Agenda packet — Pleasanton City Council, December 17, 2024 (part 4 of 6)

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
7 / 92

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.15.2. Mitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

Page 432 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
8 / 92

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2.2. Mitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data

Page 433 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
9 / 92

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Barone’s project
Construction Start Date 1/1/2025
Operational Year 2027
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.00
Precipitation (days) 37.8
Location 493 St John St, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA
County Alameda
City Pleasanton
Air District Bay Area AQMD
Air Basin San Francisco Bay Area
TAZ 1685
EDFZ 1
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.20

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description

Page 434 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
10 / 92
Single Family
Housing

14.0 Dwelling Unit 1.68 36,637 163,980 — 39.0 —
General Office
Building

3.10 1000sqft 0.00 3,100 0.00 — — —
Parking Lot 25.0 Space 0.22 0.00 0.00 — — —
Other Asphalt
Surfaces

17.4 1000sqft 0.40 0.00 0.00 — — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction C-2* Limit Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling Construction C-10-A Water Exposed Surfaces
Construction C-11 Limit Vehicle Speeds on Unpaved Roads Energy E-10-B Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems: Solar Power * Qualitative or supporting measure. Emission reductions not included in the mitigated emissions results.

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.47 23.5 27.8 0.04 0.89 0.08 0.95 0.82 0.02 0.83 — 4,081 4,081 0.16 0.04 0.35 4,098 Mit. 2.47 23.5 27.8 0.04 0.89 0.08 0.95 0.82 0.02 0.83 — 4,081 4,081 0.16 0.04 0.35 4,098 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 435 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
11 / 92
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Unmit. 2.47 23.6 27.7 0.05 1.00 8.32 9.33 0.92 3.58 4.50 — 4,922 4,922 0.21 0.06 0.02 4,946 Mit. 2.47 23.6 27.7 0.05 1.00 3.35 4.35 0.92 1.42 2.34 — 4,922 4,922 0.21 0.06 0.02 4,946 %
Reduced
— — — — — 60% 53% — 60% 48% — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.10 20.1 23.2 0.04 0.77 0.91 1.68 0.71 0.38 1.09 — 3,561 3,561 0.14 0.04 0.15 3,577 Mit. 2.10 20.1 23.2 0.04 0.77 0.40 1.17 0.71 0.16 0.87 — 3,561 3,561 0.14 0.04 0.15 3,577 %
Reduced
— — — — — 56% 31% — 58% 21% — — — — — — —
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.38 3.66 4.23 0.01 0.14 0.17 0.31 0.13 0.07 0.20 — 590 590 0.02 0.01 0.03 592 Mit. 0.38 3.66 4.23 0.01 0.14 0.07 0.21 0.13 0.03 0.16 — 590 590 0.02 0.01 0.03 592 %
Reduced
— — — — — 56% 31% — 58% 21% — — — — — — —

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.47 23.5 27.8 0.04 0.89 0.06 0.95 0.82 0.02 0.83 — 4,081 4,081 0.16 0.04 0.35 4,098 2026 2.35 22.8 27.6 0.04 0.81 0.08 0.88 0.75 0.02 0.76 — 4,077 4,077 0.16 0.04 0.33 4,094 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 436 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
12 / 92
2025 2.47 23.6 27.7 0.05 1.00 8.32 9.33 0.92 3.58 4.50 — 4,922 4,922 0.21 0.06 0.02 4,946 2026 2.35 22.8 27.6 0.04 0.81 0.06 0.88 0.75 0.02 0.76 — 4,074 4,074 0.16 0.04 0.01 4,090 2027 2.26 0.83 1.16 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 — 143 143 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 143 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.10 20.1 23.2 0.04 0.77 0.91 1.68 0.71 0.38 1.09 — 3,561 3,561 0.14 0.04 0.15 3,577 2026 1.99 12.6 15.3 0.02 0.45 0.04 0.48 0.41 0.01 0.42 — 2,248 2,248 0.09 0.02 0.08 2,257 2027 0.27 0.10 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 16.8 16.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 16.8 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.38 3.66 4.23 0.01 0.14 0.17 0.31 0.13 0.07 0.20 — 590 590 0.02 0.01 0.03 592 2026 0.36 2.30 2.79 < 0.005 0.08 0.01 0.09 0.08 < 0.005 0.08 — 372 372 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 374 2027 0.05 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.78 2.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.79

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.47 23.5 27.8 0.04 0.89 0.06 0.95 0.82 0.02 0.83 — 4,081 4,081 0.16 0.04 0.35 4,098 2026 2.35 22.8 27.6 0.04 0.81 0.08 0.88 0.75 0.02 0.76 — 4,077 4,077 0.16 0.04 0.33 4,094 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.47 23.6 27.7 0.05 1.00 3.35 4.35 0.92 1.42 2.34 — 4,922 4,922 0.21 0.06 0.02 4,946 2026 2.35 22.8 27.6 0.04 0.81 0.06 0.88 0.75 0.02 0.76 — 4,074 4,074 0.16 0.04 0.01 4,090 2027 2.26 0.83 1.16 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 — 143 143 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 143 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 437 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
13 / 92
2025 2.10 20.1 23.2 0.04 0.77 0.40 1.17 0.71 0.16 0.87 — 3,561 3,561 0.14 0.04 0.15 3,577 2026 1.99 12.6 15.3 0.02 0.45 0.04 0.48 0.41 0.01 0.42 — 2,248 2,248 0.09 0.02 0.08 2,257 2027 0.27 0.10 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 16.8 16.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 16.8 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.38 3.66 4.23 0.01 0.14 0.07 0.21 0.13 0.03 0.16 — 590 590 0.02 0.01 0.03 592 2026 0.36 2.30 2.79 < 0.005 0.08 0.01 0.09 0.08 < 0.005 0.08 — 372 372 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 374 2027 0.05 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.78 2.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.79

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.54 0.38 4.66 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 8.48 1,318 1,327 0.95 0.05 3.36 1,370 Mit. 1.54 0.38 4.66 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 8.48 1,164 1,172 0.92 0.05 3.36 1,214 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — 12% 12% 3% 6% — 11%
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.43 0.44 3.63 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 8.48 1,261 1,270 0.95 0.06 0.35 1,311 Mit. 1.43 0.44 3.63 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 8.48 1,107 1,115 0.93 0.06 0.35 1,155 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — 12% 12% 3% 5% — 12%
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.44 0.39 3.68 0.01 0.01 0.79 0.80 0.01 0.20 0.21 8.48 1,198 1,207 0.95 0.05 1.51 1,248 Mit. 1.44 0.39 3.68 0.01 0.01 0.79 0.80 0.01 0.20 0.21 8.48 1,044 1,052 0.92 0.05 1.51 1,092

Page 438 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
14 / 92
%
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — 13% 13% 3% 6% — 12%
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.26 0.07 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 1.40 198 200 0.16 0.01 0.25 207 Mit. 0.26 0.07 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 1.40 173 174 0.15 0.01 0.25 181 %
Reduced
— — — — — — — — — — — 13% 13% 3% 6% — 12%

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.51 0.38 3.73 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 — 973 973 0.04 0.04 3.09 990 Area 1.04 0.01 0.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 2.68 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.69 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 333 333 0.05 0.01 — 336 Water — — — — — — — — — — 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01 — 18.8 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Total 1.54 0.38 4.66 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 8.48 1,318 1,327 0.95 0.05 3.36 1,370 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.49 0.44 3.63 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 — 918 918 0.05 0.05 0.08 934 Area 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 333 333 0.05 0.01 — 336 Water — — — — — — — — — — 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01 — 18.8 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6

Page 439 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
15 / 92
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Total 1.43 0.44 3.63 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 8.48 1,261 1,270 0.95 0.06 0.35 1,311 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.45 0.38 3.22 0.01 0.01 0.79 0.80 0.01 0.20 0.21 — 854 854 0.04 0.04 1.24 869 Area 0.99 < 0.005 0.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 1.32 1.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.33 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 333 333 0.05 0.01 — 336 Water — — — — — — — — — — 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01 — 18.8 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Total 1.44 0.39 3.68 0.01 0.01 0.79 0.80 0.01 0.20 0.21 8.48 1,198 1,207 0.95 0.05 1.51 1,248 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.08 0.07 0.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 141 141 0.01 0.01 0.20 144 Area 0.18 < 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 55.1 55.1 0.01 < 0.005 — 55.6 Water — — — — — — — — — — 0.33 1.67 2.00 0.03 < 0.005 — 3.11 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 1.07 0.00 1.07 0.11 0.00 — 3.75 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.04
Total 0.26 0.07 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 1.40 198 200 0.16 0.01 0.25 207

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.51 0.38 3.73 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 — 973 973 0.04 0.04 3.09 990 Area 1.04 0.01 0.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 2.68 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.69

Page 440 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
16 / 92
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 178 178 0.03 < 0.005 — 180 Water — — — — — — — — — — 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01 — 18.8 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Total 1.54 0.38 4.66 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 8.48 1,164 1,172 0.92 0.05 3.36 1,214 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.49 0.44 3.63 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 — 918 918 0.05 0.05 0.08 934 Area 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 178 178 0.03 < 0.005 — 180 Water — — — — — — — — — — 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01 — 18.8 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Total 1.43 0.44 3.63 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 8.48 1,107 1,115 0.93 0.06 0.35 1,155 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.45 0.38 3.22 0.01 0.01 0.79 0.80 0.01 0.20 0.21 — 854 854 0.04 0.04 1.24 869 Area 0.99 < 0.005 0.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 1.32 1.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.33 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 178 178 0.03 < 0.005 — 180 Water — — — — — — — — — — 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01 — 18.8 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Total 1.44 0.39 3.68 0.01 0.01 0.79 0.80 0.01 0.20 0.21 8.48 1,044 1,052 0.92 0.05 1.51 1,092 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.08 0.07 0.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 141 141 0.01 0.01 0.20 144 Area 0.18 < 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 29.5 29.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.8 Water — — — — — — — — — — 0.33 1.67 2.00 0.03 < 0.005 — 3.11

Page 441 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
17 / 92
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 1.07 0.00 1.07 0.11 0.00 — 3.75 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.04
Total 0.26 0.07 0.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 1.40 173 174 0.15 0.01 0.25 181

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.43 14.8 13.9 0.02 0.64 — 0.64 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,311 2,311 0.09 0.02 — 2,319 Demolitio
n
— — — — — 0.47 0.47 — 0.07 0.07 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.16 0.15 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 25.3 25.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 25.4 Demolitio
n
— — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 442 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
18 / 92
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.19 4.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.21 Demolitio
n
— — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 120 120 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 122 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.09 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 35.7 35.7 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 37.5 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.33 1.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.35 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.39 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.41 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.22 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 443 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
19 / 92
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.43 14.8 13.9 0.02 0.64 — 0.64 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,311 2,311 0.09 0.02 — 2,319 Demolitio
n
— — — — — 0.47 0.47 — 0.07 0.07 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.16 0.15 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 25.3 25.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 25.4 Demolitio
n
— — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.19 4.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.21 Demolitio
n
— — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

Page 444 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
20 / 92
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 120 120 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 122 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.09 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 35.7 35.7 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 37.5 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.33 1.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.35 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.39 0.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.41 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.22 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.61 20.8 21.7 0.03 0.93 — 0.93 0.86 — 0.86 — 3,401 3,401 0.14 0.03 — 3,413 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 6.55 6.55 — 3.37 3.37 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 445 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
21 / 92
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.32 9.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.35 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.54 1.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.55 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

Page 446 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
22 / 92
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.61 20.8 21.7 0.03 0.93 — 0.93 0.86 — 0.86 — 3,401 3,401 0.14 0.03 — 3,413 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 2.56 2.56 — 1.31 1.31 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.32 9.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.35 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —

Page 447 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
23 / 92
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.09 0.09 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 221 221 0.01 0.01 0.02 224 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.61 0.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.62 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 448 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
24 / 92

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.39 23.2 22.6 0.04 1.00 — 1.00 0.92 — 0.92 — 4,655 4,655 0.19 0.04 — 4,671 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 8.15 8.15 — 3.54 3.54 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.24 2.35 2.29 < 0.005 0.10 — 0.10 0.09 — 0.09 — 472 472 0.02 < 0.005 — 473 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.83 0.83 — 0.36 0.36 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.43 0.42 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 78.1 78.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 78.4

Page 449 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
25 / 92
Dust — — — — — 0.15 0.15 — 0.07 0.07 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 141 141 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 142 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 0.32 0.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 127 127 0.01 0.02 0.01 133 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.3 14.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 14.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.8 12.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 13.5 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.38 2.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.41 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.12 2.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.23

3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 450 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
26 / 92
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

2.39 23.2 22.6 0.04 1.00— 1.00 0.92— 0.92— 4,655 4,655 0.19 0.04— 4,671 Dust
From
Material
Movement
————— 3.18 3.18— 1.38 1.38———————
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

0.24 2.35 2.29 < 0.005 0.10— 0.10 0.09— 0.09— 472 472 0.02 < 0.005— 473 Dust
From
Material
Movement
————— 0.32 0.32— 0.14 0.14———————
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.43 0.42 < 0.005 0.02— 0.02 0.02— 0.02— 78.1 78.1 < 0.005 < 0.005— 78.4 Dust
From
Material
Movement
————— 0.06 0.06— 0.03 0.03———————
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite—————————————————

Page 451 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
27 / 92
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 141 141 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 142 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 0.32 0.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 127 127 0.01 0.02 0.01 133 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.3 14.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 14.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.8 12.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 13.5 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.38 2.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.41 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.12 2.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.23

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.45 23.5 27.5 0.04 0.89 — 0.89 0.82 — 0.82 — 3,975 3,975 0.16 0.03 — 3,989 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 452 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
28 / 92
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.45 23.5 27.5 0.04 0.89 — 0.89 0.82 — 0.82 — 3,975 3,975 0.16 0.03 — 3,989 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.82 17.4 20.4 0.03 0.66 — 0.66 0.61 — 0.61 — 2,950 2,950 0.12 0.02 — 2,960 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.33 3.18 3.72 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.11 — 0.11 — 488 488 0.02 < 0.005 — 490 Onsite
truck

