project are discussed below. Please refer also to Initial Study Checklist Item XVII.,

Transportation/Traffic.

Potential Impact: Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of

effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of

transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the

circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways,

pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.



Impact Analysis: Operations Analysis Summary As summarized in the preceding discussions at Section 4.2.6, even with the addition of Project traffic, all Study Area transportation/traffic facilities would operate acceptably under Existing, Opening Year, and Horizon Year analytic scenarios. Policies Analysis Summary Applicable Objectives and supporting Policies and Programs as excerpted from the City of Pomona General Plan Mobility & Access Component are presented at Table 4.2-5. General Plan text is followed by a summary of Project consistency and/or supporting actions.

Table 4.2-5 General Plan Objectives and Policies/Programs Consistency

Objective/Policy Applicability/Consistency Goal 7D.G24 Require new development or redevelopment to provide bicycle parking where appropriate and ensure it is located in safe, prominent locations.

The Project would provide bicycle parking in amounts and in configurations consistent with City requirements. The Project is therefore consistent with and supports Goal 7D.G24.

Goal 7D.G26 Align the amount of parking available and the amount of parking provided by new development with the real pattern of anticipated parking demand.

As summarized at EIR Section 3.0, Project Description, all parking areas to include parking stalls, drive aisles, parking lot landscaping and hardscaping, would be designed and constructed pursuant to City requirements as outlined at City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance. The Project is therefore consistent with and supports Goal 7D.G26.

Policy 7D.P66 Revise parking standards to encourage and facilitate alternative transportation modes by employing the following:

• Requirements for preferential parking for carpoolers.

• Bicycle parking requirements/lockers/showers for large development.

The Project would provide preferential carpool parking, bicycle parking, and supporting amenities consistent with City requirements. The Project is therefore consistent with and supports Goal 7D.P66.



Based on the preceding, the Project would not cause or result in a potential conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit. Project impacts in these regards would therefore be less-than-significant. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant.

Potential Impact: Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but

not limited to a level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards

established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.

Impact Analysis: Impacts to CMP facilities are coincident with impacts to other Study

Area facilities. As summarized herein, and substantiated in detail in the Project TIA,

under Existing, Opening Year, and Horizon Year Conditions, all Project

transportation/traffic impacts would be less-than-significant, including potential

impacts to Study Area CMP facilities.

Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant.

Potential Impact: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or

dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or result in inadequate

emergency access.

Impact Analysis: Efficient and safe access within, and access to, the Project is provided

by the Project site plan design concept, site access improvements, and site adjacent

roadway improvements included as components of the Project. On-site traffic signing

and striping would be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for

the Project site.



To ensure appropriate design and implementation of all Project circulation

improvements; and the final design of the Project site plan, to include locations and

design of proposed driveways, are subject to review and approval by the City prior to

the issuance of development permits. In addition, Police and Fire Department

representatives would review the Project’s plans to ensure that emergency access is

provided consistent with Department(s) requirements.

Based on the preceding, the implemented Project inclusive of the design features noted

at EIR Section 3.0, Project Description would not substantially increase hazards to a

design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,

farm equipment); or result in inadequate emergency access.

It is also recognized that temporary and short-term traffic detours and traffic disruption

could result during Project construction activities. Management and control of

construction traffic would be addressed through the preparation and submittal of a

construction area traffic management plan, to be reviewed and approved by the City

prior to or concurrent with Project building plan review(s). The Project Construction

Area Traffic Management Plan (Plan), also summarized within the EIR Project

Description, would identify traffic controls for any street closures, detours, or other

potential disruptions to traffic circulation during Project construction. The Plan would

also be required to identify construction vehicle access routes, and hours of construction

traffic.

As supported by the preceding discussions and information presented in the EIR Project

Description, the potential for the Project to substantially increase hazards to a design

feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm

equipment); or result in inadequate emergency access is considered less-than-

significant.


4.3 AIR QUALITY

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Air Quality Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 4.3-1

4.3 AIR QUALITY

Abstract This Section identifies and addresses potential air quality impacts that may result from

construction and implementation of the Project. More specifically, the air quality analysis

evaluates the potential for the Project to result in the following impacts:

• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;;

• Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air

quality violation;

• Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the

Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality

standard, including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone

precursors;

• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations;

• Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

The discussion presented here supports the conclusion that all Project air quality impacts would

be less-than-significant, or less-than-significant as mitigated.



4.3.1 INTRODUCTION

This Section presents existing air quality conditions and identifies potential air quality

impacts resulting from construction and operations of the Project. Local and regional

climate, meteorology and air quality are discussed, as well as existing federal, state and

regional air quality regulations. The information presented in this Section is

summarized from: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of

Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016 (Project AQIA). The Project

AQIA and all supporting modeling data are presented at EIR Appendix C.

4.3.2 AIR QUALITY FUNDAMENTALS

Air pollution comprises many substances, both man-made and natural. Most air pollutants are actually wasted energy in the form of unburned fuels or by-products of the combustion process. Motor vehicles are by far the most significant source of air pollutants in urban areas, emitting reactive hydrocarbons (unburned fuel), carbon monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen. Over time, these primary air pollutants photochemically react in the atmosphere with sunlight to form secondary pollutants such as ozone. Substantive improvements in air quality have been made in California over the past twenty years. Notwithstanding, Southern California still experiences pronounced air pollution problems. As discussed in greater detail in the following paragraphs, oxidants and suspended particulates represent the major air quality problems within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB, Basin) encompassing the Project site. Air pollutants are generally classified as either primary or secondary pollutants. Primary pollutants are generated daily and emitted directly from the source, whereas secondary pollutants are created over time as the result of atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions. Examples of primary pollutants include carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NO2 and NO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and various hydrocarbons (volatile organic compounds (VOC)). Examples of secondary pollutants include ozone (O3), which is a product of the reaction between



NOx and VOC in the presence of sunlight. Other secondary pollutants include photochemical aerosols. To aid in the review of discussions presented subsequently in this Section, recurring terms, abbreviations, and acronyms are defined as follows: PPM - Parts per Million; µg/m3 - Micrograms Per Cubic Meter; PM10 - Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns In Diameter; PM2.5 - Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Microns In Diameter. 4.3.2.1 Criteria Air Pollutants Criteria air pollutants are those air contaminants for which air quality standards currently exist. Currently, state and federal air quality standards exist for ozone, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), suspended particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and lead. California has also set standards for visibility, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride. Evaluated criteria air contaminants, or their precursors, typically also include volatile organic compounds (VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and respirable particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). In general, the Basin as a whole has experienced decreases in criteria air pollutant levels when compared to historic conditions (please refer to EIR Section 4.3.5, Regional Air Quality Trends). Pollutant properties and sources, and potential health effects are summarized below. Carbon Monoxide Properties and Sources Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas formed by incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. CO levels tend to be highest during the winter mornings, when little to no wind and surface-based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. Because CO is emitted directly from internal combustion engines, motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are the primary source of CO in the Basin. The highest CO concentrations are generally found near congested transportation corridors and intersections. Other sources include aircraft, off-road vehicles, stationary equipment (e.g., fuel-fired furnaces, gas water heaters, fireplaces, gas stoves, gas dryers, charcoal grills), and landscape maintenance equipment such as lawnmowers and leaf blowers.



Human Health Effects A consistent association between increased ambient CO levels and higher-than-average rates of hospital admissions for heart diseases (such as congestive heart failure) has been observed. Carbon monoxide can cause decreased exercise capacity, and adversely affects conditions with an increased demand for oxygen supply (fetal development, chronic hypoxemia, anemia, and diseases involving the heart and blood vessels). Exposure to CO can cause impairment of time interval estimation and visual function. Ozone Properties and Sources Ozone (O3) is a highly reactive and unstable gas that is formed when volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), which are both byproducts of internal combustion engine exhaust, undergo slow photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light wind, and warm temperature conditions are favorable to the formation of the pollutant. Human Health Effects Short-term exposure to ozone can cause a decline in pulmonary function in healthy individuals including breathing pattern changes, reduction of breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung tissue and immunological changes. Additionally, an increase in the frequency of asthma attacks, cough, chest discomfort and headache can result. A correlation has been reported between elevated ambient ozone levels and increases in daily hospital admission rates and mortality as a result of long-term ozone exposure. A risk to public health implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and host defense in animals has also been reported.



Oxides of Nitrogen Properties and Sources Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) serve as integral participants in the process of photochemical smog production. During combustion, oxygen reacts with nitrogen to produce NOx. Two major forms of NOx are nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Natural causal sources or originators of NOx include lightning, soils, wildfires, stratospheric intrusion, and the oceans. Natural sources accounted for approximately seven percent of 1990 emissions of NOx for the United States (EPA 1997). Atmospheric deposition of NOx occurs when atmospheric or airborne nitrogen is transferred to water, vegetation, soil, or other materials. Acid deposition involves the deposition of nitrogen and/or sulfur acidic compounds that can harm natural resources and materials. The major source of NOx in the Basin is on-road vehicles. Stationary commercial and service source fuel combustion are other contributors. Human Health Effects Exposure to NOx may alter sensory responses or impair pulmonary function, and may increase incidence of acute respiratory disease including infections and respiratory symptoms in children. Difficulty in breathing in healthy individuals as well as bronchitic groups may also occur. NOx is also an ozone precursor. Health effects of ground-level ozone include: aggravated asthma; reduced lung capacity; increased respiratory illness susceptibility; increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations; and premature deaths. Sulfur Dioxide Properties and Sources Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, pungent gas. At levels greater than 0.5 ppm, SO2 has a strong odor. Sulfuric acid is formed from sulfur dioxide, which is an aerosol particle component that affects acid deposition. Anthropogenic, or human-caused, sources include fossil-fuel combustion, mineral ore processing, and chemical manufacturing. Volcanic emissions are a natural source of sulfur dioxide. SO2 is a precursor to sulfates and PM10.



Human Health Effects Health effects of SO2 include higher frequencies of acute respiratory symptoms (including airway constriction in some asthmatics and reduction in breathing capacity leading to severe difficulties) and diminished ventilatory function in children. Very high levels of exposure can cause lung edema (fluid accumulation), lung tissue damage, and sloughing off of cells lining the respiratory tract. Lead Properties and Sources Lead (Pb) is a solid heavy metal that can exist in air pollution as an aerosol particle component. An aerosol is a collection of solid, liquid, or mixed-phase particles suspended in the air. It was first regulated as an air pollutant in 1976. Leaded gasoline was first marketed in 1923 and was used in motor vehicles until around 1970. The exclusion of lead from gasoline helped to decrease emissions of lead in the United States from 219,000 to 4,000 short tons per year between 1970 and 1997. Lead-ore crushing, lead-ore smelting, and battery manufacturing are currently the largest sources of lead in the atmosphere in the United States. Other sources emanate from the dust of soils contaminated with lead-based paint and solid waste disposal. Lead concentrations once exceeded the state and federal air quality standards by a wide margin, but have not exceeded state or federal air quality standards at any regular monitoring station since 1982. Lead is no longer a gasoline additive, accounting for substantive reductions in airborne lead concentrations throughout the Basin. Human Health Effects Lead adversely affects the development and function of the central nervous system, leading to learning disorders, distractibility, lower IQ and increased blood pressure. An increase in blood lead levels may impair or decrease hemoglobin synthesis. Lead poisoning can cause anemia, lethargy, seizures, and death.



Particulate Matter Properties and Sources Particulate matter is a generic term that defines a broad group of chemically and physically different particles (either liquid droplets or solids) that can exist over a wide range of sizes. Examples of atmospheric particles include those produced from combustion (diesel soot or fly ash), light (urban haze), sea spray (salt particles), and soil-like particles from re-suspended dust. Fugitive dust is defined as any solid particulate matter that becomes airborne, other than that emitted from an exhaust stack, directly or indirectly as a result of human activities (Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, SCAQMD). Within air quality analyses, particulate matter is categorized by diameter: PM10 and PM2.5. PM10 refers to particulate matter that is 10 microns or less in diameter (1 micron is one millionth of a meter, or one micrometer [µm]). PM2.5 refers to particulate matter that is 2.5 microns or less in diameter. The size of particles can determine the residence time of the material in the atmosphere. PM2.5 has a longer atmospheric lifetime than PM10 and, therefore, can be transported over longer distances. Particulate matter originates from a variety of stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources that generate particulate matter include: fuel combustion for electric utilities, residential space heating, and industrial processes; construction and demolition; metals, minerals, and petrochemicals; wood products processing; mills and elevators used in agriculture; erosion from tilled lands; waste disposal and recycling. Mobile or transportation-related sources that generate particulate matter include highway vehicles, non-road vehicles and fugitive dust from paved and unpaved roads. Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) is a mixture of many exhaust particles and gases that is produced when an engine burns diesel fuel. As the result of California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulatory actions, DPM emissions within the Basin have been reduced when compared to historic levels, and will continue to decline.



Human Health Effects A consistent correlation between elevated ambient PM10 levels and an increase in mortality rates, respiratory infections, number and severity of asthma attacks and the number of hospital admissions has been observed. Many compounds found in diesel exhaust are carcinogenic, including sixteen compounds that are classified as possibly carcinogenic by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. DPM includes the particle-phase constituents in diesel exhaust. Some short-term (acute) effects of diesel exhaust include eye, nose, throat and lung irritation, as well as coughs, headaches, light-headedness and nausea. Diesel exhaust is a major source of ambient particulate matter pollution, and numerous studies have linked elevated particle levels in the air to increased hospital admission, emergency room visits, asthma attacks, and premature deaths among those suffering from respiratory problems. DPM in the Basin poses the greatest cancer risk of all identified toxic air pollutants. Valley Fever may also be transmitted through PM10 and PM2.5 emissions. “Valley Fever is a fungal infection caused by coccidioides organisms. It can cause fever, chest pain and coughing, among other signs and symptoms. Two species of coccidioides fungi cause valley fever. These fungi are commonly found in the soil in specific areas and can be stirred into the air by anything that disrupts the soil, such as farming, construction and wind. The fungi can then be breathed into the lungs and cause valley fever, also known as acute coccidioidomycosis. Mild cases of valley fever usually resolve on their own. In more severe cases, doctors prescribe antifungal medications that can treat the underlying infection.”1

1 Mayo Clinic Staff. “Diseases and Conditions-Valley Fever.” Mayo Clinic. N.p., 27 May 2015. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.



Volatile Organic Compounds Properties and Sources Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), also termed Reactive Organic Gases (ROGs) are defined as any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions. It should be noted that there is no state or national ambient air quality standard for VOCs because they are not classified as criteria pollutants. They are regulated, however, because a reduction in VOC emissions reduces certain chemical reactions that contribute to the formulation of ozone. VOCs are also transformed into organic aerosols in the atmosphere, which contribute to higher PM10 and lower visibility. The major sources of VOCs in the Basin are on-road motor vehicles and solvent evaporation. VOCs are also an ozone precursor. Benzene is a commonly occurring VOC within the Basin. Typical sources of benzene emissions include: gasoline service stations (fuel evaporation), motor vehicle exhaust, tobacco smoke, and oil and coal incineration. Benzene is also sometimes employed as a solvent for paints, inks, oils, waxes, plastic, and rubber. It is used in the extraction of oils from seeds and nuts. It is also used in the manufacture of detergents, explosives, dyestuffs, and pharmaceuticals. Human Health Effects Health effects of ground-level ozone include: aggravated asthma; reduced lung capacity; increased respiratory illness susceptibility; increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations; and premature deaths. Benzene is a known carcinogen. Short-term (acute) exposure to high doses from inhalation of benzene may cause dizziness, drowsiness, headaches, eye irritation, skin irritation, and respiratory tract irritation, and at higher levels, unconsciousness can occur. Long-term (chronic) occupational exposure to high doses by inhalation has caused blood disorders, including aplastic anemia and lower levels of red blood cells.



4.3.3 SETTING 4.3.3.1 Local and Regional Climate The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB, Basin) within the jurisdiction of SCAQMD. The SCAQMD was created by the 1977 Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act, which merged four county air pollution control bodies into one regional district. Under the Act, the SCAQMD is responsible for bringing air quality in areas under its jurisdiction into conformity with federal and state air quality standards. The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an area of approximately 10,743 square miles, consisting of the four-county Basin (Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties), and the Riverside County portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin and Mojave Desert Air Basin. The 6,745-square-mile SCAB is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The Los Angeles County portion of the Mojave Desert Air Basin is bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and west, the Los Angeles/Kern County border to the north, and the Los Angeles/San Bernardino County border to the east. The Riverside County portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains in the west and spans eastward up to the Palo Verde Valley. Persistent climatic conditions, and variations in temperature, wind, humidity, precipitation, and ambient sunshine significantly influence air quality in the SCAB. Annual average temperatures throughout the SCAB vary from the low to mid 60s (degrees Fahrenheit). Due to a decreased marine influence, easterly portions of the SCAB exhibit greater variability in average annual temperatures. January is the coldest month throughout the SCAB, with average minimum temperatures ranging from 47°F in central Los Angeles to 36°F in San Bernardino. All portions of the SCAB have recorded maximum temperatures exceeding 100°F. Although the climate of the SCAB can be characterized as semi-arid, the air near the land surface is quite moist on most days because of the presence of a marine layer. This shallow layer of sea air is an important modifier of SCAB climate. Humidity restricts



visibility in the SCAB, and the conversion of sulfur dioxide to sulfates is heightened in air with high relative humidity. The marine layer provides an environment for that conversion process, especially during the spring and summer months. The annual average relative humidity within the SCAB is 71 percent along the coast and 59 percent inland. Since the ocean effect is dominant, periods of heavy early morning fog are frequent and low stratus clouds are a characteristic feature. It should be noted that these effects decrease with distance from the coast. More than 90 percent of the SCAB’s rainfall occurs from November through April. The annual average rainfall varies from approximately nine inches in Riverside to fourteen inches in downtown Los Angeles. Monthly and yearly rainfall totals are extremely variable. Summer rainfall usually consists of widely scattered thunderstorms near the coast and slightly heavier shower activity in the eastern portion of the SCAB, with frequency being higher near the coast. Due to its generally clear weather, about three-quarters of available sunshine is received in the SCAB. The remaining one-quarter is absorbed by clouds. The ultraviolet portion of this abundant radiation is a key factor in photochemical reactions. On the shortest day of the year there are approximately 10 hours of possible sunshine, and on the longest day of the year there are approximately 14-½ hours of possible sunshine. The importance of wind to air pollution is considerable. The direction and speed of the wind determines the horizontal dispersion and transport of the air pollutants. During the late autumn to early spring rainy season, the SCAB is subjected to wind flows associated with the traveling storms moving through the region from the northwest. This period also brings five to ten periods of strong, dry offshore winds, locally termed “Santa Anas,” each year. During the dry season, which coincides with the months of maximum photochemical smog concentrations, the wind flow is bimodal, typified by a daytime onshore sea breeze and a nighttime offshore drainage wind. Summer wind flows are created by the pressure differences between the relatively cold ocean and the unevenly heated and cooled land surfaces that modify the general northwesterly wind circulation over southern California. Nighttime drainage begins



with the radiational cooling of the mountain slopes. Heavy, cool air descends the slopes and flows through the mountain passes and canyons as it follows the lowering terrain toward the ocean. Another characteristic wind regime in the SCAB is the “Catalina Eddy,” a low level cyclonic (counterclockwise) flow centered over Santa Catalina Island which results in an offshore flow to the southwest. On most spring and summer days, some indication of an eddy is apparent in coastal areas. In the SCAB, there are two distinct temperature inversion structures that control vertical mixing of air pollution. During the summer, warm high-pressure descending (subsiding) air is undercut by a shallow layer of cool marine air. The boundary between these two layers of air is a persistent marine subsidence/inversion. This boundary prevents vertical mixing which effectively acts as an impervious lid to pollutants over the entire SCAB. The mixing height for the inversion structure is normally situated 1,000 to 1,500 feet above mean sea level. A second inversion-type forms in conjunction with the drainage of cool air off the surrounding mountains at night followed by the seaward drift of this pool of cool air. The top of this layer forms a sharp boundary with the warmer air aloft and creates nocturnal radiation inversions. These inversions occur primarily in the winter, when nights are longer and onshore flow is weakest. They are typically only a few hundred feet above mean sea level. These inversions effectively trap pollutants, such as NOx and CO from vehicles, as the pool of cool air drifts seaward. Winter is therefore a period of high levels of primary pollutants along the coastline. The distinctive climate of the Project area and the SCAB is determined by its terrain and geographical location. The Basin is located in a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter. Wind patterns across the south coastal region are characterized by westerly and southwesterly on-shore winds during the day and easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Winds are characteristically light although the speed is somewhat greater during the dry summer months than during the rainy winter season.



4.3.3.2 Existing Air Quality Existing air quality is measured at established SCAQMD air quality monitoring stations. Monitored air quality is evaluated in the context of ambient air quality standards. These standards are the levels of air quality that are considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) currently in effect, as well as a summary of the health effects of each pollutant regulated under these standards are included in the following Table 4.3-1. The determination of whether a region’s air quality is healthful or unhealthful is determined by comparing contaminant levels in ambient air samples to the state and federal standards. The air quality in a region is considered to be in attainment by the state if the measured ambient air pollutant levels for O3, CO, SO2, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5

are not equaled or exceeded at any time in any consecutive three-year period; and the federal standards (other than O3, PM10, PM2.5, and those based on annual averages or arithmetic mean) are not exceeded more than once per year. The O3 standard is attained when the fourth highest eight-hour concentration in a year, averaged over three years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when 99 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over three years, are equal to or less than the standard.



Table 4.3-1 State and National Criteria Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources

Pollutant Averaging Time State

Standard

National Primary Standard

National Secondary Standard

Human Health and Atmospheric Effects Major Sources

Ozone 1 hour 8 hours

0.09 ppm1 0.07 ppm2

-- 0.075 ppm

Same as Primary Standard

High concentrations can directly affect lungs, causing irritation. Long-term exposure may cause damage to lung tissue.

Formed when volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) react in the presence of sunlight. Major sources include on-road motor vehicles, solvent evaporation, and commercial / industrial mobile equipment.

Carbon Monoxide

1 hour 8 hours

20 ppm 9 ppm

35 ppm 9 ppm

-- --

Classified as a chemical asphyxiant, carbon monoxide interferes with the transfer of fresh oxygen to the blood and deprives sensitive tissues of oxygen.

Internal combustion engines, primarily gasoline-powered motor vehicles.

Nitrogen Dioxide

1 hour Annual Average

0.18 ppm 0.030 ppm

100 ppb 0.053 ppm

-- Same as

Primary Standard

Irritating to eyes and respiratory tract. Colors atmosphere reddish-brown.

Motor vehicles, petroleum refining operations, industrial sources, aircraft, ships, and railroads.

Sulfur Dioxide

1 hour 3 hours

24 hours Annual Average

0.25 ppm --

0.04 ppm --

75 ppb --

0.14 ppm 0.030 ppm

-- 0.5 ppm

-- --

Irritates upper respiratory tract; injurious to lung tissue. Can yellow the leaves of plants, destructive to marble, iron, and steel. Limits visibility and reduces sunlight.

Fuel combustion, chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing.

Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10)


50 g/m3 20 g/m3

150 g/m3 --


May irritate eyes and respiratory tract, decreases in lung capacity, cancer and increased mortality. Produces haze and limits visibility.

Dust and fume-producing industrial and agricultural operations, fuel combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities (e.g., wind-raised dust and ocean sprays).

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)


-- 12 g/m3

35 g/m3 12 g/m3


Increases respiratory disease, lung damage, cancer, and premature death. Reduces visibility and results in surface soiling.

Fuel combustion in motor vehicles, equipment, and industrial sources; residential and agricultural burning; Also, formed from photochemical reactions of



Table 4.3-1 State and National Criteria Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources

Pollutant Averaging Time State

Standard

National Primary Standard

National Secondary Standard

Human Health and Atmospheric Effects Major Sources

other pollutants, including NOx, sulfur oxides, and organics.

Lead Monthly Average Quarterly

Rolling 3-Mo. Avg.

1.5 g/m3 -- --

-- 1.5 g/m3

0.15 g/m3


Disturbs gastrointestinal system, and causes anemia, kidney disease, and neuromuscular and neurological dysfunction.

Present source: lead smelters, battery manufacturing & recycling facilities. Past source: combustion of leaded gasoline.

Hydrogen Sulfide

1 hour 0.03 ppm None None Nuisance odor (rotten egg smell), headache and breathing difficulties (higher concentrations)

Geothermal Power Plants, Petroleum Production and Refining.

Sulfates 24 hour 25 g/m3 None None Breathing difficulties, aggravates asthma, reduced visibility

Produced by the reaction in the air of SO2.

Visibility Reducing Particles

8 hour Light extinction

of 0.23/km; visibility of 10 miles or

more

None None Reduces visibility, reduced airport safety, lower real estate value, discourages tourism.

See PM10/PM2.5.

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016. Notes: 1 PPM = parts per million; g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter 2 This concentration was approved by the California Air Resources Board on April 28, 2005 and became effective May 17, 2006.



Regional Air Quality The SCAQMD monitors regional air quality through measurement and quantification of various criteria pollutants at 30 monitoring stations located throughout the air district. In 2012, the latest year of record, the federal and state ambient air quality standards (NAAQS and CAAQS) were exceeded on one or more days for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 at most monitoring locations. No areas of the SCAB exceeded federal or state standards for SO2, CO, or sulfates. Attainment designations for the SCAB are provided at Table 4.3-2.

Table 4.3-2 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB)

Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation Ozone (1-hour) Non-attainment No Standard

Ozone (8-hour) Non-attainment Extreme Non-attainment1

Particulate Matter (PM10) Non-attainment Serious Non-attainment

Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Non-attainment Non-attainment

Carbon Monoxide Attainment Attainment/Maintenance

Nitrogen Dioxide Non-attainment2 Attainment/Maintenance

Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Attainment

Lead Attainment/Non-attainment3 Attainment/Non-attainment4

All others Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016. Notes: 1 The USEPA approved redesignation from Severe 17 to Extreme Nonattainment on May 5, 2010, effective June 4, 2010. 2 The SCAB was reclassified from attainment to non-attainment for nitrogen dioxide on March 25, 2010. 3 Los Angeles County was reclassified from attainment to non-attainment for lead on March 25, 2010; the remainder of the SCAB is in attainment of the State standard. 4 The Los Angeles County portion of the SCAB is classified as non-attainment for lead; the remainder of the SCAB meets State attainment standards.

Local Air Quality The nearest long-term air quality monitoring for Ozone (O3), Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), is carried out by the SCAQMD at the Pomona monitoring station (SRA 10) located approximately one-half mile northwest of the Project site. Data for Inhalable Particulates (PM10), and Ultra-Fine Particulates (PM2.5) is not available from the Pomona monitoring station and was obtained from the Ontario monitoring



station (SRA 33) which is the nearest monitoring site to the Project that monitors for PM10 and PM2.5. The Ontario monitoring station is located approximately 3.8 miles southeasterly of the Project site. Table 4.3-3 presents the three latest years of available representative local air quality monitoring data, and shows the number of days that standards were exceeded for the study area. Additionally, data for SO2 (Sulfur Dioxide) was omitted, since attainment standards for this pollutant are regularly met within the SCAB, and few monitoring stations continue to measure SO2 concentrations.

Table 4.3-3 Project Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary 2012-2014

Pollutant Standard 2012 2013 2014

Ozone (O3)

Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.117 0.125 0.123 Maximum 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.092 0.099 0.099 Number of Days Exceeding State 1-Hour Standard > 0.09 ppm 21 12 22 Number of Days Exceeding State 8-Hour Standard > 0.07 ppm 28 22 56 Number of Days Exceeding Federal 1-Hour Standard > 0.12 ppm 0 1 0 Number of Days Exceeding Federal 8-Hour Standard > 0.075 ppm 15 15 33 Number of Days Exceeding Health Advisory 0.15 ppm 0 0 0

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 1.2 1.2 2.0 Maximum 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) 1.5 1.6 1.6 Number of Days Exceeding State 1-Hour Standard > 20 ppm -- 0 0 Number of Days Exceeding Federal/State 8-Hour Standard > 9.0 ppm 0 0 0 Number of Days Exceeding Federal 1-Hour Standard > 35 ppm 0 0 0

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.082 0.079 .089 Annual Arithmetic Mean Concentration (ppm) 0.021 0.023 0.22 Number of Days Exceeding State 1-Hour Standard > 0.18 ppm4 0 0 0

Inhalable Particulates (PM10)2

Maximum 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) 57 60 67

Number of Samples 61 117 --



Table 4.3-3 Project Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary 2012-2014

Pollutant Standard 2012 2013 2014

Number of Samples Exceeding State Standard > 50 µg/m3 4 -- 4

Number of Samples Exceeding Federal Standard > 150 µg/m3 0 0 0

Ultra-Fine Particulates (PM2.5)2

Maximum 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) 35.2 29.8 --

Annual Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) 12.4 13.4 --

Number of Samples Exceeding Federal 24-Hour Standard > 35 µg/m3 120 27 -- Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

4.3.3.3 Air Pollutant Emissions Generated by Existing Activities

The Project site is currently vacant and is not a substantive source of air pollutant

emissions.

4.3.4 REGULATORY SETTING 4.3.4.1 Federal Regulations

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for setting and

enforcing the NAAQS for O3, CO, NOx, SO2, PM10, and lead. The U.S. EPA has

jurisdiction over emissions sources that are under the authority of the federal

government including aircraft, locomotives, and emissions sources outside state waters

(Outer Continental Shelf). The U.S. EPA also establishes emission standards for vehicles

sold in states other than California. Automobiles sold in California must meet the

stricter emission requirements of the California Air Resource Board (CARB).

The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) was first enacted in 1955, and has been amended numerous times in subsequent years (1963, 1965, 1967, 1970, 1977, and 1990). The CAA establishes the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and specifies Standards compliance dates. The CAA also mandates that states submit and implement State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for local areas not meeting these Standards. SIPs must include pollution control measures demonstrating how Standards will be met.



The 1990 amendments to the CAA that identify specific emission reduction goals for areas not meeting the NAAQS require a demonstration of reasonable further progress toward attainment and incorporate additional sanctions for failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. The sections of the CAA most directly applicable to the development of the Project site include Title I (Non-Attainment Provisions) and Title II (Mobile Source Provisions). Title I provisions were established with the goal of attaining the NAAQS for the following criteria pollutants O3, NO2, SO2, PM10, CO, PM2.5, and lead. The NAAQS were amended in July 1997 to include an additional standard for O3 and to adopt a NAAQS for PM2.5. Table 4.3-1 (previously presented) provides the NAAQS within the basin. Mobile-source emissions are regulated in accordance with Title II provisions. These provisions require the use of cleaner burning gasoline and other cleaner burning fuels such as methanol and natural gas. Automobile manufacturers are also required to reduce tailpipe emissions of hydrocarbons and NOx. NOx is a collective term that includes all forms of nitrogen oxides (NO, NO2, NO3) which are emitted as byproducts of the combustion process. 4.3.4.2 California Regulations The CARB, which became part of the California EPA in 1991, is responsible for ensuring implementation of the California Clean Air Act (AB 2595), responding to the federal CAA, and for regulating emissions from consumer products and motor vehicles. The California CAA mandates achievement of the maximum degree of emissions reductions possible from vehicular and other mobile sources in order to attain the state ambient air quality standards by the earliest practical date. The CARB established the CAAQS for all pollutants for which the federal government has NAAQS and, in addition, establishes standards for sulfates, visibility, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride. However, at this time, hydrogen sulfide and vinyl chloride are not measured at any monitoring stations in the SCAB because they are not considered to be a regional air quality problem. Generally, the CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS.



Local air quality management districts, such as the SCAQMD, regulate air emissions from stationary/area sources such as commercial/retail facilities proposed by the Project. All air pollution management districts have been formally designated as attainment or non-attainment for each CAAQS. Serious non-attainment areas are required to prepare air quality management plans that include specified emission reduction strategies in an effort to meet clean air goals. These plans are required to include: • Application of Best Available Retrofit Control Technology to existing sources; • Developing control programs for area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and

solvents) and indirect sources (e.g., motor vehicle use generated by residential and commercial development);

• A District-permitting system designed to allow no net increase in emissions from any new or modified permitted sources of emissions;

• Implementing reasonably available transportation control measures and assuring a substantial reduction in growth rate of vehicle trips and miles traveled;

• Significant use of low emissions vehicles by fleet operators; • Sufficient control strategies to achieve a five percent or more annual reduction in

emissions or 15 percent or more in a period of three years for ROGs, NOx, CO and PM10. However, air basins may use alternative emission reduction strategy that achieves a reduction of less than five percent per year under certain circumstances.

4.3.4.3 Regional Air Quality Management Planning

Currently, the NAAQS and CAAQS are exceeded in most parts of the SCAB. In

response, the SCAQMD has adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans

(AQMPs) formulated to achieve state and federal ambient air quality standards.

AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce emissions, reflect

growth and development, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution

control on the economy. Project consistency with the AQMP is discussed subsequently

within this Section.



4.3.5 REGIONAL AIR QUALITY TRENDS

SCAQMD is the agency responsible for regulating stationary air pollution sources

within the Basin.2 To these ends, SCAQMD develops comprehensive plans and

regulatory programs for the region in order to attain federal air quality standards by

dates specified under federal law. SCAQMD responsibilities also include attainment of

state air quality standards at the earliest achievable date, employing reasonably

available control measures.

SCAQMD rule development through the 1970s and 1980s realized substantial

improvement in Basin air quality. Subsequent SCAQMD pollution prevention and

control programs developed during the 1990s relied on: (i) development and

application of cleaner technologies; (ii) add-on emission controls; and (iii) uniform

CEQA review throughout the Basin. Industrial-source air pollutant emissions within

the Basin have been significantly reduced through this approach. Additionally, Basin-

wide vehicular-source emissions have been reduced by technologies implemented at

the state level by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

4.3.5.1 Criteria Pollutants Reduced Basin-wide

Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) prepared and periodically updated by

SCAQMD establish air quality attainment targets and related strategies intended to

achieve federal and state air quality standards. The Basin’s historical improvement in

air quality since the 1970s is the direct result of the comprehensive, multi-year air

pollution reduction strategies outlined in the AQMP(s), and by utilizing uniform CEQA

review throughout the Basin. Under the AQMPs, Ozone, NOx, VOC, and CO emissions

within the Basin have demonstrably decreased since 1975, with continuing substantive

decreases anticipated through 2020.

2 Separately, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulates mobile-source air pollutants within the Basin.



Diminished air pollutant emissions within the Basin are primarily the result of

replacement of older vehicles with newer more fuel-efficient and/or alternative fuel

vehicles; and increasingly effective motor vehicle emissions controls, including

evaporative emissions controls. Because of the mandated controls on motor vehicles

and the replacement of older polluting vehicles, although vehicle miles traveled in the

Basin continue to increase, NOx and VOC levels continue to decrease. NOx emissions

resulting from electric power generation have also decreased, largely due to use of

cleaner fuels and renewable energy. Relative decreases in ambient levels of Ozone,

particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and CO are also evident Basin-wide. Ozone air

quality in the SCAB has improved substantially over historic conditions. For example:

• During the 1960s, maximum 1-hour concentrations exceeded 0.60 ppm.

Currently, maximum measured concentrations approximate 0.20 ppm or less;

• The 2007 peak 8-hour indicator value for Ozone was 42 percent lower than the

1988 value;

• The 2008 three-year average of the maximum 8-hour concentration for Ozone

was over 41 percent lower than in 1990; and

• The number of days that the Basin Ozone levels exceeded state and federal

standards has also declined dramatically.

Trends for particulate matter emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) also show an overall

improvement when compared to historic conditions. Direct emissions of PM10 have

remained somewhat constant in the Basin and direct emissions of PM2.5 have decreased

slightly since 1975. Area-wide sources (fugitive dust from roads, dust from construction

and demolition, and other sources) contribute the greatest amount of direct particulate

matter emissions. Despite the overall decrease, ambient concentrations still exceed the

State annual and 24-hour PM10 standards; and the Basin is also currently designated as

nonattainment under the State and national PM2.5 standards. Measures adopted under

the Basin PM2.5 State Implementation Plan (SIP), as well as programs to reduce ozone

and diesel particulate matter (DPM) will help in reducing regional ambient PM2.5 levels.



CO concentrations in the Basin have also decreased markedly when compared to past

conditions — evidenced by more than 72 percent in the peak 8-hour CO indicator since

1988. The number of CO exceedance days has also declined. During 1988 there were 73

days above the State standard and 65 days above the national standard. However, since

2003, there were no exceedance days for either standard. The Basin in its entirety 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.

