Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
ASRPC20230328 - 05.1
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 5.1 TO: Chair and Planning Commission March 28, 2023 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2023-04, adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance, approving Minor Subdivision MS 870-2022, and Tree Removal permit TR23-007 allowing the subdivision of an existing 2.15-acre parcel located at 824 Danville Blvd. into four single- family residential lots. The tree removal request would allow for the removal of 38 Town-protected trees. DESCRIPTION This application is a request to subdivide a 2.15-acre parcel, located at 824 Danville Blvd., into four single-family residential lots. The site is relatively flat, with a number of trees located mostly around the periphery of the parcel which would remain. A total of 38 Town-protected trees are proposed to be removed as part of the project. At this time, the applicant is not proposing any architecture related to the development of the parcels. Future development of the proposed lots would require review by the Town and the Design Review Board under a separate Development Plan application. EVALUATION/ DISCUSSION Conformance with General Plan and Zoning District The site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Residential – Single Family – Low Density, allowing a range of 1-3 units per acre. As proposed, the net density of the site is approximately 2.4 units per acre (subtracting the unusable creek area). The parcel is zoned R-20; Single Family Residential District, requiring a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet. All the proposed lots are consistent with the R-20 zoning district. Tree Protection An arborist report was prepared for this project by Bob Peralta Arbor Consulting (Attachment D). There are a total of 89 surveyed trees on the site. A total of 38 trees on the site qualify as Town-protected trees under the Town’s Tree Protection Ordinance. Thirty-eight of these trees are proposed for removal as they conflict with the proposed subdivision improvements (Attachment F). The applicant would be required to post a tree preservation bond or security to assure the continued good health of any Town- protected tree where grading or development is proposed in a tree drip line. In addition, 824 Danville Blvd 2 March 28, 2023 the Town-protected trees to be removed would be required to be mitigated through the payment of an off-site planting mitigation fee of $126,500. C.3. Stormwater Pollution Control In compliance with the Town’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, future development would be subject to compliance with the Town’s C.3 stormwater pollution control requirements as found in the Stormwater Control Plan. One dual-staged stormwater treatment facility is proposed for each of the four proposed lots. The stormwater treatment facility would then drain into a public storm system. The treatment facilities would be maintained by the homeowners through a maintenance agreement. Access and Circulation Access to the proposed four lot development will be directly from Danville Blvd. The parcel map will relinquish the abutters rights for Parcel A and C along the Danville Blvd frontage. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The applicant submitted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by ENGEO Geotechnical (Attachment E). The site reconnaissance and records review did not find documentation or physical evidence of soil, or groundwater impairments associated with the use or past use of the property. A review of regulatory databases maintained by the county, state, tribal, and federal agencies found no documentation of hazardous materials violations or discharge on the property and did not identify contaminated facilities within the appropriate American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) search distances that would reasonably be expected to impact the property. However, the report found concentrations of lead exceeding residential environmental screening level in the soil surrounding the perimeters of all three on-site structures and elevated concentration of organochlorine pesticide (OCP). Conditions of approval will require the applicant remedy this issue by disposing the soil at an appropriate licensed landfill facility or reconsolidated on site with institutional and engineering controls. The project has been found to have less than significant environmental impacts by incorporating mitigation measures under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As a result, a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared for this project (Attachment C). 824 Danville Blvd 3 March 28, 2023 PUBLIC CONTACT Public notice of the March 14, 2023, hearing was mailed to property owners within 750 feet and posted online. A total of 111 notices were mailed to surrounding property owners. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance and approve Minor Subdivision request MS 870-2022, and Tree Removal permit TR23-0007 allowing the subdivision of an existing 2.15-acre parcel into four single-family residential lots at a site located at 824 Danville Blvd. Prepared by: Fred Korbmacher Project Planner Attachments: A - Resolution No. 2023-04 B - Public Notification, Notification Map & Notification List C - Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance D - Tree Report – Bob Peralta Arbor Consulting E - Phase I Environmental - ENGEO F - Tentative Map, Civil Drawings, and Tree Inventory RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE, APPROVING MINOR SUBDIVISION MS 870-2022, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT TR23-0007 ALLOWING THE SUBDIVISION OF AN EXISTING 2.15-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 824 DANVILLE BLVD. INTO FOUR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE TREE REMOVAL REQUEST WOULD ALLOW FOR THE REMOVAL OF 38 TOWN-PROTECTED TREES (APN: 200-090-003) WHEREAS, Jason Bond has requested approval of a Minor Subdivision application (MS 870-2022) and Tree Removal Permit (TR23-0007) to subdivide an existing 2.15-acre parcel into four single-family residential lots; and WHEREAS, the Tree Removal permit would allow for the removal of 38 Town-protected trees; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located at 824 Danville Blvd. and further identified as Assessor’s Parcel Number 200-090-003; and WHEREAS, the Town of Danville Subdivision Ordinance requires Planning Commission approval of a tentative parcel map prior to recordation of a final map; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared for the project indicating that, as modified through project revisions and/or recommended conditions of approval, no significant adverse environmental impacts are expected to be associated with the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the project at a noticed public hearing on March 14, 2023; and WHEREAS, the public notice of this action was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all reports, recommendations, and testimony submitted in writing and presented at the hearing concerning the project at a noticed public hearing on March 14, 2023; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance and approved Minor Subdivision MS 870-2023, and Tree Removal permit TR23-0007 subject to the conditions contained herein, and make the ATTACHMENT A PAGE 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 following findings in support of this action: FINDINGS OF APPROVAL Development Plan - Major Subdivision: 1.The proposed subdivision is in substantial conformance with the goals and policies of the 2030 General Plan and the site’s Residential – Single Family – Low Density (1-3) units per acre) land use designation. 2.The design of the proposed subdivision is in substantial conformance with the applicable zoning regulations as established under the Town’s R-20; Single Family Residential District Ordinance. 3.The design of the subdivision and the type of associated improvements will not likely cause serious public health problems because water and sanitary facility services will be available to the new parcels. 4.The design of the proposed subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or subsequently injure fish or wildlife or their habitat since this property is in an area where residential development has previously occurred. 5.The design of the proposed subdivision and proposed improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 6.The density of the subdivision is physically suitable for the subject site and surrounding neighborhood because the proposed development is similar in size and density to the residential developments adjacent and vicinity of the site. Tree Removal Permit 1.Necessity. The primary reason for removal of the 38 trees is that preservation of those trees would be inconsistent with the proposed residential development of the property, including the creation of a new roadway to access the main project area, infrastructure improvements, and the location of the housing units. 2.Erosion/surface water flow. Removal of the 38 trees, would not cause significant soil erosion or cause a significant diversion or increase in the flow of surface water. 3.Visual effects. With respect to other trees in the area, the project site and PAGE 3 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 immediately abutting area contain numerous trees, including Town-protected Valley Oaks, Live Oaks, and one Redwood tree that would not be removed for the project. Landscaping to be planted as part of the development will provide for on- site mitigation for the loss of trees. 4.Removal of the 38 trees, would not significantly affect off-site shade or adversely affect privacy between properties due to the site’s topography, the other trees that would remain, and the locations of the trees in relation to other properties. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditions of approval with an asterisk (“*”) in the left-hand column are standard project conditions of approval. Conditions of approval typed in italicized text are mitigation measures derived from the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance prepared for the project. Unless otherwise specified, the following conditions shall be complied with prior to the approval of the final map or issuance of grading permits for the project. Each item is subject to review and approval by the Planning Division unless otherwise specified. A. GENERAL 1.This approval is for Minor Subdivision application MS 870-2022, and Tree Removal permit TR22-0007 allowing the subdivision of a 2.15-acre parcel located at 824 Danville Blvd, into four single family residential lots. The Tree Removal permit allows for the removal of 38 Town-protected trees. Development shall be substantially as shown on the project drawings as follows, except as may be modified by conditions contained herein; a.Vesting Tentative Map MS 870-2022 titled “824 Danville Boulevard,” as prepared by DeBolt Civil Engineering, consisting of 4 sheets, dated December 22, 2022. b.Tree Report, prepared by Bob Peralta Arbor Consulting dated June 10, 2022, revised January 9, 2023 c.Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by ENGEO Incorporated, dated September 23, 2022. 2.All Town and other related fees that the property may be subject to shall be paid by the applicant. These fees shall be based on the current fee schedule in effect at the time the relevant permits are secured and shall be paid prior PAGE 4 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 to issuance of said permit and prior to any Town Council final approval action. The following fees are due at final map approval for the above-mentioned project and are subject to annual increases: 1.Map Check Fee .........................................................$ 3,582.00 2.Base Map Revision Fee ...............................................$ 408.00 3.Improvement Plan Check Fee ............... 3% of cost estimate 4.Engineering Inspection Fee ................... 5% of cost estimate 5.Grading Plan Check, Inspection and Permit .................TBD 6.Excavation Mitigation Fee (Flood Control) ..........$ 3,108.00 7.Drainage Area 10 (Flood Control) .......................$ 10,560.00 8.Park Land in Lieu Fee (3 Lots) .............................