Page 453 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
29 / 92
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 36.2 36.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 36.8 Vendor < 0.005 0.05 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.6 39.6 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 41.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.99 5.99 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.08 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.56 6.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.86 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.8. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.45 23.5 27.5 0.04 0.89 — 0.89 0.82 — 0.82 — 3,975 3,975 0.16 0.03 — 3,989 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.45 23.5 27.5 0.04 0.89 — 0.89 0.82 — 0.82 — 3,975 3,975 0.16 0.03 — 3,989 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.82 17.4 20.4 0.03 0.66 — 0.66 0.61 — 0.61 — 2,950 2,950 0.12 0.02 — 2,960

Page 454 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
30 / 92
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.33 3.18 3.72 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.11 — 0.11 — 488 488 0.02 < 0.005 — 490 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 52.2 52.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.21 53.0 Vendor < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 53.4 53.4 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 55.9 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 48.5 48.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 49.1 Vendor < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 53.4 53.4 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 55.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 36.2 36.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 36.8 Vendor < 0.005 0.05 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.6 39.6 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 41.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.99 5.99 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.08 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.56 6.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.86 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 455 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
31 / 92

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.33 22.7 27.4 0.04 0.81 — 0.81 0.75 — 0.75 — 3,974 3,974 0.16 0.03 — 3,987 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.33 22.7 27.4 0.04 0.81 — 0.81 0.75 — 0.75 — 3,974 3,974 0.16 0.03 — 3,987 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.26 12.3 14.8 0.02 0.44 — 0.44 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,146 2,146 0.09 0.02 — 2,154 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.23 2.24 2.70 < 0.005 0.08 — 0.08 0.07 — 0.07 — 355 355 0.01 < 0.005 — 357 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 456 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
32 / 92
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 51.2 51.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.19 52.0 Vendor < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 52.5 52.5 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 55.0 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 47.5 47.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 48.2 Vendor < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 52.5 52.5 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 54.9 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 25.9 25.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 26.2 Vendor < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 28.4 28.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 29.7 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.28 4.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.34 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.70 4.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.91 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 457 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
33 / 92
Off-Road 2.33 22.7 27.4 0.04 0.81 — 0.81 0.75 — 0.75 — 3,974 3,974 0.16 0.03 — 3,987 Equipment
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.33 22.7 27.4 0.04 0.81 — 0.81 0.75 — 0.75 — 3,974 3,974 0.16 0.03 — 3,987 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.26 12.3 14.8 0.02 0.44 — 0.44 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,146 2,146 0.09 0.02 — 2,154 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.23 2.24 2.70 < 0.005 0.08 — 0.08 0.07 — 0.07 — 355 355 0.01 < 0.005 — 357 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 51.2 51.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.19 52.0 Vendor < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 52.5 52.5 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 55.0 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 47.5 47.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 48.2

Page 458 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
34 / 92
Vendor < 0.005 0.07 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 52.5 52.5 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 54.9 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 25.9 25.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 26.2 Vendor < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 28.4 28.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 29.7 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.28 4.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.34 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.70 4.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.91 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.48 4.60 6.14 0.01 0.18 — 0.18 0.16 — 0.16 — 914 914 0.04 0.01 — 917 Paving 1.64 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 459 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
35 / 92
Off-Road < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.50 2.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.51 Equipment
Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.41 0.41 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.42 Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.02 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 85.0 85.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 86.3 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.22 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 460 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
36 / 92

3.12. Paving (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.48 4.60 6.14 0.01 0.18 — 0.18 0.16 — 0.16 — 914 914 0.04 0.01 — 917 Paving 1.64 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.50 2.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.51 Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 461 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
37 / 92
Worker 0.03 0.02 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 85.0 85.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 86.3 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.22 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings

2.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 462 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
38 / 92
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings

2.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.27 0.36 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 42.0 42.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 42.2 Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.68 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.05 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.96 6.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.98 Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.12 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.2 10.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 10.4 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 463 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
39 / 92
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.51 9.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.64 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.01 3.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.06 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.50 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.51 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.14. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings

2.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 464 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
40 / 92
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings

2.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.27 0.36 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 42.0 42.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 42.2 Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.68 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.05 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.96 6.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.98 Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.12 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

Page 465 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
41 / 92
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.51 9.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.64 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.01 3.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.06 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.50 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.51 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.15. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.11 0.83 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings

2.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 466 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
42 / 92
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.10 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 15.7 15.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.7 Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.25 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.60 2.60 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.60 Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.05 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

Page 467 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
43 / 92
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.19 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.16. Architectural Coating (2027) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.11 0.83 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings

2.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.10 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 15.7 15.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.7 Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.25 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 468 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
44 / 92
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.60 2.60 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.60 Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.05 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.33 9.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.46 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.10 1.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.12 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.18 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.19 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

Page 469 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
45 / 92

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.41 0.29 2.89 0.01 < 0.005 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 0.17 0.17 — 743 743 0.03 0.03 2.36 756 General
Office
Building

0.10 0.08 0.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.21 0.21 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 — 230 230 0.01 0.01 0.74 234 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.51 0.38 3.73 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 — 973 973 0.04 0.04 3.09 990 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.39 0.34 2.83 0.01 < 0.005 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 0.17 0.17 — 701 701 0.04 0.04 0.06 713 General
Office
Building

0.09 0.10 0.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.21 0.21 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 — 217 217 0.01 0.01 0.02 220 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 470 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
46 / 92
Total 0.49 0.44 3.63 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 — 918 918 0.05 0.05 0.08 934 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.07 0.06 0.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 — 114 114 0.01 0.01 0.16 116 General
Office
Building

0.01 0.01 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 27.3 27.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 27.8 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.08 0.07 0.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 141 141 0.01 0.01 0.20 144

4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.41 0.29 2.89 0.01 < 0.005 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 0.17 0.17 — 743 743 0.03 0.03 2.36 756 General
Office
Building

0.10 0.08 0.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.21 0.21 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 — 230 230 0.01 0.01 0.74 234 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.51 0.38 3.73 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 — 973 973 0.04 0.04 3.09 990

Page 471 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
47 / 92
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.39 0.34 2.83 0.01 < 0.005 0.67 0.67 < 0.005 0.17 0.17 — 701 701 0.04 0.04 0.06 713 General
Office
Building

0.09 0.10 0.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.21 0.21 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 — 217 217 0.01 0.01 0.02 220 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.49 0.44 3.63 0.01 0.01 0.88 0.88 0.01 0.22 0.23 — 918 918 0.05 0.05 0.08 934 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.07 0.06 0.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 — 114 114 0.01 0.01 0.16 116 General
Office
Building

0.01 0.01 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 27.3 27.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 27.8 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.08 0.07 0.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 141 141 0.01 0.01 0.20 144

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)

Page 472 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
48 / 92
Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 154 154 0.02 < 0.005 — 156
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 173 173 0.03 < 0.005 — 175
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.80 4.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.85
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 333 333 0.05 0.01 — 336
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 154 154 0.02 < 0.005 — 156
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 173 173 0.03 < 0.005 — 175
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.80 4.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.85
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 333 333 0.05 0.01 — 336
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 25.6 25.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 25.8

Page 473 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
49 / 92
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 28.7 28.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.79 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 55.1 55.1 0.01 < 0.005 — 55.6

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 173 173 0.03 < 0.005 — 175
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.80 4.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.85
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 178 178 0.03 < 0.005 — 180
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

Page 474 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
50 / 92
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 173 173 0.03 < 0.005 — 175
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.80 4.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.85
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 178 178 0.03 < 0.005 — 180
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 28.7 28.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.0
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.79 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 29.5 29.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.8

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

Page 475 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
51 / 92
General 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Office
Building
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Annual—————————————————
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00

Page 476 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
52 / 92
Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Asphalt
Surfaces
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

Page 477 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
53 / 92
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consume
r
Products

0.85 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.09 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 478 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
54 / 92
Landscap
Equipment

0.09 0.01 0.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.68 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.69 Total 1.04 0.01 0.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 2.68 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.69 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consume
r
Products

0.85 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.09 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consume
r
Products

0.16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap
e
Equipme
nt

0.01 < 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22 Total 0.18 < 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e

Page 479 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
55 / 92
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consume
r
Products

0.85 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.09 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap
e
Equipme
nt

0.85 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings

0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 480 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
56 / 92
Landscap 0.01 < 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22 e
Total 0.18 < 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 0.22 0.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.22

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 0.95 8.08 9.03 0.10 < 0.005 — 12.2
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 1.06 1.99 3.05 0.11 < 0.005 — 6.54
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01 — 18.8 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 0.95 8.08 9.03 0.10 < 0.005 — 12.2
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 1.06 1.99 3.05 0.11 < 0.005 — 6.54

Page 481 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
57 / 92
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01 — 18.8 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 0.16 1.34 1.50 0.02 < 0.005 — 2.03
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 0.17 0.33 0.50 0.02 < 0.005 — 1.08
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 0.33 1.67 2.00 0.03 < 0.005 — 3.11

4.4.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 0.95 8.08 9.03 0.10 < 0.005 — 12.2
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 1.06 1.99 3.05 0.11 < 0.005 — 6.54
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00

Page 482 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
58 / 92
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
—————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total—————————— 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01— 18.8
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
—————————— 0.95 8.08 9.03 0.10 < 0.005— 12.2
General
Office
Building
—————————— 1.06 1.99 3.05 0.11 < 0.005— 6.54
Parking
Lot
—————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
—————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total—————————— 2.01 10.1 12.1 0.21 0.01— 18.8
Annual—————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
—————————— 0.16 1.34 1.50 0.02 < 0.005— 2.03
General
Office
Building
—————————— 0.17 0.33 0.50 0.02 < 0.005— 1.08
Parking
Lot
—————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
—————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total—————————— 0.33 1.67 2.00 0.03 < 0.005— 3.11

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

Page 483 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
59 / 92

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 4.91 0.00 4.91 0.49 0.00 — 17.2
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 1.55 0.00 1.55 0.16 0.00 — 5.44
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 4.91 0.00 4.91 0.49 0.00 — 17.2
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 1.55 0.00 1.55 0.16 0.00 — 5.44
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 484 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
60 / 92
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 0.81 0.00 0.81 0.08 0.00 — 2.85
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 0.26 0.00 0.26 0.03 0.00 — 0.90
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 1.07 0.00 1.07 0.11 0.00 — 3.75

4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 4.91 0.00 4.91 0.49 0.00 — 17.2
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 1.55 0.00 1.55 0.16 0.00 — 5.44
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 485 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
61 / 92
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 4.91 0.00 4.91 0.49 0.00 — 17.2
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 1.55 0.00 1.55 0.16 0.00 — 5.44
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 6.47 0.00 6.47 0.65 0.00 — 22.6 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 0.81 0.00 0.81 0.08 0.00 — 2.85
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — 0.26 0.00 0.26 0.03 0.00 — 0.90
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 1.07 0.00 1.07 0.11 0.00 — 3.75

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e

Page 486 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
62 / 92
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.26 0.26
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.26 0.26
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.04
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.04

4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e

Page 487 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
63 / 92
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.26 0.26
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.26 0.26
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.27 0.27
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.04
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.04

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)

Page 488 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
64 / 92
Equipme
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

Page 489 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
65 / 92

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 490 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
66 / 92

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 491 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
67 / 92
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 492 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
68 / 92
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 493 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
69 / 92
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 494 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
70 / 92
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 495 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
71 / 92
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequeste
red
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 1/1/2025 1/4/2025 6.00 4.00 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/5/2025 1/6/2025 6.00 1.00 — Grading Grading 1/7/2025 2/18/2025 6.00 37.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 2/19/2025 8/18/2026 6.00 468 — Paving Paving 8/19/2026 8/19/2026 6.00 1.00 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 8/20/2026 2/19/2027 6.00 158 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

Page 496 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
72 / 92
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Demolition Excavators Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Forklifts Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Demolition Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 3 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Site Preparation Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Site Preparation Plate Compactors Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 8.00 0.43 Site Preparation Excavators Diesel Tier 3 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 150 0.36 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rollers Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Grading Plate Compactors Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 8.00 0.43 Grading Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 150 0.36 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 423 0.48
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 14.0 0.74

Page 497 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
73 / 92
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh Diesel Tier 3 3.00 6.00 84.0 0.37 oes
Building Construction Aerial Lifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 46.0 0.31 Building Construction Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Building Construction Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Building Construction Air Compressors Diesel Average 6.00 8.00 37.0 0.48 Building Construction Dumpers/Tenders Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 16.0 0.38 Building Construction Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Building Construction Pressure Washers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.30 Building Construction Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 71.0 0.37 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Demolition Excavators Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Forklifts Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Demolition Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74

Page 498 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
74 / 92
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh Diesel Tier 3 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37 Site Preparation Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Site Preparation Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Site Preparation Plate Compactors Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 8.00 0.43 Site Preparation Excavators Diesel Tier 3 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 150 0.36 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rollers Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Grading Plate Compactors Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 8.00 0.43 Grading Rubber Tired Loaders Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 150 0.36 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 423 0.48
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Tier 3 3.00 6.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Aerial Lifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 46.0 0.31 Building Construction Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Building Construction Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Building Construction Air Compressors Diesel Average 6.00 8.00 37.0 0.48 Building Construction Dumpers/Tenders Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 16.0 0.38 Building Construction Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Building Construction Pressure Washers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.30

Page 499 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
75 / 92
Building Construction Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Tier 3 1.00 8.00 71.0 0.37 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 4.00 2.10 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 27.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 17.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 14.2 2.10 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT

Page 500 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
76 / 92
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 6.03 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 2.00 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 1.21 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 4.00 2.10 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 27.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT

Page 501 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
77 / 92
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 17.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 14.2 2.10 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 6.03 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 2.00 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 1.21 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings

Page 502 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
78 / 92
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 74,190 24,730 16,547 5,516 1,635

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic Yards) Material Exported (Cubic Yards) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Building Square Footage)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,877 —
Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 —
Grading 0.00 4,200 74.0 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Single Family Housing 0.15 0%
General Office Building 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 0.22 100%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.40 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005

Page 503 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
79 / 92
2026 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Single Family
Housing
132 134 120 47,662 937 947 849 338,053
General Office
Building

30.2 6.85 2.17 8,342 296 67.1 21.3 81,767
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Single Family
Housing
132 134 120 47,662 937 947 849 338,053
General Office
Building

30.2 6.85 2.17 8,342 296 67.1 21.3 81,767
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

Page 504 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
80 / 92

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Single Family Housing—
Wood Fireplaces0
Gas Fireplaces0
Propane Fireplaces0
Electric Fireplaces0
No Fireplaces 14
Conventional Wood Stoves0
Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Pellet Wood Stoves0

5.10.1.2. Mitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Single Family Housing—
Wood Fireplaces0
Gas Fireplaces0
Propane Fireplaces0
Electric Fireplaces0
No Fireplaces 14
Conventional Wood Stoves0
Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Pellet Wood Stoves0

Page 505 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
81 / 92

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
74189.925 24,730 16,547 5,516 1,635

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Single Family Housing 276,244 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
General Office Building 310,296 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 8,586 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.11.2. Mitigated

Page 506 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
82 / 92
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Single Family Housing 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
General Office Building 310,296 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 8,586 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Single Family Housing 497,152 2,277,033
General Office Building 550,975 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00

5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Single Family Housing 497,152 2,277,033
General Office Building 550,975 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)

Page 507 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
83 / 92
Single Family Housing 9.12 —
General Office Building 2.88 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —

5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Single Family Housing 9.12 —
General Office Building 2.88 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Single Family Housing Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Single Family Housing Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0

5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced

Page 508 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
84 / 92
Single Family Housing Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Single Family Housing Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

Page 509 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
85 / 92

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

Page 510 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
86 / 92

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 17.9 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.65 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 23.4 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.

Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 2 0 0 N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A

Page 511 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
87 / 92
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 2 1 1 3
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —

Page 512 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
88 / 92
AQ-Ozone 26.7
AQ-PM 20.0
AQ-DPM 80.7
Drinking Water 44.8
Lead Risk Housing 27.3
Pesticides 68.1
Toxic Releases 33.7
Traffic 62.3
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 50.3
Groundwater 74.2
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 79.4
Impaired Water Bodies 12.5
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 20.2
Cardio-vascular 15.1
Low Birth Weights 64.5
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 18.8
Housing 76.9
Linguistic 42.1
Poverty 40.6
Unemployment 15.8

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Page 513 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
89 / 92
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 71.46156807
Employed 94.72603619
Median HI 79.53291415
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 77.17182086
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 47.91479533
Transportation —
Auto Access 21.39099192
Active commuting 84.66572565
Social —
2-parent households 63.19774156
Voting 68.80533812
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 29.11587322
Park access 42.48684717
Retail density 72.75760298
Supermarket access 41.99923008
Tree canopy 76.88951623
Housing —
Homeownership 27.52470166
Housing habitability 19.62017195
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 73.77133325 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 34.377005
Uncrowded housing 64.30129603

Page 514 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
90 / 92
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 51.84139612
Arthritis 33.8
Asthma ER Admissions 77.2
High Blood Pressure 80.7
Cancer (excluding skin) 16.1
Asthma 65.7
Coronary Heart Disease 54.4
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 62.6
Diagnosed Diabetes 82.1
Life Expectancy at Birth 91.5
Cognitively Disabled 48.3
Physically Disabled 62.2
Heart Attack ER Admissions 50.6
Mental Health Not Good 76.1
Chronic Kidney Disease 64.9
Obesity 83.0
Pedestrian Injuries 84.7
Physical Health Not Good 72.6
Stroke 58.2
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 47.1
Current Smoker 75.7
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 69.5
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0

Page 515 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
91 / 92
Children 37.8
Elderly 33.4
English Speaking 64.7
Foreign-born 50.4
Outdoor Workers 68.2
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 55.8
Traffic Density 70.7
Traffic Access 64.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 21.9
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 65.7

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 38.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 77.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

Page 516 of 893 ends

Barone’s project Detailed Report, 10/4/2023
92 / 92
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Based on applicant provided information
Construction: Construction Phases Based on applicant provided information Construction: Off-Road Equipment Based on applicant provided information Construction: Trips and VMT Based on appicant provided information. Construction debris would be exported to Pleasanton Landfill
Construction: Architectural Coatings Based on BAAQMD Reg 8 Rule 3 Operations: Hearths No fireplaces according to the applicant Operations: Architectural Coatings Based on BAAQMD Reg 8 Rule 3 Operations: Energy Use The project would not include natural gas, therefore it is assumed eletricity would subsitute estimated energy consumption.

Characteristics: Project Details Based on aerial Google Earth images

Page 517 of 893 ends

Appendix B
Historic Resources Evaluation

Page 518 of 893 ends

treanorhl.com

TREANORHL
475-493 ST. JOHN STREET, PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA

HISTORIC RESOURCES EVALUATION

DRAFT
FEBRUARY 25, 2021

Page 519 of 893 ends

treanorhl.com
Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................1

2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...............................................................................................................................1

3. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................1

4. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ..............................................................................................................................1 475 St. John Street (APN 94-114-7) ................................................................................................................2 493 St. John Street (APN 94-114-8) ................................................................................................................5

5. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE .................................................................................................................................8

6. SITE HISTORY .................................................................................................................................................8

7. HISTORIC CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................... 14

8. ARCHITECT/BUILDER .................................................................................................................................. 16

9. OWNERSHIP/OCCUPANCY HISTORY ........................................................................................................ 16

10. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ...................................................................................................................... 17 National Register of Historic Places Criteria ................................................................................................ 17 California Register of Historical Resources Criteria ...................................................................................... 18 Local Eligibility ............................................................................................................................................. 19

11. SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION ..................................................................................................................... 19 Current Historic Status ................................................................................................................................. 19 475 St. John Street (APN 94-114-7) ............................................................................................................. 19 493 St. John Street (APN 94-114-8) ............................................................................................................. 20

12. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................. 21 BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................................................... 22 APPENDIX ............................................................................................................................................................... 23

Page 520 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com

1. INTRODUCTION
Robson Homes, LLC has requested TreanorHL’s assistance in assessing two parcels located on St. John Street in Pleasanton (APNs 94-114-7 and 94-114-8). These parcels have not previously been identified on any state or national historic resources inventory. According to the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 (adopted July 2009), both parcels are located within the Downtown Commercial Center which was identified as a “heritage neighborhood.” The 493 St. John Street property was also identified as a historic structure in the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025.
1 However, neither the most recent Downtown Specific Plan (adopted August 2019), Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement (March 2015), nor Pleasanton Limited Scope Historic Resource Survey (August 2015) identify the parcels at 475 and 493 St. John Street as historic.

The following report provides an evaluation of the subject properties’ potential eligibility to be individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).

Pleasanton does not maintain any local criteria for evaluation and relies on the CRHR criteria for determining eligibility of historic resources.

2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
While both properties were found to have historic significance under at least one criterion, neither were found to possess sufficient integrity to be eligible for listing in the state or national register. Upon completion of the survey and archival work, the property at 475 St. John Street in Pleasanton does not appear individually eligible for the NRHP or CRHR as it was not found to possess sufficient integrity under criterion A/1 for its period of significance. The 493 St. John Street property also does not appear individually eligible for the NRHP or CRHR as it was not found to possess sufficient integrity under criteria A/1 and C/3 for its period of significance.

3. METHODOLOGY
TreanorHL conducted a site visit on January 14, 2021 to evaluate the existing conditions, historic features, and architectural significance of the properties. Available building permits were obtained from the City of Pleasanton Permit Center. Due to the Covid-19 shelter-in-place order, TreanorHL was not able to conduct in-person research at local libraries or archives. In order to evaluate the historic significance of the properties, available online research was completed including consultation of local city directories, Sanborn fire insurance maps, historical aerials and photographs, local newspapers, and various other sources from online repositories. Also, the staff at Pleasanton’s Museum on Main provided information on the two properties that included scans and photographs of images, maps, and newspaper articles housed in the museum’s archives. TreanorHL contacted the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS); however, no records were found regarding the properties.

4. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The subject properties are in downtown Pleasanton. Located on the southern side of the block roughly bounded by St. John Street to the south, Main Street to the east, Arroyo del Valle to the north, and the railroad tracks to the west, the subject parcels are close to the commercial center of Pleasanton which lies to the east and south.

Low-rise residential buildings, mostly single-family houses, appear to the west. 1 The City of Pleasanton, Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 (adopted July 21, 2009), pages 7-13 to 7-16.

Page 521 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 2
Figure 1. The subject properties at 475 and 493 St. John Street, outlined in red (Google Earth, imagery date June 2019). 475 St. John Street (APN 94-114-7)
The main building on the site, the restaurant, is located nearest St. John Street and has had numerous additions over the years. The additions almost completely surround the original structure which can be identified by the truncated hip roof. Behind the restaurant structure is a large, paved patio area surrounded by several accessory structures.

Constructed pre-1888 this one-story over partial basement, restaurant building is complex in plan. The woodframe structure has horizontal wood siding with simple stucco panels present at the front and east side additions.

A small portion of the front façade, around the entry door also features stucco cladding. The complex roof structure includes a truncated hip section with gable end roofs projecting from the hip along with several flat and shed roof sections. Asphalt shingles clad the sloped roof sections while roll-asphalt roofing clads the flat sections. The primary window type is vinyl-sash, six-over-six, single-hung. Canvas awnings shelter some of the windows near the front of the building. Concrete steps, flanked by ornate metal railings, lead up to the entry door. The multi-lite wood door is sheltered by a canvas awning. A dining patio and ramp stand to the northwest of the restaurant. The ramp accesses an entry off the patio. An interior brick chimney stack is visible at the east side of the structure. Notable features include the flat roof additions at the southwest corner of the building, the truncated hip roof of the original structure and the numerous other additions. Alterations to the restaurant include window replacements and numerous small additions off every façade. The overall condition of the restaurant is good.

The street facing (south) façade of the restaurant features a raised entry, accessed by concrete steps. The entry door and steps are located to the west side of the structure and are flanked by a single window to the west and a grouping of five windows to the east. A raised gable roof interrupts the flat roof of the enclosed porch addition and helps identifying the entrance. The restaurant’s name “Barone’s” is painted on the gable end. A canvas awning shelters the multi-lite wood door, while another canvas awning wraps the southeast corner of the building and protects the windows. A dining patio accessed by a wood ramp is west of the building. Currently N

Page 522 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 3
the patio and ramp are covered by a series of awnings and tents. A flat roof addition is set back from the main façade and features similar windows. Below each window on the main façade is a simple stucco panel surrounded by flat wood trim.

The east façade features a grouping of three multi-lite vinyl-sash windows at the southernmost enclosed porch addition and a grouping of nine identical windows at the side addition. Below the windows at the southernmost enclosed porch addition are stucco clad panels surrounded by flat wood trim, while the grouping of nine windows has panels that feature horizontal wood siding that match the rest of the cladding on this façade. Wood lattice hides the foundation and raised floor framing of the addition on this side of the structure. North of the addition is a deck. A shed roof addition, constructed off the back of the original house, features two openings that are currently covered with metal panels. A hip roof addition toward the north end of the elevation has a single, multi-panel door at the patio level. A small, shed roof addition adorns the southern end of this addition.

From the patio wooden stairs lead up to a single door which accesses the shed roof addition at the most northern end of the structure. Both additions are clad in horizontal wood siding and feature simple wood trim at openings.

The north façade features numerous additions. The east side addition has a pair of multi-lite wood doors opening onto a raised deck. The shed roof addition features a single opening that is currently covered. A smaller shed roof addition has no openings but features a giant “B” for Barone’s painted on the wood siding while the rear addition with a hip roof is centered on this façade. The shed roof addition off the hip roof section has no openings on this side.

The west façade of the building features a hip roof addition at the southern end. This addition has a multi-lite fixed vinyl-sash window. The roof of the addition is set below the roofline of the original structure. The northern side of the hip roof addition has a single-hung multi-lite vinyl-sash window. A flat roof addition, with a single door, is located at the southern end of the addition while a metal electrical enclosure is located at the northern end. The northwest corner of the original structure is visible. A single opening on the north façade of the original structure has been covered with a piece of wood. Off the rear gable end section of the building is an addition constructed of concrete masonry units. This addition is a single-story and is enclosed with wood lattice on the southern end, where a paneled door provides access to the space. Mechanical units are housed on the flat roof.

Another flat roof addition is located near the north end of the building and features a mix of cladding materials – vertical siding, vinyl panels and wood lattice. The northern most shed roof addition is raised above the ground and accessed by wood stairs. A single door punctuates the horizontal cladding material.

Accessory Structures
Several accessory structures are located north of the restaurant. A single-story, gable roof building is located northwest of the restaurant. Four other single-story structures flank the paved patio and dining area. These structures are open on one side and serve as outdoor bars. All structures are clad in horizontal vinyl planks. All accessory buildings were added to the site over the last two decades and are in good condition.

Page 523 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 4
Figure 2. Looking north from St. John Street, the south façade of the main building at 475 St. John Street.

Figure 3. The south and east façades.

Figure 4. The rear (north) façade.

Page 524 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 5

Figures 5 and 6. Two of the accessory structures on the subject parcel. 493 St. John Street (APN 94-114-8)
The large deep lot features a main house (nearest to St. John Street), a cottage to the northwest of the house, and three accessory buildings in the rear yard. Behind the gated rear yard is a large, paved parking lot. This parking area serves the restaurant to the east. Constructed prior to 1888, this two-story, over partial basement house is irregular in plan. The vernacular wood-frame structure has horizontal wood siding and a steeply pitched, asphalt shingle-clad, cross-gable roof with dormers featuring a shed and gable roofs. The primary window type is vinyl-sash, nine-over-nine, single-hung. Decorative shutters flank many of the windows. A full-width entry porch with columns adorns the front (south) façade with a connecting deck wrapping around to the west side of the structure. A modest gable roof projection supported by round columns shelters the main entrance which consists of a paneled wood door and sidelights. The wood railing with turned balusters at the porch is identical to the railing at the second-floor deck. Notable features include the front porch, the enclosed eaves, the cornice returns at the eaves, the two interior chimney stacks, and the wood railings. Alterations to the main house include window replacement, relocation of the main entrance door, siding replacement, the installation of new railings and columns at the front façade, and numerous additions. A detached one-story, wood-frame cottage stands northwest of the main house. Three other detached structures are located behind the main house as well.

Located around a paved parking area these prefabricated structures serve as a gym space, storage, and a detached garage. The overall condition of the main house, cottage and accessory structures is good.

