5.2 air quality - university of california, santa barbara air quality.pdf · san joaquin apartments...

San Joaquin Apartments and Precinct Improvements Project EIR Air Quality

University of California, Santa Barbara

5.2-1

5.2 AIR QUALITY This section evaluates the potential for the San Joaquin Apartments project to result in

significant impacts to air quality. The evaluation of impacts includes a discussion of the project’s consistency with the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District’s 2010 Clean Air Plan, as well as an assessment of the project’s short-term construction-related emissions; long-term mobile and stationary equipment emissions resulting from the proposed project; and diesel particulate matter emissions from construction equipment and diesel-powered emergency generators. Section 5.5, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, provides an analysis of impacts relating to climate change and greenhouse gases.

5.2.1 Setting

Regional Climate. Air quality is affected by the rate and location of pollutant

emissions and by climatic conditions that influence the movement and dispersion of pollutants. Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients, along with local and regional topography, provide the links between air pollutant emissions and air quality. The San Joaquin Apartments project site is located in southern Santa Barbara County, in the South Central Coast Air Basin. The climate of the basin is dominated by a strong and persistent high-pressure system (the Pacific High) that frequently lies west of the Pacific Coast. This system influences California’s weather, resulting in generally warm summer temperatures and controlling the pathway and occurrence of low-pressure weather systems in the winter. Daytime summer temperatures in the project area average 70 degrees Fahrenheit near the coast and in the high 80s to low 90s inland. Minimum nighttime summer temperatures are typically in the 50s. Winter high temperatures tend to range in the 50s and 60s, while nighttime temperatures are in the 40s along the coast to the 30s inland.

Although precipitation is confined primarily to the winter months, occasional, tropical

air masses result in rainfall during summer months. Annual rainfall amounts along the coast range from about 10 to 18 inches, with more substantial amounts in the higher elevations. Sunny skies are common throughout most of the area. However, low clouds and fog occur with some frequency over the ocean and adjacent coastal areas during late spring and summer which generally disperse by midday. In general, there are 60 to 80 days per year which would be categorized as cloudy.

A daily cycle of land and sea breezes, combined with local topography, greatly

influences the direction and speed of local winds. Daytime winds are usually gentle, and move from the ocean onto land. This pattern reverses at night when the air over the land surface cools and descends from the coastal mountains and mountain valleys, resulting in gentle land breezes. This pattern of day and night airflow plays an important role in the movement of pollutants.

Several types of inversions (warmer air on top of colder air) are common to the area.

In winter, weak surface inversions occur, caused by the cooling of air in contact with the cold



5.2-2

surface of the earth. During the spring and summer, subsidence inversions are created by the Pacific High when air is compressed and heated as it flows from a high-pressure area to a low-pressure inland area. The inversion acts like a lid on the cooler air mass near the ground, preventing pollutants in the lower air mass from dispersing upward.

Air Quality Regulations. To help protect the public from the harmful effects of air

pollution, federal and state air quality standards have been adopted. The 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments and the 1988 California Clean Air Act regulate the emissions of airborne pollutants and have established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Federal and state ambient air quality standards have been established for six “criteria” pollutants: ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulates less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10), and lead. Each of these pollutants is discussed below.

Ozone. Ozone is formed in the atmosphere through a complex series of chemical

reactions generally requiring light as an energy source. It is a ‘secondary’ pollutant that forms as a result of interaction between ultraviolet light, ROG, and NOX. Ozone is a pungent, colorless gas that is a strong irritant and attacks the respiratory system. Respiratory and cardiovascular diseases are aggravated by exposure to ozone. A healthy person exposed to high concentrations of ozone may experience nausea, dizziness, and a burning sensation in the chest. Ozone also damages crops and other vegetation.

Particulate Matter. Particulate matter consists of a variety of particle sizes and

composition. Particles less than 10 microns (PM10), respirable particulate matter, are considered to be pollutants because they accumulate in the lung tissues and may contain toxic materials which can be absorbed into the system. Fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, is a subset of PM10. PM2.5 consists of tiny solid or liquid particles, generally soot and aerosols. The size of the particles (2.5 microns or smaller, about 0.0001 inches or less) enables them to easily enter the air sacs deep in the lungs, causing adverse health effects. PM2.5 also causes visibility reduction.

Carbon Monoxide. Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless gas generally formed by

incomplete combustion of hydrocarbon-containing fuels. Carbon monoxide does not irritate the respiratory tract, but does interfere with the ability of blood to carry oxygen to vital tissues.

Oxides of Nitrogen. Oxides of nitrogen that are considered pollutants include nitric

oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). NO is colorless and odorless and is generally formed by combustion processes combining atmospheric oxygen and nitrogen. NO2 is a reddish-brown irritating gas formed by the combination of NO and oxygen in the atmosphere or at the emission source. Both NO and NO2 are considered ozone precursors because they react with hydrocarbons and oxygen to produce ozone. Exposure to NO2 may increase the potential for respiratory infections in children and cause difficulty in breathing, even among healthy persons and especially among asthmatics.



5.2-3

Sulfur Dioxide. Sulfur dioxide is a colorless, pungent, irritating gas that affects the upper respiratory tract. Sulfur dioxide may combine with particulate matter and settle in the lungs, causing damage to lung tissues. Sulfur dioxide may combine with water in the atmosphere to form sulfuric acid that may fall as acid rain, damaging vegetation.

Lead. Lead is a gray-white metal that is soft, malleable, ductile, and resistant to

corrosion. Sources of lead resulting in concentrations in the air include industrial sources and crustal weathering of soils followed by fugitive dust emissions. Health effects from exposure to lead include brain and kidney damage and learning disabilities. Lead is the only substance, which is currently listed as both a criteria air pollutant and a toxic air contaminant. Santa Barbara County has been in attainment for Lead since the first designations were made in 1989.