4.3.6 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE As identified within the CEQA Guidelines, air quality impacts would be considered potentially significant if the Project would:

• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;

• Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or

projected air quality violation;

• Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for

which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state

ambient air quality standard, including releasing emissions which exceed

quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors;

• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or

• Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

4.3.6.1 SCAQMD Thresholds

The SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds (Revision: March 2015)3

indicate that projects in the SCAB with emissions exceeding applicable SCAQMD

thresholds would be considered as having individually and cumulatively significant air

quality impacts. Conversely, air quality impacts for projects not exceeding applicable

emissions thresholds would be considered individually and cumulatively less-than-

3 “SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” South Coast Air Quality Management District. South Coast Air Quality Management District, n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.



significant. While the final determination of significance thresholds is within the

purview of the lead agency pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, the SCAQMD

recommends that its regional and local air quality thresholds for regulated pollutants

(summarized below) be employed by lead agencies in determining whether criteria air

pollutant emissions impacts generated by construction or operations of a given project

are significant.

Regional Thresholds

SCAQMD regional significance thresholds for maximum daily emissions of regulated

pollutants are listed at Table 4.3-4. Project emissions exceeding these thresholds would

be considered potentially significant.

Table 4.3-4

Maximum Daily Emissions-Regional Thresholds

Pollutant Construction-source Operational-source NOx 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day

VOC 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day

PM10 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day

PM2.5 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day

SOx 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day

CO 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day

Lead 3 lbs/day 3 lbs/day

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

Carbon Monoxide Concentrations (CO “hot spots”) Thresholds

CO “hot spots” are areas of carbon monoxide concentrations exceeding national or state

air quality standards. CO hotspots typically occur as a result of excessive vehicular

idling, often associated with traffic backups at underperforming intersections or

congested roadway links. SCAQMD also recommends an evaluation of potential

localized CO “hot spot” impacts for projects which may adversely affect, or

substantially contribute to, level of service impacts along area roadway segments or at

area intersections.



Pursuant to SCAQMD thresholds, a project’s localized CO emissions impacts would be

potentially significant if they exceed the following California standards for localized CO

concentrations:

• 1-hour CO standard of 20.0 parts per million (ppm);

• 8-hour CO standard of 9.0 ppm.

Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs)

LSTs represent the maximum localized emissions concentrations that would not cause

or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable national or state ambient

air quality standard (NAAQS or CAAQS) at the nearest residence or sensitive receptor.

LSTs apply to carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter less

than 10 microns (PM10), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5). The

SCAQMD states that the Lead Agency may, at the Agency’s discretion, employ LSTs as

another indicator of significance in air quality impact analyses.



The following discussions focus on areas where it has been determined that the Project

may result in potentially significant air quality impacts, pursuant to comments received

through the NOP process, and based on the analysis presented within this Section and

included within the EIR Initial Study. All CEQA checklist considerations addressing air

quality were determined to have potentially significant impacts warranting further

analysis, and are discussed below.


Following is an analysis of potential air quality impacts that are expected to occur as a

result of the Project. Potential emissions are considered for Project construction and

operation. For each topical discussion, potential impacts are evaluated under applicable

criteria established above at Section 4.3.6, Standards of Significance.



Potential Impact: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Impact Analysis: The Project site is located within the SCAB, which is characterized by

relatively poor air quality in the context of NAAQS and CAAQS. The SCAQMD has

jurisdiction over an approximately 12,000-square-mile area consisting of the four-

county Basin and the Los Angeles County and Riverside County portions of what used

to be referred to as the Southeast Desert Air Basin. In these areas, the SCAQMD is

principally responsible for air pollution control, and works directly with the SCAG,

county transportation commissions, and local governments, as well as state and federal

agencies to control and reduce Basin air pollutant emissions.

Currently, NAAQS and CAAQS are exceeded in most parts of the Basin. In response,

the SCAQMD has developed and adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans

(AQMPs) outlining strategies to achieve state and national ambient air quality

standards. AQMPs are periodically updated to reflect technological advances, recognize

new or pending regulations, more effectively reduce emissions, accommodate growth,

and minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the economy.

AQMP Consistency

The SCAQMD AQMP, last updated in 2012, incorporates the latest scientific and

technical information and planning assumptions; updated emission inventory

methodologies for various emissions source categories; and reflects information, plans,

and programs presented in the SCAG 2012 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable

Communities Strategy (2012 RTP). Air quality conditions and trends presented in the

2012 AQMP assume that regional development will occur in accordance with

population growth projections identified by SCAG in its 2012 RTP.

The SCAG 2012 RTP in turn derives its assumptions, in part, from general plans of cities

located within the SCAG region. Accordingly, if a project is consistent with the

development and growth projections reflected in the adopted general plan, it is

considered consistent with the growth assumptions in the 2012 AQMP. The 2012 AQMP



further assumes that development projects within the region will implement

appropriate strategies to reduce air pollutant emissions, thereby promoting timely

implementation of the AQMP.

Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are identified at Chapter 12,

Section 12.2 and Section 12.3 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993), as

listed below. Project consistency with, and support of these criteria is presented

subsequently.

• Criterion No. 1: The project under consideration will not result in an increase in

the frequency or severity of existing NAAQS/CAAQS air quality violations or

cause or contribute to new NAAQS/CAAQS violations; or delay the timely

attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified

in the AQMP. • Criterion No. 2: The project under consideration will not exceed the assumptions

in the AQMP in 2011 or increments based on the years of Project build-out phase.

Project Consistency with Criterion No. 1

The CAAQS and NAAQS comprise, and are reflected in, the SCAQMD Localized

Significance Thresholds (LSTs) described within this Section.4 As discussed

subsequently in this Section, the Project LST analysis substantiates that Project

construction-source emissions and operational-source emissions would not exceed

applicable LSTs, and therefore would not violate NAAQS or CAAQS. Further, the

Project would implement applicable best available control measures (BACMs), and

4 The CAAQS and NAAQS are not equivalent to SCAQMD regional emissions thresholds. The first AQMP consistency criterion specifically inquires whether or not a project would “result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations . . .” The only way to effectively answer this question is to determine if the NAAQS or CAAQS are exceeded – both of which are concentration-based thresholds, as opposed to the regional burden emissions “pounds per day” thresholds established by the SCAQMD. Regarding the latter, the SCAQMD employs regional thresholds to allow for and establish uniform mitigation requirements for all projects. However, evaluating whether a project would generate emissions exceeding SCAQMD regional thresholds does not answer the first criterion question since these regional thresholds are not tied back to the CAAQS/NAAQS.



would comply with applicable SCAQMD rules, acting to further reduce its already less-

than-significant air pollutant emissions. Moreover, the Project’s urban location

proximate to local and regional transportation facilities acts to reduce vehicle miles

traveled (VMT) and associated mobile-source (vehicular) emissions. Additionally,

Project incorporation of contemporary energy-efficiency/energy conservation

technologies and operational programs; and compliance with SCAQMD emissions

reductions and control requirements act to reduce stationary-source air emissions.

These Project attributes and features are consistent with and support AQMP air

pollution reduction strategies and promote timely attainment of AQMP air quality

standards. On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project is determined to be

consistent with the first criterion.

Project Consistency with Criterion No. 2

Criterion No. 2 addresses consistency (or inconsistency) of a given project with

approved local and regional land use plans, and associated potential AQMP

implications. That is, AQMP emissions models and emissions control strategies are

based in part on land use data provided by local general plan documentation; and

complementary regional plans, which reflect and incorporate local general plan

information. Projects that propose general plan amendments may increase the intensity

of use and/or result in higher traffic volumes, thereby resulting in increased stationary

area source emissions and/or vehicle source emissions when compared to the AQMP

assumptions. However, if a given project is consistent with and does not otherwise

exceed the growth projections in the applicable local general plan, then that project

would be considered consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP and would

not affect the AQMP’s regional emissions inventory for the Basin.

The Project does not propose or require any change in General Plan Land Use

designations, nor any increase in development intensity beyond that currently

anticipated for the subject site under the General Plan. The City of Pomona General Plan

Update, Corridors Specific Plan, ATP and Green Plan EIR, SCH No. 2012051025 (General

Plan EIR), substantiates that the implementation of the General Plan would not conflict

with the 2012 AQMP (General Plan EIR, p. 5 et al.). Because the land uses and



development intensities proposed by the Project are consistent with the currently

adopted City General Plan, the Project is considered to be in compliance with

Consistency Criterion No. 2.

AQMP Consistency Conclusion

The Project would not result in or cause NAAQS or CAAQS violations. The Project does

not propose or require any change in General Plan Land Use designations, nor any

increase in development intensity beyond that currently anticipated for the subject site

under the General Plan. The Project would not generate operational-source criteria

pollutant emissions not already reflected in the current AQMP regional emissions

inventory. Based on the preceding, the Project is considered to be consistent with the

AQMP. The potential for the Project to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the

applicable air quality plan is therefore considered less-than-significant.


Potential Impact: Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Impact Analysis: The latest SCAQMD/California Air Pollution Control Officers

Association (CAPCOA)-approved version of the California Emissions Estimator Model

(CalEEMod, v2013.2.2) was utilized to estimate Project-related air pollutant emissions

levels. Project emissions levels were then compared to applicable SCAQMD thresholds

in order to determine if air quality standards would be exceeded; or if Project emissions

would contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations. Unless

otherwise noted, CalEEMod default values and assumptions were applied throughout. REGIONAL IMPACTS Construction-Source Air Pollutant Emissions Project construction activities, listed below, would generate emissions of CO, VOCs, NOx, SOx, PM10, and PM2.5.



• Site Preparation; • Grading; • Building Construction; • Paving; and • Architectural Coating.

Within the Project construction-source emissions estimates, vehicular emissions generated by worker commutes and materials deliveries are also reflected. The approximate Project construction schedule is summarized at Table 4.3-5. Air pollutant emissions based on the construction schedule presented here represents a “worst-case” analysis scenario. That is, should construction occur any time after the dates presented here, incremental and aggregate construction-source emissions would likely decrease since emission factors for construction equipment would progressively decrease in the future. This is due to the natural turnover of the older vehicle fleet and replacement with more fuel efficient equipment with enhanced emissions controls; and implementation of more stringent regulations which collectively act to reduce construction-source (and operational-source) emissions.

Table 4.3-5 Project Construction Schedule

Activity Start Date End Date Number of Days Total

Site Preparation 06/01/2017 06/14/2017 10

Grading 06/15/2017 07/26/2017 30

Building Construction 07/27/2017 09/19/2018 300

Paving 09/20/2018 10/17/2018 20

Architectural Coating 10/18/2018 12/12/2018 40 Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

A summary of construction equipment use by activity is provided at Table 4.3-6. The

duration of construction activity and associated equipment use represents a reasonable

approximation of daily construction activities.



Table 4.3-6 Summary of Construction Equipment Use by Activity

Activity Equipment Type Equipment Pieces Hours per day

Site Preparation Crawler Tractors 4 8

Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8

Grading

Crawler Tractors 2 8 Excavators 2 8 Graders 1 8 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 Scrapers 2 8

Building Construction

Cranes 1 8

Forklifts 3 8

Generator Sets 1 8

Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8

Welders 1 8

Paving

Paving Equipment 2 8 Rollers 2 8 Pavers 2 8

Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 8 Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

Modeled maximum daily construction-source air quality impacts reflecting the above information is summarized at Table 4.3-7.

Table 4.3-7 Maximum Daily Construction-Source Air Pollutant Emissions Summary

Without Mitigation (pounds per day)

Year Pollutant

VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5

2017 8.03 85.57 73.55 0.08 23.62 13.18

2018 215.52 33.06 40.96 0.08 4.81 2.45

Maximum Daily Emissions 215.52 85.57 73.55 0.08 23.62 13.18

SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55

Threshold Exceeded? YES NO NO NO NO NO Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.



Level of Significance: Potentially Significant. As shown at Table 4.3-7, maximum daily

Project construction-source air pollutant emissions would exceed the applicable

SCAQMD regional threshold for VOC emissions. This is a potentially significant

impact. The VOC emissions levels stated at Table 4.3-7 do not, however, take credit for

pollutant emissions reductions achieved through implementation of Best Available

Control Measures (BACMs); or reductions achieved through standard regulatory

requirements (e.g., SCAQMD Rule 403). To ensure their timely implementation and

monitored compliance, application of standard BACMs and mandated SCAQMD rule

compliance are restated as construction-source air quality impact mitigation measures

presented below.

Mitigation Measures: 4.3.1 The following requirements shall be incorporated into Project plans and specifications in

order to ensure implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403 and limit fugitive dust emissions: • All clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds

exceed 25 miles per hour; • The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and disturbed areas

within the Project site are watered at least three (3) times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in the mid-morning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day; and

• The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are limited to 15 miles per hour or less.

4.3.2 Only “Zero-Volatile Organic Compounds” paints (no more than 150 grams/liter of VOC) and/or High Pressure Low Volume (HPLV) applications consistent with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1113 shall be used.

Level of Significance after Mitigation: Less-Than-Significant. As indicated at Table 4.3-8, with application of proposed mitigation, Project construction-source air pollutant emissions would be reduced in aggregate; and Project VOC emissions would be reduced to levels that would be less-than-significant.



Table 4.3-8 Maximum Daily Construction-Source Air Pollutant Emissions Summary

With Mitigation (pounds per day)

Year Pollutant


2017 8.03 85.57 73.55 0.08 11.30 6.99

2018 43.56 33.06 40.96 0.08 4.81 2.45



Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

Operational-Source Air Pollutant Emissions

Project operational activities would generate emissions of VOC, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10,

and PM2.5. Operational air pollutant emissions would be expected from the following

primary sources:

• Mobile Sources

o Tailpipe emissions; and

o Fugitive dust related to vehicular travel.

• Stationary/Area Sources

o Combustion emissions associated with natural gas and electricity use;

o Landscape maintenance equipment;

o On-Site Equipment Operations;

o Emissions from consumer products; and

o Architectural coatings.

Each of these operational emissions sources are described in the following paragraphs,

and the estimated emissions from each source are summarized subsequently. Within

the following discussions, full Project buildout and occupancy under Opening Year

(2018) conditions are assumed.



Mobile Sources (vehicles) Vehicle Exhaust/Tailpipe Emissions Project-related operational air quality impacts derive predominantly from mobile

sources. In this regard, approximately 90 percent (by weight) of all Project operational-

source emissions would be generated by mobile sources (vehicles). Vehicle exhaust

impacts are dependent on both overall daily vehicle trip generation and the effect of the

Project on peak hour traffic volumes and traffic operations in the vicinity of the Project.

Vehicle trip characteristics available from the Project Traffic Impact Analysis (Project

TIA, EIR Appendix B) were employed in the Project AQIA.

Mobile-source vehicle tail pipe emissions cannot be materially controlled or mitigated

by the Lead Agency or the Project Applicant. Rather, these emissions sources are

regulated by CARB and USEPA. As summarized herein at Section 4.3.5, Regional Air

Quality Trends, as the result of CARB and USEPA actions, Basin-wide vehicular-source

emissions have been reduced dramatically over the past years and are expected to

further decline as clean vehicle and fuel technologies improve. Future CARB and

USEPA actions could be expected to have a positive effect on Project-related vehicular-

source emissions, resulting in incremental reductions in vehicular-source emissions

when compared to either the Project AQIA emissions estimates.

Fugitive Dust Related to Vehicular Travel

Project traffic would generate fugitive road dust emissions as well as particulate matter

resulting from tire wear.

Stationary/Area Sources

Combustion Emissions Associated with Natural Gas and Electricity

Criteria pollutants are emitted through the generation of electricity and the

consumption of natural gas. Because electrical generating facilities for the Project area

are located either outside the region; are separately evaluated under their own

environmental analyses; and/or are offset through the use of pollution credit, criteria



pollutant emissions from offsite generation of electricity have been excluded from the

analysis presented here.

Landscape Maintenance Emissions

Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion

and evaporation of unburned fuel. Typical Project landscape maintenance equipment

would include lawnmowers, shredders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and

hedge trimmers.

Consumer Products

Consumer products include, but are not limited to detergents, cleaning compounds,

polishes, personal care products, and lawn and garden products. Many of these

products contain organic compounds which, when released in the atmosphere, can

react to form ozone and other photochemically reactive pollutants.

Architectural Coatings

Over time, maintenance of Project facilities would require exterior application of

architectural coatings. Such facility maintenance would generate air pollutant emissions

resulting from the evaporation of solvents contained in paints, varnishes, primers, and

other surface coatings. Operational Emissions Summary Maximum daily Project operational-source air pollutant emissions are summarized at Table 4.3-9. Applicable SCAQMD regional significance thresholds are also indicated. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant. As indicated at Table 4.3-9, Project

operational-source emissions would not exceed applicable SCAQMD regional

thresholds, and would therefore be less-than-significant.



Table 4.3-9 Maximum Daily Operational-Source Air Pollutant Emissions Summary

Without Mitigation (pounds per day)

Land Use/Emissions Source Pollutants


Summer Scenario

Area Source 13.30 7.20E-04 0.08 1.00E-05 2.80E-04 2.80E-04

Energy Source 0.20 1.86 1.56 0.01 0.14 0.14

Mobile Source 9.76 25.51 104.33 0.27 18.25 5.13 Project Total Maximum Daily Emissions

23.26 27.37 105.97 0.28 18.39 5.27


Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO

Winter Scenario

Area Source 13.30 7.20E-04 0.08 1.00E-05 2.80E-04 2.80E-04

Energy Source 0.20 1.86 1.56 1.00E-02 0.14 0.14

Mobile Source 10.26 26.83 105.95 0.26 18.25 5.13 Project Total Maximum Daily Emissions

23.76 28.69 107.59 0.27 18.39 5.27


Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

LOCALIZED IMPACTS

Localized Significance Threshold (LST) Analysis

Localized air quality impacts would be potentially significant if exceedances of the

national and/or state ambient air quality standards (NAAQS/CAAQS) would occur.

Collectively, the NAAQS/CAAQS establish Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs).

LSTs were developed in response to the SCAQMD Governing Board’s Environmental

Justice Initiative I-4. More specifically, to address potential Environmental Justice

implications of localized air pollutant impacts, the SCAQMD adopted LSTs indicating

whether a project would cause or contribute to localized air quality impacts and thereby

cause or contribute to potential localized adverse health effects. LSTs apply to carbon



monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10),

and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5).

LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute

to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable national or state ambient air quality

standard at the nearest residence or sensitive receptor. Though not required, lead

agencies may employ LSTs as another indicator of air quality impact significance.

Significance of localized emissions impacts depends on whether ambient levels in the

vicinity of the project are above or below state standards. In the case of CO and NO2, if

ambient levels are below the standards, a project is considered to have a significant

impact if project emissions result in an exceedance of one or more of these standards.

For the nonattainment pollutants PM10 and PM2.5, background ambient concentrations

already exceed state and/or national standards. LSTs for PM10 and PM2.5 are therefore

based on SCAQMD Rules 403/1303 (construction-source/operational-source emissions

respectively) and are established as an allowable change in concentration. Background

concentrations are not germane.

Emissions Considered/Methodology

LSTs apply to carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter less

than 10 microns (PM10), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5). The Project

LST analysis incorporates, and is consistent with, protocols and procedures established

by the SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (Methodology)

(SCAQMD, June 2003). The SCAQMD Methodology clearly states that “off-site mobile

emissions from the Project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs.”

Therefore, for purposes of the LST analysis, only “on-site” emissions were considered.

Receptors Localized air quality impacts were evaluated at proximate receptor land uses.

Evaluated receptor land uses are described below and are identified at Figure 4.3-1.



Figure 4.3-1 Receptor Land Uses (Exhibit 3-A from Project AQIA)



• R1—Location R1, located approximately 1,038 feet west of the Project site,

represents the existing Country Park Villas multi-family residential community.

• R2—Location R2 represents the existing office buildings west of the Project site at

a distance of roughly 72 feet.

• R3—Location R3 represents the existing WinCo Foods store west of the Project

site at a distance of approximately 467 feet.

• R4—Location R4 represents the commercial land uses north of the Project site at

a distance of approximately 292 feet.

• R5—At a distance of approximately 951 feet, location R5 represents single-family

residential homes situated north of the Project site across Rio Rancho Road.

• R6—At a distance of approximately 389 feet, location R6 represents an existing

Walmart store north of the Project site.

• R7—At a distance of approximately 1,014 feet, location R7 represents single-

family residential homes situated west of the Project site adjacent to SR-71.

• R8—At a distance of approximately 213 feet, location R8 represents the existing

San Gabriel/Pomona Regional Center east of the Project site.

Construction-Source Emissions LST Analysis

Daily maximum acreage that would be disturbed during Project site preparation and

grading activities is estimated at 4 acres. The SCAQMD LST screening “look-up tables”

provide for estimation of maximum LST impacts for site disturbances of 5 acres or less,

and were employed in determining potential LST impacts associated with Project

construction activities. In summary, the SCAQMD look-up tables quantify maximum

daily emissions occurring at a development site that would not result in violation of

CAAQS or NAAQS at varying receptor distances. LST look-up table methodology as

applied to the Project construction activities is presented in greater detail at AQIA

Section 3.6, Localized Significance—Construction Activity. Results of the Project AQIA

Construction-Source Emissions LST Analysis are summarized at Table 4.3-10.




Table 4.3-10

Construction-Source LST Emissions Impacts Summary

On-Site Site Preparation Emissions Emissions (pounds per day)

NOx CO PM10 PM2.5

Maximum Daily Emissions 75.92 40.81 11.10 6.93

SCAQMD Localized Threshold 193 1,226 101 43

Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO

On-Site Grading Emissions Emissions (pounds per day)

NOx CO PM10 PM2.5

Maximum Daily Emissions 81.68 47.51 7.41 4.73


Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

Operational-Source Emissions LST Analysis The Project Operational-Source Emissions LST Analysis evaluates emissions generated

by all on-site stationary/area sources inclusive of on-site landscaping/maintenance

activities, facility energy consumption, and all on-site passenger car and truck travel.

Detailed operational-source localized emissions modeling information is presented in

the Project AQIA. Project operational-source localized emissions impacts are

summarized at Table 4.3-11. As indicated, Project maximum daily operational-source

emissions concentrations would not exceed applicable LSTs, and would therefore be

less-than-significant.




Table 4.3-11 Operational-Source

LST Emissions Impacts Summary

Emissions (pounds per day)

NOx CO PM10 PM2.5

Maximum Daily Emissions 3.20 6.94 1.05 3.97E-01


Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

CO “Hot Spot” Analysis

As discussed below, the Project would not result in potentially adverse localized CO

concentrations or “hot spots.” Adverse localized CO concentrations (“hot spots”) are

caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at congested intersections. In

response, vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly stringent in the last

twenty years. Currently, the allowable CO emissions standard in California is a

maximum of 3.4 grams/mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain

vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of

cleaner fuels, and implementation of increasingly sophisticated and efficient emissions

control technologies, CO concentrations in the Project vicinity have declined over time,

and have not violated applicable AAQS in the last three years of record.

A CO “hot spot” would occur if an exceedance of the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm

or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur. When the SCAQMD CEQA

Handbook was first prepared in 1993, the SCAB was designated nonattainment under

the California AAQS and National AAQS for CO. As identified in the 1992 Federal

Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan) and subsequently within the

SCAQMD’s 2003 AQMP, peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the SCAB were a

result of unusual meteorological and topographical conditions and not a result of

congestion at a particular intersection.



To establish a more accurate record of baseline CO concentrations affecting the SCAB, a

CO “hot spot” analysis was conducted in 2003 for four busy intersections in Los

Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon traffic periods. Peak hour traffic volumes

reflected in the 2003 Los Angeles CO hot spot analysis are presented at Table 4.3-12. The

2003 Los Angeles CO hot spot analysis did not predict any violation of CO standards

(please refer to Table 4.3-13). It can, therefore, be reasonably concluded that projects

(such as the proposed Project) that are not subject to the extremes in vehicle volumes

and vehicle congestion that was evidenced in the 2003 Los Angeles hot spot analysis

would similarly not result in CO hot spots.

As indicated at Table 4.3-14, with the exception of SR-71 NB Ramps & Rio Rancho Road,

none of the Project Study Area intersections would exceed traffic volumes and traffic

congestion reflected in the 2003 Los Angeles hot spot analysis; as with the Los Angeles

Study, the Project would similarly not create or result in CO hot spots. It is also noted

that even for the instance where the greatest Project peak hour traffic would exceed the

2003 Los Angeles hot spot study peak hour volumes, the Project would not result in or

cause a CO hot spot condition. More specifically, the peak hour intersection CO

concentrations reflected in the 2003 Los Angeles hot spot study include background CO

concentrations that comprise the predominance of the concentration values cited. For

example, the 2003 Study’s greatest 8-hr CO concentration (occurring at Long Beach-

Imperial) reflects a background 8-hr CO concentration of 7.7 ppm, with the remaining

0.7 ppm attributable to vehicle emissions.

Within the Project AQIA Study Area, the background 8-hr CO concentration is

estimated at 1.6 ppm (please refer to previous Table 4.3-2). Even assuming the Project

would generate twice the 0.7 ppm vehicle-source CO concentrations as that reflected in

the 2003 Los Angeles hot spot analysis, when added to the ambient CO condition in the

Project vicinity would yield a total 8-hr CO concentration of 3.0 ppm. Even under this

conservative scenario, Project vehicle-source CO concentrations in combination with

background conditions would not exceed the NAAQS/CAAQS CO 8-hr concentration

standard of 9.0 ppm, and would therefore be less-than-significant.



It is further noted that as the result of the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan

strategies and requirements, levels of all criteria pollutant (including CO) within the

Basin have steadily improved and are expected to continue to do so, further reducing

the potential for occurrence of CO hot spots.

Table 4.3-12 2003 Los Angeles Study-Hot Spot Model Results

Intersection Location Carbon Monoxide Concentrations (parts per million)

Morning 1-hour Afternoon 1-hour 8-hour

Wilshire-Veteran 4.6 3.5 3.7

Sunset-Highland 4.0 4.5 3.5

La Cienega-Century 3.7 3.1 5.2

Long Beach-Imperial 3.0 3.1 8.4 Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

Table 4.3-13 2003 Los Angeles Study-Peak Hour Intersection Traffic Volumes

Intersection Location Peak Traffic Volumes (vehicles per hour)

Eastbound (AM/PM)

Westbound (AM/PM)

Southbound (AM/PM)

Northbound (AM/PM)

Total (AM/PM)

Wilshire-Veteran 4,954/2,069 1,830/3,317 721/1,400 560/933 8,062/7,719

Sunset-Highland 1,417/1,764 1,342/1,540 2,304/1,832 1,551/2,238 6,614/5,374

La Cienega-Century 2,540/2,243 1,890/2,728 1,384/2,029 821/1,674 6,634/8,674

Long Beach-Imperial 1,217/2,020 1,760/1,400 479/944 756/1,150 4,212/5,514 Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.



Table 4.3-14 Project Peak Hour Intersection Traffic Volumes

Intersection Location Peak Traffic Volumes (vehicles per hour)

Eastbound (AM/PM)

Westbound (AM/PM)

Southbound (AM/PM)

Northbound (AM/PM)

Total (AM/PM)

Phillips Ranch Rd. - Rio Rancho Rd.

1,600/1,505 1,540/1,593 0/0 1,747/858 4,887/3,956

Phillips Ranch Rd. - SR-60 EB Ramps

2,504/1,055 1,475/1,442 769/1,032 0/0 4,748/3,529

SR-71 SB Ramps – Rio Rancho Rd.

0/0 576/665 1,248/2,078 2,073/2,286 3,897/5,029

SR-71 NB Ramps at Rio Rancho Rd.

1,979/1,209 0/0 1,203/1,895 1,885/2,166 5,067/5,270

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.


Potential Impact: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Impact Analysis: Sensitive receptors can include uses such as long-term health care

facilities, rehabilitation centers, and retirement homes. Residences, schools, playgrounds,

child care centers, and athletic facilities can also be considered as sensitive receptors. As

concluded in the above discussion of Localized Air Quality Impacts, the sensitive

receptors nearest the Project site would not be subject to emissions exceeding SCAQMD

LSTs. Nor would the Project create or result in localized CO hot spots.

Based on the preceding, the potential for the Project to expose sensitive receptors to

substantial pollutant concentrations is considered less-than-significant.




Potential Impact: Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

Impact Analysis: The potential for the Project to generate objectionable odors has also

been considered. Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include:

• Agricultural uses (livestock and farming)

• Wastewater treatment plants

• Food processing plants

• Chemical plants

• Composting operations

• Refineries

• Landfills

• Dairies

• Fiberglass molding facilities

Hotel/office land uses proposed by the Project are not considered potential sources of

objectionable odors. Notwithstanding, temporary, intermittent and transient odors may

be generated by Project construction activities (e.g., equipment exhaust, and application

of asphalt and architectural coatings). Additionally, temporary storage of municipal

solid waste would be a potential odor source occurring over the life of the Project.

Standard construction requirements would preclude or minimize odor impacts

resulting from construction activity. Project-generated refuse would be stored in

covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City of

Chino’s solid waste regulations, thereby precluding or minimizing odor impacts over

the life of the Project. The Project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD

Rule 402. Rule 402 acts to control generation of, and exposure to, nuisance air pollutants

including but not limited to odors.

As supported by the preceding discussion, the potential for the Project to create

objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people is considered less-than-

significant.




Potential Impact: Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria

pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or

state ambient air quality standard, including releasing emissions which exceed

quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors.

Impact Analysis: The Project area is designated as an extreme non-attainment area for

ozone; a serious non-attainment area for PM10; and a non-attainment area for PM2.5.

Germane to these regional non-attainment conditions, the Project-specific evaluation of

emissions presented in this Section substantiates that mitigated Project-source air

pollutants would not exceed NAAQS, CAAQS, SCAQMD Regional thresholds, or

SCAQMD LSTs. Project-source air pollutant emissions would therefore be less-than-

significant, and would not be cumulatively considerable. Please refer also to the

discussion of cumulative air quality impacts presented at EIR Section 5.0, Other CEQA

Considerations.


4.4 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE/

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 4.4-1

4.4 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Abstract This Section identifies and addresses potential global climate change (GCC)/greenhouse gas

(GHG) emissions impacts that may result from construction and implementation of the Project.

More specifically, the GHG emissions impacts analysis evaluates the potential for the Project to

cause or result in the following impacts:

• Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a

significant impact on the environment; or

• Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing

the emissions of greenhouse gases.

On the basis of the analysis presented in the Project GHG Analysis as summarized herein, the

Project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have

a significant impact on the environment; or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation

adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The Project’s potential

GCC/GHG emissions impacts are therefore determined to be less-than-significant.




4.4.1 INTRODUCTION Global Climate Change (GCC) is defined as the change in average meteorological conditions on the Earth with respect to temperature, precipitation, and storms. Scientific evidence suggests that GCC is the result of increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. Most scientists believe that recent increases in greenhouse gases resulting from human activity and industrialization have accelerated and amplified GCC effects. An individual development proposal, such as the Project considered herein, cannot

generate enough greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to effect a discernible change in

global climate. However, the Project may contribute to the global climate change

through its increment of greenhouse gases in combination with the cumulative increase

in GHGs from all other sources, which when taken together constitute potential

influences on global climate change. This Section summarizes the potential for the

Project GHG emissions to have a potentially significant environmental impact. Detailed

analysis of the Project’s potential GHG/GCC impacts is presented in Pomona Hyatt Place

+ Hyatt House Greenhouse Gas Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February

8, 2016 (Project GHG Analysis, EIR Appendix D).


4.4.2.1 Global Climate Change

Global Climate Change refers to the change in average meteorological conditions with

respect to temperature, wind patterns, precipitation and storms. Global temperatures

are regulated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases such as water vapor, CO2

(Carbon Dioxide), N2O (Nitrous Oxide), CH4 (Methane), hydrofluorocarbons,

perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. These particular gases are important due to

their residence time (duration) in the atmosphere, which ranges from 10 years to more

than 100 years. These gases allow solar radiation into the atmosphere, but prevent heat

from escaping, thus warming the atmosphere. GCC can occur naturally as it has in the

past with the previous ice ages. According to the California Air Resources Board




(CARB), the climate change that is currently in effect differs from previous climate

changes in both rate and magnitude (CARB, 2004, Technical Support document for Staff

Proposal Regarding Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles).

4.4.2.2 Greenhouse Gases

Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often referred to as greenhouse gases or

GHGs. Greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere by both natural and

anthropogenic (human) activity. Without the natural greenhouse gas effect, the average

temperature would be approximately 61̊ Fahrenheit (F) cooler than it is currently. The

accumulation of these gases in the atmosphere is considered to be the cause for the

observed increase in the Earth’s temperature.

Although California’s rate of growth of greenhouse gas emissions is slowing, the state is

still a substantial contributor. In 2004, the state is estimated to have produced 492

million gross metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions. For

the purposes of this analysis, Project-related emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and

nitrous oxide were evaluated because these gases are the primary contributors to global

climate change from development projects. Emissions from Project facilities and

stationary sources as well as emissions generated by Project-related vehicular traffic

were included in the evaluation of potential GHG emissions impacts.

Greenhouse gases exhibit varying global warming potentials (GWPs). GWP values

represent the potential of a gas to trap heat in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is

utilized as the baseline GWP reference gas, and thus has a GWP of 1. The atmospheric

lifetime and GWP of greenhouse gases typically generated by urban development, and

that would be generated by the Project, are summarized at Table 4.4-1.




Table 4.4-1 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes

Gas Atmospheric Lifetime

(years) Global Warming Potential

(100-year time horizon) Carbon Dioxide 50 - 200 1

Methane 12 (+/-3) 25

Nitrous Oxide 120 298

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Greenhouse Gas Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

The following discussions summarize and describe commonly occurring greenhouse

gases, their sources, and general characteristics. Water Vapor

Water vapor (H20) is the most abundant, important, and variable greenhouse gas in the

atmosphere. Water vapor is not considered a pollutant; in the atmosphere it maintains a

climate necessary for life. Changes in its concentration are primarily considered to be a

result of climate feedbacks related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a

direct result of industrialization. A climate feedback is an indirect, or secondary,

change, either positive or negative, that occurs within the climate system in response to

a forcing mechanism. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically

important to projecting future climate change.

As the temperature of the atmosphere rises, more water is evaporated from ground

storage (rivers, oceans, reservoirs, soil). Because the air is warmer, the relative humidity

can be higher (in essence, the air is able to ‘hold’ more water when it is warmer),

leading to more water vapor in the atmosphere. As a GHG, the higher concentration of

water vapor is then able to absorb more thermal indirect energy radiated from the

Earth, thus further warming the atmosphere. The warmer atmosphere can then hold

more water vapor and so on and so on. This is referred to as a “positive feedback loop.”

The extent to which this positive feedback loop will continue is unknown as there are

also dynamics that hold the positive feedback loop in check. For example, increased

atmospheric water vapor translates to increased cloud cover and increased reflection of




incoming solar radiation (thus diminishing potential radiant heating of the Earth’s

surface).

The main source of water vapor is evaporation from the oceans (approximately 85

percent). Other sources include: evaporation from other water bodies, sublimation

(change from solid to gas) from sea ice and snow, and transpiration from plant leaves.

Carbon Dioxide

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is an odorless and colorless GHG. Outdoor levels of carbon

dioxide are not high enough to result in negative health effects. Carbon dioxide is

emitted from natural and manmade sources. Natural sources include: the

decomposition of dead organic matter; respiration of bacteria, plants, animals and

fungus; evaporation from oceans; and volcanic outgassing. Anthropogenic sources

include: the burning of coal, oil, natural gas, and wood. Carbon dioxide is naturally

removed from the air by photosynthesis, dissolution into ocean water, transfer to soils

and ice caps, and chemical weathering of carbonate rocks.

Since the industrial revolution began in the mid-1700s, the sort of human activity that

increases GHG emissions has increased dramatically in scale and distribution. Data

from the past 50 years suggests a corollary increase in levels and concentrations. As an

example, prior to the industrial revolution, CO2 concentrations were fairly stable at 280

parts per million (ppm). Today, they are around 370 ppm, an increase of more than 30

percent. Left unchecked, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is

projected to increase to a minimum of 540 ppm by 2100 as a direct result of

anthropogenic sources.

Methane

Methane (CH4) is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, though its atmospheric

concentration is less than carbon dioxide and its lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10-

12 years), compared to other GHGs. No health effects are known to occur from

exposure to methane.




Methane has both natural and anthropogenic sources. It is released as part of the

biological processes in low oxygen environments, such as in swamplands or in rice

production (at the roots of the plants). Over the last 50 years, human activities such as

growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and mining coal have added to the

atmospheric concentration of methane. Other anthropocentric sources include fossil-

fuel combustion and biomass burning.