Round columns support the overhang at the porch area. Centered on the second floor is a wide shed roof dormer. A paired multi-lite French door provides access to the deck. A single, multi-lite window stands to each side of the door.

Two sets of paired windows are visible on the east façade under the gable end at the first floor. North of these windows are three additional openings – two single-hung and one slider. Two gable end dormers punctuate the cross-gable roof at the north side of this façade. A single-hung window and a decorative metal railing give interest to each dormer. All single-hung windows and surrounds match the windows on the south façade.

Page 525 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 6
The balcony railing matches the railings on the front of the building. A single-hung window is east of the rear entry door.

A bay window, multi-lite door and single-hung window adorn the first floor of the west side of the building. At the second floor a single gable end dormer has a pair of windows. Just north of the dormer is a wood clad interior chimney stack. A paired French door with a multi-lite transom is located at the south end of the first floor under the gable end. Located directly below the ridge of the gable end at the second floor is a single-hung window. An uncovered wood deck spans most of this elevation and is connected to the entry porch. Vertical wood siding clads the railing around the deck perimeter.

Figure 7. Looking northwest from St. John Street, the south (front) and east façades of the main house at 493 St. John Street.

Figure 8. The front (south) façade.

Page 526 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 7

Figures 9 and 10. Left, the partial west façade, and right, the rear façade.

Cottage
Constructed prior to 1943, this one-story, vernacular cottage is L-shaped in plan. The wood-frame building has horizontal wood siding and an asphalt shingle-clad, gable roof with a cross-gable addition to the north. Another small gable roof addition is off the rear (north) side of the structure. The raised foundation is hidden behind vertical wood cladding. The primary window types are wood-sash, one-over-one, double-hung and fixed woodsash. Shutters flank all windows. An almost full-width porch with square wood supports shelters the main entrance, which consists of a wood panel door. The entrance door is centered on the main (south) façade with a single window to each side. The east façade has three single windows and a set of paired windows, as well as a paneled door accessed by wood stairs and a ramp. The north façade has a window centered on the small rear gable end addition, while a pair of fixed windows and a flush door are present on the cross-gable portion of the building. Wood stairs access this door. A pair of fixed windows and two single-hung windows punctuate the west façade. Notable features include the entry porch, the wood brackets at the eaves, the exposed rafter tails, the decorative shutters, and the wide flat trim at windows. Alterations to the cottage are minimal and limited to additions off the rear (north) side of the structure.

Figures 11 and 12. Left, the front (south) façade of the cottage; right, the east façade of the cottage.

Accessory Structures
Three small, prefabricated structures are in the north east corner of the yard around a paved parking area. These accessory buildings were added to the site over the last five years. The single-story structures have metal-clad hipped and flat roofs as well as vinyl horizontal siding. The western most building has a single door on the west façade, the centrally located structure has a garage door on the southern façade, while the eastern most unit has a mix of window and door openings on three sides. All accessory buildings are in good condition.

Page 527 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 8

Figures 13 and 14. The accessory structures on the parcel.

5. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE
Lacking a clear architectural style the main building at 475 St. John Street is vernacular in nature. Constructed in the 1880s as a single-family house, the building currently does not illustrate a definite architectural style.

The main house at 493 St. John Street was identified as a late 19th century vernacular form residential development by the City of Pleasanton.2
Late nineteenth-century residential development in Pleasanton included several wood-frame, vernacular housing forms common in the period. Some of the examples display architectural ornament and detailing consistent with popular recognized styles, though most are architecturally modest.

Vernacular housing forms in Pleasanton from this period include three distinct types: small, single-story, ellshaped dwellings, one or one-and-a-half-story side gable dwellings, and one or one-and-a-half-story end dwellings. The most numerous are the one-and-a-half-story, wood-frame, side gable dwellings, typically measuring a single room deep. These properties may have had modest classical or Greek Revival detailing such as cornice returns on gable ends, though most surviving examples retain little ornament. The dwellings typically had a symmetrical façade with a slightly off-center main entrance, and full-length, attached front porch.3
The cottage at 493 St. John Street is a modest vernacular dwelling without a definite architectural style. The accessory structures on both parcels are utilitarian.

6. SITE HISTORY
In the 1860s, with the impending arrival of the railroad, large property owners in the vicinity of the Pleasanton town began subdividing property into lots and laying out streets. Owned by John Kottinger, the land bounded by Division Street on the south, the Arroyo del Valle on the north, and Main Street on the east was divided into a series of blocks and lots in 1868. This division includes the present-day St. John and St. Mary streets between Main and Division streets.4
2 Email communication with City of Pleasanton, Community Development Department, December 11, 2020. 3 Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement (March 2015), 85-86. 4 Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 81.

Page 528 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 9
According to the Sanborn maps of the area, the subject block and its surroundings were largely developed by 1888: Main Street had a series of commercial buildings while the side streets were mostly residential. Garatti Winery established a large facility immediately to the northwest of the subject properties by 1939 and became one of the largest businesses in Pleasanton in the mid-20th century.5 The winery complex was replaced by housing in the early 1990s.6
475 St. John Street
The building first appears on the 1888 Sanborn map as a one-story wood frame dwelling. Irregular in plan, the dwelling had a partial-width front porch and an L-shaped rear porch. Two smaller sheds appeared to the northeast. Two additional accessory structures were constructed between 1898 and 1903, labeled as a hen coop and a chicken incubator on the 1903 Sanborn map. The dwelling received a small one-story addition to the west and had only one outbuilding in 1943. A one-story garage was constructed to the north by 1953, the outbuilding was demolished, the western addition was expanded, and the rear porch was enlarged and enclosed. It appears that the site layout and the building’s footprint had not changed until 1963. The main house received another porch addition in 1973, a kitchen addition in 1988, and a new front deck in 1989. The front deck was expanded once again in 1995.7
According to the permits on file at the City of Pleasanton, the building received various additions and alterations over time. See below for the summary.8

1973 A porch was added.
1977 The garage door was replaced with a glass door and grill. 1988 Reroofing, 640 sq. ft. kitchen addition, and interior remodel. 1989 A front deck and awnings were added to the southwest corner. The restaurant interior was expanded by covering this. A perimeter wrought iron fence and archway was constructed, and monumental sign was added.
1995 A 46’ by 24’ deck was added to the existing deck.

Figures 15 and 16. 475 St. John Street ca. 1988 (Museum on Main). 5 Sanborn maps; EDR, The EDR Aerial Photo Package, SCDC Saint John, 475 Saint John Street (August 31, 2020); The City of Pleasanton, Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 (adopted July 21, 2009), 12-8. 6 Historic Aerials by NETR Online.
7 Sanborn maps; The EDR Aerial Photo Package; City of Pleasanton Permit Center. 8 City of Pleasanton Permit Center.

Page 529 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 10
493 St. John Street
According to the material received from Museum on Main, the house at 493 St. John Street was designed and constructed in 1885 by Mr. Derendinger.”9 A newspaper announcement from 1881 states that Joseph Derendinger’s residence was about to be finished.10 The building first appears on the 1888 Sanborn map, so it was possibly constructed in the early 1880s.

The 1888 Sanborn map illustrates a one-and-a-half story L-shaped dwelling with a full-width front porch and a side porch facing east. Three one-story accessory structures to the north were attached to the main house, the southernmost one was a water mill with a tank on the roof. A one-story shed was at the northern end of the parcel. On the 1893 Sanborn map, the attached accessory structures were noted as a tank house and an outhouse; and the northern shed was replaced with two henhouses. The layout of the parcel and the buildings had not changed in 1903.

By 1929, a one-story dwelling was constructed immediately to the north of the main house: this one-story wood frame building was rectangular in plan and had a partial porch facing east. The outhouse and the water tank were removed from the main house, and the rear porch was expanded to be an L-shaped feature.

By 1943, the layout of the parcel and the main house was modified significantly. The main house received an addition at the northeast corner, so its footprint changed from an L to a rectangle. A bay window was added to the west façade. The full-width front porch remained the same. The rear dwelling was replaced by a larger Lshaped one with a south-facing front porch. A one-story garage (or a carport) and multiple free-standing outbuildings were constructed to the north and northeast of the houses. According to the later Sanborn maps and aerial photographs, the layout of the site remained unchanged until at least 1963.

The main house received multiple additions in the 1990s. The existing deck was expanded in 1995, and a small second-story deck with French doors was added to the front façade.11 The entry was altered, and a new gable roof projection was constructed at the front façade; new deck and railings were added ca. 2000.12 The configuration of the west façade was significantly altered, and it appears that the front deck supports were replaced. Dormers were added on the east and west sides of the rear gable. None of the outbuildings are extant today, only the main house and the rear dwelling stands on site.

Figure 17. A photograph on 493 St. John Street from 1951 (Museum on Main). 9 Pleasanton Museum on Main. The name was spelled as “Derndinger” on the document. 10 Livermore Herald, October 13, 1881.
11 Building permits from City of Pleasanton.
12 Personal interview with the property owner, January 14, 2021.

Page 530 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 11

Figures 18 and 19. The house at 493 St. John Street in 1982 (Museum on Main).

Figure 20. 1888 Sanborn map, the subject parcels outlined by the dashed red line.

Page 531 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 12
Figure 21. 1893 Sanborn map, the subject parcels outlined by the dashed red line (Library of Congress).

Figure 22. 1898 Sanborn map, the subject parcels outlined by the dashed red line.

Page 532 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 13
Figure 23. 1903 Sanborn map, the subject parcels outlined by the dashed red line.

Figure 24. 1929 Sanborn map, the subject parcels outlined by the dashed red line (Museum on Main).

Page 533 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 14
Figure 25. 1943 Sanborn map, the subject parcels outlined by the dashed red line (Library of Congress).

Figure 26. 1953 Sanborn map, the subject parcels outlined by the dashed red line (The EDR Aerial Photo Package).

7. HISTORIC CONTEXT13
Located in eastern Alameda County, Pleasanton is bounded by the Diablo Range foothills on the north and south, the coastal Pleasanton Ridge on the west, and the adjacent Livermore Valley on the east. Major water courses include the Arroyo del Valle and Arroyo de la Laguna. The earliest European presence in the vicinity of Pleasanton occurred in 1797. In the early 19th century, the Mexican government granted most of the vicinity of Pleasanton, including the future town site, to members of the Bernal family; the area was inhabited primarily by cattle ranch workers, seasonal hunters, and trappers. With American annexation of California and the Gold Rush 13 Unless noted, largely summarized from Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 9-13 and 83.

Page 534 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 15
in the late 1840s, the Bernal family established permanent homes on their rancho, both to capitalize on the proximity to travel routes and to protect their land claims. The initial settlers constructed adobe homes along the path of the Arroyo del Valle.

Originally called Alisal, the Pleasanton area remained sparsely populated in the 1850s, but news of the impending arrival of the railroad initiated an organized town development and an increase in population in the 1860s. The 1860s subdivisions along the axes of Main Street and the railroad formed the core of the Pleasanton town site.

The arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad sparked a commercial, agricultural, and residential boom in Pleasanton as the community gained greater access to the major regional urban markets of San Francisco and Oakland. Between the 1870s and World War II, Pleasanton became a major regional supplier of commodity crops like grain, livestock, and agricultural products like hay. Local farmers and later major corporate agricultural interests grew or raised grass crops, hops, feed and table grains, market fruits and vegetables, wine grapes, sugar beets, and dairy cows. Pleasanton became a major regional shipping center for grain and hay, as well as a local leader in viticulture. The community also became nationally and internationally known as a center of horse breeding and training by the late nineteenth century. In the early twentieth-century, Pleasanton was also a major regional dairy producer and commercial flower growing site.

Commercial activity in Pleasanton in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries clustered along Main Street and the Central Pacific Railroad line and centered on marketing and shipping agricultural commodities, servicing livestock, and providing retail, financial, legal, medical, and recreational services to residents. Industrial development in Pleasanton was limited, but included a major brickyard operation for Oakland’s Remillard Brick Company, gravel mining, and water supply infrastructure for the Spring Valley Water Company. Residential development on a substantive scale began in Pleasanton after the arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad in 1869, with development peaks in the 1880s and 1890s and the early decades of the twentieth century.14
[…]
Property types associated with post-railroad residential subdivision and development in Pleasanton [ca. 1869-1900] include residences exhibiting nationally popular forms and architectural detailing consistent with the Gothic Revival, Italianate, and Queen Anne styles as well as common nineteenth-century vernacular housing forms. Based on historic map evidence, residential buildings in the downtown neighborhoods of Pleasanton from the period consisted of largely single-story, rectangular or square plan dwellings with small rear dependencies. Toward the later decades of the nineteenth-century, more asymmetrical plan houses consistent with Queen Anne style housing forms appeared in greater numbers. Residential properties typically had one or more single-story, wood-frame outbuildings on the property to shelter horses, wheeled vehicles, poultry, and other uses. Few properties maintained tank houses after 1890.15 Pleasanton incorporated as a city in 1894. In the early 20th century, the community constructed a city hall and established a local high school. World War II brought a small boom in commercial and agricultural activity, spurred by the needs of the war effort and the nearby service members and war workers. The U.S. Navy constructed the Naval Construction Battalion Center in 1943 and later Camp Parks and Camp Shoemaker, just north of Pleasanton. After World War II, commercial and residential development in Pleasanton continued on the outskirts of the downtown area. The former agricultural districts saw development of large-scale research, office, 14 Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 11-12. 15 Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 83.

Page 535 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 16
and industrial complexes in the 1960s. The residential growth of Pleasanton continued until the 1970s; population doubled between 1950 and 1960, and more than quadrupled between 1960 and 1970.

8. ARCHITECT/BUILDER
The research did not reveal any architects or builders associated with the initial design of the building at 475 St.