$ 38,633.00 The following fees are due at building permit issuance for the above mentioned project and are subject to annual increases (credit for existing house): 1.Child Care Facilities Fee ...................................... $ 335/unit 2.Finish Grading Fee ................................................. $ 86/unit 3.Stormwater Pollution Program Fee ..................... $ 56/unit 4.SCC Regional Fee............................................... $ 1,676/unit 5.Residential TIP Fee ............................................ $ 2,000/unit 6.Tri-Valley Transportation Fee .......................... $ 6,597/unit 3.Prior to issuance of building permit the applicant shall reimburse the Town for notifying surrounding residents. The fee shall be $444.26 ($130 plus 111 notices x $0.83 per notice x two notices). * 4. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit written documentation that all requirements of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District (SRVFPD) and the San Ramon Valley Unified School District (SRVUSD) have been, or will be, met to the satisfaction of these respective agencies. * 5. In the event that subsurface archeological remains are discovered during any construction or pre-construction activities on the site, all land alteration work within 100 feet of the find shall be halted, the Town Planning Division notified, and a professional archeologist, certified by the Society of California Archeology and/or the Society of Professional Archeology, shall be notified. Site work in this area shall not occur until the archeologist has PAGE 5 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and to outline appropriate mitigation measures if they are deemed necessary. If prehistoric archaeological deposits are discovered during development of the site, local Native American organizations shall be consulted and involved in making resource management decisions. * 6. Construction activity shall be restricted to the period between the weekday hours of 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. (Monday through Friday), unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Engineer for general construction activity and the Chief Building Official for building construction activity. Prior to any construction work on the site, including grading, the property owner shall install a minimum 3’ x 3’ sign at the project entry which specifies the allowable construction workdays and hours, and lists the name and contact person for the overall project manager and all contractors and sub-contractors working on the job. * 7. The applicant shall provide security fencing, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or the Chief Building Official, around the site during construction of the project. * 8. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition, and to locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far away from existing residences as feasible. * 9. A watering program which incorporates the use of a dust suppressant, and which complies with Regulation 2 of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District shall be established and implemented for all on and off-site construction activities. Equipment and human resources for watering all exposed or disturbed soil surfaces shall be supplied on weekends and holidays as well as workdays. Dust-producing activities shall be discontinued during high wind periods. * 10. As part of the initial submittal for the final map, plan check review process, the applicant shall submit a written Compliance Report detailing how the conditions of approval for this project has been complied with. This report shall list each condition of approval followed by a description of what the property owner has provided as evidence of compliance with that condition. The report must be signed by the applicant. The report is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and/or Chief of Planning and/or Chief Building Official and may be rejected by the Town if it is not comprehensive with respect to the applicable conditions of approval. PAGE 6 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 * 11. Planning Division sign-off is required prior to final Building Inspection sign-off. 12.If tree removal must take place between February 1st and August 31st,, preconstruction nesting surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure no nesting birds would be impacted by the trees’ removal. If birds are determined to be nesting in the tree(s) slated for removal or in a nearby tree that could be disturbed by noise, a non-disturbance buffer shall be demarcated around the nest tree and no disturbance shall occur within the buffer zone until the present birds have finished nesting. Once nesting is completed and the young birds are flying freely, the non-disturbance buffer may be removed. 13.Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall retain a specialist to assess rodent control impacts anticipated to be associated with grading activity and installation of subdivision improvements. As deemed necessary, following the Planning Division’s review of the specialist’s assessment, the applicant shall develop and implement a rodent control plan to reduce impacts to surrounding properties to the extent reasonably possible for the time periods of heavy construction activity. The report shall include a schedule for regular rodent inspections and mitigation in conjunction with the developer and the Town based on the development schedule for the project. This report shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division. B. SITE PLANNING * 1. All lighting shall be installed in such a manner that lighting is generally down directed and glare is directed away from surrounding properties and rights-of-way. 2.Any on-site wells and septic systems shall be destroyed in accordance with Contra Costa County Health Services Department - Environmental Health Division regulations. Environmental Health Division permits and inspections for this work shall be obtained. The maintenance of existing on-site wells shall be allowed for landscape irrigation purposes subject to review and approval by the Contra Costa County Health Services Department – Environmental Health Division. 3.The development and use of the lots created by this subdivision shall comply with all requirements of the Town’s R-20; Single Family Residential District Ordinance. PAGE 7 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 C. LANDSCAPING 1.Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans (Landscape Plans), with planting shown at 1”=20’ scale, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division and Design Review Board. The plan shall include common names of all plant materials and shall indicate the size that various plant materials will achieve within a five-year period of time. 2.The developer shall be required to mitigate the loss of 38 Town-protected trees. The total diameter of trees to be removed is 1,012 inches. As a result, the applicant shall be responsible for the planting of either 506 15-gallon trees or 253 24-inch box size trees. It is anticipated that these trees would not be able to be planted on site, given the footprint of the proposed building. Therefore, trees would be planted off-site within Town parks and open space area subject to the applicant’s payment of an off-site mitigation fee. The mitigation fee shall be $250.00 per 15-gallon tree or $500.00 per 24-inch box size tree. 3.All plant material shall be served by an automatic underground irrigation system and maintained in a healthy growing condition. The irrigation system shall comply with East Bay Municipal Utility District’s Section 31 Water Efficiency requirements, including use of a weather-based controller with soil moisture probe and rain-shutoff switch. D. ARCHITECTURE * 1. All ducts, meters, air conditioning and/or any other mechanical equipment whether on the structure or on the ground shall be effectively screened from view with landscaping or materials architecturally compatible with the main structures. * 2. The street numbers for each structure in the project shall be posted to be easily seen from the street at all times, day and night. 3.The future development of each lot created by this subdivision shall be subject to review and approval by the Design Review Board under a separate Development Plan application(s). 4.Prior to any renovation or new construction of the residence on Parcel D, the applicant shall submit a Land Use Permit application to allow for re- establishment of a legal non-conforming which is located within the creek PAGE 8 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 setback area. Through this process, the applicant must demonstrate approval from the Contra Costa County Flood Control District and that there will be no negative impacts associated with the building location. E. GRADING * 1. Development shall be completed in compliance with a detailed soils report and the construction grading plans prepared for this project. The engineering recommendations outlined in the project specific soils report shall be incorporated into the design of this project. The report shall include specific recommendations for foundation design of the proposed buildings and shall be subject to review and approval by the Town’s Engineering and Planning Divisions. * 2. Where soils or geologic conditions encountered in grading operations are different from that anticipated in the soil report, a revised soils report shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. It shall be accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the safety of the site from settlement and seismic activity. * 3. All development shall take place in compliance with the Town Erosion Control Ordinance (Ord19-4). Restrictions include limiting construction primarily to the dry months of the year (May through October) and, if construction does occur during the rainy season, the developer shall submit an Erosion Control Plan to the City Engineer for review and approval. This plan shall incorporate erosion control devices such as, the use of sediment traps, silt fencing, pad berming and other techniques to minimize erosion. * 4. All new development shall be consistent with modern design for resistance to seismic forces. All new development shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code and Town of Danville Ordinances. * 5. Stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the wind shall be covered. * 6. If toxic or contaminated soil is encountered during construction, all construction activity in that area shall cease until the appropriate action is determined and implemented. The concentrations, extent of the contamination and mitigation shall be determined by the Contra Costa County Health Department. Suitable disposal and/or treatment of any contaminated soil shall meet all federal state and local regulations. If deemed appropriate by the Health Department, the property owner shall make provisions for immediate containment of the materials. PAGE 9 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 * 7. Runoff from any contaminated soil shall not be allowed to enter any drainage facility, inlet or creek. * 8. All grading activity shall address National Pollutant Discharge Elimination system (NPDES) concerns. Specific measures to control sediment runoff, construction pollution and other potential construction contamination shall be addressed through the Erosion control Plan (ECP) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall supplement the Erosion Control Plan and project improvement plans. These documents shall also be kept on-site while the project is under construction. A NPDES construction permit may be required, as determined by the City Engineer. 9.The applicant shall create a construction staging plan that addresses the ingress and egress location for all construction vehicles, parking and material storage area. All staging of construction materials and equipment shall occur on-site. This plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Town prior to the issuance of a grading permit. F. STREETS * 1. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Engineering Division prior to commencing any construction activities within any public right-of-way or easement. * 2. All mud or dirt carried off the construction site onto adjacent streets shall be swept each day. Water flushing of site debris or sediment or concrete washing is expressly prohibited. * 3. All improvements within the public right-of-way, including driveways, paving and utilities, shall be constructed in accordance with approved standards and/or plans and shall comply with the standard plans and specifications of the Development Services Department and Chapters XII and XXXI of the Town Code. At the time project improvement plans are submitted, the applicant shall supply to the City Engineer an up to date title report for the subject property. 