Other State-Regulated Pollutants. Hydrocarbons, which are not classified as criteria

pollutants under the federal Clean Air Act but are a major contributor to smog, include a variety of compounds containing hydrogen and carbon. Generally, ambient hydrocarbon concentrations do not cause direct adverse health effects, but result in ozone formation. Many hydrocarbons, known as reactive organic compounds (ROC), react with NO and NO2 to form ozone.

Toxic Air Contaminants. Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) refers to a diverse group of

air pollutants that can affect human health. TACs such as particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines, asbestos, chlorinated organic compounds, metals, radon and iodine gas, and other contaminants are now identified by State regulations and on a National level under the Environmental Protection Agency’s hazardous air pollutant program. TAC impacts tend to be localized because concentrations typically decline rapidly with distance from the source. The main concern with TACs is the potential to cause health problems to people who live and work near TAC sources. The health risks from TACs are classified as cancer or non-cancer related, and non-cancer health risks are further divided into acute (short-term) and chronic (long-term) risks.

In addition to the above described criteria pollutants, California has adopted standards

for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide and visibility reducing particles. The Federal and State standards have been set at levels protective of human health, including illness and discomfort, for the most sensitive persons, with a margin of safety. It is the responsibility of the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) to bring air quality within the County into conformity with the federal and state standards. Table 5.2-1 illustrates both the federal and state current pollutant regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency and California Air Resource Board periodically review new scientific data and may propose revisions to the standards as a result.



5.2-4

Table 5.2-1

Current Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards

Pollutant Federal Standard California Standard

Ozone 0.075 ppm (8-hr avg) 0.07 ppm (8-hr avg) 0.09 ppm (1-hr avg)

Carbon Monoxide 9.0 ppm (8-hr avg) 35.0 ppm (1-hr avg)

9.0 ppm (8-hr avg) 20.0 ppm (1-hr avg)

Nitrogen Dioxide 0.100 ppm (1-hr avg)

0.053 ppm (annual avg) 0.18 ppm (1-hr avg)

0.030 ppm (annual avg)

Sulfur Dioxide 0.075 ppm (1-hr avg) 0.25 ppm (1-hr avg)

0.04 ppm (24-hr avg)

Lead 1.5 g/m3 (calendar quarter) 0.15 g/m3 (3-month avg)

Particulate Matter (PM10) 150 g/m3 (24-hr avg) 20 g/m3 (annual avg) 50 g/m3 (24-hr avg)

Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 12 g/m3 (annual avg) 35 g/m3 (24-hr avg)

12 g/m3 (annual avg)

Ppm = parts per million g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter Source: California Air Resources Board, June 7, 2012. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf; EPA Particulate Matter (PM) Regulatory Actions, March 2013. http://www.epa.gov/pm/actions.html.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers federal air

quality regulations, and the California Air Quality Board (CARB) is the California equivalent. The CARB establishes air quality standards and is responsible for control of mobile emission sources. Local Air Pollution Control Districts (APCDs) have jurisdiction over stationary sources and must adopt plans and regulations necessary to demonstrate attainment of federal and state air quality standards. SBCAPCD has jurisdiction over air quality attainment in the Santa Barbara portion of the South Central Coast Air Basin.

Mobile emission sources are regulated through the establishment of federal and state

vehicle emission requirements with which auto manufacturers must comply. Motor vehicle emissions are also regulated by the State’s vehicle inspection and maintenance program (the “Smog Check Program”). Indirectly, increases in motor vehicle emissions can be regulated by agencies other than SBCAPCD or ARB through CEQA and determinations of consistency with the Clean Air Plan (CAP) and other City and County General Plans. SBCAPCD’s Scope and Content of Air Quality Sections in Environmental Documents (December 2011) establishes SBCAPCD thresholds of significance for carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic toxic air contaminants.

Air Quality. The SBCAPCD is required to monitor air pollutant levels to assure that

federal and state air quality standards are being met. If air quality standards are not met, SBCAPCD is required to develop strategies to meet the standards.



5.2-5

SBCAPCD has a network of 20 air quality monitoring stations located throughout the

County. Some pollutants, such as ozone, are measured continuously. Other pollutants are sampled periodically. Particulate matter, for example, is measured over 24 hours every six days. The stations fall into two main categories: (1) state and local air monitoring stations (SLAMS) and (2) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) stations. The six SLAMS, four of which are operated by the SBCAPCD and two of which are operated by the CARB, measure urban and regional air quality. The 12 PSD stations are used to determine the impacts of specific operations, such as large oil and gas facilities. The monitoring station closest to the project site is the Goleta – Fairview monitoring station, which is located approximately 3 miles northeast of the project site. Table 5.2-2 summarizes the number of days each of the standards has been exceeded at these stations in each of the last three years.

Table 5.2-2

Ambient Air Quality at the Goleta – Fairview Monitoring Station

Pollutant 2009 2010 2011

Ozone (ppm), Worst Hour 0.090 0.072 0.091 Number of days of State exceedances (>0.09 ppm) 0 0 0 Ozone (ppm), 8-hr average 0.078 0.065 0.076 Number of days of State exceedances (>0.07 ppm) 1 0 1 Number of days of Federal exceedances (>0.08 ppm) 1 0 0 Carbon Monoxide (ppm), Highest 8-Hour Average 0.60 0.56 0.57 Number of days of above State or Federal standard (>9.0 ppm) 0 0 0

Particulate Matter <10 microns, g/m3, Worst 24 Hours * 45.2 70.0

Number of measured days above State standard (>50 g/m3) 0 0 2

Number of measured days above Federal standard (>150 g/m3) 0 0 0

Particulate Matter <2.5 microns, g/m3, Worst 24 Hours * 23.6 18.4

Number of days above Federal standard (>65 g/m3) * * * Data collected for the Goleta – Fairview monitoring station * There was insufficient (or no) data available to determine the value. Source: CARB Top Four Summary available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php.