John Street. According to information provided by Museum on Main, the house at 493 St. John Street was designed and constructed in 1885 by Mr. Derendinger.”16 Joseph Derendinger was recorded as a wheel wright, wood worker, and wagon maker in the 1880s records.17

9. OWNERSHIP/OCCUPANCY HISTORY
According to Museum on Main, the main house at 493 St. John Street was constructed by Mr. Derendinger in 1885.18 Joseph Derendinger was born in France in 1842, and died in Pleasanton, Alameda in 1888. He was married to Magdalena Mohr in 1875.19 His occupation was recorded as wheel wright, wood worker, and wagon maker in the 1880s records.20 A newspaper announcement from 1881 mentioned that Joseph Derendinger’s residence was about to be finished.21 According to the 1916 U.S. Voter Registration records and the 1917-1918 World War I Draft Registration Cards, the Derendinger family continued to live on St. John Street in the early 20th century.22
The property was later purchased by George Trimingham.23 The Trimingham family lived at the 493 St. John Street property from at least 1930 to 1965. The 1940 federal census lists painter Earl Trimingham and his family living at 34 St. John Street. The rear house at 36 St. John Street was also occupied by the members of the same family.24 Earl Trimingham was the mayor and city councilman in Pleasanton from 1937 to 1950. A painting contractor and a World War I veteran, he also served on the Pleasanton Housing Authority board. His obituary in Oakland Tribune mentions his widow, Edith, living at the family home at 493 St. John Street in 1965.25 A house tour brochure from Museum on Main notes that the Trimingham family owned the property in the 1980s.

The earlier occupancy of the 475 St. John property is unclear. According to the 1940s assessment map, the parcel was owned by Mary E. Steane and Lydia G. Steane.26 Although the house number is not listed in the 1920 census, the Steane family lived on St. John Street. The 1930 and 1940 census records also logged the Steane family as occupants at the subject property.27 The building at 475 St. John Street has been used as a restaurant since at least the mid-1970s.28

16 Pleasanton Museum on Main.
17 Voter registers and census data from Ancestry.com.
18 Museum on Main.
19 Sacramento Daily Union, October 11, 1875.
20 Voter registers and census data from Ancestry.com.
21 Livermore Herald, October 13, 1881.
22 Ancestry.com (accessed February 4, 2021).
23 Pleasanton Museum on Main.
24 Ancestry.com.
25 “Trimingham rites slated in Pleasanton,” Oakland Tribune, December 1, 1965. 26 Museum on Main.
27 Ancestry.com.
28 Museum on Main; newspaper ad from The Argus (Fremont, California), October 31, 1976; City of Pleasanton Permit Center.

Page 536 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 17

10. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory background provided below offers an overview of federal and state criteria used to assess historic significance.

National Register of Historic Places Criteria
National Register Bulletin Number 15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, describes the Criteria for Evaluation as being composed of two factors. First, the property must be “associated with an important historic context.”29 The National Register identifies four possible context types, of which at least one must be applicable at the national, state, or local level. As listed under Section 8, “Statement of Significance,” of the NRHP Registration Form, these are:

A. Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

B. Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

C. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction.

D. Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history.30 Second, for a property to qualify under the National Register’s Criteria for Evaluation, it must also retain “historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance.”31 While a property’s significance relates to its role within a specific historic context, its integrity refers to “a property’s physical features and how they relate to its significance.”32 To determine if a property retains the physical characteristics corresponding to its historic context, the National Register has identified seven aspects of integrity:

Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred...

Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property...

Setting is the physical environment of a historic property...

Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property...

Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory...

Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time...

Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.33
29 National Park Service, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, National Register Bulletin 15 (Washington, DC: United States Department of the Interior, 1997), 3.
30 National Park Service, How to Complete the National Register Registration Form, National Register Bulletin 16A (Washington, DC: United States Department of the Interior, 1997), 75.
31 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 15, 3. 32 Ibid., 44.
33 Ibid., 44-45.

Page 537 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 18
Since integrity is based on a property’s significance within a specific historic context, an evaluation of a property’s integrity can only occur after historic significance has been established.34 California Register of Historical Resources Criteria
The California Office of Historic Preservation’s Technical Assistance Series #6, California Register and National Register: A Comparison, outlines the differences between the federal and state processes. The criteria to be used when establishing the significance of a property for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) are very similar, with emphasis on local and state significance. They are:

1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; or

2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or

3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values; or

4. It has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.35
The CRHR requires the establishment of historic significance before integrity is considered. California’s integrity threshold is slightly lower than the federal level. As a result, some resources that are historically significant but do not meet National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) integrity standards may be eligible for listing on the CRHR.36
California’s list of special considerations is shorter and more lenient than the NRHP. It includes some allowances for moved buildings, structures, or objects, as well as lower requirements for proving the significance of resources that are less than 50 years old and a more elaborate discussion of the eligibility of reconstructed buildings.37

In addition to separate evaluations for eligibility for the CRHR, the state automatically lists on the CRHR resources that are listed or determined eligible for the NRHP through a complete evaluation process.38 Integrity
Second, for a property to qualify under the CRHR’s Criteria for Evaluation, it must also retain “historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance.”39 While a property’s significance relates to its role within a specific historic context, its integrity refers to “a property’s physical features and how they relate to its significance.”40 To determine if a property retains the physical characteristics corresponding to its historic 34 Ibid., 45.
35 California Office of Historic Preservation, California Register and National Register: A Comparison, Technical Assistance Series 6, (Sacramento, 2001), 1.
36 California Register and National Register: A Comparison. 37 California Register and National Register: A Comparison, 2. 38 All State Historical Landmarks from number 770 onward are also automatically listed on the California Register. California Office of Historic Preservation, California Register of Historical Resources: The Listing Process, Technical Assistance Series 5 (Sacramento, n.d.), 1. 39 United States Department of the Interior, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, National Register Bulletin, No. 15 (Washington, D.C., 1997), 3.
40 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, 44.

Page 538 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 19
context, the NRHP has identified seven aspects of integrity (identified above under the NRHP criteria), which the CRHR closely follows.41
Local Eligibility
Apart from the “7. Conservation and Open Space Element” of the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025, the City does not have any regulations regarding historic resources, or any other ordinance that identifies local historic resources. The plan sets goals to “designate, preserve, and protect the archaeological and historic resources within the Pleasanton Planning Area: and extablishes the policy to “preserve and rehabilitate those cultural and historic resources which are significant to Pleasanton because of their age, appearance, or history.”42 The policy on the historical and archaeological resources does not include any local criteria for evaluation; rather the City uses those established for the CRHR to evaluate the significance of cultural resources. Therefore, the City relies on the CRHR criteria for determining eligibility of historic resources.

11. SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION
Current Historic Status
The subject parcels have not previously been identified on any state or national historic resources inventory.

According to the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025, both parcels are located within the Downtown Commercial Center which was identified as a heritage neighborhood. The 493 St. John Street property was also identified as a historic structure in the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025. 43 The most recent Downtown Specific
Plan (adopted August 2019), Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement (March 2015), or Pleasanton Limited Scope Historic Resource Survey (August 2015) do not identify the parcels at 475 and 493 St. John Street as historic.
475 St. John Street (APN 94-114-7)
Criterion A/1 – Association with significant events
The main building at 475 St. John Street was constructed pre-1888 during the post-railroad subdivision and development period in Pleasanton that took place from ca. 1869 to 1900. The area remained sparsely populated in the 1850s, but the arrival of the railroad increased the population as subdivisions along the axes of Main Street and the railroad formed the core of the Pleasanton town site in the 1860s. The arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad sparked a commercial, agricultural, and residential boom in Pleasanton. The subject property is associated with early residential development patterns in Pleasanton, specifically with the post-railroad subdivision and development period as one of the earlier residences in downtown. Therefore, the property appears eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion A/1. The period of significance would be 1880s, when the main building was constructed.

Criterion B/2 – Persons
No persons of known historical significance appear to have been associated with the subject property. None of the owners or occupants have been identified as important to the history of Pleasanton or California. Therefore, the building does not appear eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion B/2. 41 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, 1. 42 The City of Pleasanton, Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 (adopted July 21, 2009), pages 7-11 to 7-16, 7-35, 7-36. 43 The City of Pleasanton, Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 (adopted July 21, 2009), pages 7-13 to 7-16.

Page 539 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 20
Criterion C/3 – Architecture and Construction
The main building was originally constructed in the 1880s; however, it does not retain most of its original details or style having been greatly altered over time. It is of common construction and materials with no notable or special attributes, and the structure does not possess high artistic value. No architect, designer or builder has been identified. The main building does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type or architectural style common during post-railroad residential development in Pleasanton. The utilitarian accessory structures are of common construction and materials with no notable or special attributes, and they do not possess high artistic value. Overall, the property does not appear eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion C/3.

Criterion D/4 – Information Potential
Archival research provided no indication that the subject property has the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. The subject property does not appear eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion D/4.

Integrity
The property at 475 St. John Street retains integrity of location since it has not been moved. The property does not retain its integrity of association and feeling since it has not been used as a single-family house since at least the 1970s. The building has received multiple additions and alterations over time and its original form and massing is no longer evident. The building does not retain its scale and does not illustrate the original late 19th century vernacular architecture. The property does not retain sufficient integrity of design, materials, and workmanship. Finally, the integrity of setting has been significantly compromised by the construction of the adjacent hotel to the east and the residential development to the west. Overall, the property at 475 St. John Street does not retain sufficient integrity to communicate its significance under Criterion A/1 for its defined period of significance.
493 St. John Street (APN 94-114-8)
Criterion A/1 – Association with significant events
The main house at 493 St. John Street was constructed in the 1880s during the post-railroad subdivision and development period in Pleasanton that took place from ca. 1869 to 1900. The area remained sparsely populated in the 1850s, but the arrival of the railroad increased the population as subdivisions along the axes of Main Street and the railroad formed the core of the Pleasanton town site in the 1860s. The arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad sparked a commercial, agricultural, and residential boom in Pleasanton. The subject property is associated with early residential development patterns in Pleasanton, specifically with the post-railroad subdivision and development period as one of the earlier residences in downtown. Therefore, the property appears eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion A/1. The period of significance would be 1880s, when the main house was constructed.

The cottage to the north was constructed between 1929 and 1943, replacing an earlier dwelling on site. Neither the cottage nor the more recent accessory structures are associated with significant events of development patterns.

Criterion B/2 – Persons
No persons of known historical significance appear to have been associated with the subject property. The Trimingham family lived at the 493 St. John Street property from at least 1930 to 1965. Earl Trimingham was the mayor and city councilman in Pleasanton from 1937 to 1950. Even though Trimingham was active in administration of Pleasanton during the early to mid-20th century, research has not revealed any information about Trimingham’s contributions being historically important in the city’s development. None of the other

Page 540 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 21
owners or occupants of the main house or the cottage have been identified as important to the history of Pleasanton or California. Therefore, the building does not appear eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion B/2.

Criterion C/3 – Architecture and Construction
Constructed in the 1880s, the main house at 493 St. John Street is an example of a late 19th century vernacular form residential development in Pleasanton. The main building embodies some characteristics of the style common during the post-railroad residential development in Pleasanton including its one-and-a-half-story, wood-frame, side gable massing with a front porch and modest classical detailing. The main house was possibly constructed by its earliest owner, Joseph Derendinger who is not considered a master architect or builder.

The cottage to the north is of common construction and materials with no notable or special attributes, and the structure does not possess high artistic value. No architect, designer or builder has been identified. It does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type or common architectural style. The utilitarian accessory structures are of common construction and materials with no notable or special attributes, they do not possess high artistic value.

Overall, the main house at 493 St. John Street appears eligible for listing on the NRHP and CRHR under Criterion C/3 as an example of a late 19th century vernacular form , post-railroad residential development in Pleasanton.

The period of significance would be 1880s when the property was constructed.

Integrity
The property at 493 St. John Street retains integrity of location since it has not been moved. The property retains its integrity of association and feeling because it has been used for residential purposes since its construction.

The main house has received multiple additions and alterations over time. Even though the original massing and form is still discernable, the house no longer illustrates its late 19th century vernacular architecture. The main entrance was expanded, the window configuration was modified and a deck was added at the front façade, dormers were added to the east, and a horizontal addition expanded the building to the west. The building’s alterations and addition have significantly diminished integrity of design, materials, and workmanship. Integrity of setting has also been significantly compromised by construction of the adjacent hotel to the east and the residential development to the west. Overall, the property does not retain sufficient integrity to communicate its significance under Criteria A/1 and C/3 for its defined period of significance.

12. CONCLUSION
Based on the above evaluation, the subject property at 475 St. John Street in Pleasanton does not appear individually eligible for the NRHP or CRHR as it was not found to possess sufficient integrity under criterion A/1 for its period of significance. Additionally, the property at 493 St. John Street in Pleasanton does not appear individually eligible for the NRHP or CRHR as it was not found to possess sufficient integrity under criteria A/1 and C/3 for its period of significance.

Page 541 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 22

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ancestry.com.

Architectural Resources Group, Inc. Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement. March 2015.

California Office of Historic Preservation. California Register and National Register: A Comparison, Technical Assistance Series 6. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, 2001.

California Office of Historic Preservation. California Register of Historical Resources: The Listing Process.

Technical Assistance Series 5. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, n.d.

City of Pleasanton. Community Development Department.
---. Downtown Specific Plan. Adopted August 2019.
----. Permit Center.
----. Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025. Adopted July 21, 2009.

EDR. The EDR Aerial Photo Package, SCDC Saint John, 475 Saint John Street. August 31, 2020.

Google Earth.

Google Maps.

Historic Aerials by NETR Online. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.

Katherine Petrin Consulting and Architectural Resources Group, Inc. Pleasanton Limited Scope Historic Resources Survey. August 2015.

Livermore Herald.

National Park Service. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, National Register Bulletin 15.

Washington, DC: United States Department of the Interior, 1997.

National Park Service. How to Complete the National Register Registration Form, National Register Bulletin 16A.

Washington, DC: United States Department of the Interior, 1997.

Oakland Tribune.

Pleasanton Museum on Main.

Sacramento Daily Union.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps.

The Argus.

Page 542 of 893 ends

Project Name: 475-493 St. John St. HRE Pleasanton
Historic Resources Evaluation - DRAFT
Project No: HP0932.2101.00
February 25, 2021
treanorhl.com 23

APPENDIX

DPR FORMS

Page 543 of 893 ends

Page 1 of 8 ends

P1. Other Identifier:

DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
*P2. Location: Not for Publication  Unrestricted
*a. County Alameda and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad Date T ; R ; of of Sec ; B.M.
c. Address 475 St. John Street City Pleasanton Zip 94566 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone , mE/ mN e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, decimal degrees, etc., as appropriate) APN 94-114-7
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The subject property at 475 St. John Street is in downtown Pleasanton. Located on the southern side of the block roughly bounded by St. John Street to the south, Main Street to the east, Arroyo del Valle to the north, and the railroad tracks to the west, the subject parcel is close to the commercial center of Pleasanton which lies to the east and south.