Nitrous Oxide

Nitrous oxide (N2O), also known as laughing gas, is a colorless greenhouse gas. Nitrous

oxide can cause dizziness, euphoria, and sometimes slight hallucinations. In small

doses, it is considered harmless. However, in some cases, heavy and extended use can

cause Olney’s Lesions (brain damage).

Concentrations of nitrous oxide also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial

revolution. In 1998, the global concentration was 314 parts per billion (ppb). Nitrous

oxide is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions

which occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen. In addition to agricultural sources, some

industrial processes (fossil fuel-fired power plants, nylon production, nitric acid

production, and vehicle emissions) also contribute to its atmospheric load. It is used as

an aerosol spray propellant, i.e., in whipped cream bottles. It is also used in potato chip

bags to keep chips fresh. It is used in rocket engines and in race cars. Nitrous oxide can

be transported into the stratosphere, be deposited on the Earth’s surface, and be

converted to other compounds by chemical reaction.

Chlorofluorocarbons

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen

atoms in methane or ethane (C2H6) with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms. CFCs are

nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble and chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the

level of air at the Earth’s surface).




CFCs have no natural source, but were first synthesized in 1928. They were used for

refrigerants, aerosol propellants and cleaning solvents. Due to the discovery that they

are able to destroy stratospheric ozone, a global effort to halt their production was

undertaken and was extremely successful, so much so that levels of the major CFCs are

now remaining steady or declining. However, their long atmospheric lifetimes mean

that some of the CFCs will remain in the atmosphere for over 100 years.

Hydrofluorocarbons

Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are synthetic, man-made chemicals that are used as a

substitute for CFCs. Out of all the greenhouse gases, they are one of three groups with

the highest global warming potential. The HFCs with the greatest measured

atmospheric abundances are (in order), HFC-23 (CHF3), HFC-134a (CF3CH2F), and HFC-

152a (CH3CHF2). Prior to 1990, the only significant emissions were of HFC-23. HFC-134a

emissions are increasing due to its use as a refrigerant. The U.S. EPA estimates that

concentrations of HFC-23 and HFC-134a are now about 10 parts per trillion (ppt) each;

and that concentrations of HFC-152a are about 1 ppt. No health effects are known to

result from exposure to HFCs, which are manmade for applications such as automobile

air conditioners and refrigerants.

Perfluorocarbons

Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) have stable molecular structures and do not break down

through chemical processes in the lower atmosphere. Not until the PFCs reach the

mesosphere, about 60 kilometers above Earth, do very high-energy ultraviolet rays from

the sun destroy them. Because of this, PFCs have very long lifetimes, between 10,000

and 50,000 years. Two common PFCs are tetrafluoromethane (CF4) and

hexafluoroethane (C2F6). The U.S. EPA estimates that concentrations of CF4 in the

atmosphere are over 70 ppt. The two main sources of PFCs are primary aluminum

production and semiconductor manufacture.




Sulfur Hexafluoride

Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic, nonflammable

gas. It also has the highest GWP of any gas evaluated (23,900). The U.S. EPA indicates

that concentrations in the 1990s were about 4 ppt. Sulfur hexafluoride is used for

insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment, in the magnesium

industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas for leak detection.

4.4.2.3 Greenhouse Gases Emissions Inventories

Global

Worldwide anthropogenic (man-made) GHG emissions are tracked by the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for industrialized nations (referred to as

Annex I) and developing nations (referred to as Non-Annex I). Man-made GHG

emissions data for Annex I nations are available through 2011. Global GHG emissions

are summarized at Table 4.4-2. As indicated, global emissions totaled approximately

25,285,543 gigagrams (Gg) Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e) for the Year 2011. The

GHG emissions in more recent years may differ from the inventories presented in Table

4.4-2; however, the data is representative of currently available inventory data.

National

Table 4.4-2 summarizes 2011 GHG emissions inventories by major source countries. As

indicated at Table 4.4-2, the United States was the number two producer of GHG

emissions in 2011. The primary greenhouse gas emitted by human activities in the

United States was CO2, representing approximately 83 percent of U.S. total greenhouse

gas emissions. Carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion accounted for approximately

78 percent of U.S. GHG emissions.1

1 Project GHG Analysis, p. 10.




Table 4.4-2 Global GHG Emissions by

Major GHG Source Countries-2011 Source Countries GHG Emissions (Gg CO2e)

China 10,975,500

United States 6,665,700

European Union (27 member countries) 4,544,224

Russian Federation 2,322,220

India 3,013,770

Japan 1,344,580

Total 28,865,994


State of California

CARB compiles GHG inventories for the State of California. CARB GHG inventory data

indicates that in 2013 (the most recent inventory of record) California GHG emissions

totaled approximately 459.3 Million Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent

(MMTCO2e).2 “In 2010, California accounted for 6.8 percent of all emissions in the

country [United States], and ranked second highest among the states with total

emissions of 453 MMTCO2e, only behind Texas with 763 MMTCO2e. From a per capita

standpoint, California has the 45th lowest emissions with 12.1 MMTCO2e /person in

2010.”3

City of Pomona

Year 2007 Baseline Community GHG emissions for the City of Pomona are estimated at

987,170 MTCO2e/year, as summarized at Table 4.4-3.

2 Cal EPA. “California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory - 2015 Edition.” California's Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory. Cal EPA, n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2015. 3 California Environmental Protection Agency. Air Resources Board. California’s Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory - 2014 Edition (May 2014), p. 28.




Table 4.4-3 City of Pomona

Year 2007 GHG Baseline Emissions Inventory Sector MTCO2e/year Percent of Total

Residential Energy 148,460 15%

Commercial/Industrial Energy 232,170 24%

Direct Access Electricity 25,540 3%

Street & Traffic Lighting 10,470 1%

Water and Wastewater 12,100 1%

On-Road Transportation 522,890 53%

Community-Generated Waste 32,880 3%

Off-Road Equipment 2,600 <1%

Total 987,170 100% Source: City of Pomona Green Plan, Table B-1.

Project Site Greenhouse Gas Emissions The Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped and is not a source of GHG

emissions.

4.4.2.4 Effects of Global Climate Change

Climate

Scenarios of Climate Change in California: An Overview (California Climate Change Center)

February 2006 (Climate Scenarios Report) is generally instructive about the potential

effects of Global Climate Change within California. The Climate Scenarios Report

employs a range of emissions scenarios developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change (IPCC) to project a series of potential “warming ranges” that may occur

in California during the 21st century: lower warming range (3.0-5.5°F); medium

warming range (5.5-8.0°F); and higher warming range (8.0-10.5°F). The Climate

Scenarios Report then presents an analysis of future climatic conditions in California

under each warming range, that while uncertain, are descriptive of potential impacts of

global climate change trends in California.




California Climate Adaptation Strategy (California Natural Resources Agency) August 5,

2009 (Climate Adaptation Strategy) presents a range of potential vulnerabilities arising

from climate change including: temperature extremes, sea level rise, wildfires, floods,

droughts, and altered precipitation patterns. The Climate Adaptation Strategy responds

to the Executive Order S-13-2008 requiring state agencies to develop strategic responses

to anticipated climate impacts.

The Climate Scenarios Report and Climate Adaptation Strategy indicate that substantial

temperature increases arising from increased GHG emissions could result in a broad

range of impacts to the people, economy, and environment of California. Impacts of

global climate change in California have the potential to include, but are not limited to,

the following.

Public Health

Higher temperatures may increase the frequency, duration, and intensity of conditions

conducive to air pollution formation. For example, days with weather conducive to

ozone formation could increase from 25 to 35 percent under the lower warming range

to 75 to 85 percent under the medium warming range. In addition, if global background

ozone levels increase as predicted in some scenarios, it may become impossible to meet

local air quality standards. Air quality could be further compromised by increases in

wildfires, which emit fine particulate matter that can travel long distances, depending

on wind conditions. The Climate Scenarios Report indicates that large wildfires could

become more frequent if GHG emissions are not significantly reduced.

In addition, under the higher warming range scenario, there could be up to 100 more

days per year with temperatures above 90°F in Los Angeles and 95°F in Sacramento by

2100. This is a large increase over historical patterns and approximately twice the

increase projected if temperatures remain within or below the lower warming range.

Rising temperatures could increase the risk of death from dehydration, heat

stroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress caused by extreme heat.




Water Resources

A network of man-made reservoirs and aqueducts captures and transports water

throughout the state. The current distribution system relies on Sierra Nevada snowpack

to supply water during the dry spring and summer months. Rising temperatures,

potentially compounded by decreases in precipitation, could severely reduce spring

snowpack, increasing the risk of summer water shortages.

If temperatures continue to increase, more precipitation could fall as rain instead of

snow, and the snow that does fall could melt earlier, reducing the Sierra Nevada spring

snowpack by as much as 70 to 90 percent. Under the lower warming range scenario,

snowpack losses could be only half as large as those possible if temperatures were to

rise to the higher warming range. How much snowpack could be lost depends in part

on future precipitation patterns, the projections for which remain uncertain. However,

even under the wetter climate projections, the loss of snowpack could pose challenges

to water managers and hamper hydropower generation. It could also adversely affect

winter tourism. Under the lower warming range, the ski season at lower elevations

could be reduced by as much as a month. If temperatures reach the higher warming

range and precipitation declines, there may be years with marginal insufficient snow for

skiing and snowboarding, as was evidenced for the period 2013‒2014.

The State’s water supplies are also at risk from rising sea levels. An influx of saltwater

could degrade California’s estuaries, wetlands, and groundwater aquifers. Saltwater

intrusion caused by rising sea levels is a major threat to the quality and reliability of

water within the southern edge of the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta – a major

source of fresh water for the state.

Agriculture

Increased temperatures could cause widespread changes to the agriculture industry

reducing the quantity and quality of agricultural products statewide. First, California

farmers could possibly lose as much as 25 percent of the water supply they need.

Although higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water-




use efficiency, California’s farmers could face greater water demand for crops and a less

reliable water supply as temperatures rise. Crop growth and development could

change, as could the intensity and frequency of pest and disease outbreaks. Rising

temperatures could aggravate O3 pollution, which makes plants more susceptible to

disease and pests and interferes with plant growth.

Plant growth tends to be slow at low temperatures, increasing with rising temperatures

up to a threshold. However, faster growth can result in less-than-optimal development

for many crops, so rising temperatures could worsen the quantity and quality of yield

for a number of California’s agricultural products. Products likely to be most affected

include wine grapes, fruits and nuts.

In addition, continued global climate change could shift the ranges of existing invasive

plants and weeds and alter competition patterns with native plants. Range expansion

could occur in many species while range contractions may be less likely in rapidly

evolving species with significant populations already established. Should range

contractions occur, new or different weed species could fill the emerging gaps.

Continued global climate change could alter the abundance and types of many pests,

lengthen pests’ breeding season, and increase pathogen growth rates.

Forests and Landscapes

Global climate change has the potential to intensify the current threat to forests and

landscapes by increasing the risk of wildfire and altering the distribution and character

of natural vegetation. If temperatures rise into the medium warming range, the risk of

large wildfires in California could increase by as much as 55 percent, which is almost

twice the increase expected if temperatures stay in the lower warming range. However,

since wildfire risk is determined by a combination of factors (e.g., precipitation, winds,

temperature, terrain, and vegetation) future risks would likely not be uniform

throughout the state.




Moreover, continued global climate change has the potential to alter natural ecosystems

and biological diversity within the state. For example, alpine and subalpine ecosystems

could decline by as much as 60 to 80 percent by the end of the century as a result of

increasing temperatures. The productivity of the state’s forests has the potential to

decrease as a result of global climate change.

Rising Sea Levels

Rising sea levels, more intense coastal storms, and warmer water temperatures could

increasingly threaten the state’s coastal regions. Under the higher warming range

scenario, sea level is anticipated to rise 22 to 35 inches by 2100. Increased sea level

elevations of this magnitude would inundate low-lying coastal areas with salt water,

accelerate coastal erosion, threaten vital levees and inland water systems, and disrupt

wetlands and natural habitats. Under the lower warming range scenario, sea level could

rise 12 to 14 inches.

4.4.2.5 GHG Health Effects

Health effects of greenhouse gases are summarized below.

Water Vapor There are no known direct health effects related to water vapor at this time. Water

vapor may however act as a transport mechanism for pollutants to enter the human

body.

Carbon Dioxide The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has determined that

high concentrations of carbon dioxide can result in health effects including: headaches,

dizziness, restlessness, difficulty breathing, sweating, increased heart rate, increased

cardiac output, increased blood pressure, coma, asphyxia, and/or convulsions. Current

concentrations of carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere are estimated at

approximately 370 ppm, while the actual reference exposure level (level at which

adverse health effects typically occur) is at exposure levels of 5,000 ppm averaged over




10 hours in a 40-hour workweek; and short-term reference exposure levels of 30,000

ppm averaged over a 15-minute period (NIOSH 2005).

Methane

Methane is extremely reactive with oxidizers, halogens, and other halogen-containing

compounds, may displace oxygen in an enclosed space and act as an asphyxiant

(Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA] 2003).

Nitrous Oxide

Nitrous Oxide is often referred to as laughing gas; it is a colorless greenhouse gas. The

health effects associated with exposure to elevated concentrations of nitrous oxide

include dizziness, euphoria, slight hallucinations, and in extreme cases of elevated

concentrations nitrous oxide can also cause brain damage (OSHA 1999).

Chlorofluorocarbons

CFCs are no longer being used; therefore, it is not likely that health effects would be

experienced. Nonetheless, in confined indoor locations, working with CFC-113 or other

CFCs is thought to result in death by cardiac arrhythmia (heart frequency too high or

too low) or asphyxiation.

Fluorinated Gases (HFCs, PFCs, SF6) High concentrations of fluorinated gases can also result in adverse health effects such as

asphyxiation, dizziness, headache, cardiovascular disease, cardiac disorders, and in

extreme cases, increased mortality (NIOSH 1989, 1997).

4.4.2.6 Regulatory Setting

2015 United Nations Paris Climate Change Conference

On December 12, 2015, 195 nations, including the United States and China, established a

strategy for combatting global climate change, targeted to effective by 2020. COP 21

participating nations agreed to a universal long-term goal of maintaining a global




temperature at 2°C (3.6°F) above pre-industrial levels. The COP 21 agreement also

encouraged individual participating nations to limit temperature increases to 1.5°C

(2.7°F) above pre-industrial levels. COP21 participants agreed further to initiate GHG

reduction strategies as soon as possible, recognizing that this process may be protracted

for developing nations. Subsequent GHG emissions reductions are to be achieved in

accordance to best available technological advances. Western Regional Climate Action Initiative (WCI)

The Western Regional Climate Action Initiative (WCI) is a partnership among seven

states, including California, and four Canadian provinces to implement a regional,

economy-wide cap-and-trade system to reduce global warming pollution. The WCI will

cap GHG emissions from the region’s electricity, industrial, and transportation sectors

with the goal to reduce the heat trapping emissions that cause global warming to 15%

below 2005 levels by 2020. When the WCI adopted this goal in 2007, it estimated that

this would require 2007 levels to be reduced worldwide between 50% and 85% by 2050.

California is working closely with the other states and provinces to design a regional

GHG reduction program that includes a cap-and-trade approach.

EPA Actions and the Clean Air Act

Coinciding the 2009 meeting in Copenhagen, on December 7, 2009, the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an Endangerment Finding under

Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, opening the door to federal regulation of

greenhouse gases. The Endangerment Finding notes that greenhouse gas emissions

threaten public health and welfare and are subject to regulation under the Clean Air

Act. Current EPA GHG emissions initiatives, plans, and standards can be accessed at:

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/EPAactivities/regulatory-initiatives.html

Vehicle Standards

Other regulations have been adopted to address vehicle standards including United

States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/EPAactivities/regulatory-initiatives.html




Administration (NHTSA) joint rulemaking for vehicle standards. Recent actions are

summarized below:

• USEPA and NHTSA have issued a Supplemental Notice of Intent announcing

plans to propose stringent, coordinated federal greenhouse gas and fuel

economy standards for model year 2017–2025 light-duty vehicles. The NHTSA

intends to set standards for model years 2022–2025 in a future rulemaking.

• USEPA and the NHTSA have established enhanced fuel economy and GHG

standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, which applies to vehicles from

model years 2014–2018.

• USEPA and the NHTSA have proposed enhanced fuel economy and GHG

standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles for model years 2018 and

beyond.

Energy Independence and Security Act

On December 19, 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA, Act)

was signed into law. Among other key measures, the Act promotes nation-wide GHG

emissions reductions from mobile and non-mobile sources.

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

Guidelines on GHG

Draft guidance prepared by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) addresses

consideration and evaluation of greenhouse gases and climate change within NEPA

analyses. The guidance recommends that proposed federal actions that are reasonably

expected to directly emit 25,000 metric tons of CO2e/year should prepare a quantitative

and qualitative NEPA analysis of direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions.




The draft guidance provides reporting tools and instructions on how to assess the

effects of climate change. The draft guidance does not apply to land and resource

management actions, nor does it propose to regulate greenhouse gases. Although CEQ

has not yet issued final guidance, various NEPA documents are beginning to

incorporate the approach recommended in the draft guidance.

California Title 24 Energy Standards

The California Energy Commission (CEC) first adopted Energy Efficiency Standards for

Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Energy Efficiency Standards, California Code

of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6) in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce

energy consumption in the state. Increased energy efficiency, and reduced consumption

of electricity, natural gas, and other fuels would result in fewer GHG emissions from

development projects subject to the Energy Efficiency Standards. The CEC’s most

recent, 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, took effect on January 1, 2014. The

2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Building

Abstract summarizes key attributes and anticipated environmental benefits of the 2013

Energy Efficiency Standards, as excerpted below:

The 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards focus on several key areas

to improve the energy efficiency of newly constructed buildings and

additions and alterations to existing buildings, and include requirements

that will enable both demand reductions during critical peak periods and

future solar electric and thermal system installations. The most significant

efficiency improvements to the residential Standards are proposed for

windows, envelope insulation and HVAC system testing. The most

significant efficiency improvements to the nonresidential Standards are

proposed for lighting controls, windows, unitary HVAC equipment and

building commissioning. New efficiency requirements for process loads

such as commercial refrigeration, data centers, kitchen exhaust systems

and compressed air systems are included in the nonresidential Standards.

The 2013 Standards include expanded criteria for acceptance testing of




mechanical and lighting systems, as well as new requirements for code

compliance data to be collected in a California Energy Commission-

managed repository.

The 2013 Standards also include updates to the energy efficiency divisions

of the California Green Building Code Standards (Title 24, Part 11). A set

of prerequisites has been established for both the residential and

nonresidential Reach Standards, which include efficiency measures that

should be installed in any building project striving to meet advanced

levels of energy efficiency. The residential Reach Standards have also been

updated to require additional energy efficiency or on-site renewable

electricity generation to meet a specific threshold of expected electricity

use. Both the residential and nonresidential Reach Standards include

requirements for additions and alterations to existing buildings.

Energy Commission staff estimates that the implementation of the 2013

Building Energy Efficiency Standards may reduce statewide annual

electricity consumption by approximately 613 gigawatt-hours per year,

electrical peak demand by 195 megawatts, and natural gas consumption

by 10 million therms per year. The potential effect of these energy savings

to air quality may be a net reduction in the emission of nitric oxide by

approximately 59 tons per year, sulfur oxides by 2.4 tons per year, carbon

monoxide by 41 tons per year and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns

in diameter by 10 tons per year. Additionally, Energy Commission staff

estimates that the implementation of the 2013 Standards may reduce

statewide carbon dioxide equivalent emissions by 215 thousand metric

tons per year (2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and

Nonresidential Building, Abstract).

The 2013 Energy Efficiency Standards also include updates to the energy efficiency

divisions of the California Green Building Code Standards, (CALGreen Code, Title 24,

Part 11). The stated purpose of the CALGreen Code is to “improve public health, safety




and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the

use of building concepts having a positive environmental impact and encouraging

sustainable construction practices in the following categories: (1) Planning and design;

(2) Energy efficiency; (3) Water efficiency and conservation; (4) Material conservation

and resource efficiency; and (5) Environmental air quality” (2013 CALGreen Code, p. 1).

The CALGreen Code is not intended to substitute or be identified as meeting the

certification requirements of any green building program that is not established and

adopted by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). The CBSC has

released the 2010 California Green Building Standards Code on its web site. Unless

otherwise noted in the regulation, all newly constructed buildings in California are

subject to the requirements of the CALGreen Code.

California Assembly Bill No. 1493 (AB 1493)

California Assembly Bill 1493 requires CARB to develop and adopt the nation’s first

greenhouse gas emission standards for automobiles. The Legislature declared in AB

1493 that global warming was a matter of increasing concern for public health and

environment in California; and stated that technological solutions to reduce greenhouse

gas emissions would stimulate the California economy and provide jobs.

To meet the requirements of AB 1493, CARB approved amendments to the California

Code of Regulations (CCR) adding GHG emission standards to California’s existing

motor vehicle emission standards in 2004. Amendments to CCR Title 13 Sections 1900

(CCR 13 1900) and 1961 (CCR 13 1961) and adoption of Section 1961.1 (CCR 13 1961.1)

require automobile manufacturers to meet fleet average GHG emission limits for all

passenger cars, light-duty trucks within various weight criteria, and medium-duty

passenger vehicle weight classes beginning with the 2009 model year. Emission limits

are further reduced each model year through 2016. Subsequent lawsuits filed against

CARB prevented enforcement of CCR 13 1900 and CCR 13 1961 as amended by AB 1493

and CCR 13 1961.1.




Litigation against CARB culminated in the USEPA and the U.S. Department of

Transportation adoption of a federal program to reduce greenhouse gases and improve

fuel economy from passenger vehicles in order to achieve greenhouse gas benefits

equivalent to, or greater than, benefits that would be realized pursuant to AB 1493

regulations. Additionally, the State of California committed to (1) revise its standards to

allow manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with the fleet-average GHG emission

standard by “pooling” California and specified State vehicle sales; (2) revise its

standards for 2012–2016 model year vehicles so that compliance with USEPA-adopted

GHG standards would also comply with California’s standards; and (3) revise its

standards, as necessary, to allow manufacturers to use emissions data from the federal

Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program to demonstrate compliance with the

AB 1493 regulations.

Executive Order S-3-05

Executive Order S-3-05 proclaims that California is vulnerable to the impacts of climate

change. It declares that increased temperatures could reduce the Sierra’s snowpack,

further exacerbate California’s air quality problems, and potentially cause a rise in sea

levels. To combat those concerns, the Executive Order established total greenhouse gas

emission targets. Specifically, emissions are to be reduced to the 1990 level by 2020, and

to 80 percent below the 1990 level by 2050. The Executive Order directed the Secretary

of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to coordinate a multi-

agency effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the target levels. The Secretary also

is required to submit biannual reports to the Governor and state Legislature describing:

(1) progress made toward reaching the emission targets; (2) impacts of global warming

on California’s resources; and (3) mitigation and adaptation plans to combat these

impacts. To comply with the Executive Order, the Secretary of the CalEPA created a

Climate Action Team (CAT) made up of members from various state agencies and

commission. CAT released its first report in March 2006. The report proposed to achieve

the targets by building on voluntary actions of California businesses, local government

and community actions, as well as through state incentive and regulatory programs.




Executive Order B-30-15

Executive Order B-30-15 (April 29, 2015) states a new statewide policy goal to reduce

GHG emissions 40 percent below their 1990 levels by 2030. As of this writing, the state

legislature has not enacted law, nor has or CARB adopted regulations or standards

implementing the Executive Order’s goal statements.

California Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32)

California Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Climate Solutions Act of 2006,

requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. To

date, this reduction is being accomplished through an enforceable phased statewide cap

on GHG emissions. To effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directs CARB to develop

and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions from stationary

sources. AB 32 indicates further that regulations adopted in response to AB 1493 should

address GHG emissions from vehicles. Assembly Bill 32 contingencies also include

provisions stating that if the AB 1493 regulations cannot be implemented, then CARB

should develop new regulations to control vehicle GHG emissions under the

authorization of AB 32.

AB 32 requires that CARB adopt a quantified cap on GHG emissions representing 1990

emissions levels and disclose how it arrives at the cap; institute a schedule to meet the

emissions cap; and develop tracking, reporting, and enforcement mechanisms to ensure

that the state achieves reductions in GHG emissions necessary to meet the cap. AB 32

also includes guidance to institute emissions reductions in an economically efficient

manner and conditions to ensure that businesses and consumers are not unfairly

affected by the reductions.

In November 2007, CARB completed its estimates of 1990 GHG levels. Net emission

1990 levels were estimated at 427 million metric tons CO2 equivalent (MMTCO2e).

Accordingly, 427 MMTCO2e was established as the emissions limit for 2020. In

comparison, CARB’s estimate for baseline GHG emissions was 473 MMTCO2e for 2000




and 532 MMTCO2e for 2010. “Business as usual” conditions (estimated GHG emissions

levels absent CARB regulatory actions) for 2020 were projected to be 596 MMTCO2e.

In December 2007, CARB approved a regulation for mandatory reporting and

verification of GHG emissions for major sources. This regulation covered major

stationary sources such as cement plants, oil refineries, electric generating

facilities/providers, and co-generation facilities, which comprise 94 percent of the point

source CO2 emissions in the State.

On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted a Scoping Plan (CARB Scoping Plan, Scoping

Plan) to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels. The Scoping Plan’s recommendations for

reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 include emission reduction measures,

including a cap-and-trade program linked to Western Climate Initiative partner

jurisdictions, green building strategies, recycling and waste-related measures, as well as

Voluntary Early Actions and Reductions. In order to achieve 2020 greenhouse gas

emissions reductions targets, the CARB Scoping Plan indicates that implementation of

individual measures should have been initiated no later than January 1, 2012. The

Project GHG Analysis (EIR Appendix E) summarizes estimated year 2020 GHG

emissions reductions from regulations and programs outlined in the Scoping Plan.

California Senate Bill No. 1368

In 2006, the State Legislature adopted Senate Bill 1368 (SB 1368), which was

subsequently signed into law by the Governor. SB 1368 directs the California Public

Utilities Commission (CPUC) to adopt a greenhouse gas emission performance

standard (EPS) for the future power purchases of California utilities. SB 1368 seeks to

limit carbon emissions associated with electrical energy consumed in California by

forbidding procurement arrangements for energy longer than five years from resources

that exceed the emissions of a relatively clean, combined cycle natural gas power plant.

Coal-fired plants cannot meet this standard because such plants emit roughly twice as

much carbon as combined cycle natural gas power plants.




SB 1368 effectively prevents California’s utilities from investing in, otherwise financially

supporting, or purchasing power from new coal plants located in or out of the State.

Thus, SB 1368 will lead to dramatically lower greenhouse gas emissions associated with

California energy demand.

CEQA Guidelines

CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4(a) states “A lead agency shall have discretion to determine,

in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) Use a model or methodology to

quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and which model or

methodology to use . . .; or (2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based

standards.”

CEQA emphasizes that the effects of greenhouse gas emissions are cumulative, and

should be analyzed in the context of CEQA’s requirements for cumulative impacts

analysis. (See: CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(f)).

Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines provides direction for lead agencies for

assessing the significance of impacts of greenhouse gas emissions:

1. The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting;

2. Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project; or

3. The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such regulations or requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must include specific requirements that reduce or mitigate the project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively




considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project.

City of Pomona Green Plan

The CARB Scoping Plan considers statewide GHG emissions, and indicates that AB 32

compliance would be achieved provided there is a minimum 28.5 percent reduction in

statewide Business As Usual GHG emissions for the timeframe 1990 to 2020.

The local responsibility identified in the Scoping Plan is equivalent to a 15 percent

reduction below Baseline emissions by 2020. Accordingly, within the City’s geographic

context, the City of Pomona Green Plan establishes a 15 percent reduction in Baseline

(2007) GHG emissions by 2020.4 Notwithstanding, CalEEMod 2013.2.2 (the currently

accepted SCAQMD/CARB GHG emissions modeling program) does not have an option

for a 2007 Baseline year, and would not allow for comparison with projected year 2020

GHG emissions. For analysis purposes then, a 2010 GHG emissions Baseline condition

as modeled under CalEEMod 2013.2.2 was employed. This methodology establishes a

conservative approach when compared to using a 2007 Baseline GHG emissions

condition. That is, 2010 Baseline GHG emissions would be reduced when compared to

2007 Baseline scenario. As such, any incremental reduction in year 2020 emissions when

compared to a 2010 Baseline would tend to be diminished when compared to

incremental reductions when compared to a 2007 Baseline condition. Project’s

consistency with GHG emissions reductions targets established under the City of

Pomona Green Plan is evaluated subsequently at Section 4.4.4, Impact Statements.

4 City of Pomona Green Plan, Appendix B–Energy Action Plan, pages 22, 42, 43, 56, et al.




4.4.3 GCC Significance Thresholds and Performance Standards CEQA Guidelines The CEQA Guidelines do not identify a threshold of significance for greenhouse gas emissions, nor do they prescribe assessment methodologies or specific mitigation measures. Rather, the Guidelines call for a “good-faith effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project” (CEQA Guidelines §15064.4 [a]). The Guidelines encourage lead agencies to consider many factors in performing a CEQA analysis and preserve lead agencies’ discretion to make their own determinations based upon substantial evidence. The Guidelines also encourage public agencies to make use of programmatic mitigation plans and programs from which to tier when they perform individual project analyses. CEQA Guidelines’ suggested Environmental Checklist GHG topical issues have been incorporated into the analytic discussions presented subsequently within this Section. Senate Bill 375 SB 375, signed in September 2008 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008), aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) or alternative planning strategy (APS) prescribing land use allocations in that MPO’s regional transportation plan (RTP). Under SB 375, CARB provides each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035. CARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO’s SCS or APS for consistency with its assigned GHG reduction targets. If MPOs do not meet their assigned GHG reduction targets, transportation projects will not be eligible for funding programmed after January 1, 2012.




Senate Bill 375 also extends the minimum time period for the regional housing needs allocation cycle from five years to eight years for local governments located within an MPO that meets certain requirements. City or county land use policies (including general plans) consistency with the regional transportation plan (and associated SCS or APS) is not required. However, new provisions of CEQA would incentivize (through streamlining and other provisions) qualified projects that are consistent with an approved SCS or APS, categorized as “transit priority projects.” The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is required by law to update the Southern California Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) every four years. On April 4, 2012, the Regional Council of the SCAG adopted: 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS): Towards a Sustainable Future. The RTP/SCS incorporates land use and housing policies to meet the greenhouse gas emissions targets established by the CARB. Project consistency with RTP/SCS Goals is presented at EIR Section 4.1, Land Use; Table 4.1-2, Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Consistency with SCAG Regional Goals. Executive Order B-30-15 Executive Order B-30-15 (April 29, 2015) identifies a new statewide policy goal to reduce GHG emissions 40 percent below their 1990 levels by 2030. As of this writing, the state legislature has not enacted law, nor has CARB adopted regulations or standards implementing the Executive Order’s goal statements; nor has the Lead Agency established any related significance thresholds. South Coast Air Quality Management District Recommendations In April 2008, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), in order to provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining the significance of GHG emissions identified in CEQA documents, convened a “GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group.” The goal of the working group is to develop and reach consensus on an acceptable CEQA significance threshold for GHG emissions that would be utilized on an interim basis until CARB (or some other state agency) develops statewide guidance on assessing the significance of GHG emissions under CEQA.




Initially, SCAQMD staff presented the Working Group with a significance threshold that could be applied to various types of projects—residential, non-residential, industrial, etc. However, the threshold is still under development. In December 2008, staff presented the SCAQMD Governing Board with a significance threshold for stationary source projects where it is the lead agency. This threshold uses a tiered approach to determine a project’s significance, with 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) as a screening numerical threshold for stationary sources. More importantly it should be noted that when setting the 10,000 MTCO2e threshold, the SCAQMD did not consider mobile sources (vehicular travel). Rather the threshold is applicable to stationary source generators such as boilers, refineries, power plants, etc. Therefore, it would be misleading to apply this threshold, developed without consideration for mobile sources, to a Project where the majority of emissions are related to mobile sources. Moreover, by its terms, the threshold applies only to projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency, and is therefore not germane to this analysis. In September 2010, the Working Group released additional revisions which recommended a threshold of 3,500 MTCO2e for residential projects, 1,400 MTCO2e for commercial projects, and 3,000 MTCO2e for mixed use projects. Additionally the working group identified a project-level efficiency target of 4.8 MTCO2e per service population as a 2020 target and 3.0 MTCO2e per service population as a 2035 target. The recommended plan-level target for 2020 was 6.6 MTCO2e and the plan level target for 2035 was 4.1 MTCO2e. The SCAQMD has not announced when staff is expecting to present a finalized version of these thresholds to the Governing Board; thus, these proposed thresholds are not applicable to the proposed project. The SCAQMD has also adopted Rules 2700, 2701, and 2702 that address GHG reductions; however, these rules are currently applicable to boilers and process heaters, forestry, and manure management projects, none of which are germane to the Project considered herein. To date, the SCAQMD and CARB have not established quantified GHG emissions significance thresholds for projects being evaluated under CEQA.





The CARB Scoping Plan considers statewide GHG emissions, and indicates that AB 32

compliance would be achieved provided there is a minimum 28.5 percent reduction in

statewide Business As Usual GHG emissions for the time frame 1990 to 2020.

The local responsibility identified in the Scoping Plan is equivalent to a 15 percent

reduction below Baseline emissions by 2020. Accordingly, within the City’s geographic

context, the City of Pomona Green Plan establishes a performance standard of a 15

percent reduction in Baseline GHG emissions by 2020.5

Project’s consistency with GHG emissions reductions targets established under the City

of Pomona Green Plan is evaluated subsequently at Section 4.4.4, Impact Statements. 4.4.4 IMPACT STATEMENTS Potential Impact: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Impact Analysis: California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Employed to Estimate GHG Emissions CEQA Guidelines 15064.4 (b) (1) states that a Lead Agency may employ a model or methodology of its choice to quantify greenhouse gas emissions associated with a project. The SCAQMD-approved California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod, Model) is accepted by the Lead Agency for modeling of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and was employed in the analysis of Project GHG emissions impacts. CalEEMod calculates air pollutant/GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources, and quantifies pollutant/GHG emissions reductions achieved from mitigation measures. The

5 City of Pomona Green Plan, Appendix B–Energy Action Plan, pages 22, 42, 43, 56, et al.




Model includes and evaluates GHG emissions from the following source categories: construction, area, energy, mobile, waste, water. Considerations applicable to each of these categories are addressed briefly in the following discussions. Construction-Source GHG Emissions Project construction activities would generate the GHG emissions of CO2 and CH4. Construction-source GHG emissions are quantified and amortized over the life of the Project. To this end, and consistent with SCAQMD-recommended methodology, greenhouse gas emissions generated by Project construction activities were totaled and then divided by 30, reflecting an assumed 30-year Project life. Operational-Source GHG Emissions Project operational-source GHG emissions sources (described below) would include: area sources; building energy use; water supply, treatment and distribution (water use); solid waste management; and mobile-sources (vehicular) energy consumption. Area Sources Area sources would include generalized activities and equipment operations associated with landscape and building maintenance. These area sources would generate GHG emissions over the life of the Project. Building Energy Use Building energy use includes localized and remote fuel consumption necessary to support Project lighting, and climate control of buildings and supporting facilities. Combustion of any type of fuel emits CO2 and other GHG emissions. Unless otherwise noted, CalEEMod default parameters were employed in estimating GHG emissions generated by building energy use. Water Supply, Treatment and Distribution (Water Use) GHG emissions result from the production of electricity used to convey, treat and distribute water and wastewater. The amount of electricity required to convey, treat and distribute water is determined by the volume of water used, as well as the sources




of the water. Unless otherwise noted, CalEEMod default parameters were employed in estimating GHG emissions generated by water supply, treatment and distribution activities and processes. Solid Waste Management The Project land uses would result in the generation of, and requirements for disposal of, municipal solid waste. Solid waste not diverted or recycled would be disposed of at area landfills. GHG emissions would be generated by anaerobic breakdown of solid waste within receiving landfills. Unless otherwise noted, CalEEMod default parameters were employed in estimating GHG emissions generated by solid waste management activities and processes. Mobile-Source Emissions GHG emissions would also be generated by Project traffic (mobile sources). These mobile-source emissions would result from daily operation of motor vehicles by patrons and employees accessing the Project site. Project mobile-source emissions are dependent on overall daily vehicle trip generation and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Trip characteristics available from the Project Traffic Impact Analysis (EIR Appendix C) were utilized in this analysis. Project GHG Emissions Less-Than-Significant in Context of CARB Scoping Plan and Pomona Green Plan GHG Emission Reduction Targets

The CARB Scoping Plan BAU Scenario and City of Pomona Baseline GHG Scenario

evaluated herein reflect development of the Project site absent design features,

operational programs, mitigation measures, and state requirements established by AB

32 which would collectively act to reduce GHG emissions.