Air quality measurements indicate that the eight-hour ozone concentration exceeded

the State standard once in 2009 and once in 2011, and the federal standard once in 2009. The PM10 concentration exceeded State standards twice in 2011. No exceedances of either the State or federal standards for the one-hour ozone concentration have occurred at the Goleta – Fairview monitoring station since 2009. Similarly, no exceedances of either the state or federal carbon monoxide standard have occurred at the Goleta – Fairview monitoring station since 2009. There was insufficient data to determine the number of exceedances of the federal PM2.5 concentration between 2009 and 2011.

Santa Barbara County is designated in attainment for the State one-hour ozone

standard, and the federal PM10 standard. Santa Barbara County is designated unclassifiable/attainment for the federal eight hour ozone standard. Santa Barbara County is



5.2-6

designated nonattainment for the state eight-hour ozone standard and the state standards for PM10. The major sources for large particulate matter are quarries, grading, demolition, agricultural tilling, road dust, and vehicle exhaust. PM10 levels in the area are primarily due to agricultural operations, grading and motor vehicle emissions. Ozone is a secondary pollutant that is not produced directly by a source, but rather it is formed by a reaction between nitrogen oxides (NOX) and reactive organic gases (ROG) in the presence of sunlight. Reductions in ozone concentrations are dependent on reducing the amount of these precursors. Santa Barbara County is in unclassified/attainment for the federal PM2.5 standard and unclassified for the state PM2.5 standard (based on monitored data from 2007 to 2009). No other state or federal standard, including standards for carbon monoxide or nitrogen dioxide, were exceeded during the years 2009 to 2011.

The Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (FCAAA) of 1990 set a schedule for the

attainment of the NAAQS. States are required to prepare a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to develop strategies to bring about attainment of the standards. In addition, the California Clean Air Act of 1988 requires areas that exceed the California ambient air quality standards to plan for the eventual attainment of the State standards. Under both the 1990 FCAAA and the 1988 CCAA, the level of Santa Barbara County’s ozone originally resulted in the county being classified as a “moderate” non-attainment area. The CAP for Santa Barbara County has been prepared and is updated by SBCAPCD. Since the passage of the 1990 FCAAA, seven CAP updates have been developed for Santa Barbara County: 1) 1993 Rate of Progress Plan; 2) 1994 CAP (1-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan); 3) 1998 CAP; 4) 2001 CAP (Maintenance Plan); 5) 2004 CAP (State Triennial Update); 6) 2007 CAP; and, 7) 2010 CAP. The 1998 CAP, which was prepared in response to the requirements of the California Clean Air Act and the Federal Clean Air Act, has been adopted as part of the State Implementation Plan. The 2010 CAP is the most recent plan for the County to be adopted by the APCD Board. The 2010 CAP focuses on achieving attainment for the federal 8-hour ozone standard and provides a triennial update and revision consistent with state planning requirements.

Existing Emissions Sources. The project region is generally urbanized and supports

uses and/or activities that generate emissions on a daily basis. The majority of emissions from the UCSB campus are from natural gas boilers and water heaters. Other sources of emissions include motor vehicle traffic, laboratory facilities and emergency generators. There are several dozen diesel backup generators on the UCSB campus. These generators only operate in case of emergencies and when periodically tested throughout the year; however, they contribute to toxic air contaminant emissions. The primary source of emissions on-campus is motor vehicles; of the greatest concern are diesel buses and trucks. Off-campus emission sources include the Santa Barbara Municipal Airport, Highways 101 and 217, and local marine shipping. Ships and motor vehicles are the primary sources of pollutants in the region.



5.2-7

5.2.2 Impact Identification and Significance Thresholds

Initial Study Evaluation of Potential Impacts

Less Than Significant Impacts. The Initial Study prepared for the San Joaquin Apartments project determined that impacts associated with odors from food preparation operations on the project site would be less than significant on the basis that compliance with APCD Rule 303 requires preparation and implementation of an Odor Abatement Plan that would minimize future odor impacts.

Potentially Significant Impacts. The Initial Study concluded that the project would

have the potential to result in significant air quality impacts related to: potential conflict with the 2010 CAP; short-term construction-related emissions; long-term mobile and stationary equipment emissions resulting from the proposed project; diesel particulate matter emissions from construction equipment; diesel-powered emergency generators; and potential emissions associated with the future use of released “podium” building space after the existing dining commons relocates to the proposed Portola Dining Commons building.

Impact Evaluation Significance Thresholds

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project would have the potential

to result in a significant air quality impact if it would: 1. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, 2. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or project

air quality violation, 3. Result in a cumulative 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), or

4. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The UC CEQA Handbook includes two additional thresholds: 5. Exceed the probability of 10 in one million of a maximally exposed individual

contracting cancer; and 6. Have ground concentrations of non-carcinogenic toxic air contaminants which

would result in a Hazard Index greater than 1.0 for the maximally exposed individual.



5.2-8

The following quantitative emission thresholds are recommended in the County of Santa Barbara’s Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual (October 2008). These thresholds are used to determine whether the proposed project would violate an air quality standard, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, or conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2010 CAP (Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 2011).

Short-term/Construction Emissions. Short-term air quality impacts generally occur

during project construction. CEQA requires a discussion of short-term impacts of a project in the environmental document. The County of Santa Barbara has not established significance thresholds for short-term construction emissions. The reasoning for considering short-term impacts insignificant is provided below.