Low-rise residential buildings, mostly single-family houses, appear to the west.

The main building on the site, the restaurant, is located nearest St. John Street and has had numerous additions over the years. The additions almost completely surround the original structure which can be identified by the truncated hip roof. Behind the restaurant structure is a large, paved patio area surrounded by several accessory structures. (See Continuation Sheet.)
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List
attributes and codes)
*P4. Resources Present:  Building
Structure Object Site District
Element of District Other
(Isolates, etc.)
P5b. Description of Photo: (view,
date, accession #)
The front (south) façade, TreanorHL,
January 2021.
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: Historic Prehistoric
Both
Pre-1888, Sanborn maps
*P7. Owner and Address:

*P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation,
and address)
TreanorHL
460 Bush Street San Francisco, CA
*P9. Date Recorded: Feb 25, 2021
*P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
Intensive survey
*P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey
report and other sources, or enter "none.") TreanorHL, 475-493 St. John Street Pleasanton, CA, Historic Resources Evaluation – Draft, February 25, 2021
*Attachments: NONE Location Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List):

P5a. Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.)

Page 544 of 893 ends

*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 475 St. John Street *NRHP Status Code

Page 2 of 8 ends

DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name:

B2. Common Name: 475 St. John Street
B3. Original Use: Residential B4. Present Use: Commercial *B5. Architectural Style: Vernacular
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Constructed pre-1888. (See Continuation Sheet.)
*B7. Moved?  No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

B9a. Architect: b. Builder:
*B10. Significance: Theme Area
Period of Significance. Property Type Applicable Criteria (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) Located in eastern Alameda County, Pleasanton is bounded by the Diablo Range foothills on the north and south, the coastal Pleasanton Ridge on the west, and the adjacent Livermore Valley on the east. Major water courses include the Arroyo del Valle and Arroyo de la Laguna. The earliest European presence in the vicinity of Pleasanton occurred in 1797. In the early 19th century, the Mexican government granted most of the vicinity of Pleasanton, including the future town site, to members of the Bernal family; the area was inhabited primarily by cattle ranch workers, seasonal hunters, and trappers. With American annexation of California and the Gold Rush in the late 1840s, the Bernal family established permanent homes on their rancho, both to capitalize on the proximity to travel routes and to protect their land claims. The initial settlers constructed adobe homes along the path of the Arroyo del Valle. (See Continuation Sheet.)
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References:

See Continuation Sheets.

B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: TreanorHL
*Date of Evaluation: February 25, 2021

Page 545 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 475 St. John Street

Page 3 of 8 ends

*P3a. Description, Continued:

Constructed pre-1888 this one-story over partial basement, restaurant building is complex in plan. The wood-frame structure has horizontal wood siding with simple stucco panels present at the front and east side additions. A small portion of the front façade, around the entry door also features stucco cladding.

The complex roof structure includes a truncated hip section with gable end roofs projecting from the hip along with several flat and shed roof sections. Asphalt shingles clad the sloped roof sections while rollasphalt roofing clads the flat sections. The primary window type is vinyl-sash, six-over-six, single-hung.

Canvas awnings shelter some of the windows near the front of the building. Concrete steps, flanked by ornate metal railings, lead up to the entry door. The multi-lite wood door is sheltered by a canvas awning.

A dining patio and ramp stand to the northwest of the restaurant. The ramp accesses an entry off the patio.

An interior brick chimney stack is visible at the east side of the structure. Notable features include the flat roof additions at the southwest corner of the building, the truncated hip roof of the original structure and the numerous other additions. Alterations to the restaurant include window replacements and numerous small additions off every façade. The overall condition of the restaurant is good.

The west façade of the building features a hip roof addition at the southern end. This addition has a multilite fixed vinyl-sash window. The roof of the addition is set below the roofline of the original structure.

Page 546 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 475 St. John Street

Page 4 of 8 ends

The northern side of the hip roof addition has a single-hung multi-lite vinyl-sash window. A flat roof addition, with a single door, is located at the southern end of the addition while a metal electrical enclosure is located at the northern end. The northwest corner of the original structure is visible. A single opening on the north façade of the original structure has been covered with a piece of wood. Off the rear gable end section of the building is an addition constructed of concrete masonry units. This addition is a single-story and is enclosed with wood lattice on the southern end, where a paneled door provides access to the space. Mechanical units are housed on the flat roof. Another flat roof addition is located near the north end of the building and features a mix of cladding materials – vertical siding, vinyl panels and wood lattice. The northern most shed roof addition is raised above the ground and accessed by wood stairs. A single door punctuates the horizontal cladding material.

The south and east façades.

Two of the accessory structures on the subject parcel.

Page 547 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 475 St. John Street

Page 5 of 8 ends

*B6. Construction History, Continued:

In the 1860s, with the impending arrival of the railroad, large property owners in the vicinity of the Pleasanton town began subdividing property into lots and laying out streets. Owned by John Kottinger, the land bounded by Division Street on the south, the Arroyo del Valle on the north, and Main Street on the east was divided into a series of blocks and lots in 1868. This division includes the present-day St.

John and St. Mary streets between Main and Division streets.1 According to the Sanborn maps of the area, the subject block and its surroundings were largely developed by 1888: Main Street had a series of commercial buildings while the side streets were mostly residential.

Garatti Winery established a large facility to the northwest of the subject property by 1939 and became one of the largest businesses in Pleasanton in the mid-20th century.2 The winery complex was replaced by
housing in the early 1990s.3
The main building at 475 St. John Street first appears on the 1888 Sanborn map as a one-story wood frame dwelling. Irregular in plan, the dwelling had a partial-width front porch and an L-shaped rear porch.

Two smaller sheds appeared to the northeast. Two additional accessory structures were constructed between 1898 and 1903, labeled as a hen coop and a chicken incubator on the 1903 Sanborn map. The dwelling received a small one-story addition to the west and had only one outbuilding in 1943. A onestory garage was constructed to the north by 1953, the outbuilding was demolished, the western addition was expanded, and the rear porch was enlarged and enclosed. It appears that the site layout and the building’s footprint had not changed until 1963. The main house received another porch addition in 1973, a kitchen addition in 1988, and a new front deck in 1989. The front deck was expanded once again in 1995.4

According to the permits on file at the City of Pleasanton, the building received various additions and alterations over time. See below for the summary.5
1973 A porch was added.
1977 The garage door was replaced with a glass door and grill. 1988 Reroofing, 640 sq. ft. kitchen addition, and interior remodel. 1989 A front deck and awnings were added to the southwest corner. The restaurant interior was expanded by covering this. A perimeter wrought iron fence and archway was constructed, and monumental sign was added.
1995 A 46’ by 24’ deck was added to the existing deck.
*B10. Significance, Continued:

The arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad sparked a commercial, agricultural, and residential boom in Pleasanton as the community gained greater access to the major regional urban markets of San

Page 548 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 475 St. John Street

Page 6 of 8 ends

Francisco and Oakland. Between the 1870s and World War II, Pleasanton became a major regional supplier of commodity crops like grain, livestock, and agricultural products like hay. Local farmers and later major corporate agricultural interests grew or raised grass crops, hops, feed and table grains, market fruits and vegetables, wine grapes, sugar beets, and dairy cows. Pleasanton became a major regional shipping center for grain and hay, as well as a local leader in viticulture. The community also became nationally and internationally known as a center of horse breeding and training by the late nineteenth century. In the early twentieth-century, Pleasanton was also a major regional dairy producer and commercial flower growing site.

Commercial activity in Pleasanton in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries clustered along Main Street and the Central Pacific Railroad line and centered on marketing and shipping agricultural commodities, servicing livestock, and providing retail, financial, legal, medical, and recreational services to residents. Industrial development in Pleasanton was limited, but included a major brickyard operation for Oakland’s Remillard Brick Company, gravel mining, and water supply infrastructure for the Spring Valley Water Company. Residential development on a substantive scale began in Pleasanton after the arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad in 1869, with development peaks in the 1880s and 1890s and the early decades of the twentieth century.6 […]
Property types associated with post-railroad residential subdivision and development in Pleasanton [ca. 1869-1900] include residences exhibiting nationally popular forms and architectural detailing consistent with the Gothic Revival, Italianate, and Queen Anne styles as well as common nineteenthcentury vernacular housing forms. Based on historic map evidence, residential buildings in the downtown neighborhoods of Pleasanton from the period consisted of largely single-story, rectangular or square plan dwellings with small rear dependencies. Toward the later decades of the nineteenthcentury, more asymmetrical plan houses consistent with Queen Anne style housing forms appeared in greater numbers. Residential properties typically had one or more single-story, wood-frame outbuildings on the property to shelter horses, wheeled vehicles, poultry, and other uses. Few properties maintained tank houses after 1890.7
Pleasanton incorporated as a city in 1894. In the early 20th century, the community constructed a city hall and established a local high school. World War II brought a small boom in commercial and agricultural activity, spurred by the needs of the war effort and the nearby service members and war workers. The U.S. Navy constructed the Naval Construction Battalion Center in 1943 and later Camp Parks and Camp Shoemaker, just north of Pleasanton. After World War II, commercial and residential development in Pleasanton continued on the outskirts of the downtown area. The former agricultural districts saw development of large-scale research, office, and industrial complexes in the 1960s. The residential growth of Pleasanton continued until the 1970s; population doubled between 1950 and 1960, and more than quadrupled between 1960 and 1970.

Architect/Builder
The research did not reveal any architects or builders associated with the initial design of the building at 475 St. John Street.

Architectural Style
Lacking a clear architectural style, the main building at 475 St. John Street is vernacular in nature.

Page 549 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 475 St. John Street

Page 7 of 8 ends

Constructed in the 1880s as a single-family house, the building currently does not illustrate a definite architectural style. The accessory structures on the parcel are utilitarian.

Occupants
The earlier occupancy of the 475 St. John property is unclear. According to the 1940s assessment map, the parcel was owned by Mary E. Steane and Lydia G. Steane.8 Although the house number is not listed in the 1920 census, the Steane family lived on St. John Street. The 1930 and 1940 census records also logged the Steane family as occupants at the subject property.9 The building at 475 St. John Street has been used as a restaurant since at least the mid-1970s.10

Current Historic Status
The subject parcel has not previously been identified on any state or national historic resources inventory.

According to the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025, it is located within the Downtown Commercial Center which was identified as a “heritage neighborhood.” The most recent Downtown Specific Plan (adopted August 2019), Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement (March 2015), or Pleasanton Limited Scope Historic Resource Survey (August 2015) do not identify the property as historic.

Significance Evaluation – National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) & California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Evaluation11
Criterion A/1 – Association with significant events
The main building at 475 St. John Street was constructed pre-1888 during the post-railroad subdivision and development period in Pleasanton that took place from ca. 1869 to 1900. The area remained sparsely populated in the 1850s, but the arrival of the railroad increased the population as subdivisions along the axes of Main Street and the railroad formed the core of the Pleasanton town site in the 1860s. The arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad sparked a commercial, agricultural, and residential boom in Pleasanton.

The subject property is associated with early residential development patterns in Pleasanton, specifically with the post-railroad subdivision and development period as one of the earlier residences in downtown.

Therefore, the property appears eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion A/1. The period of significance would be 1880s, when the main building was constructed.

Criterion B/2 – Persons
No persons of known historical significance appear to have been associated with the subject property.

None of the owners or occupants have been identified as important to the history of Pleasanton or California. Therefore, the building does not appear eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion B/2.

Criterion C/3 – Architecture and Construction
The main building was originally constructed in the 1880s; however, it does not retain most of its original details or style having been greatly altered over time. It is of common construction and materials with no notable or special attributes, and the structure does not possess high artistic value. No architect, designer or builder has been identified. The main building does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type or architectural style common during post-railroad residential development in Pleasanton. The utilitarian accessory structures are of common construction and materials with no notable or special attributes, and they do not possess high artistic value. Overall, the property does not appear eligible for listing on the

Page 550 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 475 St. John Street

Page 8 of 8 ends

NRHP or CRHR under Criterion C/3.

In conclusion, the subject property at 475 St. John Street in Pleasanton does not appear individually eligible for the NRHP or CRHR as it was not found to possess sufficient integrity under criterion A/1 for its period of significance.
*B12. References (Endnotes):
1 Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement (March 2015), 81. 2 Sanborn maps; EDR, The EDR Aerial Photo Package, SCDC Saint John, 475 Saint John Street (August 31, 2020); The City of Pleasanton, Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 (adopted July 21, 2009), 12-8. 3 Historic Aerials by NETR Online.
4 Sanborn maps; The EDR Aerial Photo Package; City of Pleasanton Permit Center. 5 City of Pleasanton Permit Center.
6 Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 11-12. 7 Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 83.
8 Museum on Main.
9 Ancestry.com.
10 Museum on Main; newspaper ad from The Argus (Fremont, California), October 31, 1976; City of Pleasanton Permit Center.
11 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin: How to apply the National Register criteria for evaluation, 75, https://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm (accessed April 26, 2017); California Office of Historic Preservation, California Register and National Register: A Comparison, Technical Assistance Series 6 (Sacramento, 2001), 1.

Page 551 of 893 ends

Page 1 of 11 ends

P1. Other Identifier:

DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
*P2. Location: Not for Publication  Unrestricted
*a. County Alameda and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad Date T ; R ; of of Sec ; B.M.
c. Address 493 St. John Street City Pleasanton Zip 94566 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone , mE/ mN e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, decimal degrees, etc., as appropriate) APN 94-114-8
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The subject property at 493 St. John Street is in downtown Pleasanton. Located on the southern side of the block roughly bounded by St. John Street to the south, Main Street to the east, Arroyo del Valle to the north, and the railroad tracks to the west, the subject parcel is close to the commercial center of Pleasanton which lies to the east and south.

Low-rise residential buildings, mostly single-family houses, appear to the west.