The CARB Scoping Plan considers statewide GHG emissions, and indicates that

statewide AB 32 compliance would be achieved provided there is a minimum 28.5




percent reduction in statewide Business As Usual GHG emissions, when considering

the time frame 1990 to 2020.

The local responsibility identified in the AB 32 Scoping Plan is equivalent to a 15

percent reduction below Baseline emissions by 2020. Accordingly, within the City’s

geographic context, the City Green Plan establishes a 15 percent reduction in Baseline

GHG emissions by 2020.

Project GHG emissions levels that are consistent with the above-noted CARB Scoping

Plan and City GHG Baseline emissions reductions targets would be considered

compliant with AB 32, and potential Project GHG emissions/Global; Climate Change

impacts would be considered less-than-significant.

Annual GHG emissions that would be generated by the Project pursuant to the CARB

BAU scenario assumption and under the City Baseline assumption would total 5,431.27

MTCO2e and 5,092.49 MTCO2e, respectively, as presented at Table 4.4-4.

Table 4.4-4

CARB Scoping Plan Business as Usual; City of Pomona Green Plan Baseline

Project Annual GHG Emissions Summaries CARB Scoping Plan

Emission Source Emissions (CO2E-metric tons per year)

Construction-source emissions; annual, amortized over 30 years

38.75

Area Sources 0.02

Energy Consumption 1,584.46

Mobile Sources 3,606.96

Solid Waste Management 81.54

Water Use 119.54

Total CO2E-Metric Tons Per Year (All Sources)

5,431.27




Table 4.4-4 CARB Scoping Plan Business as Usual;

City of Pomona Green Plan Baseline Project Annual GHG Emissions Summaries


Emission Source Emissions (CO2E-metric tons per year)

Construction-source emissions; annual, amortized over 30 years 38.75 Area Sources 0.02 Energy Consumption 1,503.42 Mobile Sources 3,349.22 Solid Waste Management 81.54 Water Use 119.54 Total CO2E-Metric Tons Per Year (All Sources) 5,092.49 Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Greenhouse Gas Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016. Notes: Modeling results may not total 100% due to rounding. Scientific notation (e-3) expresses exponential quantities.

Project Scenario Annual Project GHG emissions are summarized at Table 4.4-5, and are compared to CARB BAU Scenario GHG emissions and City Baseline GHG emissions. Project GHG emissions reflect City Green Plan and Municipal Code compliance, State-implemented GHG emissions reductions measures, and Project attributes that would collectively act to reduce GHG emissions (e.g., urban infill proximate to available transportation systems; contemporary energy-efficient building designs and construction practices; energy conserving operational programs).

Table 4.4-5 Project Annual GHG Emissions Summary

Emission Source Emissions (CO2E-Metric Tons Per Year)

Construction-source emissions; annual, amortized over 30 years 38.75

Area Sources 0.02

Energy Consumption 1,103.03

Mobile Sources 2,377.63




Table 4.4-5 Project Annual GHG Emissions Summary

Emission Source Emissions (CO2E-Metric Tons Per Year)

Solid Waste Management 81.54

Water Use 78.31

Total CO2E-Metric Tons Per Year (All Sources) 3,679.28

CARB BAU Scenario Total CO2E (All Sources)

5,431.27

Project Difference/Percent Reduction (1,751.99)/32.26% City Green Plan Baseline Total CO2E

(All Sources) 5,092.49

Project Difference/Percent Reduction (1,413.21)/27.75%

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Greenhouse Gas Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016. Notes: Modeling results may not total 100% due to rounding. Scientific notation (e-3) expresses exponential quantities.

As indicated at Table 4.4-5, Project GHG emissions would be reduced by approximately 32.2 percent when compared to the CARB BAU scenario, and by an estimated 27.75 percent when compared to City Baseline conditions. This is consistent with statewide GHG emissions reduction target of 28.5 percent established under AB 32; and the City’s local responsibility of 15 percent reduction in Baseline GHG emissions by the year 2020 as established under the City Green Plan. Project compliance with AB 32 GHG emissions reduction targets; and with the City’s local responsibility for reductions in Baseline GHG emissions supports the conclusion that Project GHG emissions would not, directly or indirectly have a significant impact on the environment. Project GHG Emissions Less-Than-Significant in Context of CEQA Guidelines

GHG/GCC Significance Factors

The following discussions support the conclusion that the Project’s GHG emissions

impacts are less-than-significant based on CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4(b) GHG/GCC

Significance Factors.

FACTOR NO. 1: The extent to which the Project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas

emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting.




Year 2007 Baseline Community GHG emissions for the City of Pomona are estimated at

987,170 MTCO2e/year, as summarized at previous Table 4.4-3. The Project site is currently

vacant and is not a substantive source of GHG emissions.

The Project would incorporate energy-efficient/energy-conserving Project design

features that would reduce GHG emissions consistent with provisions of the City of

Pomona Green Plan. The Project energy efficiency and sustainability features and

operational programs are consistent with GHG reduction strategies developed by

groups and public agencies, such as CARB, California Air Pollution Control Officers

Association (CAPCOA) and the California Attorney General Office. More specifically,

the Project incorporates and expresses the following design features and attributes

promoting energy efficiency and sustainability:


o Sidewalks would be constructed along the Project’s Rancho Camino Drive

street frontage providing pedestrian connection to other uses within the Plaza. Sidewalks would also be constructed within the Project site connecting the various uses and activity centers. Facilitating pedestrian access encourages people to walk instead of drive. The Project would not impose barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity.



within the Project site would be required to implement a Water Conservation Strategy and demonstrate a minimum 20% reduction in indoor water usage




when compared to baseline water demand (total expected water demand without implementation of the Water Conservation Strategy).6 Development proposals within the Project site would also be required to implement the following: o Landscaping palette emphasizing drought-tolerant plants consistent with




Energy efficient designs and sustainability attributes of the Project summarized above

would reduce operational-source air pollutant emissions collectively, including GHG

emissions. When compared to existing conditions, the Project would not substantively

increase GHG emissions because the Project comports with GHG emissions control and

reduction requirements of the City Green Plan, as well as emissions reductions

strategies and targets identified by CARB, CAPCOA, and the California Attorney

General Office.

FACTOR NO.2: Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead

agency determines applies to the project.





Project GHG emissions would not exceed a threshold of significance that the Lead

Agency determines applies to the Project. To the contrary, the Project is consistent with

the City of Pomona Green Plan. Furthermore, the Project is consistent with the

numerous regulations that are being adopted pursuant to AB 32 and others. The Project

therefore supports and would not conflict with AB 32. As addressed directly above,

development of the Project includes energy efficient and sustainable design features

and operational programs which comply with GHG emissions reduction measures

articulated in the City of Pomona Green Plan and that would support attainment of the

state’s GHG emissions reductions targets. On this basis, Project GHG emissions would

not exceed a threshold of significance established by the City of Pomona, the Lead

Agency.

FACTOR NO.3: The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements

adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of

greenhouse gas emissions. Such requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency

through a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project's incremental

contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects

of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable, notwithstanding compliance with the

adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project.

The City of Pomona has adopted a Green Plan regulating the emission of greenhouse

gases. As discussed herein, the Project is consistent and complies with the City of

Pomona Green Plan. Project consistency with the City of Pomona Green Plan also

demonstrates consistency with, and support of, applicable state AB 32 GHG emissions

reductions targets. On this basis, the Project complies with regulations or requirements

adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or

mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.

Summary and Conclusions The analysis demonstrates that the Project is consistent with, and would not otherwise conflict with, recommended measures and actions in the CARB Scoping Plan; and




specifically that the Project complies with GHG emissions reductions targets and strategies established under the CARB Scoping Plan, AB 32, and reflected in the City of Pomona Green Plan. The Project is further determined to be in concert with AB 32 and international efforts to address global climate change and would reflect specific local requirements of the City of Pomona Green Plan that would substantially lessen cumulative GHG emissions impacts. The proposed Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project would therefore also fulfill the description of mitigation found in CEQA Guidelines §15130(a) (3) and §15183.5. The Project’s incremental contribution to GHG emissions impacts would therefore not be cumulatively considerable. The preceding discussions substantiate further that the Project complies with the regulations or requirements adopted to implement all applicable plans for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and support the conclusion that the Project’s GHG emissions impacts are less-than-significant based on CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4(b) GHG/GCC Significance Factors. As supported by the preceding discussions, the potential for the Project to generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment is considered less-than-significant. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant. Potential Impact: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the

purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

As substantiated in the preceding discussions, the Project is consistent with and

supports AB 32 and the CARB Scoping Plan, and is consistent with the City of Pomona

Green Plan. In this latter regard, the Project would comply with all state and local GHG

emissions reduction policies and mandates reflected in the Green Plan. The Project also

incorporates certain design and operational energy efficiency and sustainability




measures that would act to reduce Project GHG emissions (please refer to Project

Description, Section 3.5.10 Energy Efficiency/Sustainability).

As also demonstrated herein, the Project would comply with GHG emissions reduction

targets established under the CARB Scoping Plan, AB 32, and reflected in the City of

Pomona Green Plan. At present, there are no other applicable plans, policies or

regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the Project’s GHG emissions.

Based on the preceding, the Project would be consistent with and would support to

applicable plans, policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the

emissions of greenhouse gases. The potential for the Project to conflict with an

applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions

of greenhouse gases is therefore considered less-than-significant.


4.5 NOISE

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Noise Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 4.5-1

4.5 NOISE

Abstract

This Section assesses whether the Project would substantially increase ambient noise levels, or otherwise expose land uses to noise or groundborne vibration levels exceeding established standards. In this regard, this Section evaluates whether the Project would result in or cause:

• Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in

the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. This

impact would occur if the Project would create or result in noise exposure at receiving

occupied land uses exceeding standards established by the City or other applicable

jurisdictions; and/or if Project employees or patrons were exposed to adverse noise levels.

• A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project

vicinity above levels existing without the Project. This condition would occur if the

Project temporarily or periodically increases noise levels at receiving occupied land uses

in excess of, and for durations longer than, are allowed under applicable City standards.

• A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above

levels existing without the Project.

For vehicular source noise, this impact will occur if:

- The ambient CNEL is below the applicable land use/noise compatibility guidelines of

the Pomona General Plan, and the Project increases the ambient CNEL above

applicable guidelines; or



- The Project increases the CNEL at any receptor by an audible amount (3.0 dB or

more) when the ambient CNEL is equal to or in excess of applicable guidelines.

For stationary operational/area source noise, this impact will occur if:

- The ambient noise condition is below the applicable exterior noise standards defined

in the City of Pomona Code of Ordinances, and noise generated by the Project

increases the ambient noise conditions above applicable standards; or

- Project noise increases ambient noise levels by an audible amount (3.0 dB or more)

when existing conditions exceed ambient standards.

• Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne

noise levels.

As presented in the following analyses, all potential noise impacts of the Project are determined to be less-than-significant or can be reduced to less-than-significant levels through the implementation of mitigation.



4.5.1 INTRODUCTION This Section presents the noise setting, methodology, standards of significance, and potential noise impacts associated with the Project. Where impacts are determined to be potentially significant, mitigation measures are proposed to avoid or reduce the severity of impacts. The information presented herein has been summarized from the Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016 (Project Noise Impact Analysis). The Noise Impact Analysis in its entirety is presented at EIR Appendix E. 4.5.2 SETTING Following are discussions of noise and vibration fundamentals applicable to the Project. Existing ambient noise levels and noise sources in the Project vicinity are also identified. 4.5.2.1 Fundamentals of Noise Noise has been simply defined as “unwanted sound.” Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm or when it has adverse effects on health. Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). A-weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the human ear. Figure 4.5-1 presents a summary of the typical noise levels and their subjective loudness and effects. Range of Noise Since the range of intensities that the human ear can detect is so large, the scale frequently used to measure intensity is a scale based on multiples of 10, the logarithmic scale. The scale for measuring intensity is the decibel scale. Each interval of 10 decibels indicates a sound energy ten times greater than before, which is perceived by the human ear as being roughly twice as loud. The most common sounds vary between 40 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Normal conversation at three feet is roughly measured at 60 dBA, while loud jet engine noises equate to 110 dBA at approximately 100 feet, which can cause serious discomfort.



INSERT FIG 4.5-1 Typical Noise Levels & Their Effects



Noise Descriptors Environmental noise descriptors are generally based on averages, rather than instantaneous noise levels. The most commonly used figure is the equivalent level (Leq). Equivalent sound levels are not measured directly but are calculated from sound pressure levels typically measured in A-weighted decibels (dBA). The equivalent sound level (Leq) represents a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. To describe the time-varying character of environmental noise, the City of Pomona relies on statistical noise descriptors, such as L25, L8, and L2, which are commonly used. These are the noise levels equaled or exceeded during twenty-five percent, eight percent, and two percent of a stated time, respectively. Sound levels associated with the L8 and L2 levels typically describe transient or short-term events, while sound associated with the L25 level describes the steady state (or median) noise conditions. The City of Pomona Code of Ordinances relies on these percent noise levels to describe stationary source noise level impacts. Peak hour or average noise levels, while useful, do not completely describe a given noise environment. Noise levels lower than peak hour may be disturbing if they occur during times when quiet is most desirable, namely evening and nighttime (sleeping) hours. To account for this, the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), representing a composite twenty-four hour noise level is utilized. The CNEL is the weighted average of the intensity of a sound, with corrections for time of day, and averaged over 24 hours. The time of day corrections require the addition of 5 decibels to dBA Leq sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and the addition of 10 decibels to dBA Leq sound levels at night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. These additions are made to account for the noise sensitive time periods during the evening and night hours when sound appears louder. CNEL does not represent the actual sound level heard at any particular time, but rather represents the total sound exposure. Harmful Effects of Noise

Noise can cause temporary physical and psychological responses in humans.

Temporary physical reactions to passing noises range from a startle reflex to

constriction in peripheral blood vessels, the secretion of saliva and gastric juices, and



changes in heart rate, breathing patterns, the chemical composition of the blood and

urine, dilation of pupils in the eye, visual acuity and equilibrium. The chronic

recurrence of these physical reactions has been shown to cause fatigue, digestive

disorders, heart disease, circulatory and equilibrium disorders. Moreover, noise is a

causal factor in stress-related ailments such as ulcers, high blood pressure and anxiety.

Three harmful effects of noise which are commonly of concern include the prevention

or interruption of sleep, speech interference, and hearing loss. Interruption of sleep can

occur from low level of noise in the range of 35 to 45 dBA. Speech interference begins to

occur at about 40 to 45 dBA and becomes severe at about 60 dBA. Hearing loss can

occur from prolonged exposure to noise levels of 75 dBA or greater.

4.5.2.2 Sound Propagation When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The manner in which noise reduces with distance depends on the following factors. Geometric Spreading Sound from a localized source (i.e., a stationary point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates (or decreases) approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a point source. Highways consist of several localized noise sources on a defined path and hence can be treated as a line source, which approximates the effect of several point sources. Noise from a line source propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate approximately 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source. Ground Absorption The propagation path of noise from a highway to a receptor is usually very close to the ground. Noise attenuation from ground absorption and reflective wave canceling adds to the attenuation associated with geometric spreading. Traditionally, the excess attenuation has also been expressed in terms of attenuation per doubling of distance. This approximation is usually sufficiently accurate for distances of less than 200 feet.



For acoustically hard sites (i.e., sites with a reflective surface between the source and the receptor, such as a parking lot or body of water), no excess ground attenuation is assumed. For acoustically absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground surface between the source and the receptor such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an excess ground attenuation value of approximately 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When added to the cylindrical spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in noise attenuation of approximately 4.5 dB per doubling of distance from a line source. Atmospheric Effects Receptors located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to calm conditions, whereas locations upwind can experience comparatively decreased noise levels. Additionally, received noise levels can be increased due to atmospheric temperature inversion (i.e., increasing temperature with elevation). Other factors such as air temperature, humidity, and turbulence can also substantively affect received noise levels. Shielding by Natural or Human-Made Features A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receptor can substantially attenuate noise levels at the receptor. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of the object and the frequency content of the noise source. Shielding by trees and other such vegetation typically has an “out of sight, out of mind” effect. That is, the perception of noise impact tends to decrease when vegetation blocks the line-of-sight to nearby residents. However, for vegetation to provide a noticeable noise reduction, the vegetation area must be at least 15 feet in height, 100 feet wide and dense enough to completely obstruct the line-of-sight between the source and the receiver. This size of vegetation may provide up to 5 dBA of noise reduction. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) does not consider the planting of vegetation to be a noise abatement measure.



4.5.2.3 Traffic Noise Prediction According to the Highway Traffic Noise Assessment and Abatement Policy and Guidance, provided by the FHWA, the level of traffic noise depends on three primary factors: (1) the volume of the traffic, (2) the speed of the traffic, and (3) the vehicle mix within the flow of traffic. Generally, the loudness of traffic noise is increased by heavier traffic volumes, higher speeds, and a greater number of trucks. A doubling of the traffic volume, assuming that the speed and vehicle mix do not substantively change, results in a noise level increase of approximately 3.0 dBA. The vehicle mix on a given roadway may also have an effect on community noise levels. As the number of medium and heavy trucks increases and becomes a larger percentage of the vehicle mix, adjacent noise level impacts will increase. Vehicle noise is a combination of the noise produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires on the roadway. 4.5.2.4 Noise Barrier Attenuation

Effective noise barriers can reduce noise levels by 10 to 15 dBA. A noise barrier is most

effective when placed close to the noise source or receptor. Noise barriers, however, do

have limitations. For a noise barrier to be effective, it must be high enough and long

enough to block the view of the noise source. 4.5.2.5 Vibration

Vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. The rumbling sound caused

by the vibration of room surfaces is termed structure borne noise. Sources of

groundborne vibrations include natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic

eruptions, sea waves, landslides) or man-made causes (e.g., explosions, machinery,

traffic, trains, construction equipment). Vibration sources may be continuous, such as

factory machinery, or transient, such as explosions. In an urban environment, vibration

impacts are generally associated with activities such as train operations, construction

operations, and heavy truck movements.

As is the case with airborne sound, groundborne vibrations may be described by

amplitude and frequency. However, unlike sound measurements; there is no standard

way of measuring and reporting amplitude. Vibration may be expressed in terms of



peak particle velocity (PPV) in inches per second (in/sec). Although PPV is appropriate

for evaluating the potential for building damage, it is not always suitable for evaluating

human response (annoyance). It takes some time for the human body to respond to

vibration signals. In a sense, the human body responds to average vibration amplitude.

The root mean square (RMS) of a signal is the average of the squared amplitude of the

signal, typically calculated over a one-second period. As with airborne sound, the RMS

velocity is often expressed in decibel notation as vibration decibels (VdB), which serves

to compress the range of numbers required to describe human response to vibration.

The background vibration-velocity level in residential areas is generally 50 VdB.

Groundborne vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For

most people, a vibration-velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line

between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels. The range of interest or

potential concern regarding received vibration levels is from approximately 50 VdB,

which is the typical background vibration-velocity level, to 100 VdB, which is the

general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings.

Construction activities can generate groundborne vibrations, which can pose a risk to

nearby structures. Constant or transient vibrations can weaken structures, crack

facades, and disturb occupants. Construction vibrations can be transient, random, or

continuous. Transient construction vibration sources include blasting, impact pile

driving, and wrecking balls. Random vibration can result from jackhammers, pavement

breakers, and heavy construction equipment. Continuous vibration may result from

vibratory pile drivers, large pumps, horizontal directional drilling, and compressors.

4.5.2.6 Land Use Compatibility with Noise

Certain land uses or occupancy types are more sensitive to noise than are others. For

example, schools, hospitals, churches and residences are more sensitive to noise

intrusion than are commercial or industrial activities. As ambient noise levels affect the

perceived amenity or livability of a development, so too can the mismanagement of

noise impacts impair the economic health and growth potential of a community by

reducing the area’s desirability as a place to live, shop, and work. For this reason, land



use compatibility with the noise environment is an important consideration in the

planning and design process.

4.5.2.7 Sensitive Receptors

Land uses classified as noise-sensitive by the State of California include: schools,

hospitals, rest homes, long-term care centers, and mental care facilities. Some

jurisdictions also consider day care centers, single-family dwellings, mobile home parks,

churches, libraries, and recreation areas to be noise-sensitive. Moderately noise-

sensitive land uses typically include: multi-family dwellings, hotels, motels,

dormitories, out-patient clinics, cemeteries, golf courses, country clubs, athletic/tennis

clubs, and equestrian clubs.

Land uses which are considered less sensitive to noise include business, commercial,

and professional developments. Land uses that are typically not affected by noise

include: industrial, manufacturing, utilities, agriculture, natural open space,

undeveloped land, parking lots, warehousing, liquid and solid waste facilities, salvage

yards, and transit terminals.

This study considers likely maximum potential noise impacts at proximate sensitive

noise receptors. As identified at Figure 4.5-2, sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the

Project site include the single-family residential uses located northeasterly and

northwesterly of the site, and multi-family residential uses located to the west.



Figure 4.5-2 Sensitive Receptors



4.5.2.8 Current Noise Exposure

Noise Monitoring

To describe and document the existing noise environment, four 24-hour noise level

measurements were taken within the Project study area. The noise level measurement

locations are described below and illustrated at Figure 4.5-3.

• Location L1 represents the noise levels northwest of the Project site along Rio

Rancho Road, adjacent to an existing barrier for residential homes.

• Location L2 represents the noise levels within the Project site along Rancho

Camino Drive, near existing office and commercial uses.

• Location L3 represents the noise levels along Rancho Camino Drive near the

entrance to the San Gabriel/Pomona Regional Center.

• Located west of the Project site, location L4 represents the noise levels within the

existing Country Park Villas multi-family residential community on Country

Mile Road.

Table 4.5-1 provides the (energy average) noise levels used to describe the daytime (7:00

a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) ambient conditions. These

daytime and nighttime energy average noise levels represent the average of all hourly

noise levels observed during these time periods expressed as a single number. The

noise measurements presented below focus on the average or equivalent sound levels.

The equivalent sound level (Leq) represents a steady state sound level containing the

same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. Table 4.5-1 also

shows the median noise level (dBA L50) at each of the noise level measurement locations

to reflect the City of Pomona percentile noise level standards.



Figure 4.5-3 Ambient Noise Measurement Locations



Table 4.5-1 24-Hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements

Location Distance to

Project Site

Energy Average Hourly

Noise Level (dBA Leq)

Average Median Noise

Level (dBA L50) CNEL

Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime

L1 925’ 61.2 62.1 56.5 57.8 68.6

L2 0’ 55.6 53.9 51.4 51.9 60.9

L3 65’ 57.3 61.2 54.5 59.9 67.4

L4 925’ 63.0 59.4 61.7 58.1 67.1 Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016.

4.5.3 EXISTING POLICIES AND REGULATIONS

To limit population exposure to physically and/or psychologically damaging as well as

intrusive noise levels, the federal government, the State of California, various county

governments, and most municipalities in the state have established standards and

ordinances to control noise. In most areas, automobile and truck traffic is the major

source of environmental noise. Traffic activity generally produces an average sound

level that remains fairly constant with time. Air and rail traffic, and commercial and

industrial activities are also major sources of noise in some areas. Federal, state, and

local agencies regulate different aspects of environmental noise. Federal and state

agencies generally set noise standards for mobile sources such as aircraft and motor

vehicles, while regulation of stationary sources is left to local agencies.

4.5.3.1 State of California

Noise Requirements

The State of California regulates freeway noise, sets standards for sound transmission,

provides occupational noise control criteria, identifies noise standards and provides

noise/land use compatibility guidance. State law requires that each county and city

adopt a General Plan that includes a Noise Element which is to be prepared according

to guidelines adopted by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. The purpose

of the Noise Element is to “limit the exposure of the community to excessive noise

levels.” In addition, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all



known environmental effects of a project be analyzed, including environmental noise

impacts.

California Building Code

The State of California’s noise insulation standards are codified in the California Code

of Regulations, Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Part 2, and the

California Building Code. These noise standards are applied to new construction in

California for the purpose of controlling interior noise levels resulting from exterior

noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when

noise-sensitive structures, such as residential buildings, schools, or hospitals, are located

near major transportation noise sources, and where such noise sources create an exterior

noise level of 60 dBA CNEL or more. Acoustical studies that accompany building plans

must demonstrate that the structure has been designed to limit interior noise in

habitable rooms to acceptable noise levels. For new residential buildings, schools, and

hospitals, the acceptable interior noise limit for new construction is 45 dBA CNEL.

California Green Building Standards Code

The 2014 State of California’s Green Building Standards Code contains mandatory

measures for non-residential building construction in Section 5.506 on Environmental

Comfort. These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for the

purpose of controlling interior noise levels resulting from exterior noise sources. The

regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when non-residential

structures are developed in areas where the exterior noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL,

such as within a noise contour of an airport, freeway, railroad, and other areas where

noise contours are not readily available. If the development falls within an airport or

freeway 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, the combined sound transmission class (STC)

rating of the wall and roof-ceiling assemblies must be at least 50. For those

developments in areas where noise contours are not readily available and the noise

level exceeds 65 dBA Leq for any hour of operation, a wall and roof-ceiling combined

STC rating of 45, and exterior windows with a minimum STC rating of 40 are required

(Section 5.507.4.1).



4.5.3.2 City of Pomona Noise Standards The City of Pomona has adopted a Noise & Safety Element of the General Plan to ensure compliance with state requirements and promote a comprehensive, long range program of achieving acceptable noise levels throughout the City. The Noise & Safety Element identifies the greatest sources of transportation noise in the City of Pomona such as arterial roads, freeways, airports and railroads. In addition, the Noise & Safety Element establishes guidelines for Community Noise Exposure to determine the acceptable noise level for a variety of land uses. Land Use Compatibility The noise criteria identified in the City of Pomona Noise & Safety Element are guidelines to evaluate the land use compatibility of transportation-related noise. The compatibility criteria provides the City with a planning tool to gauge the compatibility of land uses relative to existing and future exterior noise levels. The Community Noise Exposure Matrix describes categories of compatibility and not specific noise standards. Single-family residential land uses in the Project study area are considered normally acceptable with unmitigated exterior noise levels of less than 60 dBA CNEL. Conditionally acceptable single-family land uses experience unmitigated exterior noise levels approaching 70 dBA CNEL. For transient lodging land use such as the Project’s hotel use, exterior noise levels of up to 65 dBA CNEL are considered normally acceptable, and up to 70 dBA CNEL are considered conditionally acceptable. The Project’s conference facilities are considered auditoriums in relation to the Community Noise Exposure matrix, and are considered conditionally acceptable with noise levels approaching 70 dBA CNEL. Office building land uses within the Project site are considered normally acceptable with exterior noise levels of up to 70 dBA CNEL, and exterior noise levels approaching 75 dBA CNEL are considered conditionally acceptable. For conditionally acceptable exterior noise levels, new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.



Transportation Noise Standards

The City of Pomona General Plan, Chapter 8 Implementation – Goals & Policies,

includes policies related to the noise-sensitive residential land uses within the City. For

noise-sensitive land uses, such as residential and educational facilities, Policy 7G.P2

requires the use of 65 dBA CNEL as the standard for determining potential noise

impacts at future noise-sensitive developments. Based on the 65 dBA CNEL noise level

standard, this analysis evaluates the potential Project-related off-site traffic noise level

increases at noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to study area roadway segments.

Operational/Area-Source Noise Standards

To analyze noise impacts originating from a designated fixed location or private

property such as the Project site, stationary/area-source noise (operational) that may

include roof-top air conditioning units, and parking lot/parking structure vehicle

movements are typically evaluated against standards established under a City’s

Municipal Code. Section 18-310 of the Municipal Code designates five noise zones for

different types of land uses, as follows:

• Noise Zone 1 – Single Family Residential Properties;

• Noise Zone 2 – Multiple-Family Residential Properties;

• Noise Zone 3 – Commercial Properties;

• Noise Zone 4 – Industrial Properties; and

• Noise Zone 5 – High Traffic Corridors.

Section 18-311 of the Municipal Code establishes maximum allowable exterior noise

levels for each Noise Zone. Nearby noise-sensitive land uses consist of the single-family

residential uses across Rio Rancho Road, east of the Project site across SR-71 and the

multi-family residential community located southwest of the Project site. Commercial

and office building land uses within the Pomona Ranch Plaza are adjacent to the Project

site to the north, east, and west. As such, the exterior noise standards presented at

Table 4.5-2 focus on Noise Zones 1, 2, and 3.



The base noise standards shall apply for a cumulative period of 30 minutes in any hour,

as well as plus 5 dBA cannot be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than 15

minutes in any hour, or the standard plus 10 dBA for a cumulative period of more than

5 minutes in any hour, or the standard plus 15 dBA for a cumulative period of more

than 1 minute in any hour, or the standard plus 20 dBA for any period of time.

Table 4.5-2 Operational/Area-Source Exterior Noise Standards

Land Use (Zone)

Maximum Duration

Period

Percentile Noise Level

Noise Level Adjustments Above Base

Exterior Noise Standard

Exterior Noise Level Standards (dBA)

Daytime Nighttime

Single-Family Residential

(Zone 1)

> 30 Minutes L50 +0 60 50

15 Minutes L25 +5 65 55

5 Minutes L8 +10 70 60

1 Minutes L2 +15 75 65

Not Permitted Lmax +20 80 70

Multi-Family Residential

(Zone 2)

> 30 Minutes L50 +0 65 50

15 Minutes L25 +5 70 55

5 Minutes L8 +10 75 60

1 Minutes L2 +15 80 65

Not Permitted Lmax +20 85 70

Commercial (Zone 3)

> 30 Minutes L50 +0 65 60

15 Minutes L25 +5 70 65

5 Minutes L8 +10 75 70

1 Minutes L2 +15 80 75

Not Permitted Lmax +20 85 80 Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016.

Construction Noise Standards

To analyze noise impacts originating from the construction of the Project, noise from

construction activities are typically limited to the hours of operation established under a

City’s Municipal Code. The Municipal Code noise standards for construction are

summarized at Table 4.5-3.



Table 4.5-3 Construction Noise Standards

Jurisdiction Permitted Hours of Construction Activity

Construction Noise Level

Standard

Acceptable Thresholds For

Determining Significance

dBA Leq dBA Lmax

City of Pomona

7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays; no activity allowed

on Sundays or federal holidays.

65 dBA at Residential Land Uses

65 85

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016.

The City of Pomona Municipal Code, Section 18-305(3) establishes the permitted hours during which construction within the City of Pomona may take place, between 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays. In addition, Section 18-305(3) indicates that the noise levels due to construction activity may not exceed 65 dBA plus the limits identified in Section 18-311(b), at any residential property. No exterior construction noise level standards are identified for the commercial land uses in the Project study area. For the purposes of this analysis, the construction noise level limit of 65 dBA is evaluated using the energy average hourly dBA Leq noise level to describe the typical construction activity at the Project site. Further, the anytime noise level limit (20 dBA increase over the base noise level standard) of 85 dBA Lmax is used to evaluate the maximum noise levels generated during Project construction. Construction Vibration Standards To analyze the vibration impacts originating from the construction of the Project, vibration from construction activities are typically evaluated against standards established under a City’s Municipal Code. The Municipal Code vibration standards for construction are summarized in Table 4.5-4.

Table 4.5-4 Construction Vibration Standard

Jurisdiction Root-Mean-Square (RMS) Velocity Standard (in/sec)

City of Pomona 0.05 Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016.




Based on the noise criteria presented in Section 4.5.3, and direction provided within the

CEQA Guidelines as implemented by the City of Pomona, Project noise impacts would

be considered potentially significant if the Project results in or causes the following

conditions:

• Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards

established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards

of other agencies;

• Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or

ground-borne noise levels.

• A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity

above existing levels without the proposed Project.

• A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the

Project vicinity above noise levels existing without the proposed Project.



expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels.

• For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose people residing or

working in the Project area to excessive noise levels.

The Project noise impact significance criteria are discussed below.



Threshold Consideration: Potential to expose persons to, or generate, noise levels in

excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or

applicable standards of other agencies.

Project Stationary/Area-Source Noise Exceeding City Standards Would be

Considered Potentially Significant. The City of Pomona Municipal Code Section 18-

311 establishes the acceptable noise levels that can be generated by stationary/area noise

sources as received at off-site land uses within the City of Pomona. Project

stationary/area noise that would cause or result in noise levels exceeding those levels

would therefore be potentially significant.

The City of Pomona has set restrictions to control noise impacts associated with

construction activities throughout the City. Section 18-305(3) of the City’s Noise

Ordinance indicates that the permitted hours during which construction within the City

of Pomona may take place are between 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and

Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and Holidays.

In addition, Section 18-305(3) indicates that the noise levels due to construction activity

may not exceed 65 dBA, plus the limits identified in section 18-311(b), at any residential

property. No exterior construction noise level standards are identified for the

commercial land uses in the Project study area. For the purposes of this analysis, the

construction noise level limit of 65 dBA is evaluated using the energy average hourly

dBA Leq noise level to describe the typical construction activity at the Project site.

Further, the anytime noise level limit (20 dBA increase over the base noise level

standard) of 85 dBA Lmax is used to evaluate the maximum noise levels generated

during Project construction. Project construction stationary/area-source noise that

would cause or result in noise levels exceeding 65 dBA Leq and/or 85 dBA Lmax would

potentially expose persons to noise levels in excess of standards established as the

acceptable threshold for determining the relative significance of Project construction

noise levels, and would therefore be potentially significant.



Project Vehicular-Source Noise Exceeding City Standards Would be Considered Potentially Significant. The City of Pomona General Plan Noise & Safety Element

Policies establish parameters for vehicular-source noise on City roadways. In this

regard, City General Plan Policies act to ensure that, when exterior noise levels exceed

65 dBA CNEL at sensitive receiver locations, mitigation is provided to ensure that

interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL are maintained.

The 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level parameters established by the City of Pomona

take in to account and reflect California Building Code Title 24 residential construction

standards, which typically provide 20 dBA noise attenuation from exterior conditions

(with windows closed). Based on this assumption, ambient exterior noise levels should

not exceed 65 dBA CNEL under normal conditions. Project vehicular-source noise that

would cause or result in noise levels exceeding 65 dBA CNEL would therefore

potentially expose persons to noise levels in excess of standards established in a local

general plan, and would therefore be potentially significant.

Project Stationary/Area-Source Vibration Exceeding City Standards Would be

Considered Potentially Significant. The City of Pomona Municipal Code Section 18-

309 establishes the maximum acceptable vibration levels that can be generated by

stationary/area vibration sources at residential land uses. Project construction-source

and/or stationary/area-source vibration that would cause or result in vibration levels

exceeding the quantified standards established in the City of Pomona Municipal Code,

and would therefore be potentially significant.

Summary

The potential for the Project to expose persons to, or generate, noise levels in excess of

standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable

standards of other agencies would occur if:

• Project stationary/area-source or vehicular-source noise would exceed City of

Pomona Noise Ordinance Standards; or would conflict with City of Pomona

General Plan standards addressing vehicular-source noise on City roadways; or



• Project stationary/area-source vibration would exceed City of Pomona Vibration

Standards.

Threshold Consideration: Potential to result in or cause a substantial temporary or

periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing

without the Project; or

Threshold Consideration: Potential to result in or cause a substantial permanent

increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the

Project.

Perceptible Project Stationary/Area-Source Noise Exceeding Maximum Acceptable Ambient Conditions Would be Considered Substantial and Potentially Significant.

For the purposes of this analysis, City of Pomona General Plan Noise & Safety Element

Community Noise Exposure criteria are also defined as the maximum acceptable

ambient condition when considering stationary/area-source noise impacts. In this

regard, the maximum acceptable ambient noise conditions established in this analysis

reflect local standards for acceptable noise conditions; correlate with Policies established

in the City General Plan; and are consistent with applicable California Office of

Planning and Research (OPR) Land Use/Noise Compatibility Guidelines.

When ambient noise conditions are within acceptable standards and perceptible (3.0

dBA or greater) Project stationary/area-source noise (whether temporary/periodic or

permanent) would individually or in combination with ambient noise levels, exceed

acceptable standards, Project-source increases in ambient conditions could adversely

affect area land uses, and land use/noise compatibility standards may not be

maintained. Perceptible Project stationary/area-source noise that would cause ambient

conditions to exceed acceptable standards would therefore be considered substantial

and potentially significant.



Perceptible Project Vehicular-Source Noise Exceeding Maximum Acceptable Ambient Conditions Would be Considered Substantial and Potentially Significant.