No quantitative threshold has been established for short-term, construction related

PM10 (which is approximately 50 percent of total dust). However, this impact should be discussed in all environmental documents for projects involving ground disturbance. Dust control measures are required under the County of Santa Barbara's Grading Ordinance for most projects. Some projects have the potential for construction-related dust to cause a nuisance. Also, Santa Barbara County violates the state standard for PM10. Therefore, dust control measures are required for all discretionary construction activities.

The short-term thresholds for NOX and ROG emissions from construction equipment

have not been established. Emissions of NOX from construction equipment in the County are estimated at 1,000 tons per year of NOX. When compared to the total NOX emission inventory for the County of approximately 17,000 tons per year, construction emissions comprise approximately six percent of the 1990 County-wide emission inventory for NOX (Santa Barbara County 1993 Rate-of Progress Plan). In general, this amount is considered insignificant.

Long-term/Operational Emission Thresholds. Long-term air quality impacts occur

during project operation and include emissions from any equipment or process used in the project (e.g., water heaters, engines, boilers, operations using paints or solvents) and motor vehicle emissions associated with the project. These emissions must be summed in order to determine the significance of the project’s long-term impact on air quality. A proposed project will not have a significant air quality effect on the environment, if operation of the project would:

1. Emit (from all project sources, mobile and stationary), less than the daily trigger

for offsets set in the APCD New Source Review Rule (presently 55 lbs/day), for any pollutant1.

1 Due to the relatively low background ambient CO levels in Santa Barbara County, localized CO impacts associated with congested intersections are not expected to exceed the CO health related air quality standards. Therefore, CO “Hotspot” analyses are not required.



5.2-9

2. Emit less than 25 pounds per day of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) or reactive organic compounds (ROC) from motor vehicle trips only.

3. Not cause or contribute to a violation of any California or National Ambient Air

Quality Standard (except ozone). 4. Not exceed the APCD health risk public notification thresholds adopted by the

APCD Board. 5. Be consistent with the adopted federal and state Air Quality Plans.

5.2.3 Impact Evaluation

Clean Air Plan Consistency The Santa Barbara County APCD 2010 Clean Air Plan (2010 CAP) is based on

growth projections contained in the 2007 SBCAG Regional Growth Forecast, which utilized a number of assumptions regarding land development patterns to obtain future forecasts, and contains population forecasts for Santa Barbara County. The 2007 Regional Growth Forecast did not include population growth on the UCSB campus that would be facilitated by the 2010 Long Range Development Plan (LRDP). The most recent Regional Growth Forecast, published in December 2012, provides updated population projections for Santa Barbara County (SBCAG Regional Growth Forecast, December 2012). 2012 population growth forecasts are substantially higher than the 2007 forecasts.

The San Joaquin Apartments project would provide 165 residential units for

undergraduate students (990 bed spaces) and 13 residential units/bed spaces for resident assistants, for a total of 178 student units (1,003 student bed spaces). The project would also include eight (8) residential units to be occupied by resident directors and UCSB faculty. In total, the proposed project would provide 186 residential units. To ensure that the project does not result in more on-campus bed spaces/residential units than the 1,874 units and 5,000 bed spaces identified by the 2010 LRDP, 403 bed spaces and eight residential units would be transferred to the project site from other planned on-campus housing development sites identified by the 2010 LRDP.

The San Joaquin Apartments project would not result in an increase in the number of

students enrolled at UCSB and would accommodate both existing students and previously adopted campus population growth projections identified by the UCSB 2010 LRDP. Additional student units and the eight additional on-site residential units for resident directors and faculty would not contribute to unanticipated population growth in the project region because the number of residential units/bed spaces anticipated by the 2010 LRDP would not be exceeded. In addition, it is likely that occupants of the proposed faculty/staff units would already be residents of the project region. The proposed dining commons, convenience store, mail facilities, and other accessory uses would result in an increase in area employment; however, those jobs would primarily be filled by students and existing area residents, rather



5.2-10

than inducing new residents to relocate to the area. Therefore, vehicle trips by residents of the San Joaquin Apartments project would likely have occurred within the air basin regardless of the proposed project.

The proposed project would also have an unquantifiable, yet potentially substantial, air

quality benefit that would result from increasing the supply of student residences in proximity to the UCSB campus. The proximity of the new residences to the UCSB campus would reduce commute distances from more distant residences and/or convert those vehicular commuter trips to other modes such as walking, bicycling or transit, resulting in a reduction in the total number of vehicle miles traveled and a corresponding reduction in emissions. Providing student-services on the project site, such as dining facilities, a convenience store and recreation facilities would also minimize project-related emissions. Other characteristics of the project, including providing shuttle service to the Main Campus and other project area destinations, and proposed building and project site design to achieve a LEED “Gold” designation, would also minimize project-related emissions.

In conclusion, the San Joaquin Apartments project would not directly increase student

enrollment at UCSB; would not result in more residential units/bed spaces than those anticipated by the 2010 LRDP; would not attract new residents/employees to the region; and would reduce commute distances for a substantial number of existing and future UCSB students, and provides project-design features that minimize direct and indirect project-related emissions. Therefore, the project would not conflict with 2010 CAP and project consistency-related impacts would be less than significant.

Short-Term Construction Emissions

Project-related construction activities would result in a short-term increase in air

emissions, primarily resulting from grading activities and the use of construction vehicles and equipment. Emissions of ROG, NOX, CO, and PM10 resulting from the San Joaquin Apartments project were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) v2011.1.1. Potential health risks from short-term emissions of diesel particulate matter are evaluated below.

Short-term construction-related emissions associated with the proposed project would

result primarily from the use of construction equipment, soil moving, and commute trips by construction workers. The proposed project would require the export of up to 8,220 cubic yards of soil and would not require the removal or demolition of any buildings that would have the potential to result in asbestos or other hazardous substance emissions. Project construction would begin in fall 2014, and the new residences would be ready for occupancy in the fall quarter of 2016.