4.A satisfactory private storm drain maintenance agreement for the C.3 retention basin shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town prior to recordation of the final map. G. INFRASTRUCTURE PAGE 10 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 * 1. The new and existing residences shall be required to connect to public water and sewer facilities, subject to all permitting requirements and conditions imposed by EBMUD and CCCSD. * 2. Drainage facilities and easements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or the Chief Engineer of the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (CCCFC & WCD). * 3. All runoff from impervious surfaces shall be intercepted at the project boundary and shall be collected and conducted via an approved drainage method through the project to an approved storm drainage facility, as determined by the City Engineer. * 4. Roof drainage from structures shall be collected via a closed pipe and conveyed to an approved storm drainage facility in the street curb. No concentrated drainage shall be permitted to surface flow across sidewalks. * 5. If a storm drain must cross a lot, or be in an easement between lots, the easement shall be equal to or at least double the depth of the storm drain. * 6. The applicant shall furnish proof to the City Engineer of the acquisition of all necessary rights of entry, permits and/or easements for the construction of off-site temporary or permanent road and drainage improvements. * 7. Electrical, gas, telephone, and cable TV services, shall be provided underground in accordance with the Town policies and existing ordinances. All utilities shall be located and provided within public utility easements, sited to meet utility company standards, or in public streets. * 8. All new utilities required to serve the development shall be installed underground. * 9. All street, drainage or grading improvement plans shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer. H. MISCELLANEOUS * 1. The project shall be constructed as approved. Minor modifications in the design, but not the use, may be approved by staff. Any other change will require Planning Commission approval through the subdivision review process. PAGE 11 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 * 2. Pursuant to Government Code section 66474.9, the applicant (including the applicant or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Town of Danville and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the Town or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the Town's approval concerning this Subdivision application, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37. The Town will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense. * 3. Use of a private gated entrance for more than one parcel is expressly prohibited. * 4. The proposed project shall conform to the Town’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Ord. No. 2004-06) and all applicable construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the site. For example, construction BMPs may include, but are not limited to: the storage and handling of construction materials, street cleaning, proper disposal of wastes and debris, painting, concrete operations, dewatering operations, pavement operations, vehicle/equipment cleaning, maintenance and fueling and stabilization of construction entrances. Training of contractors on BMPs for construction activities is a requirement of this permit. At the discretion of the City Engineer, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) may be required for projects under five acres. * 5. The project shall conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board post-construction C.3 regulations which shall be designed and engineered to integrate into the project’s overall site, architectural, landscaping and improvement plans. These requirements are contained in the project’s Stormwater Control Plan and are to be implemented as follows: ▪Prior to issuance of permits for building, site improvements, or landscaping, the permit application shall be consistent with the applicant’s approved Stormwater Control Plan and shall include drawings and specifications necessary to implement all measures in the approved plan. The permit application shall include a completed Stormwater Control Plan for a Small Land Development Project as published by the Contra Costa Clean Water Program. PAGE 12 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-04 APPROVED by the Danville Planning Commission at a special meeting on March 28, 2023, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAINED: ABSENT: _____________________________ CHAIR APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: _______________________________ ______________________________ CITY ATTORNEY CHIEF OF PLANNING NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING And public review period and notice of intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance Danville Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, March 28, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. | Town Meeting Hall, 201 Front Street Project Name: Minor Subdivision MS 870-2022 – 824 Danville Blvd Case File Nos.: MS 870-2022 (SUB22-0023), and TR23-0007 Location: 824 Danville Blvd | APN: 200-090-003 Description: Minor subdivision request to subdivide a 2.15-acre property into 4 single family residential lots. The development would result in the removal of 38 Town- protected trees. This action would require the approval of a Minor Subdivision request MS 870- 2022(SUB22-0023), and Tree Removal request (TR22-0031). Environmental Review: The project has been found to have less than significant environmental impacts with the incorporation of mitigation measures under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As a result, a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared for this project. Copies of the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study of Environmental Significance that have been prepared for the project are available at the Town of Danville Town Offices at 510 La Gonda Way, Danville, CA 94526 The public review period for the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance is February 17, 2023, through March 14, 2023. Any comments on the adequacy of the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration may be forwarded to the staff contact below. Property Owners/Applicant: Jason Bond 824 Danville Blvd Danville, CA 94526 Staff Contact: Fred Korbmacher, Project Planner (925) 314-3317 fkorbmacher@danville.ca.gov ATTACHMENT B NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING All interested persons are encouraged to attend and be heard at the scheduled public hearing at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 28, 2023, at the Town Meeting Hall at 201 Front Street, Danville, CA. NOTE: If you challenge the Town’s decision on this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town at, or prior, to the public hearing. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Town of Danville will provide special assistance for disabled citizens. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk (925) 314-3388. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II] Vicinity & Notification Map – 824 Danville Blvd PROJECT SITE “Small Town Atmosphere Outstanding Quality of Life” 5 1 0 L A G O N D A W A Y , D A N V I L L E , C A L I F O R N I A 9 4 5 2 6 Administration Building Engineering & Planning Transportation Maintenance Police Parks and Recreation (925) 314-3388 (925) 314-3330 (925) 314-3310 (925) 314-3310 (925) 314-3450 (925) 314-3410 (925) 314-3400 DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE LEAD AGENCY: Town of Danville -- (Fred Korbmacher) NAME OF PROJECT: SUB22-0023 (MS 870-2022) – TR23-0007 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subdivision of an existing 2.15-acre parcel into four single family residential lots where there is one (38) Town-protected trees on the subject property affected by this proposal ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS/MITIGATION MEASURES: 1.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:Will the Project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project would develop an existing 2.15-acre single-family residential property into four residential lots. The project is not projected to impact special-status species. All raptors and other nesting migratory birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and their eggs and young are protected under California Fish and Game Codes. A nesting survey would be conducted prior to commencing with construction work if this work would commence between February 1st and August 31st. If a nest is found, a buffer around the tree with the nest will be installed, which would be identified by a qualified biologist. MITIGATION MEASURE 1: If tree removal must take place between February 1st and August 31st,, preconstruction nesting surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure no nesting birds would be impacted by the trees’ removal. If birds are determined to be nesting in the tree(s) slated for removal or in a nearby tree that could be disturbed by noise, a non-disturbance buffer shall be demarcated around the nest tree and no disturbance shall occur within the buffer zone until the present birds have finished nesting. Once nesting is completed and the young birds ATTACHMENT C February 8, 2023 Page 2 are flying freely, the non-disturbance buffer may be removed. d)Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project would develop a site with an existing single-family residence and landscaped area. All stormwater/surface runoff should be directed into the Town’s storm drain system. All raptors and other nesting migratory birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and their eggs and young are protected under California Fish and Game Codes. A nesting survey would be conducted prior to commencing with construction work if this work would commence between February 1st and August 31st. If a nest is found, a buffer around the tree with the nest will be installed, which would be identified by a qualified biologist. MITIGATION MEASURE 2: If tree removal must take place between February 1st and August 31st,, preconstruction nesting surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure no nesting birds would be impacted by the trees’ removal. If birds are determined to be nesting in the tree(s) slated for removal or in a nearby tree that could be disturbed by noise, a non-disturbance buffer shall be demarcated around the nest tree and no disturbance shall occur within the buffer zone until the present birds have finished nesting. Once nesting is completed and the young birds are flying freely, the non-disturbance buffer may be removed. e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Of the 89 trees surveyed on the site, 76 are to be removed. Of the 76 trees, 38 trees are protected under the Town’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. 38 new trees will be planted on site or in-lieu fees will be paid. MITIGATION MEASURE 3: The developer shall be required to mitigate the loss of 38 Town- protected trees. The total diameter of trees to be removed is 1,012 inches. As a result, the applicant shall be responsible for the planting of either 506 15-gallon trees or 253 24-inch box size trees. It is anticipated that these trees would not be able to be planted on site, given the footprint of the February 8, 2023 Page 3 proposed building. Therefore, trees would be planted off-site within Town parks and open space area subject to the applicant’s payment of an off-site mitigation fee. The mitigation fee shall be $250.00 per 15-gallon tree or $500.00 per 24-inch box size tree. 4.NOISE:Would the project result in: d)A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Noise levels would temporarily be increased due to noise associated with the construction of the project. The noise impact will be less than significant given required standard conditions of approval which define and limit hours of construction. MITIGATION MEASURE 4: The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers, which are in good condition, and to locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far away from existing residences as feasible. MITIGATION MEASURE 5: Construction activity shall be restricted to the period between the weekday hours of 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. (Mondays through Fridays), unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Engineer for general construction activity and the Chief Building Official for building construction activity. Prior to any construction work on the site, including grading, the applicant shall install a minimum 3’ x 3’ sign at the project entry which specifies the allowable construction workdays and hours, and lists the name and contact person for the overall project manager and all contractors and sub-contractors working on the job. 5.