Similarly, when considering vehicular-source noise, the 65 dBA CNEL standard

reflected in the City of Pomona General Plan is defined as the maximum acceptable

ambient condition when considering vehicular-source noise impacts. When ambient

noise conditions are within acceptable parameters and perceptible (3.0 dBA or greater)

Project vehicular-source noise would, individually or in combination with ambient

conditions, exceed the applicable standard, Project-source increases in ambient

conditions could adversely affect area land uses, and land/use noise compatibility

standards may not be maintained. Perceptible Project vehicular-source noise that

would cause ambient conditions to exceed applicable standards would therefore be

considered substantial and potentially significant.

When Noise Levels Exceed Maximum Acceptable Ambient Conditions, Project

Vehicular-Source Noise Increases of 1.5 dBA or Greater Would Be Considered Substantial and Potentially Significant. If, however, ambient conditions already

exceed minimum acceptable standards, subsequent increases in noise levels may be

considered substantial as they would contribute to already deficient conditions. Neither

local municipalities nor the State have established a quantified incremental increase in

noise levels that could be considered “substantial” in instances where ambient

conditions may already be considered unacceptable. Guidance in this regard is,

however, provided at the federal level through the Federal Interagency Committee on

Noise (FICON). FICON guidance facilitates assessment of project-generated increases

in noise levels that take into account ambient noise conditions. Although the FICON

guidance was specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts, this guidance is

broadly relevant to all environmental noise assessments in determining perceived

effects of noise. The FICON guidance indicates that when ambient noise conditions are

at or above normally acceptable standards, increases in noise of 1.5 dBA or greater

would contribute to existing deficiencies, potentially resulting in increased community

annoyance, citizen complaints, and potential litigation.



FICON guidance as applied within this analysis would indicate that when ambient

conditions equal or exceed acceptable standards for stationary/area-sources, Project

stationary/area-source noise increases of 1.5 dBA or greater in ambient conditions could

result in increased community annoyance, citizen complaints, and potential litigation.

For the purposes of this analysis then, when ambient conditions equal or exceed

maximum acceptable standards, Project stationary/area-source noise increases of 1.5

dBA more in ambient conditions would therefore be considered substantial and

therefore potentially significant.

When Noise Levels Exceed Maximum Acceptable Ambient Conditions, Project Stationary/Area-Source Noise Increases of 1.5 dBA or Greater Would be Considered

Substantial and Potentially Significant. Similarly, when ambient noise conditions are

at or above normally acceptable standards, Project stationary/area-source increases of

1.5 dBA or greater in ambient conditions would contribute to existing unacceptable

conditions and could result in increased community annoyance, citizen complaints, and

potential litigation. For the purposes of this analysis then, when ambient conditions

equal or exceed acceptable standards, Project stationary/area-source noise increases of

1.5 dBA more in ambient conditions would therefore be considered substantial and

potentially significant.

Summary

A substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise conditions would

occur if Project-source noise would:

• Result in an perceptible increase in noise levels (3.0 dBA or greater) that would

cause the acceptable ambient condition to be exceeded; or

• Result in an increase of 1.5 dBA in ambient conditions when the noise

environment at receiving land uses already exceeds the acceptable ambient noise

condition.



Threshold Consideration: For a project located within an airport land use plan or,

where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public

use airport, expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise

levels.

Threshold Consideration: For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose

people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels.

The Project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or within the vicinity

of a private airstrip, and therefore, would not expose people residing or working in the

Project area to excessive noise levels. No further noise analysis is conducted in relation

to these thresholds.

Table 4.5-5 provides a summary of the significance thresholds used to determine

Project-related impacts within the subsequent analysis.

Table 4.5-5

Summary of Significance Thresholds

Analysis

Scenario

Receptor

Land Use

Ambient Condition/

Exposure Scenario Metric

Significance Criteria

Daytime Nighttime

Off-Site Noise-

Sensitive

if ambient is

< 65 dBA CNEL

Project plus ambient is > 65

dBA;

and a ≥ 3 dBA Project increase

if ambient is

> 65 dBA CNEL

≥ 1.5 dBA

Project increase

Operational/

Area-

Source

Single-

Family

Residential

≥ 30 minutes L50 60 50

≥ 15 minutes L25 65 55

≥ 5 minutes L8 70 60

≥ 1 minute L2 75 65

Anytime Lmax 80 70

Multi-

Family

Residential

≥ 30 minutes L50 65 50

≥ 15 minutes L25 70 55




Table 4.5-5 Summary of Significance Thresholds

Analysis

Scenario

Receptor

Land Use

Ambient Condition/

Exposure Scenario Metric

Significance Criteria

Daytime Nighttime

≥ 1 minute L2 80 65

Anytime Lmax 85 70

Commercial

≥ 30 minutes L50 65 60

≥ 15 minutes L25 70 65


≥ 1 minute L2 80 75

Anytime Lmax 85 80

Noise-

Sensitive

if ambient is below the

noise level standard Any

Project increase of ≥ 3 dBA

causes ambient to exceed the

standard

if ambient is greater than

the

noise level standard

Any ≥ 1.5 dBA

Project increase

Construction Noise-

Sensitive

Permitted hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays;

no activity allowed on Sundays or federal holidays.

Noise Exposure Leq 65 n/a

Lmax 85 n/a

Vibration Exposure RMS 0.05 in/sec n/a Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016.


4.5.5.1 Overview

The following discussions focus on areas where it has been determined that the Project

may result in potentially significant noise/vibration impacts, based on the analysis

presented within this Section, included within the Initial Study (EIR Appendix A), or in

response to comments provided through the NOP process. The following two potential

impacts are not applicable since the Project site is not located near a public or private

airport. On this basis, the Project’s potential impacts in these regards are determined to

be less-than-significant, and are not further discussed in this Section:





expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels.

• For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose people residing or

working in the Project area to excessive noise levels.

Please refer also to Initial Study Checklist Item XIII., Noise.


The following analysis addresses the potential noise impacts that are expected to occur

as a result of the Project. Noise levels will change both on-site and off-site if the Project

is approved and implemented. The discussion of potential noise impacts is organized to

reflect categories or types of Project noise sources, including:

• Construction-source Noise;

• Vehicular-source Noise;

• Operational/Area-source Noise; and

• Vibration.

For each topical discussion, potential impacts are evaluated under applicable criteria

established above at Section 4.5.4, Standards of Significance.

To assess the potential for short-term construction and long-term operational/area-

source noise impacts, the following eight receiver locations were identified as

representative locations for analysis. Please refer also to Figure 4.5-4.

R1 Located approximately 1,038 feet west of the Project site, location R1 represents

the existing Country Park Villas multi-family residential community. A long-

term noise measurement was also taken at this location (L4) to describe the

existing ambient noise environment.



R2 Location R2 represents the existing office buildings west of the Project site at a

distance of roughly 72 feet.

R3 Location R3 represents the existing WinCo Foods store west of the Project site at

a distance of approximately 467 feet.

R4 Location R4 represents the commercial land uses north of the Project site at a

distance of approximately 292 feet.

R5 At a distance of approximately 951 feet, location R5 represents single-family

residential homes situated north of the Project site across Rio Rancho Road. A

long-term noise measurement was also taken near this location (L1) to describe

the existing ambient noise environment.

R6 At a distance of approximately 389 feet, location R6 represents an existing

Walmart store north of the Project site.

R7 At a distance of approximately 1,014 feet, location R7 represents single-family

residential homes situated west of the Project site adjacent to SR-71.

R8 At a distance of approximately 213 feet, location R8 represents the existing San

Gabriel/Pomona Regional Center east of the Project site. A long-term noise

measurement was also taken near this location (L3) to describe the existing

ambient noise environment.



Figure 4.5-4 Receptor Locations



CONSTRUCTION-SOURCE NOISE

Potential Impact: Project construction noise would result in exposure of persons to, or

generation of, noise levels in excess of City standards.

Impact Analysis: Project construction-source noise would result from on-site activities,

such as site preparation, grading, building construction, paving and site finishes, and

architectural coating.

This construction noise analysis was prepared using reference noise level measurements (collected from similar activities at several construction sites1) to describe typical construction activity noise levels for each stage of Project construction. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment can range from approximately 62 dBA to an excess of 80 dBA when measured at 50 feet. However, these noise levels diminish with distance from the construction site at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. For example, a noise level of 80 dBA measured at 50 feet from the noise source to the receiver would be reduced to 74 dBA at 100 feet from the source to the receiver, and would be further reduced to 68 dBA at 200 feet from the source to the receiver. Using the reference construction equipment noise levels, calculations of Project construction noise levels at the eight sensitive receiver locations were completed. To assess the peak construction noise levels at each receiver location, this analysis shows the highest noise impacts when the equipment with the highest reference noise level is operating at the Project site boundary. Table 4.5-6 presents the short-term construction noise levels under all stages of construction, and includes the noise attenuation provided by existing barriers in the Project study area. 1 Please refer to Section 6.3.1 of the Noise Impact Analysis for further details regarding the reference noise level measurements.



Table 4.5-6 Construction Noise Levels

Receiver Location

Land Use

Peak Construction Activity Noise Levels

Threshold Threshold Exceeded?

dBA Leq dBA Lmax

dBA Leq dBA Lmax

dBA Leq dBA Lmax

R1 Multi-Family 48.2 54.1 65 85 No No R2 Commercial 76.4 82.3 n/a n/a No No R3 Commercial 60.2 66.1 n/a n/a No No R4 Commercial 64.2 70.1 n/a n/a No No R5 Single-Family 50.0 55.9 65 85 No No R6 Commercial 61.7 67.6 n/a n/a No No R7 Single-Family 53.4 59.3 65 85 No No R8 Commercial 67.0 72.9 n/a n/a No No

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016. n/a = City of Pomona construction noise thresholds only apply to noise-sensitive residential receiver locations. See Municipal Code Section 18-305(3).

As shown above, the unmitigated peak construction noise levels are expected to range from 48.2 to 76.4 dBA Leq and 54.1 to 82.3 dBA Lmax. Based on the significance criteria for construction noise, the potential short-term unmitigated construction noise level impacts will not exceed City of Pomona acceptable construction noise level thresholds of 65 dBA Leq and 85 dBA Lmax at nearby sensitive residential receiver locations during the permitted hours of construction activity. Based on the preceding discussion, the potential for Project construction-source noise to result in exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of City standards is considered less-than-significant. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant. Mitigation Measures: Although Project construction is not expected to exceed City noise standards, the following mitigation will act to further reduce construction noise levels.



4.5.1 Prior to approval of grading plans and/or issuance of building permits, plans shall include a note indicating that noise-generating Project construction activities shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays. The Project construction supervisor shall ensure compliance with the note and the City shall conduct periodic inspection at its discretion.

4.5.2 During all Project site construction, the construction contractors shall equip all

construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the Project site.

4.5.3 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the

greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receivers nearest the Project site during all Project construction.

4.5.4 The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified

for construction equipment (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays). The Project Applicant shall prepare a haul route exhibit to design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck-related noise.

Potential Impact: Project construction activities and associated noise would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Impact Analysis: Construction noise is not considered a source of permanent noise increases, and associated threshold questions are not germane. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant.



Potential Impact: Project construction activities and associated noise would result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Impact Analysis: As presented above, Project-related construction noise will not exceed City of Pomona acceptable construction noise level thresholds at nearby sensitive residential receiver locations during the permitted hours of construction activity. As such, Project construction-source noise would not represent a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant. VEHICULAR-SOURCE NOISE Potential Impact: Project vehicular source noise would result in exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established by the City. Impact Analysis: As discussed in the following paragraphs, vehicular noise has been evaluated in terms of 1) potential impacts of Project-related vehicular noise to off-site receivers, and 2) potential impacts of vehicular noise to on-site sensitive uses. Vehicular Noise Impacts to Off-Site Land Uses To assess the off-site vehicular CNEL noise level impacts associated with development of the Project, noise contours were developed based on the Project Traffic Impact Analysis2. Noise contours were developed for the following traffic scenarios:

• Existing Without / With Project: This scenario refers to the existing present-day

noise conditions, without the Project, and with the construction of the Project.

2 Please refer to Tables 7-1 through 7-6 of the Noise Impact Analysis for specific noise contour calculations.



• Year 2018 Without / With Project: This scenario refers to the background noise conditions at future Year 2018 with and without the proposed Project. The with Project scenario corresponds to Year 2018 conditions and includes all cumulative projects identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis.

• Year 2040 Without / With Project: This scenario refers to the background noise

conditions at future Year 2040 with and without the proposed Project. The with Project scenario corresponds to Year 2040 conditions and includes all cumulative projects identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis.

The noise contours were then used to assess the changes in traffic noise levels on 12 roadway segments surrounding the Project site. Based on the noise contours, Tables 4.5-7 through 4.5-9 present the Project noise addition along the 12 roadway segments under each scenario listed above.

Table 4.5-7 Existing Off-Site Project-Related Traffic Noise Impacts

ID Road Segment Adjacent Land Use

CNEL at Adjacent Land Use (dBA) Threshold

Exceeded? Without Project

With Project

Project Addition

1 Phillips Ranch Rd. s/o Rio Rancho Rd. Residential 70.9 71.1 0.2 No 2 Phillips Ranch Rd. s/o SR-60 WB Ramps Residential 71.1 71.2 0.1 No 3 Chino Hills Pk. s/o SR-60 EB Ramps Residential 48.0 48.0 0.0 No 4 Rancho Camino Dr. s/o Rio Rancho Rd. TOD: Neighborhood 61.8 63.2 1.4 No 5 Rio Rancho Rd. e/o Phillips Ranch Rd. Residential 66.8 67.0 0.2 No 6 Rio Rancho Rd. w/o Rancho Camino Dr. Residential 67.1 67.3 0.2 No 7 Rio Rancho Rd. e/o Rancho Camino Dr. Residential 68.2 68.6 0.4 No 8 Rio Rancho Rd. e/o Lone Ridge Rd. Residential 69.2 69.5 0.3 No 9 Rio Rancho Rd. e/o SR-71 SB Ramps TOD: Neighborhood 69.9 70.1 0.2 No

10 Rio Rancho Rd. e/o SR-71 NB Ramps TOD: Neighborhood 69.3 69.3 0.0 No 11 Rancho Camino Dr. w/o Driveway 1 TOD: Neighborhood 54.8 59.7 4.9 No 12 Rancho Camino Dr. e/o Driveway 1 TOD: Neighborhood 54.1 56.9 2.8 No Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016. TOD = Transit Oriented District



Table 4.5-8 Year 2018 Off-Site Project-Related Traffic Noise Impacts




With Project

Project Addition


10 Rio Rancho Rd. e/o SR-71 NB Ramps TOD: Neighborhood 70.6 70.6 0.0 No 11 Rancho Camino Dr. w/o Driveway 1 TOD: Neighborhood 55.2 59.8 4.6 No 12 Rancho Camino Dr. e/o Driveway 1 TOD: Neighborhood 54.5 57.1 2.6 No

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016. TOD = Transit Oriented District

Table 4.5-9

Year 2040 Off-Site Project-Related Traffic Noise Impacts




With Project

Project Addition


10 Rio Rancho Rd. e/o SR-71 NB Ramps TOD: Neighborhood 71.0 71.1 0.1 No 11 Rancho Camino Dr. w/o Driveway 1 TOD: Neighborhood 55.7 60.0 4.3 No 12 Rancho Camino Dr. e/o Driveway 1 TOD: Neighborhood 55.2 57.3 2.1 No

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016. TOD = Transit Oriented District



Summary of Vehicular Noise Impacts to Off-Site Land Uses As shown in preceding Tables 4.5-7 through 4.5-9, under all scenarios analyzed, Project

traffic would not cause or result in increased noise levels that would exceed the 65 dBA

CNEL threshold condition for residential land uses. Nor would Project traffic cause or

result in increased noise levels of greater than 1.5 dBA CNEL when the without-Project

condition already exceeds 65 dBA CNEL. As such, Project-related vehicular impacts to

off-site land uses are considered less-than-significant.

Vehicular Noise Impacts to On-Site Land Uses This analysis has been conducted to determine the noise exposure levels to on-site uses that would result from off-site traffic, and to identify potential noise abatement measures that would achieve acceptable Project exterior and interior noise levels. Primary sources of traffic noise affecting the Project site would be traffic noise from emanating from SR-71 and SR-60. The Project would also be exposed to nominal traffic noise from Rancho Camino Drive. However, due to the distance, topography and low traffic volume/speed, traffic noise from this road will not make a substantive contribution to ambient noise conditions. The following paragraphs discuss potential exterior and interior impacts as received by the proposed on-site land uses.

Exterior Noise Analysis Table 4.5-10 summarizes anticipated traffic-source noise levels at exterior spaces within the Project site.

Table 4.5-10 Exterior Noise Levels (CNEL)

Building Roadway Unmitigated Noise Level (dBA CNEL)

Land Use Compatibility

Hotel Building (Northeast) SR-71 Freeway 60.8 Normally Acceptable Office Building SR-60 Freeway 62.7 Normally Acceptable

Hotel Building (Southwest) SR-60 Freeway 61.9 Normally Acceptable Hotel Pool Area SR-60 Freeway 66.4 Conditionally Acceptable

Conference Facilities SR-60 Freeway 61.4 Normally Acceptable Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016.



As indicated, Project buildings facing SR-71 and SR-60 would experience exterior noise levels ranging from 60.8 to 66.4 dBA CNEL. The analysis of off-site traffic noise on Project exterior spaces indicates that Project site exterior noise levels will be normally acceptable at the hotel, conference facility, and office building land uses, with noise levels below 65 dBA CNEL. The hotel pool area will experience conditionally acceptable noise levels of up to 66.4 dBA CNEL.

Interior Noise Analysis The calculated interior noise level is the difference between the predicted exterior noise level at the building facade and the noise attenuation achieved through building design and structural elements. Typical building construction practices will provide a Noise Reduction (NR) of approximately 12 dBA with “windows open” and a minimum 25 dBA noise reduction with “windows closed.” However, sound leaks, cracks and openings within the window assembly can greatly diminish its effectiveness in reducing noise. Several methods are used to improve interior noise reduction, including: (1) weather-stripped solid core exterior doors; (2) upgraded dual glazed windows; (3) mechanical ventilation/air conditioning; and (4) exterior wall/roof assembles free of cut outs or openings. Using the exterior noise levels presented above, coupled with typical construction/design measures, it is possible to estimate the interior noise levels of the future land uses within the site. Tables 8-2 through 8-7 of the Noise Impact Analysis present the estimated interior noise levels on each floor (first through sixth) of the proposed hotel use. Based on the location of the Project site, adjacent to major freeways, the results of the interior noise calculations indicate that interior noise levels may exceed City standards. The 2014 California Green Building Standards Code requires non-residential buildings within the 65 dBA noise contour of a freeway to install minimum STC ratings of 40 for all windows.3 However, as presented within the Noise Impact Analysis, even with the

3 It is noted that this requirement would be implemented regardless of its inclusion as mitigation. Nonetheless, it is included here to ensure timely implementation and ease of monitoring.



upgraded windows required under the 2014 California Green Building Standards Code, interior noise levels have the potential to exceed City standards. Summary of Vehicular Noise Impacts to On-Site Land Uses As presented above, exterior noise levels as received at the proposed hotel use would be considered acceptable/conditionally acceptable, and would not exceed City standards. However, the analysis of interior noise levels indicate that, even with the upgraded windows required under the 2014 California Green Building Standards Code, interior noise levels have the potential to exceed City standards. This is a potentially significant impact. Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant. Mitigation Measure: 4.5.5 In order to meet the City of Pomona 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standards, and 2014

California Green Building Standards Code requirements, the final Project architectural designs should incorporate the following (or equivalent) noise attenuation features.

• Windows: All windows and sliding glass doors shall be well fitted, well weather-

stripped assemblies and shall have a minimum sound transmission class (STC) rating of 40.

• Doors: All exterior hinged and sliding glass doors to habitable rooms that are directly

exposed to transportation noise and are facing the source of the noise shall be a door and edge seal assembly with a minimum STC rating of 27.

• Roof: Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be well fitted or caulked plywood of at

least one-half inch thick. Ceilings shall be well fitted, well sealed gypsum board of at least one-half inch thick. Insulation with at least a rating of R-19 shall be used in the attic space.



• Ventilation: Arrangements for any habitable room shall be such that any exterior door or window can be kept closed when the room is in use. A forced air circulation system (e.g., air conditioning) shall be provided which satisfies the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.

Level of Significance After Mitigation: Less-Than-Significant.

Potential Impact: Project vehicular source noise would result in a substantial

temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above


Impact Analysis: Vehicular source noise is addressed as a permanent source of noise,

rather than a temporary or periodic source of noise increases. As such, associated

threshold questions are not germane.


Potential Impact: Project vehicular source noise would result in a substantial

permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing

without the Project.

Impact Analysis: As discussed previously, vehicular source noise levels would not

exceed City standards and therefore would not result in a substantial permanent

increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the

Project.




OPERATIONAL/AREA-SOURCE NOISE

Potential Impact: Project operational/area-source noise would result in a substantial

permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing

without the Project.

Impact Analysis: The general and persistent level of activity within the site may result

in a permanent substantial increase in ambient noise levels. Additionally, certain short

term periodic noise events may exceed applicable Noise Ordinance Standards.

Characteristic Project noise sources contributing to average noise levels include roof-top

air conditioning units and parking lot/parking structure activities. Locations of these

anticipated noise sources are indicated at Figure 4.5-5. Noise receiver locations R1

through R8, indicated at previous Figure 4.5-4, were again used to represent the nearest

off-site noise receptor locations.

To estimate the potential operational noise impacts at sensitive receivers in the Project

study area, reference noise level measurements were collected from similar types of

activities to represent the noise levels expected with operations of the Project.4 Using

the collected reference noise levels, Project operational noise was estimated. Table 4.5-

11 evaluates operational noise associated with the Project against City of Pomona

daytime and nighttime noise level thresholds.

It is noted that the following projected noise levels assume the worst-case noise

environment with the roof-top air conditioning units, and parking lot/parking structure

vehicle movements all operating simultaneously. In reality, these noise level impacts

will vary throughout the day.

4 Please refer to Section 6.2 of the Noise Impact Analysis for further details regarding the operational reference noise levels.



Figure 4.5-5 Operational Noise Sources



Table 4.5-11 Operational Noise Level Compliance

Receiver

Location

Land

Use

Noise Level at Receiver Locations (dBA) Threshold

Exceeded? L50

(30mins)

L25

(15mins)

L8

(5mins)

L2

(1min)

Lmax

(Anytime) Daytime Nighttime

R1 Multi-Family 10.6 11.7 14.5 17.8 30.2 No No

R2 Commercial 40.9 36.2 39.1 42.5 55.2 No No



R5 Single-Family 20.8 20.8 23.7 27.1 39.6 No No


R7 Single-Family 23.6 26.5 28.6 35.1 42.7 No No

R8 Commercial 46.8 49.6 51.7 58.3 65.8 No No Source: Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016.

As shown above, based on the significance thresholds presented previously at Table 4.5-

5, Project-related operation noise levels will not exceed City of Pomona standards.

To describe the Project operational noise level contributions, the Project

operational/area-source noise levels presented at Table 4.5-11 were combined with the

existing ambient noise level measurements for the eight receiver locations potentially

impacted by the Project. The difference between the combined Project and ambient

noise levels describe the Project noise level contributions. Noise levels that would be

experienced at receiver locations when Project-source noise is added to the ambient

daytime and nighttime conditions are presented at Tables 4.5-12 and 4.5-13.



Table 4.5-12 Daytime Operational Noise Level Contributions

Location Type of Noise Noise Levels (dBA)

Threshold Exceeded? L50

(30mins) L25

(15mins) L8

(5mins) L2

(1min) Lmax

(Anytime)

R1 L4

Project Noise Level 10.6 11.7 14.5 17.8 30.2

No Ambient Noise Level 61.7 62.6 63.6 64.7 76.9

Combined 61.7 62.6 63.6 64.7 76.9 Project Contribution 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

R2 L2




R3 L4




R4 L2




R5 L1




R6 L3




R7 L3




R8 L3







Table 4.5-13 Nighttime Operational Noise Level Contributions

Location Type of Noise Noise Levels (dBA)

Threshold Exceeded? L50

(30mins) L25

(15mins) L8

(5mins) L2

(1min) Lmax

(Anytime)

R1 L4




R2 L2



Combined5 52.2 53.1 54.7 57.3 71.5 Project Contribution 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

R3 L4




R4 L2




R5 L1




R6 L3




R7 L3




R8 L3







As shown above, the Project would contribute operational/area-source noise level

increases of up to 0.7 dBA L50 during the daytime hours, and up to 0.3 dBA L50 during

the nighttime hours at the receiver locations. Based on the operational/area-source

noise analysis, the Project-related noise level contributions would not exceed the

standards presented previously at Section 4.5.4, and would not discernibly affect the

ambient noise levels at the nearby sensitive receiver locations.


Potential Impact: Project operational/area-source noise would result in exposure of

persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the City’s

General Plan or Noise Ordinance.

Impact Analysis: As discussed above, noise levels attributable to ongoing Project activities and operations would not exceed City standards, nor would the Project substantially affect ambient noise levels at nearby sensitive receivers. On this basis, noise generated by Project operations would not result in exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of City of Pomona standards at receiving land uses. Potential impacts would be less-than-significant. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant. Potential Impact: Project operational/area-source noise would result in a substantial

temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above


Impact Analysis: As discussed above, noise levels attributable to ongoing Project

activities and operations would not exceed City Noise Ordinance Standards. As such,

temporary and periodic peak noise events generated by Project operations and area/site

sources would not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient

noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Potential

impacts would be less-than-significant.




VIBRATION

The following discussion addresses the Project’s potential to generate groundborne

vibration and related groundborne noise. The Project does not propose or require uses

or facilities that would cause or result in groundborne vibration or groundborne noise.

However, as discussed below, Project construction could result in varying degrees of

ground vibration and associated groundborne noise depending on the equipment and

methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type.

Potential Impact: Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive groundborne

vibration or groundborne noise. Impact Analysis: As noted above, operational aspects of the Project do not include nor

require equipment, facilities, or activities that would result in substantial groundborne

vibration or groundborne noise. As such, Project operations would not result in, nor

cause any groundborne noise or vibration impacts. However, during Project

implementation, construction equipment operating within the Project site has the

potential to result in off-site vibration impacts.

The construction activities most likely to cause vibration impacts are:

• Heavy Construction Equipment: Although all heavy mobile construction

equipment has the potential of causing at least some perceptible vibration while

operating close to building, the vibration is usually short-term and is not of

sufficient magnitude to cause building damage. It is not expected that heavy

equipment such as large bulldozers would operate close enough to any

residences to cause a vibration impact.

• Trucks: Trucks hauling building materials to construction sites can be sources of

vibration intrusion if the haul routes pass through residential neighborhoods on



streets with bumps or potholes. Repairing the bumps and potholes generally

eliminates the problem.

Groundborne vibration levels resulting from construction activities occurring within the

Project site were estimated based data published by the Federal Transit Administration

(FTA) and vibration source levels of construction equipment presented within the Noise

Impact Analysis. Table 4.5-14 presents the expected Project-related vibration levels at

each of the sensitive receiver locations.

Table 4.5-14 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels

Receiver Location

Dist. To Const.

Activity (Feet)

Receiver PPV Levels (in/sec) Peak

Vibration (PPV)

RMS Velocity Levels (in/sec)

Threshold Threshold Exceeded? Small

Bulldozer Jack-

hammer Loaded Trucks

Large Bulldozer

R1 1,038' 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.05 No R2 72' 0.001 0.007 0.016 0.018 0.018 0.013 0.05 No R3 467' 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.05 No R4 292' 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.05 No R5 951' 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.05 No R6 389' 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.05 No R7 1,014' 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.05 No R8 213' 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.05 No


Table 4.5-14 shows that construction vibration levels are expected to approach a

maximum of 0.013 in/sec (RMS) at receiver location R2. Based on the City of Pomona

0.05 in/sec (RMS) vibration standards, the proposed Project site will not include or

require equipment, facilities, or activities that would result in a human response

(annoyance) due to vibration.

The Project would comply with all ordinance restrictions on construction activities, and

would not conduct such activities between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on

weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday.



Moreover, as indicated in the preceding discussions, there is little (if any) potential for

Project construction-source vibration to endanger the public health, welfare and safety.

On this basis, the potential for the Project to result in or cause exposure of persons to, or

generation of, excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise is considered less-

than-significant.


4.6 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Hydrology and Water Quality Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 4.6-1

4.6 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

Abstract

This Section of the EIR addresses potential impacts of the Project related to hydrology and water

quality. The analysis presented herein focuses on the potential for the Project to:

• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;

• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration

of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion

or siltation on- or off-site;

• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the

alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount

of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;

• Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or

planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of

polluted runoff; or

• Otherwise substantially degrade water quality.

As supported by the analysis presented in this Section, the above-noted potential

hydrology/water quality impacts are determined to be less-than-significant.



4.6.1 INTRODUCTION

This Section evaluates the Project’s potential hydrology and water quality impacts.

Information contained and referenced in this Section was obtained from: Pomona Ranch

Plaza Lot 9 Preliminary Hydrology Report (Incledon Consulting Group) February 2016

(Project Hydrology Report); and Pomona Ranch Plaza Lot 9 Preliminary Standard Urban

Stormwater Management Plan (Incledon Consulting Group) February 2016 (Project

SUSMP).

4.6.2 SETTING


The hydrologic setting described below establishes the baseline against which the

Project’s potential hydrology/water quality impacts were evaluated. Please refer also to

EIR Section 3.0, Project Description, for a general discussion of the Project’s regional and

vicinity setting.

The City General Plan EIR describes area hydrologic and water quality characteristics,

and is summarized and paraphrased in pertinent part within these discussions. Please

refer also to City General Plan EIR Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality.

4.6.2.2 Stormwater and Urban Runoff

Stormwater runoff from development such as is proposed by the Project can accumulate

pollutants and, as it flows into drainage systems and waterways, may degrade the

quality of receiving surface waters. Stormwater discharges from the City of Pomona

flow generally to Thompson Creek and San Jose Creek, both of which are tributary to

the San Gabriel River. Southerly portions of the City discharge to San Antonio

Creek/Chino Creek, which are tributary to the Santa Ana River.

During rain events, stormwater pollution can occur when rainwater picks up pollutants

as it flows across paved surfaces, which are then transported into the storm drain

system. Other sources of urban runoff (e.g., irrigation) can also transport pollutants to



the storm drain system. Common urban stormwater contaminants include litter, trash,

pet waste, paint residue, yard waste, fertilizers, pesticides, sediments, construction

debris, cooking grease, illegally dumped motor oil, and other harmful fluids.

The City protects receiving water resources from the effects of urban runoff through

implementation of its Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) as required

by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. The

NPDES permit program, as authorized by the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), controls

water pollution through regulation of discharges to waters of the United States.

4.6.2.3 Flooding

Flood Hazards

Flood hazards are directly related to precipitation intensity and duration. Regional

topography, type and extent of vegetation coverage, amount of impermeable surfaces,

local slope characteristics, and available drainage facilities all factor into the region’s

ability to collect, divert, and convey precipitation runoff. Urbanization increases the

volume and velocity of runoff water via two main processes: 1) undeveloped areas that

would normally absorb rainfall have been replaced by impermeable surfaces (e.g.,

streets, buildings, parking areas); and 2) channelization of natural drainage systems

within urban areas tends to increase the volume and velocity of runoff.

The size, or magnitude, of a flood is described by its “recurrence interval.” A five-year

flood is one that would occur, on average, once every five years (or has a 20 percent

chance of occurring during any year). Similarly, a 100-year flood is expected on average,

to occur once in a century; but has a one-percent chance of occurring during any year.

The magnitude of flood events can be altered if changes are made to a drainage area,

such as a substantive increase (or decrease) in the amount of impervious surfaces, or

alteration of drainage systems or drainage patterns.



The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of its statutory

responsibilities to carry out the National Flood Insurance Program, has mapped most of

the flood risk areas within the United States. As delineated by FEMA, the City of

Pomona does not lie within a designated 100- or 500- year floodplain area (General

Plan EIR, p. 4.7-17).

Dam Inundation

The San Antonio Dam and Reservoir (Dam) is located approximately five miles

northeasterly of the City and operated and maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (USACE). This Dam serves as a major flood control facility and therefore does

not typically store large quantities of water except during periods of heavy rain.

Notwithstanding, when full, failure or rupture of the Dam would release waters and

result in the flooding of areas southerly of the Dam, including easterly portions of

Pomona. Other dams located near Pomona include the Thompson Creek Dam and

Reservoir and Live Oak Reservoir. As indicated at General Plan EIR Figure 4.7-2, Dam

and Reservoir Inundation Zones, the Project site is not located within a potential dam

inundation area.

Flood Control

The City of Pomona lies at the edge of the San Antonio Canyon Flood Plain. The City is

served by a system of local storm drains and flood control channels which convey

stormwaters through and away from the City. Major flood control facilities serving the

City include the following.

• San Antonio Creek, a regional flood control channel, is located approximately

one-half mile easterly of the Project site. Most of San Antonio Creek is a concrete-

lined channel, which generally follows the boundary between the counties of Los

Angeles and San Bernardino. The San Antonio Creek channel conveys

stormwaters southerly from the San Antonio Dam Spreading Grounds, to the

channel confluence with Chino Creek south of the City, near the SR-71

interchange with Chino Avenue. The San Antonio Creek channel continues



southerly from this point to the Prado Flood Control Basin and the Prado Dam,

ultimately discharging to the Pacific Ocean via the Santa Ana River.

• Chino Creek is located in the southerly portion of the City of Pomona, in the

Puente Hills area, and connects to San Antonio Creek.

• Thompson Creek runs from north to south through the northerly portion of the

City of Pomona, then trends westerly and becomes North San Jose Creek, which

drains to the Whittier Narrows.

• South San Jose Creek is located parallel to and south of North San Jose Creek in

the westerly portion of the City of Pomona, starting just north of Diamond Bar

and flowing southwesterly, ultimately discharging to the Whittier Narrows.

Project Site Drainage

Existing Project site drainage patterns are presented at Figure 4.6-1. The site is hilly, with slopes ranging between 2 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (2:1) and 4:1. Project site elevations range from 885 feet to 790 feet above mean sea level (MSL).

In the existing condition, the Project area drains generally from south-to-north, discharging to existing Rancho Camino Drive along the Project site’s southerly boundary. A portion of the Project site drains to an existing sediment trap conveying stormwater discharges to an existing 24-inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP). The easterly portion of the Project site drains to an existing v-ditch located along the site’s easterly edge. This v-ditch conveys stormwater discharges to an existing catch basin. Runoff discharging to Rancho Camino Drive, the referenced sediment trap, and v-ditch is conveyed to a City of Pomona owned and maintained 24-inch RCP that connects to a 66-inch RCP located northeasterly of the Project site at the terminus of the Rancho Camino Drive cul-de-sac. This 66-inch RCP has been designed to convey runoff from future commercial buildout of the Pomona Ranch Plaza, including development of the Project site (Project Hydrology Study, p. 4).



Figure 4.6-1 (Use Existing Condition Hydrology Map from Preliminary Hydrology Study)



Stormwater discharges from the Project site and the Pomona Ranch Plaza in total are conveyed westerly, under SR-71 by a 12-foot-wide by 12-foot high Reinforced Concrete Box (RCB) that discharges into the Chino Drain. The Chino Drain conveys stormwater discharges southerly and easterly to the Santa Ana River and Prado Dam. The Santa Ana River discharges westerly to the Pacific Ocean between Huntington Beach and Newport Beach. 4.6.3 REGULATORY SETTING 4.6.3.1 Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Federal Clean Water Act (CWA)

The principal law governing pollution of the nation’s surface waters is the Federal

Water Pollution Control Act, or Clean Water Act (CWA), which was substantially

revised by amendments in 1972 that created the bulk of the current statutory scheme.

The CWA requires states to adopt water quality standards. To achieve its objectives, the

CWA is based on the concept that all discharges into the nation’s waters are unlawful,

unless specifically authorized by a permit. Moreover, the CWA states that discharge of

pollutants into waters of the United States from any point source is unlawful unless the

discharge complies with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

permit.

The NPDES is a national program under Section 402 of the CWA. The CWA establishes

the framework for regulating municipal and industrial (point sources) stormwater

discharges under the NPDES program, and allows the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) to delegate its NPDES system permitting authority to states with an

approved regulatory program. In California, the NPDES program is administered

through the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards, including the Los Angeles

Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) and the Santa Ana Regional Water

Quality Control Board (SARWQCB), both of which are responsible for determining the

City of Pomona’s compliance with the water quality requirements of the CWA.