Peak construction emissions from the proposed project were estimated assuming there

would be six to nine pieces of heavy equipment operating on the housing site simultaneously. It was also assumed that emissions would occur from stationary equipment and construction



5.2-11

worker vehicle trips. Construction-related emissions resulting from the project are summarized in Table 5.2-3. Air emission calculations are provided in Appendix C.

Peak emissions of ROG during the construction of the San Joaquin Apartments and Precinct Improvements Project would be approximately 154 pounds per day during the architectural coating phase, and peak emissions of and NOX would be approximately 112 pounds per day during the grading phase. These short-term emissions would not substantially contribute to existing air quality standard violations, and based on the air quality impact guidelines from Santa Barbara County, would result in a less than significant air quality impact. Peak emissions of PM10 from construction activities would be approximately 59 pounds per day. Short-term project-related emissions of PM10 would incrementally contribute to an existing air quality standard exceedence, therefore, construction-related fugitive dust emissions would result in a potentially significant air quality impact. This impact would be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of proposed mitigation measures AQ-1a through 1g, which provide dust control measures recommended by Santa Barbara County and required by the 1979 Air Quality Attainment Plan.

In addition, SBCAPCD uses 25 tons per year for ROG or NOX as a guideline for determining the significance of construction impacts. The annual emissions of ROG would not exceed 3.62 tons per year, and the annual emissions of NOX would not exceed 8.71 tons per year. Therefore, short-term construction emissions would be below the 25-ton-per-year guideline under SBCAPCD Rule 202.F.3. No air emission offsets would be required for annual construction emissions. For full modeling results refer to Appendix C.

Long-Term Project Operation Impacts

Mobile and Non-Mobile Sources of Emissions. Emissions from vehicle trips

resulting from the San Joaquin Apartments project were calculated using CalEEMod v2011.1.1 and project-generated average daily vehicle trip estimates. Emissions from project-related non-mobile sources, such as natural gas usage, landscape maintenance and consumer products were also estimated using CalEEMod. Estimates of the long-term emissions resulting from the occupancy and operation of the proposed project are summarized in Table 5.2-4. Air emission calculations are provided in Appendix C.



5.2-12

Table 5.2-3

Estimated Construction Emissions

ROG

(lbs/day) NOX

(lbs/day) PM10 dust(lbs/day)

PM10 exhaust (lbs/day)

PM10 total(lbs/day)

Site Preparation (2014) On-Site Equipment 9.37 74.88 8.47 3.61 12.08 Soil Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor and Worker Trips 0.14 0.17 0.27 0.01 0.28 Subtotal 9.51 75.05 8.74 3.62 12.36 Grading (2014) On-Site Equipment 5.98 45.66 3.25 2.47 5.72 Soil Hauling 7.77 66.08 51.38 2.05 53.43 Vendor and Worker Trips 0.11 0.15 0.22 0.01 0.23 Subtotal 13.86 111.89 54.85 4.53 59.38 Building Construction (2014) On-Site Equipment 4.74 32.06 0.00 2.02 2.02 Soil Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor and Worker Trips 4.62 3.62 1.41 0.11 1.52 Subtotal 9.36 35.68 1.41 2.13 3.54 Building Construction (2015) On-Site Equipment 4.34 29.16 0.00 1.80 1.80 Soil Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor and Worker Trips 4.26 3.34 1.41 0.10 1.51 Subtotal 8.60 32.50 1.41 1.90 3.31 Building Construction (2016) On-Site Equipment 3.99 26.52 0.00 1.58 1.58 Soil Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor and Worker Trips 3.94 3.08 1.41 0.10 1.51 Subtotal 7.93 29.60 1.41 1.68 3.09 Paving (2016) On-Site Equipment 25.20 21.72 0.00 1.75 1.75 Soil Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor and Worker Trips 0.29 0.16 0.30 0.01 0.31 Subtotal 25.49 21.88 0.30 1.76 2.06 Architectural Coating (2016) On-Site Equipment 153.36 2.37 0.00 0.20 0.20 Soil Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor and Worker Trips 0.25 0.14 0.25 0.01 0.26 Subtotal 153.61 2.51 0.25 0.21 0.46

2014 Max Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 13.86 111.89 54.85 4.53 59.38 2014 Total Emissions (tons/year) 0.35 2.53 0.48 0.13 0.61 2015 Max Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 8.60 32.50 1.41 1.90 3.31 2015 Total Emissions (tons/year) 0.69 4.24 0.16 0.25 0.41 2016 Max Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 153.61 29.60 1.41 1.76 3.09 2016 Total Emissions (tons/year) 2.58 1.94 0.07 0.12 0.19 Source: CalEEMod v.2011.1, modeling results contained in Appendix C.



5.2-13

Table 5.2-4

Long-Tem Air Emission Estimates (Summer)

Emission Source ROG

(lbs/day) NOX

(lbs/day) CO

(lbs/day) PM10

(lbs/day) Mobile (Vehicle) Emission Sources 8.62 13.97 77.80 12.76

Mobile Emissions Threshold 25 25 No

Threshold No

Threshold Non-Mobile Sources (Consumer Products, Landscaping, Natural Gas)

5.46 0.73 1.27 0.06

Total Emissions - unmitigated 14.08 14.70 17.09 12.82

Total Operation Emissions Threshold 55 55 No

Threshold 55

Sources: Fehr & Peers 2013; CalEEMod v.2011.1, modeling results contained in Appendix C.

Combined mobile and non-mobile emissions generated from the project would not

exceed the daily trigger for offsets set in the SBCAPCD New Source Review Rule (presently 55 lbs/day), for ROG, NOX, or PM10. The vehicle emissions resulting from the project would not exceed 25 pounds per day; therefore, the vehicle trips generated by the proposed housing project would not result in air emissions that exceed an adopted air quality threshold, and would result in a less than significant air quality impact.