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project result in: c)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? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project will be required to comply with all stormwater quality requirements. The project proposes self-retaining pervious areas and a bio-retention basin. Calculations were computed on the Contra Costa Clean Water Program’s IMP calculator to determine C3 compliance. MITIGATION MEASURE 6: Stormwater and surface water runoff shall be directed into the property’s public storm drain system. The applicant shall be required to pay the Excavation Mitigation Fee to Contra Costa County Flood Control. February 8, 2023 Page 4 8.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project result in: a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project is in a residential area, similar to the surrounding area. The proposed project is an infill four lot residential project. Hazardous materials were located around the perimeters of all three structures, and OCP impacts are located around the guest house. These impacts should be addressed with a limited remediation/mitigation program, which would consist of the excavation of surface soil adjacent to these structure perimeters. MITIGATION MEASURE 7: If toxic or contaminated soil is encountered during construction, all construction activity in that area shall cease until the appropriate action is determined and implemented. The concentrations, extent of the contamination and mitigation shall be determined by the Contra Costa County Health Department. Suitable disposal and/or treatment of any contaminated soil shall meet all federal state and local regulations. If deemed appropriate by the Health Department, the property owner shall make provisions for immediate containment of the materials. DETERMINATION: Based upon the above identified mitigation measures, no significant environmental impacts are anticipated to be associated with the subject project. A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared. The Initial Study was prepared by the Planning Department, Town of Danville. Copies of the Initial Study may be obtained at the Town offices located at 510 La Gonda Way, Danville, California 94526. ATTEST: Fred Korbmacher Development Service Coordinator Tree Evaluation Prepared For: Jason Bond 2302 Chesterton Drive Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Prepared By: Bob Peralta Bob Peralta Arbor Consulting American Society of Consulting Arborists 237 Berna Avenue Napa, California 94559 (925) 525- 3795 March 22, 2022 ATTACHMENT D Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 2 Dear Jason, Thank you for asking me to provide a Consulting Arborist Report for your Proposed Project located at 824 Danville Boulevard in Danville, California. I visited the site on March 16, 2022, to review your Vesting Tentative Parcel Map. The map was provided to you by DeBolt Civil Engineering dated 03/04/2022 – Job NO: 21350 – Sheet VTPM-1. This map shows all (90) trees on the property. The purpose of my site visit is to evaluate the species, size, location, health, and recommendations. I reviewed a total of 90 trees on the property - (30) Valley oaks (Quercas lobata), (27) Coast Live oaks (Quercas agrifolia), (11) American elm trees (Ulmus americana), (7) Pine Trees (Pinus spp.), (4) Bay laurel (Laurus nobilis), (2) Privet trees (Ligustrum ovalifolium), (3) California Black Walnut (Juglans californica), Strawberry tree (Arbutus species), (1) Ash Tree (Fraxinus species), (1) Sycamore tree (Platanus occidentalis), Magnolia tree (Magnolia macrophylla), (1) Cedar tree (Cedrus species), (1) Redwood (Sequioa sempervirens). A majority of the trees were rated in poor condition due to poor branch structure. Many trees are growing close together and all are competing for sunlight and have grown straight up or at an angle to find sunlight. Together they form one large canopy and have resulted in trees that are at risk of failure as they continue to mature. The Vesting Tentative Parcel Map identifies (77) trees that will be impacted by the proposed project. The remaining (13) trees will need to follow the tree protection guidelines below. I have attached maps that show the general location of each tree and a picture of each tree with diameter (dbh) and tree tag #. The health and structure of the trees were assessed visually from the ground level. No drilling, root excavation, or aerial inspections were performed. Internal or non-detectable defects may exist and could lead to part of whole tree failures. Due to the dynamic nature of trees and their environment, it is not possible for Arborists to guarantee that trees will not fail in the future. Please review the health rating below and tree protection measures. Listed below Is the Inventory and Health of each tree. Tree Inventory and Health Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 3 Note: Trees are measured using the DBH method – circum, measured at 4.3 above the ground. ID Tag Species Dbh. Health Recommendation Protected 1 Valley Oak 20”Fair Protect X 2 Privet 6/4/3/2”Critical Project Removal 3 Black Walnut 10.5”Dead Project Removal 4 Elm Tree 17.4”Fair Project Removal 5 Elm Tree 14.5”Fair Project Removal 6 Live Oak 23”Critical Project Removal X 7 Live Oak 24”Critical Project Removal X 8 Live Oak 22.5”Poor Project Removal X 9 Live Oak 23.7”Poor Project Removal X 10 Live Oak 29.2”Poor Project Removal X 11 Live Oak 29.2”Poor Project Removal X 12 Live Oak 25”Poor Project Removal X 13 Live Oak 20.5”Poor Project Removal X 14 Live Oak 13”Poor Project Removal X 15 Live Oak 23”Poor Project Removal X 16 Live Oak 26.5”Poor Project Removal X 17 Live Oak 18.1”Poor Project Removal X 18 Live Oak 16/14/8”Poor Project Removal X 19 Bay Tree 17”Fair Project Removal X 20 Live Oak 20.5”Poor Project Removal X 21 Live Oak 21.5/12”Poor Project Removal X 22 Live Oak 8.8”Poor Project Removal 23 Elm Tree 22.5”Poor Project Removal 24 Elm Tree 30”Poor Project Removal 25 Elm Tree 26.4”Poor Project Removal 26 Valley Oak 24”Fair Protect X 27 Black Walnut 31.6”Dead Project Removal 28 Live Oak 20.5”Fair Project Removal X 29 Live Oak 42.3”Poor Project Removal X 30 Live Oak 36.4”Poor Project Removal X 31 Valley Oak 27.2”Fair Project Removal X 32 Pine Tree 27.2”Dead Project Removal 33 Elm Tree 19.8”Poor Project Removal 34 Valley Oak 27.2”Poor Project Removal X 35 Live Oak 20.2”Poor Project Removal X 36 Valley Oak 19.2”Poor Project Removal X 37 Live Oak 20.2”Poor Project Removal X 38 Valley Oak 19”Poor Project Removal X 39 Live Oak 20.2”Poor Project Removal X 40 Live Oak 20.1”Fair Project Removal X 41 Live Oak 18/28”Poor Project Removal X 42 Live Oak 33.8”Poor Project Removal X 43 Privet 9.5”Critical Project Removal 44 Bay Tree 13/14”Poor Project Removal X 45 Valley Oak 19.5”Poor Project Removal X ID Tag Species Dbh. Health Recommendation Protected Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 4 46 Valley Oak 22.2”Poor Project Removal X 47 Arbutus Tree 7/3”Critical Project Removal 48 Valley Oak 22.7”Poor Project Removal X 49 Valley Oak 18.8”Poor Project Removal X 50 Pine Tree 16.5”Poor Project Removal Fell 12/13/22 51 Pine Tree 69.2”Poor Project Removal X 52 Pine Tree 13”Dead Project Removal 53 Elm Tree 13”Poor Project Removal 54 Sycamore Tree 33”Poor Project Removal 55 Bay Tree 16.8”Poor Project Removal X 56 Valley Oak 18.8”Critical Project Removal X 57 Live Oak 15.8”Fair Project Removal X 58 Pine Tree 24”Poor Project Removal 59 Pine Tree 21.7”Poor Project Removal 60 Pine Tree 28”Poor Project Removal 61 Elm Tree 7”Poor Project Removal 62 Valley Oak 15.7”Critical Project Removal X 63 Valley Oak 27”Fair Protect X 64 Magnolia 13”Poor Project Removal 65 Elm Tree 15”Poor Project Removal 66 Valley Oak 27”Poor Project Removal X 67 White Walnut 16”Fair Project Removal 67A Cedar Tree 15”Fair Project Removal 68 Valley Oak 16”Fair Project Removal X 69 Bay Tree 6”Poor Project Removal 70 Valley Oak 18.2”Poor Protect X 71 Live Oak 16”Poor Project Removal X 71A Live Oak 13”Poor Project Removal X 72 Elm Tree 13.5”Poor Project Removal X 73 Elm Tree 12”Poor Project Removal X 75 Valley Oak 34/32”Fair Protect X 76 Valley Oak 13.5”Poor Protect X 77 Valley Oak 13”Fair Protect X 78 Valley Oak 9”Fair Project Removal 79 Valley Oak 4”Fair Project Removal 80 Valley Oak 4”Fair Project Removal 81 Valley Oak 15.2”Poor Protect X 82 Valley Oak 9/4”Poor Project Removal 83 Valley Oak 11.3”Poor Project Removal 84 Valley Oak 10.5”Fair Project Removal 85 Live Oak 15.8”Fair Protect X 86 Valley Oak 21.9”Fair Protect X 87 Valley Oak 14.6”Fair Protect X 88 Valley Oak 15”Fair Protect X 89 Redwood 52”Good Protect X I have been contracted by you to install and monitor the Tree Protection on (13) of your Protected Trees. This monitoring will include being on site during grading or excavation activity near any protected tree. Below are the Tree Protection Guidelines. Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 5 Recommended Tree Protection Guidelines: All contractors including demolition, grading, and underground contractors, sub- contractors, construction superintendent and other pertinent personnel should be required to review these guidelines with the Project Arborist (PA) prior to beginning work on site. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) identifies will be installed 2’ outside of the drip-line in a half circle on all sides of the proposed home - by installing 4’ high orange protective fencing around the entire drip-line of the tree and roots from disturbance. The installation will be installed by the Project Arborist (Bob Peralta) and any work within the erected TPZ will need permission from the PA before being moved. The following signs will be posted on 8.5x11 inches and installed on all the fences – the sign will read: This is a Tree Protection Zone Movement of this fence requires the prior authorization of the Project Arborist & Owner (List Contact Information) Activities prohibited within the TPZ include: ·Storage or parking vehicles, building materials, refuse, excavated spoils, or dumping of paint or poisonous materials on or around trees and roots. Poisonous materials include, but are not limited to, paint, petroleum products, concrete or stucco mix dirty water or any other material which may be deleterious to tree health. ·The use of tree trunks as winch support, anchorage, as a temporary power pole, sign-post or any other similar function. ·Cutting of roots by utility trenching, foundation digging, placement of curbs, trenches and other miscellaneous excavation without prior approval of the PA. ·Soil disturbance or grade/drainage changes. ·Materials must not be stored, stockpiled, dumped, even temporarily, inside the TPZ of protected trees. Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 6 Activities permitted within the TPZ include: As needed or recommended by the PA ·Irrigation, aeration, or other beneficial practices that have been specifically approved for use within the TPZ. ·Mulch if needed and or fertilization as recommended by monthly site visits by the PA. ·Each site visit will require a report recommending tree healthcare supplements, recommended watering as needed during peak summer months and reduction into Fall and Winter. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Bob Peralta Bob Peralta Certified Arborist WE-7150A ASCA Consulting Arborist #505 Copyright © 2022 by ENGEO Incorporated. This document may not be reproduced in whole or in part by any means whatsoever, nor may it be quoted or excerpted without the express written consent of ENGEO Incorporated. 