Because discharges from north of and adjacent to Interstate 10 enter Thompson

Creek/San Jose Creek, which are tributary to the San Gabriel River (regulated by the

LARWQCB), and discharges from south of I-10 enter both Chino Creek and San

Antonio Creek, which are tributary to the Santa Ana River (regulated by the

SARWQCB), the City of Pomona works with staff from both of these regulatory

agencies.

4.6.3.2 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act

Section 303 of the federal Clean Water Act and the State’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality

Act establish applicable water quality objectives for ground and surface waters in the

State. In general, protection and maintenance of surface water quality is the combined

responsibility of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), water supply

and wastewater management agencies, and City and County governments.

The RWQCB has purview over point and non-point sources of pollution. Point source

water pollutants consist of controlled wastewater releases that are commonly generated

by activities that use water to collect pollutants and transport them from the processing

facility. When such wastewater discharges are proposed, the applicant must obtain a set

of Waste Discharge Requirements from the RWQCB which serve to control water

pollution to a non-significant level from such point sources.

Non-point sources of water pollution consist of surface runoff from a site or area during

or following a storm where the source of pollution cannot be traced to a specific

location. Typical non-point water pollution sources consist of agricultural fields with

sediment and fertilizers, construction sites with sediment and debris, and roads with oil,

tire particles, and debris common to roads.

Non-point pollution sources are also regulated by the RWQCBs through a number of

programs and permits including Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and Municipal

Stormwater Permits. The City is currently a member of the Santa Ana/Prado Dam

Bacteria TMDL workgroup, organized to address the regional TMDL of bacteria. The



working group collects monitoring data and assesses tributary drainages throughout

the Santa Ana River and Chino Creek Watersheds to discover and control sources of

bacteria throughout these watersheds. Although the LARWQCB is the primary agency

that regulates and oversees water quality discharges from the City of Pomona, the

SARWQCB also regulates water quality discharges that may impact their jurisdictional

drainages. The City is a co-permittee under Los Angeles County Municipal Permit

(Order No. 2001-182) which regulates and monitors stormwater discharges generated

throughout the City from both point and non-point sources.

4.6.3.3 State Water Resources Control Board, Construction Permitting

In December 1999, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) issued an NPDES

General Permit for the discharge of stormwater associated with construction activities.

Federal regulations promulgated by USEPA (40 CFR Parts, 9, 122, 123, and 124)

expanded the NPDES stormwater program to include stormwater discharges from

municipal separate storm sewer systems and construction sites that were smaller than

those previously included in the program. Accordingly, the SWRCB has issued an

NPDES General Permit for the discharge of stormwater associated with construction

activities. This Permit addresses stormwater discharges associated with construction

activities. The Permit is applicable to all of California, including the City of Pomona and

the Project site.

Compliance with the SWRCB General Construction Permit requires enrollment into the

current permit, and development of a construction SWPPP. The Project SWPPP would

identify potential pollutant sources and BMPs that would reduce or prevent the

discharge of pollutants during construction activities.

4.6.3.4 Los Angeles Region Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan)

The Basin Plan describes existing water quality conditions and establishes regional

water quality goals and policies. The Basin Plan is also the basis for the Regional

Board’s regulatory programs. To this end, the Basin Plan establishes water quality

standards for all the ground and surface waters of the region. The term “water quality



standards,” as used in the Clean Water Act, includes both the beneficial uses of specific

water bodies and water quality standards which must be met and maintained to protect

those beneficial uses. The Basin Plan includes an implementation plan describing

actions by the Regional Board and others that are necessary to achieve and maintain

target water quality standards.

The Basin Plan has been in place since 1994, with the goal of protecting the public health

and welfare, and maintaining or enhancing water quality potential beneficial uses of the

water. The Basin Plan in its entirety can be reviewed at

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/. As supported by the discussions presented

here, the Project would not adversely affect water quality, nor otherwise conflict with

applicable provisions of the Basin Plan.

4.6.3.5 Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, Post-Construction Permit

NPDES permitting is used for continued control and monitoring of water quality

following construction, pursuant to the Clean Water Act. NPDES municipal permitting

has been issued by the LARWQCB to Los Angeles County and local agencies. The City

of Pomona is one of many cities included as a “co-permittee” in the NPDES municipal

permit issued to the County. The municipal permit requires cities to review proposed

development projects to ensure compliance with environmental regulations including

the development and implementation of Project-specific Standard Urban Stormwater

Mitigation Plans (SUSMPs). Pursuant to the municipal permit, cities are also required to

submit an annual report documenting compliance with NPDES requirements.

The Project would develop and implement a SUSMP pursuant to City and LARWQCB

mandates. The Project SUSMP would be required to demonstrate consistency with the

Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit issued to

the City. The Project SUSMP (Pomona Ranch Plaza Lot 9 Preliminary Standard Urban

Stormwater Management Plan [Incledon Consulting Group] February 2016) is provided at

EIR Appendix F.

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/



4.6.3.6 Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, Wastewater Permitting

The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD) are responsible for the treatment

of wastewater conveyed from the Project site. Locally, the LACSD Pomona Water

Reclamation Plant (WRP) provides primary, secondary and tertiary treatment for

approximately 13 million gallons of wastewater per day, serving approximately 130,000

people, and would also serve the Project. Treated and reclaimed water discharge from

the WRP is used Citywide for non-potable applications. Nearly 100% of the reclaimed

water from the WRP is reused for irrigation, dust control, industrial applications, or

groundwater recharge.

4.6.3.7 City of Pomona

Municipal Code

All Project storm drain facilities would be funded, designed, implemented, and

maintained consistent with City of Pomona policies and requirements as outlined in the

City Municipal Code. More specifically, Municipal Code Chapter 18, Article X,

Stormwater Management regulates discharge of pollutants to the City storm drains, and

establishes pollutant reduction and watercourse protection measures. Please refer also

to the City of Pomona Municipal Code:

https://www.municode.com/library/ca/pomona/codes/code_of_ordinances. The Project

is also required to comply with provisions of the City of Pomona Standard Urban

Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP).

4.6.4 PROJECT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CONCEPT The Project Stormwater Management System Concept is presented in Figure 4.6-2. All

Project stormwater management system components and designs would be subject to

review and approval by the City prior to issuance of development permits.

https://www.municode.com/library/ca/pomona/codes/code_of_ordinances



4.6.4.1 Stormwater Collection and Conveyance

Under the Project Stormwater Management System Concept, existing drainage patterns

would be generally maintained. The Project Stormwater Management System Concept

does not introduce additional tributary areas than those already planned for and

anticipated under previously approved drainage studies for the Project area and the

Pomona Ranch Plaza in total. Compared to existing conditions, stormwater discharge

volumes from the developed Project site would be increased as the result of increased

impervious areas within the subject site.

Under post-development conditions, stormwater discharges from the Project site would

be conveyed to the existing 66-inch RCP located northeasterly of the Project site at the

terminus of the Rancho Camino Drive cul-de-sac. As noted previously, this 66-inch RCP

has been designed to convey runoff from future commercial buildout of the Pomona

Ranch Plaza, including stormwater discharges resulting from development of the

Project site. Developed stormwater within the Project site would be collected via surface inlets and

internal secondary drain lines and would be directed to two main storm drain lines “A”

and “B” (please refer to Figure 4.6-2). Proposed storm drain lines A and B would be

aligned along the Project site perimeter; and would confluence at the northeasterly

limits of the Project site prior to connection with the existing 24” RCP at the south edge

of the Rancho Camino Drive cul-de-sac. As indicated at Figure 4.6-2, this 24-inch RCP

would then connect northerly to the previously noted 66-inch RCP discharging

northeasterly to the 12-foot x 12-foot RCB culvert underlying the SR-71 freeway.

Under the Project stormwater management system concept, stormwater discharges to

the existing v-ditch along the Project site’s northeasterly boundary would likely be

diminished and the v-ditch may no longer be required as a stormwater conveyance

feature. Storm drain designs and detailed hydrologic and hydraulic calculations will be

refined and completed concurrent with final Project design.



Figure 4.6-2 Project Stormwater Management Concept (Use Proposed Condition Hydrology Map from Preliminary Hydrology Study)



4.6.4.2 Project Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (Project SUSMP)

All stormwater discharges from the Project site runoff would be required to undergo

some type of treatment/filtration, as required by NPDES Permit No. CAS004001 Order

No. R4-2012-0175. To these ends, and in compliance with City requirements, the Project

would be required to development and implement a site- and use-specific Standard

Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP). A preliminary Project SUSMP has been

developed, and is provided at Appendix F of this EIR. The Project SUSMP identifies a

range of recommended structural and non-structural pollutant source control and

treatment BMPs (see following discussions) to be implemented. The City’s MS4 permit

requires that the Project complete and implement the approved SUSMP.

As one component of the Project Stormwater Management System Concept, the SUSMP

incorporates necessary design features and operational programs (Best Management

Practices, BMPs) ensuring that Project stormwater discharges do not degrade or

otherwise adversely affect the quality of receiving waters. Site Design, Source Control,

and Treatment Control BMPs incorporated in the Project SUSMP would include, but

would not be limited to, the following:

Site Design BMPs

• Minimize Impervious Area/Maximize Permeability – Impervious areas within

the Project site were minimized by the following methods:

o Buildings proposed by the Project have multiple stories, promoting increased

development intensities while minimizing building footprints.

o Sidewalks and parking areas would be constructed at the minimum

dimensions required, provided that public safety and a walkable

environment for pedestrians are not compromised.

o Slopes within the Project site would be landscaped with drought-tolerant and

water-efficient landscaping acting to increase site permeability.



o Buildings would be clustered within the Project site, acting to encourage

shared site amenities and reduce the requirement for redundant impervious

surfaces (e.g., shared parking areas would act to reduce the total paved areas

required for parking).

• Minimize Directly Connected Impervious Areas (DCIAs) – The amount of

directly connected impervious areas on the Project site would be minimized

during the final design process by the following methods:

o Where feasible, walkways and driveways would drain to adjacent landscaped

areas.

• Create Reduced or “Zero Discharge” Areas – Runoff volume to be reduced by

the following methods:

o Within the context of City requirements, Project site landscaped areas would

be maximized, acting to increase site permeability.

• Protect and Restore Natural Areas – Preservation and restoration of natural and

permeable areas would be realized through the following design features and

development actions:

o Southerly portions of the Project site, adjacent to SR-60, would be preserved

as permeable areas.

o Grading would be minimized allowing for protection and restoration of

permeable areas.

o Final designs for constructed slopes within the Project will act to preserve and

restore permeable areas through incorporation of drought-tolerant and water-

efficient landscaping, other permeable slope surface treatments approved by

the City.



Source Control BMPs

Non-structural and structural source control BMPS to be employed on a site- and use-

specific basis throughout the Project site are also identified in the Project SUSMP, and

are listed below. Please refer also to details regarding each of the listed BMPs presented

at Appendix IV of the Project SUSMP.

Non-Structural Source Control BMPs

BMP Identifier Description SC-10 Non-Stormwater Discharges SC-11 Spill Prevention, Control and Cleanup SC-30 Outdoor Loading/Unloading SC-34 Waste Handling and Disposal SC-41 Building and Grounds Maintenance SC-42 Building Repair and Construction SC-43 Parking/Storage Area Maintenance SC-44 Drainage System Maintenance

Structural Source Control BMPs

BMP Identifier Description

SD-10 Site Design and Landscape Planning

SD-11 Roof Runoff Controls SD-12 Efficient Irrigation SD-13 Storm Drain Signage SD-31 Maintenance Bays and Docks SD-32 Trash Enclosures



Treatment Control BMPs The Project would be required to treat the stormwater quality design storm volume (SWQDv). The design storm is defined as the greater of the 0.75-inch, 24-hour rain event, or the 85th percentile, 24-hour rain event as determined from the Los Angeles County 85th percentile precipitation isoheytal map. The 85th percentile, 24-hour rainfall depth is estimated at 0.9 inches; establishing the SWQDv for the Project treatment control BMPs. Pursuant to City and LARWQCB requirements, treatment control BMPs shall be implemented to remove the anticipated pollutants of concern from Project site stormwater discharges. In response to these requirements, the Project SUSMP specifies that the Project would include on-site bioretention/biofiltration equal to 1.5 times the Project SWQDv.1 Under the proposed SUSMP, runoff from natural/restored areas of the site bordering SR-60 would not be treated (Project SUSMP, p. 7). Modular Wetlands System Treatment Control The Project proposes implementation of Modular Wetlands System (MWS) Linear units, a proprietary device designed to efficiently remove pollutants of concern within the affected hydrologic area. The MWS would achieve the following pollutant removal efficiencies:

• Total Suspended Solids: 85% • Total Phosphorus: 64% • Ortho Phosphorus: 67% • Nitrogen: 45% • Dissolved Zinc: 66%

1 Stormwater infiltration and stormwater harvest are considered technically infeasible at the subject site. More specifically:

• Technical infeasibility of infiltration on the project site due to existence of a landfill and potential for pollutant mobilization, steep slopes, and soils with an infiltration rate less than 0.3 inches per hour (to be verified by geotechnical report).

• Technical infeasibility of stormwater harvest and reuse on the project site due to the existence of a landfill and steel slopes, where storage facilities may cause potential geotechnical hazards (to be verified by geotechnical report) (Preliminary SUSMP, p. 6)



• Dissolved Copper: 38% • Total Zinc: 69% • Total Copper: 50% • Motor Oil: 95%

Details and calculations for the sizing of the MWS Linear units are presented at Appendix II of the Project SUSMP. 4.6.5 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Consistent with the standards of significance outlined in the CEQA Guidelines, hydrology/water quality impacts would be considered potentially significant if the Project would:

• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;

• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site;

• Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with

groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of the pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted);

• Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including

through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;



• Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff;

• Otherwise substantially degrade water quality;

• Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood

Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map;

$ Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or

redirect flood flows;

$ Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam; or

$ Cause or result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

4.6.6 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 4.6.6.1 Introduction The following discussions focus on topical areas and issues where it has been determined pursuant to the EIR Initial Study/NOP process, that the Project may result in or cause potentially significant hydrology/water quality impacts. Of the CEQA threshold considerations identified above at Section 4.6.5, and as substantiated in the Initial Study (EIR Appendix A), the Project’s potential impacts under the following topics are determined to be less-than-significant, and are not further substantively discussed here: • Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with

groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or



a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of the pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted);

• Place a housing project within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a

federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map;

• Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or

redirect flood flows; • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving

flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam; or • Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

All other CEQA topics concerning the Project’s potential impacts to hydrology/water quality are discussed below. Please refer to also Initial Study Checklist Item X., Hydrology and Water Quality. 4.6.6.2 Impact Statements Potential Impacts: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge

requirements; or Otherwise substantially degrade water quality. Impact Analysis: The Project is mandated to acquire and comply with requisite permits, and to conform to other applicable City of Pomona, LACSD, and RWQCB water quality standards waste discharge requirements, thereby acting to preclude, or substantively reduce the potential for the Project to violate established water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. The following discussions more specifically address the



Project’s potential water quality impacts attributable to wastewater (sewage) and stormwater runoff. Wastewater Management Improvements and Regulatory Compliance The Project proposes conventional hotel/office uses and activities, and would not generate wastewater or wastewater constituents requiring special handling or treatment. The Project would connect to existing municipal sanitary sewer system facilities, and does not propose or require wastewater systems or facilities that would affect area water quality. The Project’s plan for connection to existing sanitary sewer infrastructure is subject to review and approval by the City and the LACSD. The Project Applicant would be required to apply for service and pay a mandated connection fee, which would be applied toward maintenance and expansion of wastewater treatment facilities in the manner determined by the LACSD. Stormwater Management Improvements and Regulatory Compliance The Project would be developed and operated in compliance with City and LARWQCB regulations and water quality standards. More specifically, the Project would provide connection to, and interface with, existing drainage systems in the least invasive manner possible. Design, configuration, and locations of proposed drainage system improvements would be reviewed and approved by the City prior to, or concurrent with, application for grading permits. Aiding in the management and treatment of stormwater, the Project design would

employ landscaped bioretention/biofiltration areas acting to further reduce the rate and

quantity of stormwater discharges, while providing treatment of stormflows and

elimination/reduction of discharged pollutants of concern.

City of Pomona Municipal Code Chapter 18, Article X, Stormwater Management, et al., codify City implementation and enforcement of stormwater management requirements



applicable to the Project. In this regard, all Project stormwater discharges would be required to comply with applicable provisions and performance standards articulated in the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Consistent with NPDES, LARWQCB and City requirements, waste materials would not be discharged to drainage areas. Compliance with these, and other previously referenced state and regional water quality permitting mandates, would ensure the control of pollutants entering receiving waters. Applicable stormwater discharge permitting requirements are summarized below. Construction Permitting As required by the SWRCB and in compliance with the City of Pomona’s requirements, the Project Applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State of California to comply with the requirements of the NPDES General Construction Permit. Before the issuance of a grading permit, the Project Applicant shall prepare a Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), in compliance with the applicable ordinances and regulations of the City of Pomona, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, and the SWRCB. The Project Construction SWPPP shall incorporate BMPs for control of pollutants in stormwater runoff during construction-related activities, and would be designed to address water erosion control, sediment control, off-site tracking control, wind erosion control, non-stormwater management control, and waste management and materials pollution control. BMPs incorporated in the Project Construction SWPPP would include, but would not be limited to, the following: • Off-site sediment release and on-site erosion shall be controlled through

temporary sediment basins, filter screens, and gravel bags. • Control devices shall be placed at the facility entrance to restrict off-site tracking

of sediment on vehicles exiting the site.



• Disturbed areas shall be watered on a regular basis and as necessary to control windblown dust.

• Construction vehicles shall be fueled and maintained in a designated area to

avoid and contain spills. • All hazardous materials shall be properly stored and contained on site. Spill

containment and cleanup tools and materials shall be kept at the vehicle fueling and maintenance area on the site.

• The construction contractor shall implement good housekeeping programs to

reduce litter and contaminants. • All solid wastes shall be placed in designated storage containers until removed

from the site. • On-site portable toilet facilities shall be provided during construction. • Designated concrete washout areas or containers shall be provided on-site. • Following a major storm event, all physical BMPs shall be inspected and

repaired, as necessary, to assure that they would continue to function properly. • Employees shall be trained in Best Management Practices.

Consistent with LARWQCB and City permit requirements, appropriate BMPs would be

employed throughout construction processes, thereby controlling potential discharge of

pollutants, preventing sewage spills, and avoiding discharge of sediments into streets,

stormwater channels, or waterways.



Post-Construction Permitting

Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) In compliance with the City’s required SUSMP and municipal stormwater permit, the

Project Applicant would be required to develop and implement a Project-specific

SUSMP. The SUSMP would effectively prohibit non-stormwater discharges from new

development and/or redevelopment projects, and reduce the discharge of pollutants

from stormwater conveyance systems to the maximum extent practicable (MEP)

statutory standard. The Project SUSMP responds accordingly by incorporating Site

Design, Source Control, and Treatment Control BMPs described previously at Section

4.6.4.2. The Project SUSMP and all required drainage improvements and BMPs would

be designed and implemented to the satisfaction of the City and LARWQCB.

Verification of Ongoing BMP Maintenance Verification would include the developer’s signed statement, as part of the Project

application, accepting responsibility for all structural and treatment control BMP

maintenance until the time the property is transferred and, where applicable, a signed

agreement from the public entity assuming responsibility for structural or treatment

control BMP maintenance (Covenant Agreement).

Summary

With implementation of the SWPPP and SUSMP plans and programs summarized in

the preceding discussions, the potential for the Project to violate any water quality

standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water

quality is determined to be less-than-significant.




Potential Impacts: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,

including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially

increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in

flooding or substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; or Create or contribute

runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned stormwater

drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.

Impact Analysis: The Project incorporates all necessary stormwater management

system components, and would comply with all stormwater management system

design, construction, and operational requirements mandated under the City Municipal

Code and within regulations established by other agencies, such as the LARWQCB and

California Department of Water Resources. In combination, the Project’s stormwater

management system components, and compliance with regulatory requirements act to

preclude potentially adverse drainage and stormwater runoff impacts.

More specifically, as discussed herein:

• The Project stormwater management system concept emulates and maintains the

site’s general south-to-north drainage patterns. No streams or rivers traverse the

Project site, nor would be otherwise substantively affected by the Project. The

Project would therefore not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the

site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river.

• The Project stormwater management system concept provides for

bioretention/biofiltration of 1.5 times the SWQDv acting to reduce and treat

discharges from the site consistent with City and LARWQCB requirements.

Further, the Project stormwater management system concept collects and directs

developed stormwaters from impervious areas to existing and proposed storm

drains, acting to minimize or preclude flooding, erosion, and siltation concerns at

receiving facilities. The Project would therefore not substantially increase the rate



or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding or

substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site.

• Stormwater discharges from the Project site would be directed to the existing 66-

inch RCP located northeasterly of the Project site. This 66-inch RCP has been

designed to convey runoff from future commercial buildout of the Pomona

Ranch Plaza, including development of the Project site (Project Hydrology Study,

p. 4). The Project would therefore not create or contribute runoff water which

would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned stormwater drainage

systems.

As approved by the City, final designs of all Project storm drains,

bioretention/biofiltration areas, and all proposed BMPs would achieve performance

standards established under NPDES Permit No. CAS004001 Order No. R4-2012-0175.

Based on the preceding discussion, the potential for the Project to result in the following

is determined to be less-than-significant: Substantially alter the existing drainage

pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or

river; Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which

would result in flooding or substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; or Create or

contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned

stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted

runoff.


4.7 PUBLIC SERVICES

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Public Services Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 4.7-1

4.7 PUBLIC SERVICES

Abstract

This Section of the EIR addresses the Project’s potential impacts to public services. Specifically,

the public services analysis examines whether the Project would:

• Result in or cause substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of

new or physically altered governmental facilities; or result in the need for new or

physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause

significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,

response times or other performance objectives for fire or police protection services.

Public services, including fire and police protection, are currently provided to the Project area,

and the Project would potentially increase demands for these services. Such potentially increased

demands are addressed through the Project’s physical design features, (e.g., fire protection

systems such as sprinklers, and adequate security lighting), which act to reduce the extent and

frequency of fire and police protection service calls. Further, fees and taxes paid by the Project

will provide funds available for the purchase and maintenance of equipment and hiring of

personnel commensurate with Project-related demands for fire and police services.

As supported by the discussion presented in this Section, the potential for the Project to

adversely affect public services or to result in potentially adverse environmental impacts due to

the construction or expansion of service facilities or systems is less-than-significant.



4.7.1 INTRODUCTION

For each of the public services discussed, existing service conditions are described, any

improvements required to accommodate the proposed development are identified, and

any resulting or associated impacts and required mitigation are discussed. The analysis

is based on physical and operational attributes presented in the Project Description (EIR

Section 3.0); information presented in the City of Pomona General Plan; and information

provided by the City of Pomona, Los Angeles County Fire Department, and the City of

Pomona Police Department.


4.7.2.1 Fire Protection Services

Fire protection services for the City of Pomona are provided under contract by the Los

Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD). The LACoFD answered almost 360,000

emergency calls in 2014, providing fire protection and emergency response services

within its approximately 2,300-square-mile service area.1 The LACoFD responds to a

variety of service needs, including traffic accidents, Emergency Medical Services,

hazardous material incidents, grass/vegetation fires, and residential calls.

The City of Pomona lies within the LACoFD Division VIII service area. There are 19 fire

stations among the cities in Division VIII, 8 of which are located in Pomona. If

necessary, resources in adjacent jurisdictions provide additional support.2 Of these

facilities, Station 188 is nearest the subject site. This Station is located at 18-A Village

Loop Road in Phillips Ranch, approximately 0.75 miles northwesterly of the Project.

Two additional stations are located near the Project site: Station No. 185, located

approximately 1.5 miles northeasterly of the Project site at 925 East Lexington Avenue;

and Station 181 at 590 South Park Avenue, adjacent to the Civic Center, approximately

1.7 miles north of the Project site. The location of these fire stations in relation to the

Project site is presented at Figure 4.7-1. 1 Los Angeles County Fire Department 2014 Statistical Summary. http://www.fire.lacounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2014-StatSummary.pdf 2 City of Pomona General Plan EIR, p. 4.11-1.

http://www.fire.lacounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2014-StatSummary.pdf

http://www.fire.lacounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2014-StatSummary.pdf



Figure 4.7-1 Police/Fire Department Locations (from Pomona Walmart Expansion EIR)



4.7.2.2 Police Protection Services

Police protection for the Project site and vicinity properties is currently provided by the

Pomona Police Department. Seven facilities provide police services in Pomona. Police

Department first-response facilities include the Main Station at 490 W. Mission

Boulevard, the Traffic Bureau at 100 W. Commercial, and the Aero Bureau at 1905

McKinley in the City of La Verne. Of these, the Main Station, located approximately 1.7

miles northerly, is nearest the Project site. Location of the Main Station in relation to the

Project site is also indicated at Figure 4.7-1.

The Pomona Police Department is divided into three Divisions:

• Operations Division: The Operations Division is the largest in the organization

and is responsible for the field services provided to the City of Pomona by

uniformed personnel. Specialized units within the Division include the K9 Unit,

Youth Services Unit, SWAT team, Bike Patrol, and all augment Patrol Services.

These units work together in an effort to reduce crime and increase service

delivery, with the ultimate goal of public safety in a city of an estimated 150,000

people in 24 square miles.

• Administrative Services Division: This Division is responsible for providing

administrative and other essential support services for the effective and cost

efficient delivery of police services. The programs and work activities assigned to

this division include the Records and Clerical Program, Budget and Accounting,

Fleet and Facility Maintenance, Dispatch Services, Jail Operations, and Property

and Evidence.

• Investigative Service Division: The Investigative Service Division initiates

investigations and handles all the follow-up and casework for incidents that

require a response by patrol officers. Division units include, but are not limited

to, Traffic Services, Aero Bureau, Homicide, Gang Violence Suppression Unit and

Vice. The Division also responds to citizen and council complaints on criminal



activity. The Division is staffed with detectives, a major crime task force, and

specially-trained civilian personnel. (City of Pomona General Plan EIR, pp. 4.11-

6, 7).

The Pomona Police Department consists of 163 sworn personnel and 106 non-sworn

personnel. This represents 1.1 officers per 1,000 people. The current national average for

cities with populations between 100,000 and 249,999 is 1.9 officers per 1,000 residents.

The Pomona Police Department operates at staffing levels below the national average.

The Police Department classifies service calls by assigning them a priority level. The

average emergency response time in 2012 was 3.96 minutes for life-threatening calls

(Priority 0). The average response time for a crime in progress (Priority 1) is 9.68

minutes.3

4.7.2.3 Community Emergency Response Team (CERT)

In support of area fire and police emergency response services, the City of Pomona in

collaboration with the LACoFD, California State Polytechnic University (Cal Poly

Pomona), and the Police Department is participatory to CERT formation and training.

In emergency situations, CERT members provide valuable emergency response services

complementing and supplementing actions by fire and police first responders. LACoFD

offers free, FEMA-approved 20-hour CERT training to the communities they serve.

Classes are taught by trained emergency personnel, including firefighters and

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel. Through this training, residents learn

about hazards that may impact their area as well as basic disaster response skills, such

as fire safety, light search and rescue, team organization, and disaster medical

operations.4

3City of Pomona General Plan Update, Corridors Specific Plan, Active Transportation Plan and Green Plan, Volume I Draft Environmental Impact Report (Rincon Consultants, Inc.) July 2013. 4 http://www.fire.lacounty.gov/lacofd-cert-program/

http://www.fire.lacounty.gov/lacofd-cert-program/



4.7.3 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Consistent with the standards of significance outlined in the CEQA Guidelines, public services impacts resulting from implementation of the Project could be considered potentially significant if they caused or resulted in any of the following: • Substantial adverse physical effects from the construction of new or altered

government facilities needed to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire or police protection services, schools, parks, or other public facilities.

4.7.4 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 4.7.4.1 Introduction The following discussions focus on areas where it has been determined that the Project may result in potentially significant public services impacts, based on the analysis presented within this Section and included within the EIR Initial Study (EIR Appendix A). That is, as substantiated in the Initial Study, the Project will not result in potentially significant impacts related to the provision of new or physically altered schools, parks, or other public facilities. The Project’s potential to impact fire or police protection services are discussed below. Please refer also to Initial Study Checklist Items XV., Public Services. 4.7.4.2 Impact Statement Potential Impact: Result in or cause substantial adverse physical impacts associated

with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities; or result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire or police protection services.



Impact Analysis: Fire Protection Services As discussed previously in this Section, fire protection and emergency medical services for the Project would be provided by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD). Fire protection and emergency medical response services are provided throughout the City under municipal contract. Countywide, the LACoFD operates 171 fire stations that are divided into 22 batallions.5 The City of Pomona is served primarily by Battalion 15, which includes seven active fire stations; however, personnel and equipment from stations within other nearby batallions could also be dispatched to respond, if needed. LACoFD Fire Station No. 188 is nearest the subject site, and would provide first response. This Station is located at 18-A Village Loop Road in Phillips Ranch, approximately 0.75 miles northwesterly of the Project. All firefighters employed by the Los Angeles County Fire Department are certified as Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT-1), which allows them to respond to emergency medical calls and, if necessary, provide life support services. Ambulance services are currently provided under County contract and dispatched by LACoFD. Patients in Pomona are typically transported to Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center, a full-service hospital located approximately 3.25 miles northerly of the Project site. Two additional stations are located near the Project site: Station No. 185, located

approximately 1.5 miles northeasterly of the Project site at 925 E. Lexington Avenue;

and Station 181 at 590 South Park Avenue, adjacent to the Civic Center, approximately

1.7 miles north of the Project site. The location of these fire stations in relation to the

Project site is presented at Figure 4.7-1.

Prior to issuance of building permits, the Project site plan and design of proposed structures will be reviewed by the City and Fire Department to ensure compliance with

5 http://www.fire.lacounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2014-StatSummary.pdf



Fire Department Conditions of Approval, to include emergency access and fire flow requirements, along with any fire prevention, protection, and/or suppression requirements (e.g., sprinkler systems, fire hydrants) as specified under existing Ordinances and applicable Building Code and Fire Code provisions. Moreover, the Project is required to comply with agency-specific criteria outlined in the Project Conditions of Approval. The Project will comply with these Conditions of Approval and subsequent requirements of the Fire Department identified through the City’s final site plan and plan check/building permit review processes. Compliance with these requirements acts to further reduce potential demands for, and impacts upon, fire department and emergency response services. It is also noted that the City’s Public Safety Improvement Fee will provide funding available to expand or enhance current fire protection services available to the Project and vicinity. The City of Pomona, in consultation with LACoFD, will ultimately determine the most effective use of revenues generated by the Project, and how they will be employed for the provision and enhancement of fire protection services. Police Protection Services For facilities such as those proposed by the Project, provision and maintenance of adequate police protection services is typically realized through a combination of: • site and facility designs that incorporate appropriate safety and security

elements; and • adequate Police Department funding and staffing.

The Project site plan and proposed facilities designs will be reviewed by the Pomona Police Department to ensure the incorporation of appropriate safety and security elements throughout the Project, e.g., appropriate building security and alarm systems, adequate outdoor lighting, and defensible spaces.



As discussed previously in this Section, police protection for the Project site and vicinity properties is currently provided by the Pomona Police Department. The Police Department headquarters is located at 490 W. Mission Boulevard, approximately 1.7 miles northerly of the Project site. It is further noted that the City’s required Public Safety Improvement Fee, collected from all new development, will provide supplemental funding available to expand or enhance current police protection services available to the Project and vicinity. The City of Pomona, in consultation with the Pomona Police Department, will ultimately determine the most effective use of revenues generated by the Project, and how they will be employed for the provision and enhancement of police protection services. Summary Development of the Project would result in an incremental increase in the overall Citywide demand for fire protection and/or police protection services, which could result in additional staffing or equipment requirements. However, based on the fact that the Project would be constructed within an already-developed urban environment and the availability of existing facilities and services to the subject site, the Project will not result in a potential need or requirement for new physical facilities, the construction of which would result in potentially significant environmental impacts. The Project is not anticipated to significantly affect existing response times or service ratios in regard to the provision of emergency services. Development impact fees and sales tax revenues generated by the Project will provide funding sources available for support and enhancement of fire and police protection services. The City of Pomona (through their contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department) and the Pomona Police Department administration will ultimately determine the most effective use of revenues generated by the Project, and how these funds will be employed for the provision and enhancement of fire and police protection services. Level of Significance: Less-Than-Significant.

5.0 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Other CEQA Considerations Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 5-1

5.0 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS

This Section of the EIR addresses other environmental considerations and topics mandated under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). These topics include Cumulative Impacts, Alternatives to the Project, Growth Inducement, Significant Environmental Effects of the Project, Significant and Irreversible Environmental Changes, and Energy Conservation. 5.1 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

The CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR identify any significant cumulative impacts associated with a project (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15130 (a)). When potential cumulative impacts are not deemed significant, the document should explain the basis for that conclusion. Cumulative impacts are “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15355). Thus, a legally adequate cumulative impact analysis is an analysis of a particular project viewed over time and with other related past, present, and foreseeable probable future projects, whose impacts might compound or interrelate with those of the Project considered here. CEQA notes that the discussion of cumulative impacts should be guided by standards of practicality and reasonableness (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15130 (b)). Only those projects whose impacts might compound or interrelate with those of the Project under consideration require evaluation. CEQA does not require as much detail in the analysis of cumulative environmental impacts as must be provided for the Project alone. The CEQA Guidelines identify two basic methods for satisfying the cumulative impacts analysis requirement: the list-of-projects methodology, and the summary-of-projections methodology. Because each environmental resource is affected by its surroundings in



different manners, either of the two methodologies, or a combination of both, may be applied to the analysis of cumulative impacts to each resource. For example, because the approval process and construction phase of development typically takes at least one to two years, the list-of-projects method is likely to provide a more accurate projection of growth in the near term. This method may overstate potential cumulative impacts because the considered list-of-projects may include proposals that will never be developed. Similarly, because development proposals are rarely publicly known until within five (5) years of the expected development, the summary-of-projections method provides a more accurate projection of growth over the long term. This method may not accurately predict growth in any given year, but aggregates various growth trends over the long term. For each topical discussion presented herein, the cumulative geographic context is identified, which in turn relates to the amount and type of growth that is anticipated to occur within the geographic area under consideration. Where appropriate to the analysis in question, cumulative impacts are assessed with reference to a list of “related projects,” as described at CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b). In this manner, the EIR appropriately characterizes and evaluates potential cumulative impacts. Consistent with direction provided in the CEQA Guidelines, related projects considered in these cumulative analyses are “only those projects whose impacts might compound or interrelate with those of the Project under consideration require evaluation.” In this regard, it is recognized that within the context of the cumulative impacts analysis, varied criteria are employed in determining the scope and type of “cumulative projects” considered. For example, the analysis of cumulative traffic impacts evaluates the Project’s traffic impacts in the context of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable probable future related development proposals that would discernibly affect traffic conditions within the Traffic Impact Analysis Study Area. As another example, cumulative air quality impacts are considered in terms of the Project’s contribution to other air emissions impacts affecting the encompassing Air Basin (Basin). The manner in which each resource may be affected also dictates the geographic scope of the cumulative impacts analysis. For example, cumulative traffic impacts would typically be localized to the vicinity of a given project site because after a relatively short distance,



traffic patterns tend to normalize; whereas cumulative air quality impacts are more appropriately analyzed with a Basin-wide approach because the Basin’s meteorological and geographic conditions generally define the extent of cumulative air quality considerations. Similar considerations are discussed in evaluating potential cumulative impacts for each of the EIR’s environmental topics (Land Use and Planning, Traffic and Transportation, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gases/Global Climate Change, Noise, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Public Services). Unless otherwise noted herein, the cumulative impact analysis ultimately evaluates effects of the Project within the context of anticipated buildout of the City as envisioned under the General Plan and related regional plans. Specific cumulative projects have also been identified where this information may be different, more detailed than that provided within the General Plan or applicable regional plans, or where such specific information otherwise benefits the cumulative impact analyses. 5.1.1 DISCUSSION OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Section 15139(a) of the CEQA Guidelines notes that, “an EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable, as defined at CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(c). Where a lead agency is examining a project with an incremental effect that is not ‘cumulatively considerable,’ a lead agency need not consider that effect significant, but shall briefly describe its basis for concluding that the incremental effect is not cumulatively considerable.” Potential cumulative impacts for each of the EIR’s environmental topics are presented below and include:

• Land Use and Planning; • Traffic and Transportation; • Air Quality; • Greenhouse Gases/Global Climate Change; • Noise; • Hydrology and Water Quality; and • Public Services.



5.1.1.1 Cumulative Impacts Related to Land Use and Planning

The cumulative impact area when considering potential cumulative land use and planning

issues includes areas that are currently subject to provisions of the City General Plan and

Zoning Ordinance. These areas include incorporated areas of Pomona and surrounding

areas lying within the City’s Sphere of Influence.