The project would also have an unquantifiable, yet potentially substantial, air quality

benefit that would result from increasing the supply of student residences in proximity to the UCSB campus. The proximity of the new residences to the campus would reduce commute distances from more distant residences and/or convert those vehicular commuter trips to other modes such as walking, bicycling or transit, resulting in a reduction in the total number of vehicle miles traveled and a corresponding reduction in emissions

An estimate of project-related emissions resulting from the occupancy of the proposed

housing units, such as natural gas combustion from the use of boilers for space and water heating, is included in the emission estimates provided in Table 5.2-4. The type of boiler that would be used by the project has not yet been selected, however, based on the natural gas combustion emission estimates provided on Table 5.2-4, it is not anticipated that new boilers would be a significantly higher source of criteria pollutant emissions than estimated in Table 5.2-4. Any boilers installed at the housing project would comply with the permitting regulations of SBCAPCD, and if necessary, required permits would be obtained by the University. The proposed housing project would not result in other operations that would be a significant source of air emissions.

Potential Future Uses of Existing Podium Space. The proposed project would result

in the decommissioning of the existing 30,000 square foot dining commons facility located in the podium space between the two residential building towers at the Santa Catalina Residence Hall. The project does not include, however, the renovation or establishment of new uses in the vacated dining commons space. If and when funds become available, potential future uses



5.2-14

for the podium space could include student service-related functions intended primarily for use by residents of the Santa Catalina Residence Hall and the San Joaquin Apartments. Types of uses that may be considered in the future could include a new fitness facility (e.g., gym equipment and related activities), meeting and study rooms, satellite wellness center facilities, and a small multi-purpose theater.

Potential future uses of the podium space may increase or decrease non-mobile

project-related emissions; however, providing additional student service-related functions on the project site would be expected to limit off-site trips, and would not generate a substantial number of additional vehicle trips, resulting in an overall reduction in emissions from mobile sources. As shown in Table 5.2-4, the majority of project-related criteria pollutant emissions are expected to result from mobile sources. Therefore, the anticipated reduction in emissions from mobile sources would be expected to offset any potential increase in non-mobile project-related emissions from potential future uses of the podium space, resulting in a net reduction of the total project emissions shown in Table 5.2-4.

The eventual reuse of the podium space may require a small amount of internal

demolition that could result in asbestos or lead-based paint dust emissions. UCSB has previously detected asbestos in materials such as floor tile mastic and wall board mud in other on-campus buildings, and these types of materials would likely be disturbed if demolition activities are required to convert the podium building to new uses. It is also possible that surfaces within the podium building have lead-based paint coatings.

Prior to any renovation or demolition activities, EPA recommends that all asbestos

containing materials be removed. The removal and handling of these materials are governed primarily by EPA regulations under Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations, but are implemented by SBCAPCD. The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Fed/OSHA) also has a survey requirement under Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations, which is implemented by Cal/OSHA under Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations. These regulations require facilities to take all necessary precautions to protect employees and the public from exposure to asbestos.

The Cal/OSHA lead-based paint standard for construction activities is implemented

under Title 8 California Code of Regulations. The standard applies to any construction activities that may release lead dust or fumes, including, but not limited to: manual scraping, manual sanding, heat gun application, power tool cleaning, rivet busting, abrasive blasting, welding, cutting, or torch burning or lead-based coatings. Unless otherwise determined by approved testing methods, all paints and other surface coatings are assumed to contain lead, depending on the application date of the paint or coating.

Any suspect materials that require demolition would be tested for the presence of

asbestos and lead-based paint prior to the start of demolition activities. All asbestos containing materials and lead-based coatings encountered during demolition and renovation activities would be removed and handled in accordance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations, which includes disposal of hazardous materials at a facility licensed to



5.2-15

accept such waste. As a result, potential impacts to workers and the public from asbestos or lead dust emissions would be less than significant.

Diesel Particulate Emissions

Short-Term Construction Emissions. Diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air

pollutants, mainly composed of gases, vapors and fine particles. The visible emissions in diesel exhaust are known as particulate matter, and consist of carbon particles (soot) and other gases that become visible as they cool. Diesel exhaust particles carry many of the harmful organic compounds and metals present in the exhaust. Exposures to airborne respirable diesel particulate matter can result in respiratory symptoms such as changes in lung function and cardiovascular disease. In 1998, California identified diesel particulate matter as a toxic air contaminant based on its potential to cause cancer and other adverse health effects.

The major sources of diesel particulate matter are diesel-fueled vehicles such as trucks

and buses, construction equipment, portable equipment such as drilling rigs, trains, marine vessels, and power generation. Traffic on U.S. 101 is a principle source of diesel exhaust emissions in the project region. Diesel particulate matter emissions tend to remain local, rather than dispersing regionally, and have the potential to cause health problems to people who live and work nearby construction activity. The sensitive receptors closest to the project site are the Santa Catalina Residence Hall (located on the project site), the Storke Ranch townhomes located adjacent to the northern project site boundary, the UCSB West Campus Family Apartments located on the west side of Storke Road, and the Isla Vista Elementary School.

The 2010 LRDP Final EIR included a health risk assessment that evaluated potential

health risks associated with future on-campus construction anticipated to occur under the 2010 LRDP. A health risk assessment characterizes human health risks as a result of exposure to toxic substances, including short-term construction emissions of diesel particulate matter. Based on conservative assumptions regarding proposed on-campus construction projects, the 2010 LRDP Final EIR concluded that if an individual on-campus construction project emitted less than 2,365 pounds of diesel particulate matter per year, that project would not result in a significant health risk to receptors near the project site. Pursuant to the 2010 LRDP Final EIR, this emission limit may be used as a surrogate for emissions calculations, and compliance with the limit at each location where construction is occurring ensures that diesel particulate matter emissions from constriction projects do not exceed thresholds of significance.