824 DANVILLE BOULEVARD DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA MODIFIED PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT SUBMITTED TO Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard Danville, CA 94526 PREPARED BY ENGEO Incorporated September 26, 2022 PROJECT NO. 20679.000.001 ATTACHMENT E GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL WATER RESOURCES CONSTRUCTION SERVICES COASTAL/MARINE GEOTECHNICS 2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250 San Ramon, CA 94583 (925) 866-9000 Fax (888) 279-2698 www.engeo.com Project No. 20679.000.001 September 26, 2022 Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard Danville, CA 94526 Subject: 824 Danville Boulevard Danville, California MODIFIED PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Dear Mr. Bond: ENGEO is pleased to present our modified phase I environmental site assessment of the subject property (Property), located in Danville, California. The attached report includes a description of the site assessment activities, along with ENGEO's findings, opinions, and conclusions regarding the Property. ENGEO has the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess the nature, history, and setting of the Property, and has developed and performed all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312 and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Practice E1527-13. We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, the responsible charge for this study meets the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in Section 312.10 of 40 CFR Part 312 and ASTM E1527-13. We are pleased to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning the contents of our report, please contact us. Sincerely, ENGEO Incorporated Jenna Keith Jeffrey A. Adams, PhD, PE Rian Montagh jk/rm/jaa/ar Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment i of ii September 26, 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3 1.1 PURPOSE OF PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT .................................. 3 1.2 DETAILED SCOPE OF SERVICES .................................................................................... 3 1.3 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .............................................................................. 3 1.4 CURRENT USE OF PROPERTY AND ADJOINING PROPERTIES ................................. 3 1.5 SITE AND VICINITY CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................ 4 1.6 INDOOR AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................... 5 2.0 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS......................................................... 5 3.0 RECORDS REVIEW ............................................................................................ 5 3.1 PROPERTY RECORDS ..................................................................................................... 5 3.1.1 Title Report/Ownership .......................................................................................... 5 3.1.2 Environmental Liens and Activity Use Limitations ................................................. 5 3.2 HISTORICAL RECORD SOURCES ................................................................................... 6 3.2.1 Historical Topographic Maps/Aerial Photographs/Sanborn Maps ......................... 6 3.2.2 City Directory .......................................................................................................... 7 3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES ......................................................................... 7 3.3.1 Environmental Records .......................................................................................... 7 3.3.1.1 Property .................................................................................................. 7 3.3.1.2 Other Properties ..................................................................................... 7 3.4 REGULATORY AGENCY FILES AND RECORDS ............................................................ 8 4.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE................................................................................... 9 4.1 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................ 9 4.2 GENERAL SITE SETTING ................................................................................................. 9 4.3 EXTERIOR OBSERVATIONS .......................................................................................... 10 4.4 INTERIOR OBSERVATIONS ........................................................................................... 11 4.5 ASBESTOS, LEAD, AND PCB-CONTAINING MATERIALS ............................................ 11 5.0 INTERVIEWS ..................................................................................................... 11 6.0 AGRICHEMICAL SOIL ASSESSMENT ............................................................. 12 6.1 SOIL SAMPLING .............................................................................................................. 12 6.1 ANALYTICAL RESULTS .................................................................................................. 12 7.0 FINDINGS AND OPINIONS ............................................................................... 13 7.1 DATA GAPS ...................................................................................................................... 14 7.2 SIGNIFICANT ASSUMPTIONS OR DEVIATIONS FROM ASTM STANDARD PRACTICE ........................................................................................................................ 14 8.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................. 15 9.0 LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................... 15 9.1 LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS OF ASSESSMENT ................................................... 15 9.2 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ............................................................................. 16 Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) ii of ii September 26, 2022 SELECTED REFERENCES TABLE A – Analytical Laboratory Results FIGURES APPENDIX A – Environmental Data Resources, Inc., Radius Map Report APPENDIX B – Old Republic Title Company, Preliminary Title Report APPENDIX C – Environmental Data Resources, Inc., Historical Topographic Map Report APPENDIX D – Environmental Data Resources, Inc., Aerial Photo Decade Package APPENDIX E – Environmental Data Resources, Inc., Sanborn Map Report APPENDIX F – Environmental Data Resources, Inc., City Directory APPENDIX G – Environmental Site Assessment Questionnaires (2) APPENDIX H – Torrent Laboratory Inc., Laboratory Analytical Reports APPENDIX I – Qualifications of Environmental Professional Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 1 September 26, 2022 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ENGEO conducted a modified phase I environmental site assessment for the subject property located at 824 Danville Boulevard in Danville, California (Property). The Property is approximately 2.1 acres in area and is identified by Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 200-090-003. The Property consists of a main house, guest house, garage, well house, storage shed, and former chicken and peacock coops. The rest of the Property is densely vegetated with oak and pine trees and some underbrush. The northern Property boundary slopes steeply toward San Ramon Creek. The Property has been used for residential purposes with household-scale fowl husbandry activities since at least the mid-1960s. This assessment included a review of local, state, tribal, and federal environmental record sources, standard historical sources, aerial photographs, fire insurance maps and physical setting sources. A reconnaissance of the Property was completed to review site use and current conditions to check for the storage, use, production, or disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous materials. Written and oral interviews were also conducted with persons knowledgeable about current and past site use. The records review did not find documentation of soil, soil gas, or groundwater impairments associated with the use or past use of the Property. A review of regulatory databases maintained by county, state, tribal, and federal agencies found no documentation of hazardous materials violations or discharge on the Property and did not identify contaminated facilities within the appropriate ASTM search distances that would reasonably be expected to impact the Property. However, based on the historical use of the Property for agricultural activities, as well as the age of the three on-site structures, an assessment of the surface soil was conducted to evaluate the potential for residual concentrations of OCPs, arsenic, and lead. A total of 16 soil samples were recovered across the Property and around the perimeters of the three on-site structures, which were analyzed for OCPs, lead, and arsenic. The following exceedances were reported. • Lead was detected above the residential environmental screening level (ESL) of 80 mg/kg in 11 samples, at concentrations ranging between 89.6 and 805 mg/kg. • Dieldrin was reported above the residential ESL of 0.0368 mg/kg in samples S-2 (0.271 mg/kg) and S-4 (0.0427 mg/kg). • Chlordane was reported above the residential ESL of 0.481 mg/kg and the Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) of 2.5 mg/kg in sample S-2 (3.86 mg/kg). Based on the findings of this assessment, no historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) and no controlled RECs were identified for the Property. The following REC was identified. • ENGEO’s investigation of the Property found concentrations of lead exceeding residential ESLs in soil surrounding the perimeters of all three on-site structures and elevated concentrations of OCPs in soil located around the guest house. These impacts should be addressed with a limited remediation/mitigation program, which would consist of the excavation of surface soil adjacent to these structure perimeters. The excavated soil may be disposed of off-site at an appropriate licensed landfill facility. Alternatively, soil may be reconsolidated on site with institutional and engineering controls. We recommend engaging the Town of Danville to coordinate this program prior to or during redevelopment. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 2 September 26, 2022 Based on our client interview and site reconnaissance, we present information on a feature of potential environmental concern observed on the Property. This feature was not considered to be an REC. We briefly discuss the feature below. • Septic systems remain underground to the northwest of the main residence and guest house. We recommend that these systems be properly decommissioned following appropriate local and/or state regulations. We have performed a modified phase I environmental site assessment in general conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM E1527-13 and the standards and practices of the All Appropriate Inquiry – Final Rule (40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 312). Any exception to, or deletions from this practice are described in Sections 7 and 9.1 of the report. It is our opinion that the findings of this study are based on a sufficient level of information obtained during our contracted scope of services to render a conclusion as to whether additional appropriate investigation is required to identify the presence or likely presence of a REC. The following data gap was identified. • The main house was inaccessible during the site reconnaissance. The data gap identified during this process does not affect the conclusions as to the presence or lack of presence of RECs at the Property. This assessment has revealed evidence of one REC in connection with the Property. ENGEO recommends the following. • Identified soil impacts should be addressed with a limited remediation/mitigation program, which would consist of the excavation of surface soil adjacent to these structure perimeters. The excavated soil may be disposed of off-site at an appropriate licensed landfill facility. Alternatively, soil may be reconsolidated on site with institutional and engineering controls. We recommend engaging the Town of Danville to coordinate this program prior to or during redevelopment. • Septic systems that remain underground to the northwest of the main residence and guest house should be properly decommissioned following appropriate local and/or state regulations. Please note, the findings from this report are valid until July 26, 2023, and updates of portions of the assessment may be necessary after January 26, 2023. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 3 September 26, 2022 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT This assessment was performed at the request of Mr. Jason Bond for financial lending purposes associated with potential site redevelopment. The objective of this modified phase I environmental site assessment is to identify RECs associated with the Property. As defined in the ASTM Standard Practice E1527-13, an REC is “(1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the environment; (2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or (3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.” 1.2 DETAILED SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services performed included the following. • A review of publicly available and practicably reviewable standard local, state, tribal, and federal environmental record sources. • A review of publicly available and practicably reviewable standard historical sources, aerial photographs, fire insurance maps and physical setting sources. • A reconnaissance of the Property to review site use and current conditions. The reconnaissance was conducted to check for the storage, use, production or disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous materials. • Written/oral Interviews with owners/occupants and public sector officials. • A lead and agrichemical impact assessment of soil at the Property. • Preparation of this report with our findings, opinions, and conclusions. 1.3 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Property is located at 824 Danville Boulevard, Danville, California (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The approximately 2.1-acre Property is identified as APN 200-090-003 (Figure 4) and is currently occupied by private residences, associated outbuildings, and dense vegetation. 1.4 CURRENT USE OF PROPERTY AND ADJOINING PROPERTIES The Property is currently zoned as R-20 (single-family, low-density developments). The proposed development includes subdividing the Property into four half-acre, single-family residential lots. Based on a review of current records and our site reconnaissance, the adjoining site users are summarized below. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 4 September 26, 2022 TABLE 1.4-1: Adjoining Site Uses DIRECTION SITE USE North San Ramon Creek, single-family residential developments South Single-family residential developments East Single-family residential developments West Single-family residential developments 1.5 SITE AND VICINITY CHARACTERISTICS According to published topographic maps, site grade at the Property is relatively flat and situated at approximately Elevation 325. The area just north of the Property slopes steeply downhill toward San Ramon Creek. The Property is located within the Las Trampas Ridge quadrangle, underlain by Holocene-aged alluvial gravel, sand, and clay of valley areas (Dibblee, 2005). Geocheck – Physical Setting Source Summary of the Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) report (Appendix A) indicated zero Federal United States Geological Survey (USGS) and nine state wells located within 1 mile of the Property. Well Number SL0601367413-MW-4 is mapped approximately 1 mile southeast of the Property, and 57 groundwater level measurements are reported for this well between 2008 and 2022. Groundwater was encountered between 10 to 13.71 feet below the ground surface (bgs). EDR also reports that the groundwater flow direction near this well is northwest towards San Ramon Creek. We expect the groundwater specific to the Property to follow the local topography and flow northeast towards San Ramon Creek. We also reviewed EnviroStor, a website maintained by the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control, and GeoTracker, a website maintained by the State of California Water Resources Control Board, for nearby facilities with records that include depth-to-groundwater measurements. No sites were identified within ½ mile of the Property. The site-specific depth to groundwater and direction of groundwater flow were not determined as part of this assessment. Fluctuations in groundwater levels may occur seasonally and over a period of years due to variations in precipitation, temperature, irrigation, and other factors. We reviewed the Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management (CalGEM), website and map database to determine if any historical oil or gas wells were located within the Property. No oil or gas wells were mapped within 1 mile of the Property. We reviewed the National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS) public viewer website for information about petroleum, natural gas, or hazardous liquid storage, processing, or transmission facilities in the vicinity of the Property. No facilities were mapped within ¼ mile of the Property. An active hazardous liquid pipeline extends within the right-of-way of the Iron Horse Trail, several hundred feet to the west of the Property. This would not be expected to pose an environmental risk to the Property. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 5 September 26, 2022 1.6 INDOOR AIR QUALITY An evaluation of indoor air quality, mold, or radon was not included as part of the contracted scope of services. The California Department of Public Health has conducted studies of radon risks throughout the state, sorted by zip code. Results of the studies indicate that 46 tests were conducted within the Property zip code, with none of the tests exceeding the current EPA action level of 4 picocuries per liter (pCi/L)1. In accordance with ASTM E2600-15 (Tier 1) (Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions); There are no potential petroleum hydrocarbon sources for vapor intrusion within 1/10 mile of the Property or volatile organic compound (VOC) sources within 1/3 mile of the Property. 2.0 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS No previous environmental reports were identified for the Property. 3.0 RECORDS REVIEW 3.1 PROPERTY RECORDS 3.1.1 Title Report/Ownership The Title Report lists recorded land title detail, ownership fees, leases, land contracts, easements, liens, deficiencies, and other encumbrances attached to or recorded against a subject property. Laws and regulations pertaining to land trusts vary from state to state and the detail of information presented in a Title Report can vary greatly by jurisdiction. As a result, ENGEO utilizes a Title Report, when provided to us, as a supplement to other historical record sources. ENGEO assumes that any environmental lien, activity use limitations (AUL), and/or institutional controls for the Property are noted in the Preliminary Title Report. A Preliminary Title Report for the Property, prepared by Old Republic Title Company and dated April 6, 2022, was provided for our review. The Property title is vested in Jason C. Bond, Trustee of the Jason C. Bond Trust. No references to environmental liens, deed restrictions, or other potential environmental issues were noted. This report is included in Appendix B. 3.1.2 Environmental Liens and Activity Use Limitations The Preliminary Title Report included an environmental lien and activity use limitations (AUL) search. The report, which is included in Appendix B, listed no environmental liens associated with the Property APN. In addition, a questionnaire completed by Mr. Bond indicated that he is not aware of any environmental cleanup liens recorded against the Property. 1 California Department of Public Health – Radon Program– (https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CEH/DRSEM/CDPH%20Document%20Library/EMB/Radon/Radon% 20Test%20Results.pdf). Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 6 September 26, 2022 We reviewed two engineering control (EC) and institutional control (IC) registries: EnviroStor, a website maintained by the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control, and GeoTracker, a website maintained by the State of California Water Resources Control Board, for environmental liens or AULs associated with the Property. No records of environmental liens or AULs were noted. 3.2 HISTORICAL RECORD SOURCES The purpose of the historical record review is to develop a history of the previous uses or occupancies of the Property and surrounding areas to identify those uses or occupancies that are likely to have led to recognized environmental conditions on the Property. 3.2.1 Historical Topographic Maps/Aerial Photographs/Sanborn Maps Historical USGS topographic maps and aerial photograph were reviewed to determine if discernible changes pertaining to the Property had been recorded. EDR provided the following maps and photographs, presented in Appendices C and D. A Sanborn fire insurance map search did not identify maps for the Property; the search report is presented in Appendix E. TABLE 3.2.1-1: Historical Review Summary HISTORICAL MAP/PHOTOGRAPH YEARS Topographic Maps 1896, 1912, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1959, 1968, 1973, 1980, 1996, 1999, 2012, 2015, 2015, 2018 Aerial Photographs 1946, 1949, 1950, 1958, 1966, 1979, 1982, 1993, 1998, 2006, 2009, 2012, 2016 Sanborn Maps N/A In the 1896 and 1912 topographic maps, San Ramon Creek is located on the southwestern boundary of the Property, as opposed to its present-day location to the northeast of the Property, likely associated with an erroneous mapping of the Property location. The maps from 1947 onward depict San Ramon Creek in its present-day alignment. The 1896 map indicates a railroad was located less than ¼ mile southwest of the Property. By 1912, additional railroad tracks are visible about 350 feet to the southwest of the Property. By 1947, the closer of the two railroad tracks had been removed and converted to a secondary highway and three small structures are depicted in the southeastern region of Property. Aerial photographs from 1946 show that the Property and surrounding areas were primarily used for agricultural purposes (orchards). The surrounding areas were gradually replaced by residential neighborhoods beginning in the 1950s. Some of the fruit trees on the Property were fallowed, but conditions at the Property have generally been consistent since the 1960s. The three on-site structures are not easily visible in aerial photographs because of the extensive tree canopies. In the 2016 aerial photograph, the surrounding areas are mostly devoted to residential uses and the Property is covered in dense vegetation. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 7 September 26, 2022 3.2.2 City Directory City Directories, published since the 18th century for major towns and cities, list the name of the resident or business associated with each address. A city directory search conducted by EDR is located in Appendix F. TABLE 3.2.2-1: City Directory YEAR LISTINGS 1975 Bond J Charlie 1980 Baxter Doug Bond J Charlie 1985 Bond J Charlie 1990 Bond J Charlie Bond S 1992 Bond, J C 1995 Bond, J Brennam, Erin 2000 Bond, J C Cardenas, Gabriel Ertassi, Anthony J 2005 Bond, Charles J Brennam, Erin Senior, Lee R Traum, Dee A 2010 Traum, Deeann K Other listings in the vicinity of the Property are associated with mostly residential uses and some commercial uses such as schools, businesses, and offices. 3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES EDR performed a search of federal, tribal, state, and local databases regarding the Property and nearby properties. Details regarding the databases searched by EDR are provided in Appendix A. A list of the facilities documented by EDR within the approximate minimum search distance of the Property is provided below. 3.3.1 Environmental Records 3.3.1.1 Property The Property is not listed on Environmental Record source databases. 3.3.1.2 Other Properties The following databases include facilities listed within the appropriate ASTM search distances of the Property on Environmental Records sources. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 8 September 26, 2022 TABLE 3.3.1.2-1: Environmental Database Listings for Nearby Properties FACILITY STREET DATABASES Jennifer Reddy 100 Hartford Road RCRA NONGEN / NLR Ruth Davidson 100 Hartford Road RCRA NONGEN / NLR Ygnacio Valley Shell Service 106 Glen Court EDR HIST AUTO Julie Watson 30 Fairmaiden Lane RCRA NONGEN / NLR Melissa & David Bowen 120 El Portal RCRA NONGEN / NLR Anne Blake 881 Danville Boulevard RCRA NONGEN / NLR David Heckle 722 Camino Amigo RCRA NONGEN / NLR Mike Nelson 932 La Gonda Way RCRA NONGEN / NLR Westbriar Knolls 663 La Gonda Way LUST, CORTESE, HIST CORTESE, CONTRA COSTA CO. SITE LIST, CERS Peter McDevitt 693 Las Barrancas Drive RCRA NONGEN / NLR Mark Howard 696 Danville Boulevard RCRA NONGEN / NLR PG&E Wayne Substation 180 Wayne Avenue CONTRA COSTA CO. SITE LIST Xavier Estates Remedial Grading 977 Danville Boulevard ENVIROSTOR, VCP, NPDES San Ramon Valley High School 140 Love Lane HWTS, RCRA, SQG, ENVIROSTOR, SCH, FINDS, ECHO, HAZNET One nearby property of potential environmental concern is discussed below. Ygnacio Valley Shell Service – 106 Glen Court The Ygnacio Valley Shell Service was identified by EDR in their EDR Historical Auto Stations database. EDR reports that this gasoline service station was located 306 feet southwest of the Property from 1989 to 1993, but historical aerial photographs show no evidence that a gasoline service station existed there. We believe that EDR’s site location is erroneous and may be a contact address for the station’s owner and/or proprietor. Based on the distances to the identified database sites, regional topographic gradient, and the EDR findings, it is unlikely that the above-stated database sites pose an environmental risk to the Property. There are no properties listed on the Orphan Summary list. 3.4 REGULATORY AGENCY FILES AND RECORDS The following agencies were contacted pertaining to possible past development and/or activity at the Property. TABLE 3.4-1: Regulatory Agency Records NAME OF AGENCY RECORDS REVIEWED Town of Danville Building Division We contacted the City of Danville Building Division on July 26, 2022, regarding environmental records for the Property. The Building and Planning Departments indicated they have no files pertaining to the Property. Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development We contacted the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development on July 26, 2022, regarding environmental records for the Property. CCC DCD provided a project planning file for the Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 9 September 26, 2022 NAME OF AGENCY RECORDS REVIEWED Property’s APN, but the incorrect address, indicating an error in the county’s file. This file is not relevant to the Property. San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District We contacted the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District on July 26, 2022, regarding environmental records for the Property. The Fire Department indicated they have no files pertaining to the Property. Contra Costa County Department of Environmental Health – Hazardous Materials Division We contacted the Contra Costa County Department of Environmental Health, Hazardous Materials Division on July 26, 2022, regarding environmental records for the Property. CCCDEH indicated they have no files pertaining to the Property. Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office We reviewed online parcel maps provided by the Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office. The property boundary and APNs provided in the EDR radius map report are consistent with the online parcel maps. Town of Danville Code Enforcement Department We contacted the Town of Danville Code Enforcement Department on July 27, 2022, regarding records of code violations. The Town of Danville indicated they have no records of any code violations on the Property. California State Water Resources Control Board We reviewed GeoTracker, the website maintained by the State Water Resources Control Board, for files pertaining to the Property. No listings were found for the Property. Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) We reviewed EnviroStor, the website maintained by DTSC, for files pertaining to the Property. No listings were found for the Property. 4.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 4.1 METHODOLOGY We conducted a reconnaissance of the Property on August 9, 2022. The reconnaissance was performed by Rian Montagh and Jenna Keith, staff engineers of ENGEO. The Property was viewed for hazardous materials storage, superficial staining or discoloration, debris, stressed vegetation, or other conditions that may be indicative of potential sources of soil or groundwater contamination. The Property was also checked for evidence of fill/ventilation pipes, ground subsidence, or other evidence of existing or preexisting underground storage tanks. Photographs taken during the site reconnaissance are presented in Figure 5. We were not able to view the interior of the main residence as it was inaccessible. 4.2 GENERAL SITE SETTING The Property is located in a residential area and is bordered by San Ramon Creek to the northeast, Danville Boulevard to the southwest, and private residences to the east and west. The Property is accessible through an ungated, unpaved driveway from Danville Boulevard, and contains large oak and pine trees and some underbrush. The structures on the Property include a main house, a guest house, a garage, a well house, a storage shed, and former chicken and peacock coops. Household items such as garden hoses, clothing, pet toys and bowls, etc., are located throughout the Property. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 10 September 26, 2022 4.3 EXTERIOR OBSERVATIONS The following table summarizes our observations during the reconnaissance. TABLE 4.3-1: Exterior Site Observations FEATURE TYPE OBSERVATIONS Structures Four main structures are located on the Property, including a main house, guest house, garage, and well house. The main house, guest house, and garage had peeling and chipping paint. The well house was unpainted. All the structures were in a somewhat to very dilapidated condition. The guest house apparently has been illegally intruded. Hazardous Substances and Petroleum Products in Connection with Identified Uses No hazardous substances or petroleum products were observed within the Property during the site reconnaissance. Storage Tanks (underground and above-ground) No above-ground storage tanks were observed during the site reconnaissance. Underground septic tanks are located along the western sides of the main house and guest house (see below). Roads The Property is bordered on its southwestern side and accessible by Danville Boulevard, which is a two-lane road. The Property has a long unpaved driveway that terminates at the main house. Strong, Pungent, or Noxious Odors and Their Sources No odors indicative of hazardous materials or petroleum material impacts were noted at the time of the reconnaissance. Standing Surface Water and Pools or Sumps Containing Liquids Likely to be Hazardous Substances or Petroleum Products No pools of potentially hazardous liquid were observed within the Property at the time of our reconnaissance. Drums, Totes, and Intermediate Bulk Containers No drums were observed on the Property at the time of the reconnaissance. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Containing Equipment No potential PCB-containing equipment, including transformers, were observed within the Property during our site reconnaissance. Hazardous Substances and Petroleum Product Containers A household pesticide sprayer and a household gasoline container were observed on the porch of the main house. We do not expect these items to indicate significant contamination on the Property. Stains or Corrosion on Floors, Walls, or Ceilings (Except Water Staining) No stains or corrosion on floors, walls, or ceilings were observed on the Property at the time of our reconnaissance. Drains and Sumps No drains or sumps were observed within the Property at the time of our reconnaissance. Pits, Ponds, and Lagoons No pits, ponds, or lagoons were observed within the Property at the time of our reconnaissance. Stained Soil/Pavement No stained soil or pavement were observed within the Property at the time of our reconnaissance. Stressed Vegetation No signs of stressed vegetation were observed on the Property at the time of our reconnaissance. Solid Waste/Debris Household garbage bins are located near the main house. Household items are scattered throughout the Property, such as clothing and pet items. Debris is located throughout the guest house. Stockpiles/Fill Material No stockpiles or fill material were observed on the Property during the reconnaissance. Wastewater No wastewater conveyance systems were observed at the Property during the reconnaissance. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 11 September 26, 2022 FEATURE TYPE OBSERVATIONS Wells One well is located within a shed in the approximate center of the Property. Mr. Bond has indicated that this well has never been used during his family’s ownership of the Property (1964 to the present). The well is covered by a concrete slab. Septic Systems Mr. Bond indicated that the main house and the guest house are both on septic systems. We observed two depressions on the northwestern side of the main house. One hole was dug to locate the septic system and the other was a depression above the septic tank, which remains in place. We did not see any visual evidence of the guest house’s septic system, but Mr. Bond informed us that it exists on the northwestern side of the guest house. 4.4 INTERIOR OBSERVATIONS We were provided access to the interior of the well house, garage, and guest house, but not the main house. The exterior of each structure is painted wood, which has chipped. The well house was empty other than the covered well. The garage had concrete flooring and was empty, except for household items such as lawn chairs and yard tools. In the guest house, we observed potential disturbances from transient people. Furniture appeared to be overturned and boards were ripped off the walls. The interior of these three structures can be seen in Figure 5. We were not able to enter the main house but understand that it is in the process of being vacated of contents. Household items were placed on the porch outside the house. 4.5 ASBESTOS, LEAD, AND PCB-CONTAINING MATERIALS An asbestos, lead, and PCB-containing building material survey was not conducted as part of this assessment. Given the age of the existing structures, it is conceivable that asbestos, lead, and PCB-containing materials may exist within the structures. 5.0 INTERVIEWS Mr. Jason Bond, property owner, completed environmental questionnaires pertaining to applicable environmental information regarding the Property on July 19, 2022. In the questionnaires, Mr. Bond indicated that his father purchased the Property in 1964 and it has remained in the family since. His grandparents lived on the Property between 1964 and 2001 and raised fowl as pets and for eggs, and maintained a small garden. Mr. Jason Bond has used the Property as his personal residence on and off since 2001. Mr. Bond did not identify potentially environmentally related issues with the Property; he does not recall pesticides ever being used on the Property. Mr. Bond indicated that there is one water well located in the approximate center of the Property, surrounded by a shed and covered by a concrete slab. To his knowledge, it has never been uncovered or used since his family’s acquisition of the Property in 1964. There are also two septic tanks, one each for the main house and guest house, respectively. Mr. Bond is unaware of commonly known, reasonably ascertainable, or specialized knowledge indicative of releases or threatened releases that is material to the potential presence of RECs. The questionnaires are provided in Appendix G. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 12 September 26, 2022 6.0 AGRICHEMICAL SOIL ASSESSMENT Fruit trees are visible across the Property in aerial photographs as early as 1946. Based on the historical use of the Property for agricultural activities, as well as the age of the three on-site structures, an assessment of the surface soil was conducted to evaluate the potential for residual concentrations of OCPs, arsenic, and lead. 6.1 SOIL SAMPLING Soil samples were collected on August 9, 2022, from representative locations across the Property (Figures 2 and 3). Samples AG-1 to AG-4 were collected from locations across the Property, and samples S-1 to S-4, S-5 to S-8, and S-9 to S-12 were collected from the perimeters of the guest house, garage, and main house, respectively. Soil samples were collected at depths of 3 to 9 inches bgs using a shovel and hand auger. The soil samples were collected using 4-ounce, pre-cleaned glass jars and labeled with a unique sample number and time/date collected. The soil samples were placed into a cooler on ice and submitted under documented chain-of-custody to Torrent Laboratory, Inc., a state-accredited laboratory located in Milpitas, California. The following analyses were performed. • Four 4-point composite samples (AG-4 through AG-4, S-1 to S-4, S-5 to S-8, and S-9 to S-12) were analyzed for OCPs by EPA Method 8081. • One discrete sample from each composite (total of four samples) was analyzed for arsenic and lead by EPA Method 6020. 