General Plan and Zoning Considerations

Uses, development intensities, and development types proposed by the Project are allowed

under the site’s General Plan Place Type designation, Transit Oriented District. Further, the

Project would comport with the 2016 Specific Plan amendment for the subject site.

The Project would be designed, developed, and operated consistent with General Plan

Goals and Policies, and requirements and standards articulated in the 2016 Specific Plan

with no demonstrable cumulative impacts regarding compliance or consistency with other

land use plans or regulations. Moreover, the Project does not propose or require elements

or aspects that would affect off-site land use designations or other local or regional land use

plans or land use programs.

The City comprehensively updates and amends General Plan and Zoning documents to

reflect cumulative land use changes within the impact area. Regional agencies employ

development-specific information and General Plan/Zoning information provided by the

City in developing regional plans and growth projections. In combination, these actions

ensure that potential cumulative effects of evolving land use plans are appropriately

addressed at local and regional levels.

Lastly, the Project represents buildout of the site consistent with land uses envisioned by the City of Pomona General Plan. The General Plan EIR by its nature addresses cumulative impacts associated with buildout of the City, including potential cumulative land use impacts. More specifically, the General Plan EIR at Section 4.8, Land Use and Planning concludes that future development consistent with the General Plan would have less-than-significant land use and planning impacts.



Based on the preceding discussions, the Project’s contributions to potential cumulative land use and planning impacts is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are determined to be less-than-significant.

5.1.1.2 Cumulative Impacts Related to Traffic/Transportation

The cumulative impact area for traffic/transportation impacts is defined by the Traffic

Impact Study Area (Study Area), as described within the Project Traffic Impact Analysis

(EIR Appendix B). The Study Area encompasses potentially affected roadways and

intersections within the City of Pomona and also includes potentially affected Caltrans and

Congestion Management Program facilities.

The Project Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) comprehensively addresses potential

cumulative traffic impacts resulting from, or affecting the Project. In this regard, for

Opening Year (2018) and Horizon Year (2040) Conditions, the TIA considers traffic

generated by the Project within the context of cumulative traffic that would be generated

by other known or probable related developments (please refer to TIA Appendix 4.1,

Cumulative Development Project Research). The TIA estimates of traffic growth also

incorporate an ambient growth factor of 2 percent compounded annually to account for

cumulative non-specific traffic generation.

As summarized at EIR Section 4.2, Transportation/Traffic and presented in detail in the

Project TIA, the Project would not result in or cause potentially significant cumulative

traffic/transportation impacts.

Cumulative Access Considerations

Site access driveways, traffic controls, and on-site circulation improvement concepts

proposed by the Project act to reduce potential access and on-site circulation impacts. Final

site access and on-site circulation designs would incorporate any additional provisions or

modifications suggested within the Project TIA, or as may otherwise be required by the

City. City design review processes, and any resultant modifications incorporated in the

Project Final Site Plan, would ensure that potential parking, site access, and internal



circulation impacts are less-than-significant. On this basis, the Project’s potential

contribution to cumulative impacts in regard to site access are not considerable, and the

cumulative effects of the Project are determined to be less-than-significant.

5.1.1.3 Cumulative Impacts Related to Air Quality

The cumulative impact area for air quality considerations is generally defined by the

encompassing Air Basin and boundaries of the jurisdictional air quality management

agency. In this case, the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB, Air Basin) and the South Coast Air

Quality Management District (SCAQMD) respectively. Project air pollutant emissions

within the context of SCAQMD’s regional emissions thresholds provide an indicator of

potential cumulative impacts within the jurisdictional Air Basin. Due to the defining

geographic and meteorological characteristics of the Air Basin, criteria pollutant emissions

that would potentially cumulatively impact air quality would be, for practical purposes,

restricted to the Air Basin. Accordingly, the geographic area encompassed by the Air Basin

is the appropriate limit for this cumulative Air Quality analysis.

Construction-Source Air Quality Impacts

As summarized at EIR Section 4.3, Air Quality, with application of mitigation, Project

construction-source air pollutant emissions would not exceed applicable SCAQMD

regional thresholds. Mitigated Project-level construction-source regional air quality impacts

would therefore be less-than-significant. Per SCAQMD’s Cumulative Impact Analysis

Requirements Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, cumulative impacts in these regards would

similarly be less-than-significant.

Modeled construction-source air pollutant emissions reflect all-on-site construction

activities and also account for construction worker commutes and vendor deliveries.

Modeled emissions do not however take credit for reductions achieved through application

of best available control measures (BACMs) and compliance with standard regulatory

requirements, such as SCAQMD Rule 403 (fugitive dust control). Compliance with these

measures would further reduce already less-than-significant Project-level and cumulative

construction-source air quality impacts.



Operational-Source Air Quality Impacts

As substantiated at EIR Section 4.3, Air Quality, Project operational-source air pollutant

emissions would not exceed applicable SCAQMD thresholds. Per SCAQMD’s “Cumulative

Impact Analysis Requirements Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines,” cumulative impacts in these

regards would similarly be less-than-significant.

Non-Attainment Impacts

The Project area is designated as an extreme non-attainment area for ozone, a serious non-

attainment area for PM10, and a non-attainment area for PM2.5. Germane to these regional

non-attainment conditions, as substantiated at EIR Section 4.3, Air Quality, the Project’s

construction- and operational-source emissions would not exceed applicable SCAQMD

regional significance thresholds, and would be less-than-significant or less-than-significant

as mitigated. These same significance thresholds are applied by SCAQMD in determining

whether a given project’s incremental contribution to criteria pollutant loads in the Basin is

cumulatively considerable. The Project’s emissions would therefore not result in a

cumulatively considerable net increase in PM2.5, PM10, VOC, and NOx emissions (VOC and

NOx are ozone precursors; additionally, NOx is a precursor to PM10/PM2.5) within the

encompassing non-attainment area(s).

LST Impacts

As substantiated at EIR Section 4.3, Air Quality, the Project’s construction- and operational-

source emissions would not exceed applicable SCAQMD localized significance thresholds

(LSTs). These same significance thresholds are applied by SCAQMD in determining

whether a given project’s incremental contribution to LST impacts is cumulatively

considerable. The Project would therefore not result in a cumulatively considerable net

increase in LST impacts.

CO Hotspot Impacts

The Project would generate additional vehicular traffic, and therefore could generate

mobile-source emissions that could cause or contribute to adverse CO concentrations (CO

“hotspots”). As substantiated at EIR Section 4.3, Air Quality potential CO hotspot impacts



were determined to be less-than-significant. Less-than-significant CO hotspot impacts at the

Project level are not cumulatively considerable.

Lastly, the Project represents buildout of the site consistent with land uses envisioned by

the City of Pomona General Plan. The General Plan EIR by its nature addresses cumulative

impacts associated with buildout of the City, including potential cumulative air quality

impacts. More specifically, the General Plan EIR at Section 4.2, Air Quality concludes that

future development consistent with the General Plan would have less-than-significant air

quality impacts.

Based on the preceding, the Project’s potential to contribute considerably to cumulative air

quality impacts is considered less-than-significant.

5.1.1.4 Cumulative Impacts Related to GHG Emissions/Global Climate Change CEQA emphasizes that the effects of greenhouse gas emissions are cumulative, and should

be evaluated in the context of CEQA’s requirements for cumulative impacts analysis

(CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(f)). In this regard, the Project Greenhouse Gas (GHG)

Analysis (EIR Appendix D) is by its nature a cumulative analysis.

As demonstrated in the Project Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Project GHG Analysis) and the

information presented at EIR Section 4.4, Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas

Emissions, the Project would not cause or result in a substantial increase in Greenhouse Gas

(GHG) emissions when compared to the Business As Usual (BAU) scenario. Further, Project

GHG emissions would not exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency

determines applicable to the Project. The Project GHG analysis also demonstrates that the

Project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide,

regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.

In this latter regard, the GHG Analysis demonstrates that Project-source GHG emissions

represent an approximate 32.2 percent reduction in GHG emissions when compared to the



CARB BAU scenario. This is consistent with and supports California AB 32 Scoping Plan

directives calling for an approximate 28.5 percent reduction in GHG emissions.

Further, the Project would conform to applicable City of Pomona Green Plan (Green Plan)

GHG emissions reductions targets. In this latter regard, Project GHG emissions would be

reduced by approximately 27.75% when compared to the Green Plan BAU scenario. This is

consistent with and supports the Green Plan directives calling for an approximate 15

percent reduction in GHG emissions.

Further, irrespective of the use of the BAU threshold, substantial evidence exists

supporting the conclusion that the Project’s GHG emissions impacts are less-than-

significant. To this end, the analysis at EIR Section 4.4 substantiates that the Project GHG

emission would be less-than-significant when considered independently within the context

of applicable CEQA Guidelines GHG Emissions Significance Factors.



impacts associated with buildout of the City, including potential cumulative air quality

impacts. More specifically, the General Plan EIR at Section 4.15, Greenhouse Gases, concludes

that future development consistent with the General Plan would have less-than-significant

greenhouse gas/global climate change impacts.

Based on the preceding, the Project’s potential to contribute considerably to greenhouse

gas/global climate change impacts is considered less-than-significant.

5.1.1.5 Cumulative Impacts Related to Noise

The cumulative impact area for noise considerations is defined as surrounding properties

that could receive Project-generated noise including construction-source or stationary/area-

source noise emanating from the Project site; and would also include roadway corridors

affected by Project traffic and associated vehicular-source noise.



Construction-Source and Stationary/Area-Source Noise Impacts

Potential noise impacts of the Project are discussed in EIR Section 4.5, Noise, and EIR

Appendix E. As discussed within the EIR, the Project’s construction-source and

stationary/area-source noise levels were not found to result in a substantial temporary

periodic or permanent increase in ambient noise conditions compared to conditions without

the Project. Project construction-source noise and stationary/area-source in combination with

ambient noise levels would not cause an exceedance of applicable noise thresholds.

The Project is consistent with land uses and development intensities anticipated under

General Plan Update Buildout conditions. Cumulative construction-source and

stationary/area-source noise impacts affecting area land uses under General Plan Buildout

conditions are comprehensively addressed in the City of Pomona General Plan Update EIR

(July 2013), and are determined to be less-than-significant.1

Vehicular-Source Noise Impacts

The Project is consistent with land uses and development intensities anticipated under

General Plan Update Buildout conditions, and traffic and vehicular-source noise generated

by the Project are reflected in the traffic and noise modeling prepared as part of the General

Plan Update EIR. As noted, under General Plan Buildout conditions, cumulative vehicular-

source noise impacts affecting City roadways would be less-than-significant, and the

Project’s contribution to these less-than-significant impacts would be indiscernible and not

cumulatively considerable. Cumulative vehicular-source noise impacts affecting City

roadway corridors under General Plan Buildout conditions are comprehensively addressed

in the City of Pomona General Plan Update EIR (July 2013), and are determined to be less-

than-significant.2

1 City of Pomona General Plan Update, Corridors Specific Plan, ATP and Green Plan EIR (Rincon Consultants, Inc.) July 2013, pages 15–16, et. al. 2 City of Pomona General Plan Update, Corridors Specific Plan, ATP and Green Plan EIR (Rincon Consultants, Inc.) July 2013, pages 15–16, et. al.



Based on the preceding, the Project’s potential contributions to cumulative construction-

source and operational-source noise impacts (inclusive of stationary/area sources and

vehicular sources) is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project would be

less-than-significant.

5.1.1.6 Cumulative Impacts Related to Hydrology and Water Quality

The cumulative impact area when considering potential hydrology and water quality

impacts is defined as the area encompassed by the jurisdictional Regional Water Quality

Control Board. In this case, this is the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board

(LARWQCB). Local oversight is also provided by the City of Pomona and County of Los

Angeles.

As discussed at EIR Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project would incorporate

all necessary drainage and stormwater management systems, and would comply with all

stormwater system design, construction, and operational requirements mandated under

the City’s Municipal Code and within regulations established by other agencies, including

but not limited to: the LARWQCB and California Department of Water Resources. Treated

post-development stormwater discharges would be directed off-site to existing storm

drains designed to accept stormwater runoff volumes and rates from the fully developed

Pomona Ranch Plaza, including the Project site; thereby avoiding potentially adverse

cumulative effects of increased stormwater discharge rates. Potential cumulative effects of

stormwater pollutants are addressed and regulated pursuant to mandated Project-specific

SWPPP and SUSMP requirements, reflecting NPDES mandates and water quality

objectives, plans and policies articulated in the LARWQCB Basin Plan, and its updates and

amendments.

The Project would comply with established policies and regulations and would implement

City-approved stormwater management systems, reducing the Project’s potential

contribution to cumulative hydrology and water quality to levels that would be less-than-

significant.





impacts associated with buildout of the City, including potential cumulative

hydrology/water quality impacts. More specifically, the General Plan EIR at Section 4.7,

Hydrology and Water Quality, concludes that future development consistent with the

General Plan would have less-than-significant hydrology and water quality impacts.

Based on the preceding discussion, the Project’s potential contribution to cumulative

impacts in regard to hydrology and water quality is not considerable, and the cumulative

effects of the Project are determined to be less-than-significant.

5.1.1.7 Cumulative Impacts Related to Public Services (Police and Fire Protection)

The cumulative impact areas for fire and police protection services are defined by

respective fire protection and police protection service boundaries, though such agencies

also provide extra-jurisdictional mutual support allowing for additional and supplemental

services under emergency situations.

The Project would incrementally increase demands on police and fire protection services.

Cumulative demands for these services are reduced through review and coordination of

development projects with potentially affected service providers, and incorporation of

appropriate design and construction elements which act to enhance safety and minimize

potential hazards. The Project site and building plans are subject to review and approval by

responsible fire protection and law enforcement agencies, acting to reduce or avoid

potential increased demands on fire protection and law enforcement services.

Cumulatively, areawide demands for police and fire protection services are funded

through payment of taxes and fees that support government services. Tax revenues and

fees generated by the Project would contribute to City funds available to improve facilities

and equipment, and to hire and train additional staff and officers. Service providers, in

combination with City decision-makers, would ultimately determine the most effective use



of revenues generated by the Project, and how these may be employed for the provision

and enhancement of police and fire protection services.



impacts associated with buildout of the City. More specifically, the General Plan EIR at

Section 4.11, Public Services, concludes that future development consistent with the General

Plan would have less-than-significant public services impacts, including potential

cumulative impacts to police and fire protection services.

Based on the preceding discussion, the Project’s potential contribution to cumulative

impacts in regard to public services is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the

Project are determined to be less-than-significant.

5.2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

5.2.1 Alternatives Overview

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, an EIR must describe a range of reasonable

alternatives to the Project, or to the location of the Project, which would feasibly attain the

basic Project objectives, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant

environmental effects of the proposal (for ease of reference, Project environmental impacts

are summarized in Section 5.2.3, following). As further presented in the CEQA Guidelines,

an EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative, but rather, the discussion of

alternatives and their relative merits and impacts should be provided in a manner that

fosters informed decision-making and public participation. To this end, the CEQA

Guidelines indicate that the range of alternatives selected for examination in an EIR should

be governed by “rule of reason,” and requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives

necessary to permit an informed decision.

Consistent with the provisions of the CEQA Guidelines, the following analysis presents a

reasonable range of alternatives to the Project that would potentially lessen its



environmental effects while allowing for attainment of the basic Project Objectives (for ease

of reference, Project Objectives are restated in Section 5.2.2, following). Supporting

reasoning behind the selection of alternatives is presented together with a summary

description of each alternative. The merits of the selected alternatives compared to the

Project are described and evaluated.

The alternatives analysis concludes with identification of the environmentally superior

alternative. If the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project Alternative, the

CEQA Guidelines require that one of the remaining considered Alternatives be identified as

the environmentally superior selection.

5.2.2 Project Objectives

The primary goal of the Project is the development of the subject site with a productive mix of hotel and office uses. Complementary objectives of the Project include the following:



provided by adjacent SR-71 freeway and local access provided by Rio Rancho Road;


• Develop the subject site with high-quality hotel uses offering a unique guest experience;


• Attract and accommodate new and additional hotel and office development serving local and regional markets;




• Transition the Project site from its current unimproved/vacant state to a commercial

development, with resulting new fiscal benefits to the City of Pomona. Benefits would include new sales/room tax revenues and increased property tax revenues.

• Implement employment-generating land uses that would create new jobs available

to City residents.

5.2.3 Environmental Impacts of the Project

The Project’s potential impacts under all environmental topics considered in this EIR (Land

Use, Traffic/Transportation, Air Quality, Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas

Emissions, Noise, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Public Services) are less-than-

significant or can be reduced to a level that is less-than-significant through the application

of mitigation measures proposed herein. The Alternatives Analysis presented herein

therefore does not specifically consider development scenarios intended to reduce

significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. The Alternative Analysis does however

identify and disclose potential environmental impacts that would result should

development of the site other than that proposed by the Project would occur.

5.2.4 Description of Alternatives

Overview

The CEQA Guidelines specifically require that the EIR include in its evaluation a No Project

Alternative. The No Project Alternative should make a reasoned assessment as to future

disposition of the subject site should the Project under consideration not be developed. In

this latter regard, the CEQA Guidelines state in pertinent part:

If the project is other than a land use or regulatory plan, for example a

development project on identifiable property, the “no project” alternative is



the circumstance under which the project does not proceed. Here the

discussion would compare the environmental effects of the property

remaining in its existing state against environmental effects which would

occur if the project is approved. If disapproval of the project under

consideration would result in predictable actions by others, such as the

proposal of some other project, this “no project” consequence should be

discussed. In certain instances, the no project alternative means “no build”

wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained. However, where

failure to proceed with the project will not result in preservation of existing

environmental conditions, the analysis should identify the practical result of

the project’s non-approval and not create and analyze a set of artificial

assumptions that would be required to preserve the existing physical

environment (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6 (e)(3)(b)).

5.2.4.1 No Project/No Build Alternative

In this instance, development of the subject site is substantively defined by the site’s

General Plan Land Use Designations and the 2016 Specific Plan for the Pomona Ranch

Plaza (2016 Specific Plan). The No Project Alternative would be required to conform to land

uses approved for, and overarching performance standards and development regulations

established under, the General Plan and the 2016 Specific Plan. It is therefore considered

unlikely that the subject site would remain vacant or in a “No Build” condition. That is,

failure to proceed with the Project would not result in preservation of existing

environmental conditions, and the practical result of the Project’s non-approval would be

the development of the subject site with some other variety or configuration of approved

Specific Plan land uses.

As a consequence, any development of the subject site under a No Project Alternative

would be likely materially consistent with the Project, though internal land use

configurations, development intensities, and specific uses may be realigned within the

constraints and allowances of the General Plan and Specific Plan. Environmental impacts



resulting from development of the subject site under a No Project Alternative would likely

therefore be comparable to those occurring under the Project.

If, however, development of the subject site was significantly delayed by economic,

political, or other outside influences, existing environmental conditions would likely

prevail, and in most instances, environmental impacts would be reduced when compared

to the Project. To provide an analysis differentiated from that developed for the Project

within the body of this EIR, the No Project Alternative considered herein is assumed to

represent a “No Build” condition.

5.2.4.2 Reduced Intensity Alternative

The Reduced Intensity Alternative considered here would implement development similar

to the proposed by the Project, but at a diminished scope and scale. This Alternative would

act to diminish already less-than-significant impacts that would otherwise occur under the

Project. In order to address the Alternatives Assessment requirements of CEQA, and

provide the public and decision-makers a readily-differentiated assessment of an

alternative development scenario for the subject site, the Reduced Intensity Alternative

considered here reflects development of the subject site with only the proposed Hyatt Place

Hotel. The Reduced Intensity Alternative considered here would thus result in

development of a 200-room Hyatt Place/Hyatt House Hotel with conference facilities and

supporting amenities totaling approximately 159,000 square feet. The currently proposed

75,000-square-foot office use would not be implemented.

5.2.5 Alternative Site Considered and Rejected

As stated at CEQA Guidelines §15126.6 (f)(1)(2)(A), the “key question and first step in [the]

analysis [of alternative locations] is whether any of the significant effects of the project

would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the Project in another location.”

Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the

Project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR.



As substantiated in this EIR, all potential environmental impacts resulting from the Project

in its current location and configuration are less-than-significant, or less-than-significant

with the application of mitigation measures identified herein. CEQA does not require

analysis of alternative locations in order to further reduce impacts that are already less-

than-significant.

On this basis, further analysis of a potential Alternative Site or alternative configuration

within the subject site were not considered warranted, nor would such discussions be of

material benefit to the EIR Alternatives Analysis.

5.2.6 Comparative Impacts of Alternatives

5.2.6.1 Comparative Land Use Impacts

No Project Alternative

The No Project Alternative assumes continuing use of the subject site in its present state. No new development would occur, and no discretionary approvals would be required. The No Project Alternative would have no substantive incremental environmental effects differing from existing conditions. On this basis, potential land use impacts under the No Project Alternative would be reduced when compared to the Project. Reduced Intensity Alternative Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, only the proposed Hyatt Place Hotel would be constructed; the currently proposed 75,000-square-foot office use would not be implemented. Discretionary actions required under the Project would also be required under the Reduced Intensity Alternative. Land use and planning impacts of the Reduced Intensity Alternative would be comparable to those of the Project, and would be less-than-significant.



5.2.6.2 Comparative Transportation/Traffic Impacts No Project Alternative The No Project Alternative assumes continuing use of the subject site in its present vacant state. No new development would occur, and existing traffic conditions would remain unaffected, except as altered by ambient growth or other related projects. Already less-than-significant transportation/traffic impacts occurring under the Project would not occur. Reduced Intensity Alternative Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, only the proposed Hyatt Place Hotel would be constructed; the currently proposed 75,000-square-foot office use would not be implemented. Comparative trip generation under the Project and the Reduced Intensity Alternative are summarized at Table 5.2-1.

Table 5.2-1 Trip Generation Comparison

Project and Reduced Intensity Alternative

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Daily In Out Total In Out Total

Project

Hotel (200 Rooms) 62 44 106 62 58 120 1,634

General Office (75,000 SF) 134 18 152 28 135 163 1,055

Total 196 62 258 90 193 283 2,689

Reduced Intensity Alternative

Hotel (200 Rooms) 62 44 106 62 58 120 1,634

Total 62 44 106 62 58 120 1,634

Net Reduction 134 18 152 28 135 163 1,055

Source: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Traffic Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) May 2016.

The reduction in scope under the Reduced Intensity Alternative would likely result in incrementally improved performance at Study Area roadways and intersections. Already less-than-significant traffic/transportation impacts under the Project would likely be further diminished under the Reduced Intensity Alternative.



5.2.6.3 Comparative Air Quality Impacts


Incremental air pollutant emissions under the No Project Alternative would be precluded

in that no additional development activity would take place. The No Project Alternative

would therefore not result in any development-specific or cumulative air pollutant

emissions impacts. Air quality characteristics at the subject site would reflect currently

monitored conditions, as may be affected by any off-site development proposals, and

regional air quality and climactic patterns. On this basis, construction and operational air

pollutant emissions impacts under the No Project Alternative would likely reflect existing

air quality conditions.


Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, maximum construction-related emissions from

site preparation and grading would likely be the same as for the Project. In this regard, the

maximum daily site disturbance and amount of equipment employed concurrently would

likely be similar to the construction scenario envisioned for the Project. As with the Project,

mitigated construction-related emissions would not exceed SCAQMD emissions

thresholds. Because the scope of development would be reduced under this Alternative, the

duration of construction activities and construction emissions may be reduced when

compared to the Project.

Based on its reduced scope of development and associated reductions in vehicle trips and

vehicle miles traveled (VMT), area-source, energy source, and vehicular-source emissions

under the Reduced Intensity Alternative would likely be reduced when compared to the

Project. For purposes of comparison, area source and energy sources emissions reductions

are assumed to be proportional to the reduction in building area under the Reduced

Intensity Alternative (the Reduced Intensity Alternative represents approximately 68

percent of the Project building area); and mobile source emissions are assumed to be

reduced proportionally to reductions in traffic generation (the Reduced Intensity

Alternative trip generation represents approximately 61 percent of the Project trip



generation. Operational-source emissions under the Project and under the Reduced

Intensity Alternative are compared at Table 5.2-2.

Table 5.2-2 Comparative Operational-Source Emissions - Project and Reduced Intensity Alternative

Worst Case Winter/Summer Conditions (Pounds Per Day) Operational Emissions VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5

Project Area Sources (Landscape and Building Maintenance, Consumer Products)

13.30 7.20E-04 0.08 1.00E-05 2.80E-04 2.80E-04

Building Energy Consumption 0.20 1.86 1.56 0.01 0.14 0.14

Mobile Sources 10.26 26.83 105.95 0.27 18.25 5.13



Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO

Reduced Intensity Alternative Area Sources (Landscape and Building Maintenance, Consumer Products)

9.04 4.90E-04 0.54 0.68-05 1.90E-04 1.90E-04

Building Energy Consumption 0.14 1.27 72.05 0.007 12.41 3.49

Mobile Sources 6.26 16.37 64.63 0.17 11.13 3.13



Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Sources: Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016; Applied Planning, Inc. Notes: Modeling results may not total 100% due to rounding. Scientific notation (e-3) expresses exponential quantities; e.g. 7.20e-4 = 7.20 x10-4 = 7.20 x 0.0001 = 0.000720.

As indicated at Table 5.2-2, operational-source emissions levels under the Reduced

Intensity Alternative would remain below applicable thresholds. Moreover, based on

overall reductions in development scope, operational activities and associated reductions in

air pollutant emissions, already less-than-significant LST, CO Hot Spot, and GHG impacts

occurring under the Project would likely be further reduced under the Reduced Intensity

Alternative.



5.2.6.4 Comparative Greenhouse Gas/Global Climate Change Impacts

The Project would not cause or result in a substantial increase in Greenhouse Gas (GHG)

emissions. In this regard, the GHG Analysis demonstrates that Project-source GHG

emissions would be reduced consistent with the provisions and requirements of the City of

Pomona Green Plan (Green Plan). The Green Plan is consistent with and supports AB 32

and CARB Scoping Plan directives. On this basis, Project GHG emissions would not exceed

a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the Project.

Further, the Project GHG analysis demonstrates that the Project complies with regulations

or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction

or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. The Project’s potential to contribute

considerably (either individually or cumulatively) to a global climate change impact

through GHG emissions is therefore considered less-than-significant.

No Build Alternative

No additional uses or development would be implemented under the No Build

Alternative, and GHG emissions would be decreased when compared to the Project.


Reduced building areas under this Alternative would incrementally reduce building

energy consumption, and would thereby reduce the extent and scope of area-source GHG

emissions otherwise generated by the Project. Additionally, reduced trip generation and

associated reduction in vehicle emissions under this Alternative would result in reduced

vehicular-source GHG emissions when compared to the Project.

It is assumed that like the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would conform to the

City of Pomona Green Plan. On this basis, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would not

cause or result in a substantial increase in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions; would not

exceed an applicable Lead Agency threshold of significance; and would comply with

regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for

the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. The Reduced Intensity



Alternative’s potential to contribute considerably (either individually or cumulatively) to a

global climate change impact through GHG emissions would be incrementally reduced

when compared to the Project, and would be considered less-than-significant.

5.2.6.5 Comparative Noise Impacts


No development would occur under the No Project Alternative, and no new construction-

source noise or operational-source noise would be generated. Potential noise impacts

otherwise occurring under the Project would likely be reduced when compared to the No

Project condition.


Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, the scope of operational area noise sources would

likely be reduced based on an overall reduction in site development and intensity of

activities. However, aggregate perceived operational noise levels due to area sources would

not be discernibly reduced in that peak noise levels and noise sources associated with the

Project would remain unaffected. Under either the Reduced Intensity Alternative or the

Project, noise levels generated by area sources would be less-than-significant.

Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, traffic volumes would be decreased when

compared to the Project, with anticipated correlating decreases in vehicular-source noise. In

this regard, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would likely further diminish already less-

than-significant vehicular-source noise impacts of the Project.

5.2.6.6 Comparative Hydrology/Water Quality Impacts


Under the No Project Alternative, no additional impervious surfaces would be created,

existing drainage patterns would not be altered and no new drainage/stormwater

management systems would be required. Potential hydrology/water quality impacts



otherwise occurring under the Project would likely be reduced when compared to the No

Project condition.


Diminished overall site development realized under the Reduced Intensity Alternative

would likely reduce the extent of impermeable surfaces within the subject site, with

corollary reductions in developed stormwater runoff. This could reduce the scope of and/or

alter certain design and drainage elements, with no discernible effect on the amount or

quality of stormwater exiting the Project site. That is, as with the Project, the quality and

quantity of stormwater discharge resulting from implementation of the Reduced Intensity

Alternative are governed by fixed NPDES permitting requirements as well as applicable

policies of the City SUSMP, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works and Los

Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. As such, quality and quantity of

stormwater discharge resulting from implementation of the Reduced Intensity Alternative

would not be substantively different than discharge quantities and qualities resulting from

implementation of the Project. Under either the Project or the Reduced Intensity

Alternative, potential hydrology/water quality impacts would be less-than-significant.

5.2.6.7 Comparative Public Services Impacts


The No Project Alternative would not introduce new development to the subject site. No

impacts to public services would result from implementation of this Alternative. In this

sense, Public Services Impacts would be reduced when compared to the Project.


The Reduced Intensity Alternative, because it would result in development of similar land

uses at a lower intensities than that of the EIR Project, can be expected to have similar,

though reduced, public services impacts. Potential public services impacts of the Project are

determined to be less-than-significant. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would further

diminish these potential impacts.



5.2.6.8 Comparative Attainment of Project Objectives


No new or additional hotel or office facilities would be realized under the No Project

Alternative. The No Project Alternative would therefore not achieve any of the Project

Objectives.

Reduced Intensity Alternative As summarized below, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would, to some degree, realize the stated Project Objectives. The primary goal of the Project is the development of the subject site with a productive mix of hotel and office uses. Complementary objectives of the Project include the following:

• Implement land uses that are consistent with the City of Pomona General Plan land use and development density vision for the subject site. The approximately 32 percent reduction in Project scope under the Reduced Intensity Alternative minimizes effective use of the existing available commercial property located in the vicinity of the Rio Rancho Road/SR-71 interchange, which is considered to be in a premier location due to its visibility from nearby roadways (including SR-60), and access to nearby communities in Phillips Ranch, the cities of Pomona, Chino Hills, and Diamond Bar. The noted reduction in scope would similarly not fully implement land uses that are consistent with the City of Pomona General Plan land use and development density vision for the subject site.


provided by adjacent SR-71 freeway and local access provided by Rio Rancho Road. The approximately 32 percent reduction in Project scope under the Reduced Intensity Alternative minimizes effective use of the site as a destination land use that is afforded proximate access to the local and regional transportation system. Development excluded from the site and at a less advantageous location would tend to increase VMT within the region contrary to City and SCAG RTP mobility goals.



• Take advantage of the site’s visibility from adjacent SR-60 and SR-71 freeways. The approximately 32 percent reduction in Project scope under the Reduced Intensity Alternative minimizes effective use of the existing available commercial property located in the vicinity of the Rio Rancho Road/SR-71 interchange, which is considered to be in a premier location due to its visibility from nearby roadways (including SR-60), and access to nearby communities in Phillips Ranch, Pomona, Chino Hills, and Diamond Bar.

• Develop the subject site with high-quality hotel uses offering a unique guest experience. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would maintain the currently proposed Hyatt Place Hotel and would therefore achieve this objective.

• Establish hotel and office uses that are compatible with, and complement, existing uses within the Pomona Ranch Plaza. Office uses currently proposed by the Project would not be implemented under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, diminishing attainment of this objective.

• Attract and accommodate new and additional hotel and office development serving

local and regional markets. Office uses currently proposed by the Project would not be implemented under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, diminishing attainment of this objective.

• Attract visitors, business travelers, meeting/convention activities, and office tenants

to the City of Pomona. Office uses currently proposed by the Project would not be implemented under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, diminishing attainment of this objective.

• Transition the Project site from its current unimproved/vacant state to a commercial

development, with resulting new fiscal benefits to the City of Pomona. Benefits would include new sales/room tax revenues and increased property tax revenues. The 32 percent reduction in scope and elimination of office uses under the Reduced Intensity Alternative would tend to diminish property tax revenues; and would reduce sales and sales tax revenues that may otherwise result from office tenancies realized under the Project.



• Implement employment-generating land uses that would create new jobs available to City residents. The 32 percent reduction in scope and elimination of office uses under the Reduced Intensity Alternative would tend to diminish the scope and variety of new employment opportunities otherwise created by the Project.

5.2.7 Comparison of Alternatives

The CEQA Guidelines require that the environmentally superior alternative (other than the

No Project Alternative) be identified among the Project and other Alternatives considered

in an EIR.

The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in the greatest aggregate reduction in

environmental effects when compared to the Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative

would, to a limited degree, realize attainment of the basic Project Objectives. On this basis,

and for the purposes of CEQA and the EIR Alternative Analysis, the Reduced Intensity

Alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative.

While CEQA indicates that socioeconomic effects are not appropriate as a lone determinant

in selection of an alternative, they are important considerations for decision-makers. With

respect to socioeconomics, the Project or the Reduced Intensity Alternative would each

have beneficial effects for the area. Development of the Project or the Reduced Intensity

Alternative would contribute to area employment and the City’s overall tax base. However,

as noted previously, because the scope and variety of market offerings would be

substantively reduced under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, the resulting effective

realization of the Project Objectives, to include economic benefits to the City and region,

would be substantively diminished.

5.3 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

5.3.1 Overview

The California Environmental Quality Act requires a discussion of the ways in which a

project could be growth-inducing. (Public Resources Code, §21100, (b)(5); CEQA Guidelines,



§§ 15126 (d), 15126.2 (d)). The CEQA Guidelines identify a project as growth-inducing if it

would foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing,

either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. New employees from

commercial or industrial development and new population from residential development

represent direct forms of growth. These direct forms of growth have a secondary effect of

expanding the size of local markets and inducing additional economic activity in the area.

Under CEQA Guidelines, growth inducement is not considered necessarily detrimental,

beneficial, or of significance to the environment.

A project could indirectly induce growth by reducing or removing barriers to growth, or by

creating a condition that attracts additional population or new economic activity. However,

a project’s potential to induce growth does not automatically result in growth. Growth can

happen through capital investment in new economic opportunities by the private or public

sectors. Development pressures are a result of economic investment in a particular locality.

These pressures help to structure the local politics of growth and the local jurisdiction’s

posture on growth management and land use policy. The land use policies of local

municipalities and counties regulate growth at the local level.

Impacts related to growth inducement would also be realized if a project provides

infrastructure or service capacity which accommodates growth beyond the levels currently

permitted or anticipated by local or regional plans and policies. In general, growth induced

by a project is considered a significant impact if it directly or indirectly affects the ability of

agencies to provide needed public services, or if it can be demonstrated that the potential

growth significantly affects the environment in some other manner.

5.3.2 Growth-Inducing Effects

The Project does not propose creation of housing. As such, new residential uses leading to

additional population growth would not occur.

Investment in the Project would have local and regional economic impacts which may result

in growth-inducing effects. More specifically, additional employment opportunities created



by the Project could result in potential demands for employee housing. Such additional

demands for housing are reflected in current City General Plan and General Plan EIR growth

projections and would not result in unanticipated growth or unanticipated environmental

effects related to growth.

Infrastructure improvements constructed by the Project could also facilitate and induce

growth. In this regard, development of the Project would be accommodated by existing or

modified infrastructure systems in the immediate Project vicinity, including abutting

roadways, local water distribution and sewer collection systems, and stormwater

management/water quality facilities. Infrastructure improvements necessitated by the

implementation of the Project would tier off of these existing systems and would not

facilitate or encourage unanticipated development of nearby properties.

Based on the preceding discussions, the Project would not result in significant or

unanticipated growth, and would not result in growth of the City beyond that anticipated

and accounted for under the City General Plan and General Plan EIR. The Project, in

combination with other planned or anticipated projects in the area, would contribute to

cumulative future growth projected for the region.

5.4 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

An EIR must identify any significant environmental effects that would result from the

Project. (Public Resources Code §21100 (b)(2)(B)). As substantiated in this EIR, all

environmental impacts of the Project would be less-than-significant, or would be mitigated

to levels that are less-than-significant. The Project would not result in or cause any

significant and unavoidable environmental impacts.

5.5 SIGNIFICANT AND IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES

CEQA Guidelines Sections 15126 (c), 15126.2 (c) & 15127 require that for certain types or

categories of projects, an EIR must address significant irreversible environmental changes

that would occur should the Project be implemented. As presented at CEQA Guidelines



Section 15127, the topic of Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes need to be

addressed in EIRs prepared in connection with any of the following activities:

(a) The adoption, amendment, or enactment of a plan, policy, or ordinance of a

public agency;

(b) The adoption by a local agency formation commission of a resolution making

determinations; or

(c) A project which will be subject to the requirements for preparing of an

environmental impact statement pursuant to the requirements of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. Section 4321-4347.