The 2010 LRDP EIR analysis of potential construction site diesel particulate matter

emissions evaluates project-specific impacts (individual construction projects) because diesel particulate matter impacts only have a localized effect in the vicinity of the construction site.

The 2010 LRDP EIR provides a table indicating how much construction equipment

horsepower can be operated at a particular construction site on a daily basis before 2,365 pounds of diesel particulate matter would be emitted. This table provides information for construction projects of varying durations (one month, three months and one year) and the use of various “tiers” (age) of construction equipment that may be operated on the site. Newer



5.2-16

construction equipment can be operated at a construction site for a longer duration before 2,365 pounds of diesel particulate matter is emitted because newer “tiers” of construction equipment have engines that emit less diesel particulate matter than older engines. Table 5.2-5 presents the amount of construction equipment (measured in horsepower) that can be operated on a construction site in a single day over a specified time period without emitting more than 2,365 pounds of diesel particulate matter.

Table 5.2-5

Daily Maximum Diesel Construction Equipment Horsepower Threshold to Remain Less than Significant

Emission Standards

One Month Construction Period

(horsepower/day)

Three Month Construction Period

(horsepower/day)

One Year Construction Period

(horsepower/day) Tier 0 (before model year 1996)

19,687 6,562 1,641

Tier 1 (starting model year 1996-1997)

26,577 8,859 2,215

Tier 2/3 (starting model year 2001-2012)

70,872 23,624 5,906

Tier 4 (starting model year 2011-2012)

708,719 236,240 59,060

Source: 2010 LRDP EIR Construction equipment horsepower that would be used during project construction

was estimated using CalEEMod and is based on reasonable estimates of construction equipment use during each of the project’s construction phases. As shown in Table 5.2-3, construction activity on the project site is not expected to be a substantial source of diesel emissions (maximum of 3.61 pounds of PM10 exhaust per day during the grading phase, 2.47 pounds of PM10 exhaust per day during the grading phase, and lower during all other phases of project construction). Table 5.2-6 summarizes peak construction-related equipment use during 2014 (the peak equipment use and construction emission year).

Table 5.2-6

Peak Day Diesel-Powered Construction Equipment Horsepower

Peak Site Preparation Equipment Diesel Horsepower

Peak Grading Equipment Diesel Horsepower

Analysis Threshold (maximum

horsepower/day)

Significant Impact?

1,374 902 2,215 No

Source: CalEEMod v.2011.1, modeling results contained in Appendix C.

For this analysis it was conservatively estimated that each piece of diesel-powered

equipment would be used continuously for six-to-eight hours during each workday, and that



5.2-17

only Tier 1 construction equipment (starting model year 1996-1997) would be used on the project site. The use of Tier 2/3 diesel-powered equipment would substantially increase the amount of horsepower that could be operated on the project site without resulting in significant health-related effects. Alternatively, under similar equipment loads, use of Tier 2/3 diesel-powered equipment would substantially reduce diesel particulate matter emissions. As shown on Table 5.2-5, the peak use of diesel-powered construction equipment on the project site would be substantially below the combined daily horsepower threshold of 2,215 identified by the 2010 LRDP EIR for construction projects with duration of one year or greater. Therefore, emissions of diesel particulate matter during the construction phase of the project would remain below the 2,365-pounds-per-year emission limit, which would result in less than significant health-related effects to receptors near the project site. Implementation of recommend mitigation measure AQ-2a.3, which encourages the use of Tier 2 or Tier 3 equipment during project construction would further reduce short-term emissions of diesel particulate matter.

Long-Term Emissions. The San Joaquin Apartments project would not include

industrial or commercial uses or processes that would result in long-term emissions of toxic air contaminants. However, the project proposes to provide two new on-site diesel-powered emergency backup power generators. The sensitive receptors closest to the project site that may be affected by emissions from the proposed new generators include the Santa Catalina Residence Hall (located on the project site), the Storke Ranch townhomes located adjacent to the northern project site boundary, the UCSB West Campus Family Apartments located on the west side of Storke Road, and the Isla Vista Elementary School. Residents of the on-site Santa Catalina Residence Hall are students, and would have a substantially shorter residence time than the standard lifetime exposure of 70 years. Other nearby sensitive receptors include adult and child residents, who would be affected by longer lifetime exposure to emissions, and in the case of child residents, higher sensitivity to the effects of diesel particulate matter.

The generator on the western portion of the site would be approximately 110 feet north

of El Colegio road and approximately 135 feet east of Storke Road. The generator on the eastern portion of the project site would be approximately 175 feet north of El Colegio Road. The setback distance to the eastern project site property line would be substantially more than 175 feet. The new emergency generators would be used to provide standby power for uses such as fire pumps, elevators and emergency lighting. Both generators would be rated at 370 horsepower. The generators would be sited to ensure that exhaust is not vented near fresh air intakes or operable windows. The SBCAPCD requires that prior to occupancy of new buildings, Authority to Construct permits are obtained for diesel engines rated at 50 brake-horsepower and greater.

Emergency generators are not used on a regular basis, but are tested periodically,

which results in brief periods of diesel particulate matter emissions. The 2010 LRDP Final EIR included a health risk assessment that evaluated potential health risks associated with development anticipated to occur under the 2010 LRDP, including emissions from emergency generator testing. A health risk assessment characterizes human health risks as a result of exposure to toxic substances. The analysis determined that cumulative toxic air contaminant



5.2-18

impacts (including cancer risk, chronic non-cancer risk, and acute non-cancer risk) resulting from the buildout of the 2010 LRDP would be less than significant without mitigation (UCSB, 2010).