6.1 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Arsenic was not detected above the naturally occurring background concentration of 11 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)2 in any of the samples. Lead was detected above the residential environmental screening level (ESL) of 80 mg/kg3 in samples S-5 (143 mg/kg) and S-9 (89.6 mg/kg). Based on these results, we directed the laboratory to analyze the additional samples collected around the perimeters of the structures on site for lead. The following concentrations were reported. • Lead was reported above the residential ESL in samples S-2 (650 mg/kg), S-3 (147 mg/kg), S-4 (322 mg/kg), S-6 (323 mg/kg), S-7 (805 mg/kg), S-8 (371 mg/kg), S-10 (515 mg/kg), S-11 (284 mg/kg), and S-12 (157 mg/kg). Several OCPs were detected in composite samples AG-1 to AG-4, S-1 to S-4, and S-5 to S-8. Of these, the following exceedances were reported. • Chlordane was reported above the residential ESL of 0.481 mg/kg in the composite sample S-1 to S-4 (0.880 mg/kg). • Dieldrin was reported above the residential ESL of 0.0368 mg/kg in the composite samples AG-1 to AG-4 (0.0838 mg/kg) and S-1 to S-4 (0.0570 mg/kg). 2 Duverge, D.J., Establishing Background Arsenic in Soil of the Urbanized San Francisco Bay Region, December 2011. 3 Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB); Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs); Direct Exposure Human Health Risk Levels: Residential Shallow Soil Exposure (Table S-1); 2019 (Rev. 2). Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 13 September 26, 2022 Based on these results, we directed the laboratory to analyze the individual samples from composites AG-1 to AG-4 and S-1 to S-4 on a discrete basis for OCPs. The following exceedances were reported. • Chlordane was reported above the residential ESL and the Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) of 2.5 mg/kg in sample S-2 (3.86 mg/kg). • Dieldrin was reported above the residential ESL in samples S-2 (0.271 mg/kg) and S-4 (0.0427 mg/kg). To summarize, lead impacts are located around the perimeters of all three structures, and OCP impacts are located around the guest house. These impacts should be addressed with a limited remediation/mitigation program, which would consist of the excavation of surface soil adjacent to these structure perimeters. The excavated soil may be disposed of off-site at an appropriate licensed landfill facility. Alternatively, soil may be reconsolidated on site with institutional and engineering controls. Notably, while dieldrin exceeded the residential ESL in the composite sample AG-1 through AG-4, none of the discrete samples reported dieldrin above laboratory reporting limits. These samples were collected from undeveloped areas of the Property. Therefore, it does not appear that OCP impacts are present in the formerly cultivated areas of the Property. A summary of the laboratory results is presented in Table A. The laboratory report is presented in its entirety in Appendix H. 7.0 FINDINGS AND OPINIONS This assessment included a review of local, state, tribal, and federal environmental record sources, standard historical sources, aerial photographs, fire insurance maps and physical setting sources. A reconnaissance of the Property was completed to review site use and current conditions to check for the storage, use, production, or disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous materials and to conduct written/oral interviews with persons knowledgeable about current and past site use. The records review did not find documentation of soil, soil gas, or groundwater impairments associated with the use or past use of the Property. A review of regulatory databases maintained by county, state, tribal, and federal agencies found no documentation of hazardous materials violations or discharge on the Property and did not identify contaminated facilities within the appropriate ASTM search distances that would reasonably be expected to impact the Property. However, based on the historical use of the Property for agricultural activities, as well as the age of the three on-site structures, an assessment of the surface soil was conducted to evaluate the potential for residual concentrations of OCPs, arsenic, and lead. A total of 16 soil samples were recovered across the Property and around the perimeters of the three on-site structures, which were analyzed for OCPs, lead, and arsenic. The following exceedances were reported. • Lead was detected above the residential environmental screening level (ESL) of 80 mg/kg in 11 samples, at concentrations ranging between 89.6 and 805 mg/kg. • Dieldrin was reported above the residential ESL of 0.0368 mg/kg in samples S-2 (0.271 mg/kg) and S-4 (0.0427 mg/kg). Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 14 September 26, 2022 • Chlordane was reported above the residential ESL of 0.481 mg/kg and the TTLC of 2.5 mg/kg in sample S-2 (3.86 mg/kg). Based on the findings of this assessment, no historical RECs and no controlled RECs were identified for the Property. The following REC was identified. • ENGEO’s investigation of the Property found concentrations of lead exceeding residential ESLs in soil surrounding the perimeters of all three on-site structures and elevated concentrations of OCPs in soil located around the guest house. These impacts should be addressed with a limited remediation/mitigation program, which would consist of the excavation of surface soil adjacent to these structure perimeters. The excavated soil may be disposed of off-site at an appropriate licensed landfill facility. Alternatively, soil may be reconsolidated on site with institutional and engineering controls. We recommend engaging the Town of Danville to coordinate this program prior to or during redevelopment. Based on our client interview and site reconnaissance, we present information on a feature of potential environmental concern observed on the Property. This feature was not considered to be a REC. We briefly discuss the feature below. • Septic systems remain underground to the northwest of the main residence and guest house. We recommend that these systems be properly decommissioned following appropriate local and/or state regulations. 7.1 DATA GAPS It is our opinion that the findings of this study are based on a sufficient level of information obtained during our contracted scope of services to render a conclusion as to whether additional appropriate investigation is required to identify the presence or likely presence of a REC. The following data gap was identified. • The main house was inaccessible during the site reconnaissance. The data gap identified during this process does not affect the conclusions as to the presence or lack of presence of RECs at the Property. 7.2 SIGNIFICANT ASSUMPTIONS OR DEVIATIONS FROM ASTM STANDARD PRACTICE There were no significant deviations from ASTM Standard Practice E1527-13 in the preparation of this report. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 15 September 26, 2022 8.0 CONCLUSIONS It is our opinion that the findings of this study are based on a sufficient level of information obtained during our contracted scope of services to render a conclusion as to whether additional appropriate investigation is required to identify the presence or likely presence of a REC. We have performed a modified phase I environmental site assessment in general conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM E1527-13 and the standards and practices of the All Appropriate Inquiry – Final Rule (40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 312) of the Property. Any exception to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Sections 7 and 9.1 of the report. This assessment has revealed evidence of one REC in connection with the Property. ENGEO recommends the following. • Identified soil impacts should be addressed with a limited remediation/mitigation program, which would consist of the excavation of surface soil adjacent to these structure perimeters. The excavated soil may be disposed of off-site at an appropriate licensed landfill facility. Alternatively, soil may be reconsolidated on site with institutional and engineering controls. We recommend engaging the Town of Danville to coordinate this program prior to or during redevelopment. • Septic systems that remain underground to the northwest of the main residence and guest house should be properly decommissioned following appropriate local and/or state regulations. 9.0 LIMITATIONS 9.1 LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS OF ASSESSMENT The professional staff at ENGEO strives to perform its services in a proper and professional manner with reasonable care and competence but is not infallible. The recommendations and conclusions presented in this report were based on the findings of our study, which were developed solely from the contracted services. The findings of the report are based in part on contracted database research, out-of-house reports, and personal communications. The opinions formed by ENGEO are based on the assumed accuracy of the relied upon data in conjunction with our relevant professional experience related to such data interpretation. We assume no liability for the validity of the materials relied upon in the preparation of this report. This document must not be subject to unauthorized reuse; that is, reuse without written authorization of ENGEO. Such authorization is essential because it requires ENGEO to evaluate the document's applicability given new circumstances, not the least of which is passage of time. The findings from a phase I environmental site assessment are valid for 1 year after from the earliest date of the following components: records review, site reconnaissance, interviews, declaration by environmental professional. Updates of portions of the assessment may be necessary after a period of 180 days of the earliest date of the four components. Mr. Jason Bond 824 Danville Boulevard 20679.000.001 Modified Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page | 16 September 26, 2022 A more extensive assessment that would include additional subsurface exploration with laboratory testing of soil, soil gas, and groundwater samples could provide more definitive information concerning site-specific conditions. If additional assessment activities are considered for the Property and if other entities are retained to provide such services, ENGEO cannot be held responsible for any and all claims arising from or resulting from the performance of such services by other persons or entities. ENGEO can also not be held responsible from any and all claims arising or resulting from clarifications, adjustments, modifications, discrepancies or other changes necessary to reflect changed field or other conditions. 9.2 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of our client, Mr. Jason Bond. It is recognized and agreed that ENGEO has assumed responsibility only for undertaking the study for the Client. The responsibility for disclosures or reports to a third party and for remedial or mitigative action shall be solely that of the Client. This phase I environmental site assessment is not intended to represent a complete soil, soil gas, or groundwater characterization, nor define the depth or extent of soil, soil gas, or groundwater contamination. It is intended to provide an evaluation of potential environmental concerns associated with the use of the Property. The assessment did not include an asbestos survey, an inspection of light ballasts for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), or a mold survey. A radon evaluation was not performed. This report is based upon field and other conditions discovered at the time of preparation of ENGEO's assessment. Visual observations referenced in this report are intended only to represent conditions at the time of the reconnaissance. We would not be aware of site contamination, such as dumping and/or accidental spillage, that occurred subsequent to the reconnaissance conducted by ENGEO personnel. AT T A C H M E N T F