The Project does not propose or require any of the actions identified under CEQA

Guidelines §15127. A discussion and analysis of Significant Irreversible Environmental

Changes related to the Project is therefore not required.

5.6 ENERGY CONSERVATION

5.6.1 Overview

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Appendix F, this Section of the EIR addresses the

potential for the Project to result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of

energy. For new development such as that proposed by the Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel

Project, compliance with California Title 24 energy efficiency requirements is considered

demonstrable evidence of efficient use of energy.

As discussed below, the Project would provide for, and promote, energy efficiencies

consistent with applicable state or federal standards and regulations, and in so doing

would meet or exceed all Title 24 standards. Moreover, energy consumed by the Project

would be comparable to, or less than, energy consumed by other development proposals of

similar scale and intensity. On this basis, the Project would not result in the inefficient,



wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy, and potential Project impacts in these

regards are less-than-significant. Further, the Project would not cause or result in the need

for additional energy producing facilities or energy delivery systems. The Project,

therefore, would not create or result in a potentially significant impact on energy resources.

5.6.2 Background and Introduction

In 1975, largely in response to the oil crisis of the 1970s, the State Legislature adopted AB

1575, which created the California Energy Commission (CEC). The statutory mission of the

CEC is to forecast future energy needs; license thermal power plants of 50 megawatts or

larger; develop energy technologies and renewable energy resources; plan for and direct

responses to energy emergencies; and, perhaps most importantly, to promote energy

efficiency through the adoption and enforcement of appliance and building energy

efficiency standards.

Germane to the Project and this EIR, AB 1575 also amended Public Resources Code Section

21100(b)(3) to require EIRs to consider the potential for wasteful, inefficient, and/or

unnecessary consumption of energy caused by or resulting from a project. Appendix F to

the CEQA Guidelines assists EIR preparers in this regard. More specifically, Appendix F is

an advisory document establishing parameters and context for determining whether a

project would result in the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. 5.6.3 Existing Conditions 5.6.3.1 Overview California’s estimated annual energy use as of 2015 included:

• Approximately 287,104 gigawatt hours of electricity;3

3 California Energy Commission. “California Energy Demand 2014-2024 Revised Forecast, Volume 1: Statewide Electricity Demand, End-User Natural Gas Demand, and Energy Efficiency - Staff Final Report” (page 2, Mid Energy Demand). California Energy Commission. Ed. California Energy Commission. CEC, 10 Jan. 2014. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.



• Approximately 12,687 million therms natural gas (approximately 3.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day);4 and

• Approximately 18 billion gallons of gasoline.5 As of 2013, energy use in California by demand sector was:

• Approximately 37.8 percent transportation;

• Approximately 23.6 percent industrial;

• Approximately 19.3 percent residential; and

• Approximately 19.3 percent commercial.6

A summary of, and context for, energy consumption and energy demands within the State

is presented in U.S. Energy Information Administration, California State Profile and Energy

Estimates, Quick Facts excerpted below:

• Excluding federal offshore areas, California ranked third in the nation in crude oil

production in 2013, despite an overall decline in production rates since the mid-

1980s.

• California also ranked third in the nation in refining capacity as of January 2014,

with a combined capacity of almost 2 million barrels per calendar day from its 18

operable refineries.

4 Ibid. page 5, Mid Energy Demand. 5 California Energy Commission. “2013 Integrated Energy Policy Report” (p. 255). California Energy Commission. Ed. California Energy Commission. CEC, n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2015. 6 U.S. Energy Information Agency. “California State Profile and Energy Estimates.” U.S. Energy Information



• In 2012, California’s per capita energy consumption ranked 49th in the nation; the

state’s low use of energy was due in part to its mild climate and its energy efficiency

programs.

• In 2013, California ranked fourth in the nation in conventional hydroelectric

generation, second in net electricity generation from other renewable energy

resources, and first as a producer of electricity from geothermal energy.

• In 2013, California ranked 15th in net electricity generation from nuclear power after

one of its two nuclear plants was taken out of service in January 2012; as of June

2013, operations permanently ceased at that plant, the San Onofre Nuclear

Generating Station.

Average site electricity consumption in California homes is among the lowest in the

nation (6.9 megawatt hours per year), according to EIA’s Residential Energy

Consumption Survey. 7

As indicated above, California is one of the nation’s leading energy-producing states, and

California per capita energy use is among the nation’s most efficient.

5.6.3.2 Electricity and Natural Gas Resources

Electricity

Electricity would be provided to the Project by Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE

provides electric power to an estimated 15 million persons in 15 counties and in 180

incorporated cities, within a service area encompassing approximately 50,000 square miles.8

SCE derives electricity from varied energy resources including: fossil fuels, hydroelectric

Agency. U.S. IEA, 17 Sept. 2015. Web. 17 Oct. 2015. 7 U.S. Energy Information Administration. “California State Profile and Energy Estimates. California Energy Consumption by End-Use Sector.” U.S. Energy Information Administration. Web. 17 Oct. 2015. 8 Southern California Edison. “About Us. Who We Are.” Southern California Edison. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.



generators, nuclear power plants, geothermal power plants, solar power generation, and

wind farms. SCE also purchases from independent power producers and utilities, including

out-of-state suppliers.

California’s electricity industry is an organization of traditional utilities, private generating

companies, and state agencies, each with a variety of roles and responsibilities to ensure

that electrical power is provided to consumers. The California Independent Service

Operator (“ISO”) is a nonprofit public benefit corporation, and is the impartial operator of

the State’s wholesale power grid and is charged with maintaining grid reliability, and to

direct uninterrupted electrical energy supplies to California residential and commercial

users. While utilities [such as SCE] still own transmission assets, the ISO routes electrical

power along these assets, maximizing the use of the transmission system and its power

generation resources. The ISO matches buyers and sellers of electricity to ensure that

sufficient power is available to meet demand. To these ends, every five minutes the ISO

forecasts electrical demands, accounts for operating reserves, and assigns the lowest cost

power plant unit to meet demands while ensuring adequate system transmission capacities

and capabilities.9

Part of the ISO’s charge is to plan and coordinate grid enhancements to ensure that

electrical power is provided to California consumers. To this end, transmission owners

(investor-owned utilities such as SCE) file annual transmission expansion/modification

plans to accommodate the State’s growing electrical needs. The ISO reviews and either

approves or denies the proposed additions. In addition, and perhaps most importantly, the

ISO works with other areas in the western United States electrical grid to ensure that

adequate power supplies are available to the State. In this manner, continuing reliable and

affordable electrical power is assured to existing and new consumers throughout the State.

9 California ISO. “Understanding the ISO.” California ISO - Our Business. California ISO, n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.



Natural Gas

Natural gas would be provided to the Project by The Gas Company (Southern California

Gas, SoCalGas). The following summary of natural gas resources and service providers,

delivery systems, and associated regulation is excerpted from information provided by the

California Public Utilities Commission (PUC).

The California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regulates natural gas utility

service for approximately 10.8 million customers that receive natural gas

from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Gas (SoCalGas),

San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), Southwest Gas, and several smaller

natural gas utilities. The CPUC also regulates independent storage operators

Lodi Gas Storage, Wild Goose Storage, Central Valley Storage and Gill Ranch

Storage.

The vast majority of California’s natural gas customers are residential and

small commercial customers, referred to as “core” customers, who accounted

for approximately 32% of the natural gas delivered by California utilities in

2012. Large consumers, like electric generators and industrial customers,

referred to as “noncore” customers, accounted for approximately 68% of the

natural gas delivered by California utilities in 2012.

The PUC regulates the California utilities’ natural gas rates and natural gas

services, including in-state transportation over the utilities’ transmission and

distribution pipeline systems, storage, procurement, metering and billing.

Most of the natural gas used in California comes from out-of-state natural gas

basins. In 2012, California customers received 35% of their natural gas supply

from basins located in the Southwest, 16% from Canada, 40% from the Rocky

Mountains, and 9% from basins located within California. California gas

utilities may soon also begin receiving biogas into their pipeline systems.



Natural gas from out-of-state production basins is delivered into California

via the interstate natural gas pipeline system. The major interstate pipelines

that deliver out-of-state natural gas to California consumers are the Gas

Transmission Northwest Pipeline, Kern River Pipeline, Transwestern

Pipeline, El Paso Pipeline, the Ruby Pipeline, Questar Southern Trails and

Mojave Pipeline. Another pipeline, the North Baja – Baja Norte Pipeline,

takes gas off the El Paso Pipeline at the California/Arizona border, and

delivers that gas through California into Mexico. While the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates the transportation of natural gas

on the interstate pipelines, the PUC often participates in FERC regulatory

proceedings to represent the interests of California natural gas consumers.

Most of the natural gas transported via the interstate pipelines, as well as

some of the California-produced natural gas, is delivered into the PG&E and

SoCalGas intrastate natural gas transmission pipeline systems (commonly

referred to as California’s “backbone” natural gas pipeline system). Natural

gas on the utilities’ backbone pipeline systems is then delivered into the local

transmission and distribution pipeline systems, or to natural gas storage

fields. Some large noncore customers take natural gas directly off the high-

pressure backbone pipeline systems, while core customers and other noncore

customers take natural gas off the utilities’ distribution pipeline systems. The

PUC has regulatory jurisdiction over 150,000 miles of utility-owned natural

gas pipelines, which transported 82% of the total amount of natural gas

delivered to California’s gas consumers in 2012.

SDG&E and Southwest Gas’ southern division are wholesale customers of

SoCalGas, and currently receive all of their natural gas from the SoCalGas

system (Southwest Gas also provides natural gas distribution service in the

Lake Tahoe area). Some other municipal wholesale customers are the cities of

Palo Alto, Long Beach, and Vernon, which are not regulated by the CPUC.



Some of the natural gas delivered to California customers may be delivered

directly to them without being transported over the regulated utility systems.

For example, the Kern River/Mojave pipeline system can deliver natural gas

directly to some large customers, “bypassing” the utilities’ systems. Much of

California-produced natural gas is also delivered directly to large

consumers.

PG&E and SoCalGas own and operate several natural gas storage fields that

are located in northern and southern California. These storage fields, and

four independently owned storage utilities – Lodi Gas Storage, Wild Goose

Storage, Central Valley Storage, and Gill Ranch Storage – help meet peak

seasonal natural gas demand and allow California natural gas customers to

secure natural gas supplies more efficiently. (A portion of the Gill Ranch

facility is owned by PG&E).

California’s regulated utilities do not own any natural gas production

facilities. All of the natural gas sold by these utilities must be purchased from

suppliers and/or marketers. The price of natural gas sold by suppliers and

marketers was deregulated by the FERC in the mid-1980’s and is determined

by “market forces.” However, the PUC decides whether California’s utilities

have taken reasonable steps in order to minimize the cost of natural gas

purchased on behalf of their core customers.10

As indicated in the preceding discussions, natural gas is available from a variety of in-state

and out-of-state sources and is provided throughout the state in response to market supply

and demand. Complementing available natural gas resources, biogas may soon be available

via existing delivery systems, thereby increasing the availability and reliability of resources

in total. The PUC oversees utility purchases and transmission of natural gas to ensure

10 California Public Utilities Commission. “Natural Gas and California.” Natural Gas and California. CPUC, 7 Sept. 2013. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.



reliable and affordable natural gas deliveries to existing and new consumers throughout

the state.

5.6.3.3 Transportation Energy Resources

The Project would generate additional vehicle trips with resulting consumption of energy

resources, predominantly gasoline. Gasoline (and other vehicle fuels) are commercially-

provided commodities, and would be available to the Project patrons and employees via

commercial outlets.

There are more than 27 million registered vehicles in California, and those vehicles

consume an estimated 18 billion gallons of fuel each year. Petroleum comprises

approximately 92 percent of California’s transportation energy sources. Notwithstanding,

technology advances, market trends, consumer behavior, and government policies could

result in significant changes in fuel consumption by type and in total by 2020.11

Policies, rules, and regulations at the federal and state levels have been enacted to improve

vehicle fuel efficiency; promote the development and use of alternative fuels; reduce

transportation-source air pollutants and GHG emissions; and reduce vehicle miles traveled

(VMT). Market forces and technological advances have made use of alternative energy

resources or alternative transportation modes increasingly feasible.

Largely, as a result of and in response to these multiple factors, gasoline consumption

within the state has declined in recent years, while availability of other alternative

fuels/energy sources has increased. In total, the quantity, availability, and reliability of

transportation energy resources have increased in recent years, and this trend may likely

continue and accelerate. Increasingly available and diversified transportation energy

resources act to promote continuing reliable and affordable means to support vehicular

transportation within the state.

11 CEC. “2013 Integrated Energy Policy Report.” 2013 Integrated Energy Policy Report. CEC, n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.



5.6.4 Regulatory Setting

Federal and state agencies regulate energy use and consumption through various means

and programs. On the federal level, the United States Department of Transportation, the

United States Department of Energy, and the United States Environmental Protection

Agency are three federal agencies with substantial influence over energy policies and

programs. On the state level, the PUC and the CEC are two agencies with authority over

different aspects of energy. Relevant federal and state energy-related laws and plans are

summarized below. Project consistency with applicable federal and state regulations is also

presented in italicized text.

5.6.4.1 Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act

The Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (Act) intends that all vehicles sold

in the U.S. would meet certain fuel economy goals. Through this Act, Congress established

the first fuel economy standards for on-road motor vehicles in the U.S. Pursuant to the Act,

the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, which is part of the United States

Department of Transportation, is responsible for establishing additional vehicle standards

and for revising existing standards. Vehicles accessing the Project site are subject to the Federal

Energy Policy and Conservation Act (Act). The Project is therefore consistent with, and would not

otherwise interfere with, nor obstruct implementation of the Act.

5.6.4.2 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA)

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) promoted the

development of inter-modal transportation systems to maximize mobility as well as

address national and local interests in air quality and energy. ISTEA contained factors that

Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) were to address in developing transportation

plans and programs, including some energy-related factors. To meet the new ISTEA

requirements, MPOs adopted explicit policies defining the social, economic, energy, and

environmental values guiding transportation decisions. Transportation and access to the

Project site is provided primarily by the local and regional roadway systems. The Project would not

interfere with, nor otherwise obstruct intermodal transportation plans or projects that may be

realized pursuant to the ISTEA.



5.6.4.3 The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21)

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) was signed into law in 1998 and

builds upon the initiatives established in the ISTEA legislation, discussed above. TEA-21

authorizes highway, highway safety, transit, and other efficient surface transportation

programs. TEA-21 continues the program structure established for highways and transit

under ISTEA, such as flexibility in the use of funds, emphasis on measures to improve the

environment, and focus on a strong planning process as the foundation of good

transportation decisions. TEA-21 also provides for investment in research and its application

to maximize the performance of the transportation system through, for example, deployment

of Intelligent Transportation Systems, to help improve operations and management of

transportation systems and vehicle safety. The Project site is located along major transportation

corridors with proximate access to the Interstate freeway system. The site selected for the Project

facilitates access; acts to reduce vehicle miles traveled; takes advantage of existing infrastructure

systems; and promotes land use compatibilities by implementing The City of Pomona General Plan and

The 2016 Specific Plan for the Pomona Ranch Plaza through the introduction of hotel and office

development at the subject site. In this manner, the Project supports the strong planning processes

emphasized under TEA-21. The Project is therefore consistent with, and would not otherwise interfere

with, nor obstruct implementation of TEA-21.

5.6.4.4 State of California Energy Plan

The CEC is responsible for preparing the State Energy Plan, which identifies emerging

trends related to energy supply, demand, conservation, public health and safety, and the

maintenance of a healthy economy. The Plan calls for the state to assist in the

transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and

increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the least environmental and energy costs. To

further this policy, the plan identifies a number of strategies, including assistance to public

agencies and fleet operators and encouragement of urban designs that reduce vehicle miles

traveled and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access. The Project site is located along

major transportation corridors with proximate access to the Interstate freeway system. The site

selected for the Project facilitates access; acts to reduce vehicle miles traveled; takes advantage of

existing infrastructure systems; and promotes land use compatibilities by implementing The City of



Pomona General Plan and The 2016 Specific Plan for the Pomona Ranch Plaza through the

introduction of hotel and office development at the subject site. The Project therefore supports urban

design and planning processes identified in the State of California Energy Plan, is consistent with,

and would not otherwise interfere with, nor obstruct implementation of the State of California

Energy Plan.

5.6.4.5 California Code Title 24, Part 6, Energy Efficiency Standards

California Code Title 24, Part 6 (also referred to as the California Energy Code), was

promulgated by the CEC in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to create uniform

building codes to reduce California’s energy consumption. To these ends, the California

Energy Code provides energy efficiency standards for residential and nonresidential

buildings. According to the CEC, the Energy Commission’s energy efficiency standards

have saved Californians more than $74 billion in reduced electricity bills since 1977.12

California’s building efficiency standards are updated on an approximately three-year

cycle. The 2013 Standards would continue to improve upon the 2008 Standards for new

construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings.

The 2013 Standards went into effect on July 1, 2014, following approval of the California

Building Standards Commission.

The 2013 Energy Efficiency Standards in their entirety may be reviewed at:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2013standards/. The 2013 Energy Efficiency Standards

may also be reviewed at the California Energy Commission, 1516 Ninth Street, MS-37,

Sacramento, CA 95814-5512. The Project would be designed, constructed and operated so as to

meet or exceed incumbent Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards. On this basis, the Project is

determined to be consistent with, and would not interfere with, nor otherwise obstruct

implementation of Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards.

12 CEC. “California’s Energy Efficiency Standards Have Saved $74 Billion.” California's Energy Efficiency Standards Have Saved $74 Billion. CEC, n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.

http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2013standards/



5.6.4.6 City of Pomona

The City of Pomona Green Plan (Green Plan) acts to control and mitigate GHG emissions

and GHG emissions sources within the City. Implementing Strategies adopted pursuant to

the Green Plan include, but are not limited to compliance with energy conservation

measures, implementation of energy efficient and sustainable facilities designs, and

conformance with energy consumption performance standards. Draft EIR Section 4.4,

Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, substantiates that the Project would

meet or exceed GHG emissions reductions strategies established under the Green Plan. Final plans

for all Project facilities would be subject to review and approval by the City thereby ensuring that

the Project site would comply with applicable provisions of the Green Plan.

5.6.5 Project Energy Demands and Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures

Estimated energy demands of Project construction and Project operations are summarized

in the following discussions. Project design features and operational programs, as well as

regulations that promote energy conservation are also identified. The Project in total would

comport with incumbent performance standards established under the Building Energy

Efficiency Standards contained in the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Part 6

(Title 24, Energy Efficiency Standards). Also, given rising energy prices, contractors and

owners have vested financial incentives to avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary

consumption of energy during construction and operations. In summary, there is growing

recognition among developers and retailers that efficient and sustainable construction and

operational practices yield both environmental and economic benefits.

5.6.5.1 Construction Energy Demands and Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures

Construction Energy Demands

Fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource

expended over the course of Project construction. Project construction activity timeline

estimates, construction equipment schedules, equipment power ratings, load factors, and

associated fuel consumption estimates are presented at Table 5.6-1. Eight-hour daily use of

all equipment is assumed. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that all



construction equipment would be diesel-powered. Diesel fuel would be supplied by

existing commercial fuel providers serving the City and region. The aggregate fuel

consumption rate for all equipment is estimated at 18.5 hp-hr-gal. as obtained from CARB

2013 Emissions Factors Tables and cited fuel consumption rate factors presented in Table

D-24 of the Moyer guidelines.13 As presented at Table 5.6-1, Project construction activities

would consume an estimated 56,249 gallons of diesel. Project construction would represent

a “single-event” diesel fuel demand and would not require on-going or permanent

commitment of diesel fuel resources for this purpose.

Table 5.6-1 Construction-Source Fuel Consumption Estimates

Activity/ Duration

Equipment HP Rating Quantity Use

Hours/Day Load

Factor HP-

hrs./day

Total Fuel Consumption

(gal. diesel fuel)

Site Preparation

(10 days)

Crawler Tractors 208 4 8 0.43 2862.08 1,547

Rubber Tired Dozers

255 3 8 0.40 2448.00 1,323

Grading (30 days)

Crawler Tractors 208 2 8 0.43 1431.04 2,321

Excavators 162 2 8 0.38 984.96 1,599

Graders 174 1 8 0.41 570.72 926 Rubber Tired Dozers

255 1 8 0.40 816.00 1,323

Scrapers 361 2 8 0.48 2772.48 4,496

Building Construction

(300 days)

Cranes 226 1 8 0.29 524.32 8,502

Forklifts 89 3 8 0.20 427.20 6,928

Generator Sets 84 1 8 0.74 497.28 8,064 Tractors/Loaders/ Backhoes

97 3 8 0.37 861.36 13,968

Welders 46 1 8 0.45 165.60 2,685

Paving Pavers 125 2 8 0.42 840.00 908

13 Methods to Find the Cost-Effectiveness of Funding Air Quality Projects for Evaluating Motor Vehicle Registration Fee Projects and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Projects, Emission Factor Tables (California Air Resources Board) May 2013; Table D-24 Moyers Guidelines Fuel Consumption Rate Factors -All Engines < 750 hp = 18.5 hp-hr-gal.



Table 5.6-1 Construction-Source Fuel Consumption Estimates

Activity/ Duration

Equipment HP Rating Quantity Use

Hours/Day Load

Factor HP-

hrs./day

Total Fuel Consumption

(gal. diesel fuel)

(20 days) Paving Equipment 130 2 8 0.36 748.80 809

Rollers 80 2 8 0.38 486.40 526 Architectural

Finishes (40 days)

Air Compressors 78 1 8 0.48 299.52 324

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION FUEL DEMAND (gallons diesel fuel) 56,249 Notes: Construction equipment schedules, power ratings, load factors populated from CalEEMod data presented in Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

Construction Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures

Equipment used for Project construction would conform to CARB regulations and

California emissions standards, and would evince related fuel efficiencies. There are no

unusual Project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of

equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities; or

equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards (and related fuel

efficiencies). Equipment employed in construction of the Project would therefore not result

in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of fuel.

Additionally, certain incidental construction-source energy efficiencies would likely accrue

through implementation of California regulations. More specifically, California Code of

Regulations Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section 2449(d)(3) Idling, limits idling times of

construction vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby precluding unnecessary and

wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment.

Enforcement of idling limitations is realized through periodic site inspections conducted by

City building officials, and/or in response to citizen complaints.

Indirectly, construction energy efficiencies and energy conservation would be achieved

through the use of recycled/recyclable materials and related procedures; and energy

efficiencies realized from bulk purchase, transport and use of construction materials. In



general, the use of materials and construction processes described herein promote

conservation and efficient use of energy by reducing raw materials demands, with related

reduction in energy demands associated with raw materials extraction, transportation,

processing and refinement. Use of recycled and recyclable materials and use of materials in

bulk as described below also reduces energy demands associated with preparation and

transport of construction materials as transport and disposal of construction waste and

solid waste in general, with corollary reduced demands on area landfill capacities and

energy consumed by waste transport and landfill operations.

Construction Waste Management Plan

Consistent with Section 5.408, Construction Waste Reduction, Disposal, and Recycling of the

California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code), as adopted by the City of

Pomona, the Project would recycle or salvage for reuse a minimum of 50 percent of the

nonhazardous construction and demolition waste. A Project Construction Waste

Management Plan would also be prepared consistent with Section 5.408.1.1 of the

CALGreen Code.

Summary

Construction equipment used by the Project would result in single event consumption of

approximately 56,249 gallons of diesel fuel. Diesel fuel would be supplied by City and

regional commercial vendors. Construction equipment use of fuel would not be atypical for

the type of construction proposed, and Project construction equipment would conform to

CARB emissions standards, acting to promote equipment fuel efficiencies. CCR Title 13,

Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section 2449(d)(3) Idling, limits idling times of construction

vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby precluding unnecessary and wasteful

consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. Enforcement of

idling limitations is realized through periodic site inspections conducted by City building

officials, and/or in response to citizen complaints. Indirectly, construction energy

efficiencies and energy conservation would be achieved through the use of

recycled/recyclable materials and related procedures; and energy efficiencies realized from

bulk purchase, transport and use of construction materials. As supported by the preceding



discussions, Project construction energy consumption would not be considered inefficient,

wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.

5.6.5.2 Operational Energy Demands and Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures

Energy consumption in support of or related to Project operations would include

transportation energy demands (energy consumed by employee and patron vehicles

accessing the Project site) and facilities energy demands (energy consumed by building

operations and site maintenance activities).

Transportation Energy Demands

Energy that would be consumed by Project-generated traffic is a function of total VMT and

estimated vehicle fuel economies of vehicles accessing the Project site. For the purposes of

this analysis, it is assumed that the Project VMT would accrue to Light Duty Vehicles

(LDVs), with no substantive Heavy Duty Vehicle traffic. Gasoline is assumed to be the

primary fuel for LDVs. Fuel demands of vehicles accessing the Project site would be met

through commercial fuel providers. Estimated Project transportation energy demands

resulting from vehicle fuel consumption are summarized at Table 5.6-2.

Table 5.6-2 Project-Generated Traffic Annual Fuel Consumption

Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled Average Vehicle Fuel Economy

(mpg) Estimated Annual Fuel Consumption (gallons)

Light Duty Vehicles

6,628,315 21.9 302,663

6,628,315 37.0 179,144 Notes: Estimated VMT from CalEEMod data presented in Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California (Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016. Average fuel economies from: Annual Energy Outlook 2015, with projections to 2040 (U.S. Energy Information Administration, USEIA) April 2015, p. 10.

Facilities Energy Demands

Project building operations and Project site maintenance activities would result in the

consumption of natural gas and electricity. Natural gas would be supplied to the Project by

The Gas Company; electricity would be supplied to the Project by SCE. Annual natural gas

and electricity demands of the Project are summarized at Table 5.6-3.



Table 5.6-3 Project Annual Operational Energy Demand Summary

Land Use Electricity Use (kWh/yr.) Natural Gas Use (kBTU/yr.)

General Office Building 997,500 1,882

Hotel 2,270,930 17,106

Parking Lot 164,736 0

Totals 3,433,166 18,988


Energy Efficiency/Sustainability

Energy-saving and sustainable design features and operational programs incorporated in the Project are described below. Please refer also to related discussions presented at EIR Section 3.0, Project Description; 3.5.10 Energy Efficiency/Sustainability.


o Sidewalks would be constructed along the Project’s Rancho Camino Drive street

frontage providing pedestrian connection to other uses within the Plaza. Sidewalks would also be constructed within the Project site connecting the various uses and activity centers. Facilitating pedestrian access encourages people to walk instead of drive. The Project would not impose barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity.


• To reduce water demands and associated energy use, development proposals within

the Project site would be required to implement a Water Conservation Strategy and demonstrate a minimum 20% reduction in indoor water usage when compared to baseline water demand (total expected water demand without implementation of



the Water Conservation Strategy).14 Development proposals within the Project site would also be required to implement the following: o Landscaping palette emphasizing drought-tolerant plants consistent with




Additionally, the Project in total would comply with incumbent performance standards

established under the Building Energy Efficiency Standards contained in the California

Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Part 6 (Title 24, Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards).

Enhanced Vehicle Fuel Efficiencies

Estimated annual fuel consumption estimates presented previously at Table 5.6-2 represent

likely potential maximums that would occur under Project Opening Year (2018)

Conditions. Under future conditions, average fuel economies of vehicles accessing the

Project site can be expected to improve as older, less fuel efficient vehicles are removed

from circulation, and in response to fuel economy and emissions standards imposed on

newer vehicles entering the circulation system.

Project Location and Access

The Project proposes hotel and office uses that are readily accessible from regional and

local roadways; and the Project in total supports concentration of multiple complementary




uses as envisioned for the Pomona General Plan Transit Oriented District Place Type. In

this manner, the Project at its current location acts to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT)

within the region and associated consumption of resources. Collocation of uses within the

Project site also acts to reduce VMT by allowing access to services and facilities by single

rather than multiple vehicle trips.

Alternative Transportation

Pedestrian Access/Bicycle Access The Project area is predominantly developed and includes sidewalk facilities for

pedestrians. Crosswalks are provided at signalized Study Area intersections. The Project

would provide a pedestrian access network that would internally link all uses and connect

to all existing or planned external streets and pedestrian facilities contiguous with the

Project site. The Project would also provide bicycle parking/storage amenities as required

by the City. Pedestrian/bicycle access and improvements provided within the Project site

and otherwise accommodated by the Project would encourage people to walk and bicycle

rather than drive, acting to reduce local and regional VMT.

Transit The Project area is currently served by Foothill Transit with bus services along Village Loop

Road, Phillips Ranch Road, and Rio Rancho Road via Line 195. There are also two

Metrolink rail service stations in the City of Pomona.

Transit agencies and services routinely review and adjust their ridership schedules to

accommodate public demand. The need for transit-related facilities including, but not

limited to, bus shelters and bicycle parking would be coordinated between the City and the

Project Applicant, with input from transit providers as applicable, as part of the City’s

standard development review process.



Landscaping

Landscaping throughout the Project site would be provided consistent with City of

Pomona requirements, and recognizing competing demands for available water resources.

Drought-tolerant plants would be used, where appropriate, reducing water consumption

and power demand related to water delivery/irrigation systems. The Project would connect

to recycled water distribution systems when available to the Project site, further reducing

potable water demands of the Project. Reduced water consumption provides corollary

energy conservation benefits by reducing related water/wastewater conveyance and

treatment energy consumption.

Solid Waste Diversion/Recycling

The Project would comply with State of California, County of Los Angeles, and City of

Pomona requirements acting to reduce the amount of solid waste transported to, and

disposed at area landfills, with corollary reduced demands on area landfill capacities and

energy consumed by waste transport and landfill operations.

Summary

Transportation Energy Demands Vehicular trips and related VMT generated by the Project would result in an estimated

179,144 to 302,663 gallons of gasoline consumption per year. Fuel would be provided by

current and future commercial vendors. Trip generation and VMT generated by the Project

are consistent with other uses of similar scale and configuration. That is, the Project does

not propose uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful

vehicle trips and VMT, nor associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption.

Enhanced fuel economies realized pursuant to federal and state regulatory actions, and

related transition of vehicles to alternative energy sources (e.g., electricity, natural gas, bio

fuels, hydrogen cells) would likely decrease future gasoline fuel demands per VMT.

Location of the Project proximate to its patronage base, and proximate to regional and local

roadway systems tends to reduce VMT within the region, acting to reduce regional vehicle

energy demands. Collocation of complementary uses within the Project site also acts to



reduce VMT by facilitating access to services and facilities by single rather than multiple

vehicle trips.

The Project would also implement sidewalks and pedestrian paths, thereby encouraging

pedestrian access. Bicycle facilities implemented and accommodated by the Project would

facilitate and encourage use of bicycles. Provision of pedestrian and bicycle facilities under

the Project would reduce VMT and associated energy consumption.

The need for transit-related facilities, including but not limited to bus shelters and bicycle

parking, would be coordinated between the City and the Project Applicant, with input

from transit providers as applicable, as part of the City’s standard development review

process.

Facilities Energy Demands Project facility operational energy demands are estimated at: 18,988 kBTU/year natural gas;

and 3,433,166 kWh/year electricity. Natural gas would be supplied to the Project by The

Gas Company; electricity would be supplied by SCE. The Project proposes conventional

development types, reflecting contemporary energy efficient/energy conserving designs

and operational programs. Uses proposed by the Project are not inherently energy

intensive, and the Project energy demands in total would be comparable to, or less than,

other similar projects of like scale and configuration.

5.6.6 Conclusion

As supported by the preceding analyses, Project construction and operations would not

result in the inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy, and potential

Project impacts in these regards are less-than-significant. Further, energy demands of the

Project can be accommodated within the context of available resources and energy delivery

systems. The Project would therefore not cause or result in the need for additional energy

producing or transmission facilities and would not create or result in a potentially

significant impact affecting energy resources or energy delivery systems.

6.0 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Acronyms and Abbreviations Draft EIR-SCH No. 2016011079 Page 6-1

6.0 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ADT Average Daily Traffic

AQMP Air Quality Management Plan

ARB California Air Resources Board

AQIA Air Quality Impact Analysis

BMP Best Management Practice

CAA Clean Air Act

CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards

CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model

CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency

Caltrans California Department of Transportation

CARB California Air Resources Board

CAT Climate Action Team

CBC California Building Code

CBSC California Building Standards Commission

CCR California Code of Regulations

CC&Rs Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions

CEC California Energy Commission

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act

CFC Chlorofluorocarbons

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

cfs cubic feet per second

CH4 Methane

CMP Congestion Management Plan (or Program)

CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level

CO Carbon monoxide



CO2 Carbon dioxide

CPUC California Public Utilities Commission

CUP Conditional Use Permit

CWA Clean Water Act

dB decibel

dBA A-weighted decibel

DEIR Draft Environmental Impact Report

DPM Diesel Particulate Matter

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act

EMS energy management system

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

Fed/OSHA Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FRP Fiber Reinforced Plastic

GCC Global Climate Change

GHG Greenhouse Gas

HCM Highway Capacity Manual

HFC Hydrofluorocarbons

HI Hazard Index

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IS Initial Study

ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers

Leq equivalent sound level

LACSD Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts

LARWQCB Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board

LCA life-cycle analysis

LED light emitting diodes



LOS Level of Service

LST Localized Significance Threshold

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NAHC Native American Heritage Commission

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NO2 Nitrogen dioxide

NOP Notice of Preparation

NOx Oxides of nitrogen

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NRP Non-Reinforced Thermoplastic Panel

O3 Ozone

OEHHA California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PAED Project Approval/Environmental Document

Pb Lead

PM2.5 Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Microns in Diameter

PM10 Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns in Diameter

ppb parts per billion

ppm parts per million

ppt parts per trillion

PPV peak particle velocity

PRTA Pomona Retail Trade Area

PTA Primary Trade Area

PWRP Pomona Water Reclamation Plant

REL Reference Exposure Level

RMS root mean square

ROG Reactive Organic Gases

RTP regional transportation plan



RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board

SARWQCB Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board

SCAB South Coast Air Basin

SCAG Southern California Association of Governments

SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District

SCH State Clearinghouse

SOx Oxides of sulfur

SRRE Source Reduction and Recycling Element

SUSMP Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plans

SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan

SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board

TAC Toxic Air Contaminants

TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

TIA Traffic Impact Analysis

TPD tons per day

TRU Transport Refrigeration Units

UBC Uniform Building Code

UNFCCC United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change

URF unit risk factor

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

UWMP Urban Water Management Plan

V/C Volume to Capacity

VdB vibration decibel

VMT vehicle miles traveled

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

WCI Western Regional Climate Action Initiative

WQMP Water Quality Management Plan

7.0 REFERENCES

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project References Draft EIR – SCH No. 2016011079 Page 7-1

7.0 REFERENCES

PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED

City of Pomona

Brad Johnson, Planning Manager

Leonard Bechet, Assistant Planner

Project Applicant

DMPlA Limited Partnership c/o YK America Group, Inc.

9680 Flair Drive

El Monte, California 91731

EIR PREPARERS

Applied Planning, Inc.

Ross S. Geller, Principal

Charly Ray, Senior Project Manager

Amy Flores, Assistant Project Manager

Jennifer Gilbert, Staff Editor

Urban Crossroads, Inc.

Aric Evatt, PTP

Bill Lawson, PE, INCE

Haseeb Qureshi, MES

Charlene So, PE


Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project References Draft EIR – SCH No. 2016011079 Page 7-2

DOCUMENTS CONSULTED

City of Pomona General Plan Update, City of Pomona, March 2014.

City of Pomona Zoning Code, City of Pomona, 2011.

Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Sections 15000-

15387 of the California Code of Regulations, Governor’s Office of Planning and

Research.

Pomona Hyatt Place Hotel Project Initial Study (Applied Planning, Inc.) February 2016.

Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Air Quality Impact Analysis, City of Pomona, California

(Urban Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Greenhouse Gas Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban

Crossroads, Inc.) February 8, 2016.

Pomona Hyatt Place & Hyatt House Noise Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban

Crossroads, Inc.) January 14, 2016.

Pomona Hyatt Place + Hyatt House Traffic Impact Analysis, City of Pomona (Urban

Crossroads, Inc.) May 2016.

Pomona Ranch Plaza Lot 9 Preliminary Hydrology Report (Incledon Consulting Group)

February 2016.

Pomona Ranch Plaza Lot 9 Preliminary Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan

(Incledon Consulting Group) February 2016.

APPENDICES

Please refer to accompanying CD-ROM