SBCAPCD conducted a screening-level health risk assessment for the proposed new

generators. The assumptions of the project-specific health risk assessment are conservative and assume a lifetime (70-year) exposure to emissions. Due to the conservative exposure assumptions used in the health risk screening assessment, the analysis represents health risk to sensitive receptors such as children, who are more sensitive to the effects of diesel particulate emission. The SBCAPCD analysis determined that the combined cancer risk resulting from the operation of both generators would be 5.80 in a million for a maximally exposed individual. The estimated cancer-related health risk would not exceed the UC CEQA Handbook standard for health risk of 10 in one million probability of a maximally exposed individual contracting cancer. The health risk standard of 10 in one million is also the standard used by the SBCAPCD.

Based on the findings of the 2010 LRDP Final EIR, as well as the project-specific

health risk assessment conducted by the SBCAPCD, the potential health risk impact from the proposed project at nearby sensitive receptors would be less than significant. Compliance with SBCAPCD regulations regarding the installation and use of diesel-powered emergency generators, including compliance with existing Stationary Diesel Airborne Toxic Control Measures; and recommended mitigation measures AQ-2a, which would minimize construction equipment use on the project site, would further reduce the potential for project-specific health-related impacts.

5.2.4 Cumulative Impacts

Based on criteria provided by the County of Santa Barbara’s Environmental

Thresholds and Guidelines Manual, if a project's emissions of ozone precursors (NOX or ROG) exceed the long-term thresholds, or if emissions have not been taken into account in the most recent CAP growth projections, then the project’s cumulative air quality impact would be significant. The vehicle emissions from the San Joaquin Apartments and Precinct Improvements Project would not exceed the 25 pounds per day threshold; therefore, the project’s emissions of ozone precursors would not be cumulatively significant. Similarly, the combined non-mobile and mobile emissions of ozone precursors would not exceed the operational threshold of 55 pound per day, and would not be cumulatively significant.

As discussed above, the San Joaquin Apartments project would be consistent with the

2010 CAP because the project would not result in population growth beyond that anticipated by the LRDP, and the project would implement a variety of measures that would reduce the project’s direct and indirect air emissions. Therefore, cumulative air quality impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant.



5.2-19

5.2.5 Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts

Impacts That Can Be Reduced To a Less Than Significant Level.

AQ-1. Dust emissions from project-related construction activities have the potential to

result in a significant air quality impact and contribute to existing non-attainment conditions for PM10.

AQ-1a. Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used during construction to keep

all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, such areas shall be watered down in the late morning and after completion of work at the end of the day. Reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible.

AQ-1b. The frequency of watering shall be increased when wind speeds exceed 15

miles per hour if soils are not completely wet. If wind speeds increase to the point that the dust control measures cannot prevent dust from leaving the site, construction activities shall be suspended.

AQ-1c. If importation, exportation, or stockpiling of fill is involved, soil stockpiled

for more than two days shall be covered and kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporting fill material to and from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin.

AQ-1d. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed, the

disturbed area shall be treated by watering, revegetating, or by spreading soil binders until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur.

AQ-1e. Gravel pads shall be installed at all vehicle access points to minimize

tracking of mud onto public roads. AQ-1f. Construction contractors shall designate a monitor for the dust control

program. The monitor may order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust offsite. The monitor’s work schedule shall include holiday and weekend periods when work at the project site may not be in progress. The contractor shall provide the name and telephone number of such person to the SBCAPCD prior to the start of grading.

AQ-1g. All required dust control measures shall be shown on project grading and

building plans and as notes on a separate sheet attached to the grading plans or as a separate plan prior to the start of construction.



5.2-20

Implementation of the dust control measures provided above would be consistent with the requirements of the 1979 Air Quality Attainment Plan and would minimize the effects of short-term construction-related air quality impacts from the San Joaquin Apartments project to a less than significant level.

Recommended Measures for Less Than Significant Impacts The following measures are recommended by the Santa Barbara County APCD to reduce project-related emissions of criteria pollutants to the extent feasible. Implementation of the following measures will further reduce an already less than significant impact. AQ-2 Construction equipment emissions resulting from the development of the San

Joaquin Apartments project would contribute to emissions of NOx, PM10, PM2.5

and diesel particulate matter.

AQ-2a The following emission control measures have been recommended by the Santa Barbara County APCD to further reduce the project’s less than significant short-term emissions of NOx, PM10, PM2.5, and diesel particulate matter. All of these measures should be implemented at the project site during construction.

1. All portable construction equipment shall be registered with the State’s portable equipment registration program OR shall obtain an APCD permit.

2. All commercial diesel vehicles are subject to Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations, which limits engine idling time. Idling of heavy-duty diesel construction equipment and trucks during loading and unloading shall be limited to five minutes; electric auxiliary power units should be used whenever possible.

3. Diesel construction equipment meeting the California Air Resources Board’s Tier 1 emission standards for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines shall be used. Equipment meeting Tier 2 or higher emission standards should be used to the maximum extent feasible.

4. Diesel powered equipment should be replaced by electric equipment whenever feasible.

5. If feasible, diesel construction equipment shall be equipped with selective catalytic reduction systems, diesel oxidation catalysts and diesel particulate filters as certified and/or verified by EPA or California.

6. The engine size of construction equipment shall be the minimum practical size.

7. The number of construction equipment operating simultaneously shall be minimized through efficient management practices to ensure that the smallest practical number is operating at any one time.



5.2-21

8. Construction equipment shall be maintained in tune per the manufacturer’s specifications.

9. Catalytic converters shall be installed on gasoline-powered equipment, if feasible.



5.2-22