The large deep lot features a main house (nearest to St. John Street), a cottage to the northwest of the house, and three accessory buildings in the rear yard. Behind the gated rear yard is a large, paved parking lot. This parking area serves the restaurant to the east. Constructed prior to 1888, this two-story, over partial basement house is irregular in plan.

The vernacular wood-frame structure has horizontal wood siding and a steeply pitched, asphalt shingle-clad, crossgable roof with dormers featuring a shed and gable roofs. (See Continuation Sheet.) *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List
attributes and codes)
*P4. Resources Present:  Building
Structure Object Site District
Element of District Other
(Isolates, etc.)
P5b. Description of Photo: (view,
date, accession #)
The front (south) and east façades,
TreanorHL, January 2021.
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: Historic Prehistoric
Both
1880s, Sanborn maps
*P7. Owner and Address:

P5a. Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.)

Page 552 of 893 ends

*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 493 St. John Street *NRHP Status Code

Page 2 of 11 ends

DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name:

B2. Common Name: 493 St. John Street
B3. Original Use: Residential B4. Present Use: Residential *B5. Architectural Style: Late 19th century vernacular form residential development *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Constructed in the 1880s. (See Continuation Sheet.)
*B7. Moved?  No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

B9a. Architect: b. Builder: Joseph Derendinger
*B10. Significance: Theme Area
Period of Significance. Property Type Applicable Criteria (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) Located in eastern Alameda County, Pleasanton is bounded by the Diablo Range foothills on the north and south, the coastal Pleasanton Ridge on the west, and the adjacent Livermore Valley on the east. Major water courses include the Arroyo del Valle and Arroyo de la Laguna. The earliest European presence in the vicinity of Pleasanton occurred in 1797. In the early 19th century, the Mexican government granted most of the vicinity of Pleasanton, including the future town site, to members of the Bernal family; the area was inhabited primarily by cattle ranch workers, seasonal hunters, and trappers. With American annexation of California and the Gold Rush in the late 1840s, the Bernal family established permanent homes on their rancho, both to capitalize on the proximity to travel routes and to protect their land claims. The initial settlers constructed adobe homes along the path of the Arroyo del Valle. (See Continuation Sheet.)
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References:

See Continuation Sheets.

B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: TreanorHL
*Date of Evaluation: February 25, 2021

Page 553 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 3 of 11 ends

*P3a. Description, Continued:

The primary window type is vinyl-sash, nine-over-nine, single-hung. Decorative shutters flank many of the windows. A full-width entry porch with columns adorns the front (south) façade with a connecting deck wrapping around to the west side of the structure. A modest gable roof projection supported by round columns shelters the main entrance which consists of a paneled wood door and sidelights. The wood railing with turned balusters at the porch is identical to the railing at the second-floor deck. Notable features include the front porch, the enclosed eaves, the cornice returns at the eaves, the two interior chimney stacks, and the wood railings. Alterations to the main house include window replacement, relocation of the main entrance door, siding replacement, the installation of new railings and columns at the front façade, and numerous additions. A detached one-story, wood-frame cottage stands northwest of the main house. Three other detached structures are located behind the main house as well. Located around a paved parking area these prefabricated structures serve as a gym space, storage, and a detached garage. The overall condition of the main house, cottage and accessory structures is good.

Main House
The entrance to the house is located to the west end of the street facing façade of the main house. The enclosed entrance takes up a small portion of the original porch and projects from the original façade of the house. East of the entry are three windows with wide trim and a decorative crosshead. Each window is flanked by shutters. Round columns support the overhang at the porch area. Centered on the second floor is a wide shed roof dormer. A paired multi-lite French door provides access to the deck. A single, multilite window stands to each side of the door.

The dominant feature of the north façade is the second floor balcony supported by round columns. The balcony shelters the rear entrance which is slightly off center on the first floor. A single French door accesses the balcony. The balcony railing matches the railings on the front of the building. A single-hung window is east of the rear entry door.

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 4 of 11 ends

one, double-hung and fixed wood-sash. Shutters flank all windows. An almost full-width porch with square wood supports shelters the main entrance, which consists of a wood panel door. The entrance door is centered on the main (south) façade with a single window to each side. The east façade has three single windows and a set of paired windows, as well as a paneled door accessed by wood stairs and a ramp. The north façade has a window centered on the small rear gable end addition, while a pair of fixed windows and a flush door are present on the cross-gable portion of the building. Wood stairs access this door. A pair of fixed windows and two single-hung windows punctuate the west façade. Notable features include the entry porch, the wood brackets at the eaves, the exposed rafter tails, the decorative shutters, and the wide flat trim at windows. Alterations to the cottage are minimal and limited to additions off the rear (north) side of the structure.

Left, the front (south) façade of the cottage; right, the east façade of the cottage.

Accessory Structures
Three small, prefabricated structures are in the north east corner of the yard around a paved parking area.

These accessory buildings were added to the site over the last five years. The single-story structures have metal-clad hipped and flat roofs as well as vinyl horizontal siding. The western most building has a single door on the west façade, the centrally located structure has a garage door on the southern façade, while the eastern most unit has a mix of window and door openings on three sides. All accessory buildings are in good condition.

The accessory structures on the parcel.

Page 555 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 5 of 11 ends

*B6. Construction History, Continued:

Garatti Winery established a large facility to the northwest of the subject property by 1939 and became one of the largest businesses in Pleasanton in the mid-20th century.2 The winery complex was replaced by
housing in the early 1990s.3
According to the material received from Museum on Main, the house at 493 St. John Street was designed and constructed in 1885 by Mr. Derendinger.”4
A newspaper announcement from 1881 states that Joseph
Derendinger’s residence was about to be finished.5 The building first appears on the 1888 Sanborn map, so it was possibly constructed in the early 1880s.

By 1943, the layout of the parcel and the main house was modified significantly. The main house received an addition at the northeast corner, so its footprint changed from an L to a rectangle. A bay window was added to the west façade. The full-width front porch remained the same. The rear dwelling was replaced by a larger L-shaped one with a south-facing front porch. A one-story garage (or a carport) and multiple free-standing outbuildings were constructed to the north and northeast of the houses.

According to the later Sanborn maps and aerial photographs, the layout of the site remained unchanged until at least 1963.

The main house received multiple additions in the 1990s. The existing deck was expanded in 1995, and a small second-story deck with French doors was added to the front façade.6 The entry was altered, and a
new gable roof projection was constructed at the front façade; new deck and railings were added ca. 2000.7
The configuration of the west façade was significantly altered, and it appears that the front deck supports were replaced. Dormers were added on the east and west sides of the rear gable. None of the outbuildings are extant today, only the main house and the rear dwelling stands on site.

Page 556 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 6 of 11 ends

A photograph on 493 St. John Street from 1951 (Museum on Main).

The house at 493 St. John Street in 1982 (Museum on Main). *B10. Significance, Continued:

Page 557 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 7 of 11 ends

nineteenth century. In the early twentieth-century, Pleasanton was also a major regional dairy producer and commercial flower growing site.

Commercial activity in Pleasanton in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries clustered along Main Street and the Central Pacific Railroad line and centered on marketing and shipping agricultural commodities, servicing livestock, and providing retail, financial, legal, medical, and recreational services to residents. Industrial development in Pleasanton was limited, but included a major brickyard operation for Oakland’s Remillard Brick Company, gravel mining, and water supply infrastructure for the Spring Valley Water Company. Residential development on a substantive scale began in Pleasanton after the arrival of the Central Pacific Railroad in 1869, with development peaks in the 1880s and 1890s and the early decades of the twentieth century.8 […]
Property types associated with post-railroad residential subdivision and development in Pleasanton [ca. 1869-1900] include residences exhibiting nationally popular forms and architectural detailing consistent with the Gothic Revival, Italianate, and Queen Anne styles as well as common nineteenthcentury vernacular housing forms. Based on historic map evidence, residential buildings in the downtown neighborhoods of Pleasanton from the period consisted of largely single-story, rectangular or square plan dwellings with small rear dependencies. Toward the later decades of the nineteenthcentury, more asymmetrical plan houses consistent with Queen Anne style housing forms appeared in greater numbers. Residential properties typically had one or more single-story, wood-frame outbuildings on the property to shelter horses, wheeled vehicles, poultry, and other uses. Few properties maintained tank houses after 1890.9
Pleasanton incorporated as a city in 1894. In the early 20th century, the community constructed a city hall and established a local high school. World War II brought a small boom in commercial and agricultural activity, spurred by the needs of the war effort and the nearby service members and war workers. The U.S. Navy constructed the Naval Construction Battalion Center in 1943 and later Camp Parks and Camp Shoemaker, just north of Pleasanton. After World War II, commercial and residential development in Pleasanton continued on the outskirts of the downtown area. The former agricultural districts saw development of large-scale research, office, and industrial complexes in the 1960s. The residential growth of Pleasanton continued until the 1970s; population doubled between 1950 and 1960, and more than quadrupled between 1960 and 1970.

Architect/Builder
According to information provided by Museum on Main, the house at 493 St. John Street was designed and constructed in 1885 by Mr. Derendinger.”10 Joseph Derendinger was recorded as a wheel wright, wood worker, and wagon maker in the 1880s records.11
Architectural Style
The main house at 493 St. John Street was identified as a late 19th century vernacular form residential development by the City of Pleasanton.12
Late nineteenth-century residential development in Pleasanton included several wood-frame, vernacular housing forms common in the period. Some of the examples display architectural ornament and detailing consistent with popular recognized styles, though most are architecturally modest.

Page 558 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 8 of 11 ends

Vernacular housing forms in Pleasanton from this period include three distinct types: small, singlestory, ell-shaped dwellings, one or one-and-a-half-story side gable dwellings, and one or one-and-ahalf-story end dwellings. The most numerous are the one-and-a-half-story, wood-frame, side gable dwellings, typically measuring a single room deep. These properties may have had modest classical or Greek Revival detailing such as cornice returns on gable ends, though most surviving examples retain little ornament. The dwellings typically had a symmetrical façade with a slightly off-center main entrance, and full-length, attached front porch.13 The cottage at 493 St. John Street is a modest vernacular dwelling without a definite architectural style.

The accessory structures on the parcel are utilitarian.

Occupants
According to Museum on Main, the main house at 493 St. John Street was constructed by Mr.

Derendinger in 1885.14 Joseph Derendinger was born in France in 1842, and died in Pleasanton, Alameda in 1888. He was married to Magdalena Mohr in 1875.15 His occupation was recorded as wheel wright, wood worker, and wagon maker in the 1880s records.16 A newspaper announcement from 1881 mentioned that Joseph Derendinger’s residence was about to be finished.17 According to the 1916 U.S.

Voter Registration records and the 1917-1918 World War I Draft Registration Cards, the Derendinger family continued to live on St. John Street in the early 20th century.18 The property was later purchased by George Trimingham.19 The Trimingham family lived at the 493 St.

John Street property from at least 1930 to 1965. The 1940 federal census lists painter Earl Trimingham and his family living at 34 St. John Street. The rear house at 36 St. John Street was also occupied by the members of the same family.20 Earl Trimingham was the mayor and city councilman in Pleasanton from 1937 to 1950. A painting contractor and a World War I veteran, he also served on the Pleasanton Housing Authority board. His obituary in Oakland Tribune mentions his widow, Edith, living at the family home at 493 St. John Street in 1965.21 A house tour brochure from Museum on Main notes that the Trimingham family owned the property in the 1980s.

Current Historic Status
The subject parcel has not previously been identified on any state or national historic resources inventory.

According to the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025, it is located within the Downtown Commercial Center which was identified as a “heritage neighborhood.” The property was also identified as a historic structure in the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025.
22 The most recent Downtown Specific Plan
(adopted August 2019), Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement (March 2015), or Pleasanton Limited Scope Historic Resource Survey (August 2015) do not identify the parcel as historic.

Significance Evaluation – National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) & California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Evaluation23
Criterion A/1 – Association with significant events
The main house at 493 St. John Street was constructed in the 1880s during the post-railroad subdivision and development period in Pleasanton that took place from ca. 1869 to 1900. The area remained sparsely populated in the 1850s, but the arrival of the railroad increased the population as subdivisions along the axes of Main Street and the railroad formed the core of the Pleasanton town site in the 1860s. The arrival

Page 559 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 9 of 11 ends

of the Central Pacific Railroad sparked a commercial, agricultural, and residential boom in Pleasanton.

Therefore, the property appears eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion A/1. The period of significance would be 1880s, when the main house was constructed.

The cottage to the north was constructed between 1929 and 1943, replacing an earlier dwelling on site.

Neither the cottage nor the more recent accessory structures are associated with significant events of development patterns.

None of the other owners or occupants of the main house or the cottage have been identified as important to the history of Pleasanton or California. Therefore, the building does not appear eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion B/2.

Criterion C/3 – Architecture and Construction
Constructed in the 1880s, the main house at 493 St. John Street is an example of a late 19th century vernacular form residential development in Pleasanton. The main building embodies some characteristics of the style common during the post-railroad residential development in Pleasanton including its one-anda-half-story, wood-frame, side gable massing with a front porch and modest classical detailing. The main house was possibly constructed by its earliest owner, Joseph Derendinger who is not considered a master architect or builder.

It does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type or common architectural style. The utilitarian accessory structures are of common construction and materials with no notable or special attributes, they do not possess high artistic value.

Overall, the main house at 493 St. John Street appears eligible for listing on the NRHP and CRHR under Criterion C/3 as an example of a late 19th century vernacular form, post-railroad residential development in Pleasanton. The period of significance would be 1880s when the property was constructed.

Integrity
The property at 493 St. John Street retains integrity of location since it has not been moved. The property

Page 560 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 10 of 11 ends

retains its integrity of association and feeling because it has been used for residential purposes since its construction. The main house has received multiple additions and alterations over time. Even though the original massing and form is still discernable, the house no longer illustrates its late 19th century vernacular architecture. The main entrance was expanded, the window configuration was modified, and a deck was added at the front façade, dormers were added to the east, and a horizontal addition expanded the building to the west. The building’s alterations and addition have significantly diminished integrity of design, materials, and workmanship. Integrity of setting has also been significantly compromised by nearby residential and commercial development. Overall, the property does not retain sufficient integrity to communicate its significance under Criteria A/1 and C/3 for its defined period of significance.

In conclusion, the subject property at 493 St. John Street in Pleasanton does not appear individually eligible for the NRHP or CRHR as it was not found to possess sufficient integrity under criteria A/1 and C/3 for its period of significance.
*B12. References (Endnotes):
1 Architectural Resources Group, Inc., Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement (March 2015), 81. 2 Sanborn maps; EDR, The EDR Aerial Photo Package, SCDC Saint John, 475 Saint John Street (August 31, 2020); The City of Pleasanton, Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 (adopted July 21, 2009), 12-8. 3 Historic Aerials by NETR Online.
4 Pleasanton Museum on Main. The name was spelled as “Derndinger” on the document. 5 Livermore Herald, October 13, 1881.
6 Building permits from City of Pleasanton.
7 Personal interview with the property owner, January 14, 2021. 8 Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 11-12. 9 Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 83.
10 Pleasanton Museum on Main.
11 Voter registers and census data from Ancestry.com.
12 Email communication with City of Pleasanton, Community Development Department, December 11, 2020. 13 Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement, 85-86. 14 Museum on Main.
15 Sacramento Daily Union, October 11, 1875.
16 Voter registers and census data from Ancestry.com.
17 Livermore Herald, October 13, 1881.
18 Ancestry.com (accessed February 4, 2021).
19 Pleasanton Museum on Main.
20 Ancestry.com.
21 “Trimingham rites slated in Pleasanton,” Oakland Tribune, December 1, 1965.

Page 561 of 893 ends

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 493 St. John Street

Page 11 of 11 ends

22 The City of Pleasanton, Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 (adopted July 21, 2009), pages 7-13 to 7-16. 23 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin: How to apply the National Register criteria for evaluation, 75, https://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm (accessed April 26, 2017); California Office of Historic Preservation, California Register and National Register: A Comparison, Technical Assistance Series 6 (Sacramento, 2001), 1.

Page 562 of 893 ends

Appendix C
Archaeological Resources Assessment
The Archaeological Resources Assessment contains sensitive information pertaining to the location of archaeological resources and is confidential. The Archaeological Resources Assessment shall be kept on file with the City of Pleasanton Community Development Department.

Page 563 of 893 ends

Appendix D
Geotechnical Investigation

Page 564 of 893 ends

GEOTECHNICAL STUDY

PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 2, 2022
PROJECT PA20.1055.00
SUBMITTED TO:

Robson Homes
2185 The Alameda, Suite 150
San Jose, CA 95126
PREPARED BY:

Geo-Logic Associates
dba Pacific Geotechnical Engineering
6300 San Ignacio Avenue, Suite A
San Jose, California 95119
(408) 778-2818

Page 565 of 893 ends

GEOTECHNICAL STUDY

PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................ 1

1.2 INFORMATION PROVIDED .................................................................................................. 2

1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES.................................................................................... 2 2 SITE INVESTIGATION........................................................................................................ 4

2.1 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION............................................................................................... 4

2.1.1 Exploratory Drill Holes............................................................................................ 4

2.1.2 Cone Penetration Test Probes................................................................................ 4

2.2 LABORATORY TESTING........................................................................................................ 5 3 FINDINGS......................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS........................................................................................................ 6

3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................. 6

3.3 GROUNDWATER.................................................................................................................. 7

3.4 VARIATIONS IN SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS........................................................................ 7 4 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................................... 8

4.1 EARTHQUAKE FAULTING..................................................................................................... 8

4.2 GROUND ACCELERATIONS .................................................................................................. 8

4.3 SEISMICITY .......................................................................................................................... 9

4.4 LIQUEFACTION.................................................................................................................... 9

4.5 LATERAL SPREADING AND CREEK BANK STABILITY .......................................................... 10

4.6 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS......................................................................................... 12 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................... 13

5.1 GROUND RUPTURE ........................................................................................................... 13

5.2 SEISMIC SHAKING.............................................................................................................. 13

5.3 LIQUEFACTION.................................................................................................................. 13

5.4 SLOPE STABILITY AND LATERAL DEFORMATIONS............................................................. 13

5.5 CREEK BANK EROSION ...................................................................................................... 14

5.6 EXPANSION POTENTIAL OF SURFICIAL SOILS.................................................................... 14

5.7 EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................... 14 6 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................ 16

6.1 BUILDING SET-BACK.......................................................................................................... 16

6.2 EARTHWORK ..................................................................................................................... 16

6.2.1 Site Preparation, Clearing and Stripping............................................................... 16

6.2.2 Excavation, Temporary Construction Slopes, and Shoring................................... 16

6.2.3 Subgrade Preparation ........................................................................................... 17

6.2.4 Materials for Fill .................................................................................................... 17

6.2.5 Engineered Fill Placement and Compaction......................................................... 18

6.2.6 Utility Trench Backfill ............................................................................................ 18

Page 566 of 893 ends

6.2.7 Considerations for Soil Moisture and Seepage Control........................................ 19

6.2.8 Wet Weather Construction................................................................................... 19

6.3 FOUNDATIONS .................................................................................................................. 19

6.3.1 General.................................................................................................................. 19

6.3.2 Post-tensioned Slabs (Residential Buildings)........................................................ 20

6.3.3 Structural Mats (Commercial Buildings)............................................................... 21

6.3.4 Grid Foundations (Commercial Buildings) ............................................................ 21

6.3.5 Conventional Footings (Retaining Walls, etc.)...................................................... 22

6.4 CONCRETE SLABS-ON-GRADE ........................................................................................... 23

6.4.1 Interior Slabs-on-grade ......................................................................................... 23

6.4.2 Exterior Concrete Slabs-on-grade......................................................................... 23

6.5 RETAINING WALLS ............................................................................................................ 24

6.6 VEHICLE PAVEMENTS........................................................................................................ 25

6.7 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE........................................................................... 26

6.8 STITCH PIERS ALONG EXISTING CREEK BANK ................................................................... 26 7 PLAN REVIEW, EARTHWORK AND FOUNDATION OBSERVATION..................................... 28 8 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................. 29 Figures
Figure 1 Site Plan – Existing Development
Figure 2 Site Plan – Proposed Development
Figure 3 Locations of Project Site and Zone 7 Monitoring Well 16P5 Figure 4 Depth to Groundwater, Zone 7 Well 16P5
Figure 5 Recommended Building Setback
Figure 6 Post-tensioned Slab Typical Section
Appendix A - Keys to Soil Classification, Drill Hole Logs, and CPT Plots Keys to Soil Classification (Fine and Coarse Grained Soils) Log of Exploratory Drill Holes (DH-1 through DH-4)
CPT Plots (CPT-1 through CPT-3)
Appendix B – Laboratory Test Data
Figure B-1 Atterberg Limits Summary Report
Figure B-2 Particle Size Analysis Test Report
Figure B-3 R-value Test Result
CERCO Analytical Report and Test Results
Appendix C – Results of Liquefaction Analyses
Appendix D – Results of Slope Stability and Lateral Deformation Analyses

Page 567 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 1
June 2, 2022
1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical study for the proposed residential development on two adjoining parcels located at 475 and 493 St. John Street in Pleasanton, California. The combined area of the two parcels is approximately 2.3 acres. The Assessor Parcel Numbers of the parcels are 94-114-7 and 94-114-8. The combined parcels are referenced as the “property,” “site,” or “project area” in this report. The approximate location of the project site is shown on the Vicinity Map included with Figures 1 and 2 of this report. Figure 1 shows a layout of the existing site conditions. Figure 2 shows a layout of the currently proposed development.

This report presents our findings, conclusions, and geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the project. These findings, conclusions, and recommendations are based on information collected and reviewed during this study. The conclusions and recommendations in this report should not be extrapolated to other areas or used for other projects without our review.

This report also addresses comments from the City of Pleasanton (City) in their review letter dated February 25, 2022, and discussions in a meeting between the City, Robson Homes (project developer), Ruggeri Jensen Azar (RJA, project civil engineer), and our firm (project geotechnical engineer) on March 15, 2022.

1.1 Project Description
The 475 St. John Street parcel is currently occupied by the Barone’s Restaurant building in the southern portion and the 493 St. John Street parcel is occupied by a residence in the southwestern portion. The northern approximately 90 to 100 feet of the two parcels are occupied by the Arroyo del Valle Creek. The remainder of the 475 St. John Street parcel is occupied by miscellaneous structures, patio, and lawn. The remainder of the 493 St. John Street parcel is occupied by a paved parking lot.

As presently planned, the existing residence will remain and the rest of the site will be developed with fourteen single-family residential lots (Lots 1 through 14) and a commercial lot (Lot 15).

Associated improvements will include paved on-site streets, underground utilities, and landscaping. The proposed residential buildings with attached garages will each be a two-story, wood-framed structure with a basement at about 5 feet below ground surface. The buildings will be supported on post-tensioned slab foundations. The below-grade perimeter building walls will serve as retaining walls. Other site retaining walls, if required, will be limited to landscaping walls on the order of 2 feet in height.

The proposed commercial lot will be developed with two buildings separated by an open plaza.

The buildings will be constructed at grade. These buildings will each be supported either on a structural mat or a grid foundation system with conventional concrete slab (see Section 4.4 of this report).

Page 568 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 2
June 2, 2022
Preliminary grading information indicates site grading will involve fills of about 1 to 2 feet thick and cuts up to about 5 to 6 feet deep to construct the building pads and to achieve design grades.

Deeper excavations may be necessary for construction of underground utilities.

The current plan is to use hardscape in the backyards of Lots 8 through 14 with area drains to collect and direct storm water away from the creek behind these lots. Stitch piers will also be installed along the top of the existing creek bank on these seven lots to reduce the potential for creek bank erosion impacting the proposed development. These approaches are intended to address the City’s review comment regarding creek bank erosion, and to allow the hardscape in the backyards of Lots 8 through 14 extending to the stitch piers.

The above project descriptions are based on information provided to us. If the actual project differs from those described above, Geo-Logic Associates (GLA) should be contacted to review our findings, conclusions, and recommendations and present any necessary modifications to address the different project development schemes.

1.2 Information Provided
For this investigation, we were provided with the following by Robson Homes and RJA.

1. A 6-sheet set of drawings titled “Planned Unit Development, 475 and 493 Saint John Street, City of Pleasanton, Alameda County, California,” prepared by RJA, dated May 26, 2022.

2. A 7-sheet set of drawings titled “Vesting Tentative Map, Tract 8631 - 475 and 493 Saint John Street, City of Pleasanton, County of Alameda, California,” prepared by RJA, dated May 26, 2022.

1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services
The purpose of this geotechnical study was to explore subsurface conditions at the project site and to provide geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed improvements. The following work was performed.

1. Performed a site reconnaissance to observe site surface conditions and to mark locations of our exploration.

2. Reviewed available geologic and geotechnical information pertinent to the site.

3. Obtained a drilling permit from Zone 7 Water District for our subsurface exploration.

4. Notified Underground Service Alert (USA) for underground utility clearance and coordination of our drilling with Robson Homes.

Page 569 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 3
June 2, 2022

5. Subcontracted with a private underground locator to check the proposed exploration locations for presence of underground utilities.

6. Explored subsurface conditions by means of four exploratory drill holes and three cone penetration test (CPT) probes to depths between approximately 20 and 50 feet below ground surface.

7. Collected a bulk sample of the near-surface soil.

8. Performed laboratory tests on selected soil samples from the drill holes and on the bulk sample to measure pertinent engineering properties of the samples.

9. Performed engineering analysis on the field and laboratory data.

10. Prepared draft geotechnical study reports.

11. Provided geotechnical consultation to our client.

12. Reviewed and responded to comments in the City of Pleasanton review letter dated February 25, 2022.

13. Attended a meeting with the City of Pleasanton Engineering Department on March 15, 2022 to review the City review comments.

14. Prepared this final geotechnical study report.

Page 570 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 4
June 2, 2022
2 SITE INVESTIGATION
This investigation consists of a site reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration program. The site reconnaissance was to observe existing site surface conditions. The subsurface exploration program wasto explore earth conditions at the project site. The observed surface and subsurface site conditions are discussed in Section 3 of this report.

2.1 Subsurface Exploration
Our geotechnical subsurface exploration program included four exploratory drill holes (DH-1 through DH-4) and three CPT probes (CPT-1 through CPT-3) advanced on November 13, 2020.

The exploratory drill holes and CPT probes were located in the field by referencing to existing site features and pacing; therefore, their locations are approximate. These approximate exploration locations are shown on Figures 1 and 2 of this report. The drill holes and CPT probes were backfilled in accordance with Zone 7 Water Agency guidelines after completion of drilling and testing.

2.1.1 Exploratory Drill Holes
The four exploratory drill holes were advanced using a truck-mounted Mobile B61 drilling rig equipped with 8-inch diameter hollow-stem augers. The depth of exploration ranged between approximately 20 and 50 feet below ground surface (bgs). In the field, our personnel visually classified the materials encountered and maintained a log of each drill hole.

Soil samples were obtained using a 2-inch outside diameter (O.D.; 1.4-inch inside diameter, I.D.) split-barrel sampler (also called a Standard Penetration Test sampler) and a 3-inch O.D. (2½-inch I.D.) split-barrel sampler. Soil samples were obtained by driving the sampler up to 18 inches into the earth material using a 140-pound automatic trip hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler was recorded for each 6-inch penetration interval. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches, or the penetration interval indicated on the log when harder material was encountered, is shown as blows per foot (blow count) on the drill hole logs.

In the field, our personnel visually classified the materials encountered and maintained a log of each drill hole. Visual classification of soils encountered in our drill holes was made in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D 2487 and D 2488). The results of our laboratory tests were used to refine our field classifications. Two Keys to Soil Classification, one for fine grained soils and one for coarse grained soils, are included in Appendix A, together with our drill hole logs.

2.1.2 Cone Penetration Test Probes
The three CPT probes were performed by Middle Earth Geo Testing to depths between approximately 30 and 50 feet bgs. CPT involves pushing a small diameter steel probe (15 cm2

Page 571 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 5
June 2, 2022
cross-sectional area cone was used for this project) into the ground using a hydraulic jack attached to a truck-mounted rig. The tip of the probe is instrumented and takes almost continuous measurements (roughly every 1 inch) of tip resistance, side friction resistance, and pore pressure. Graphic presentations of the CPT data are included in Appendix A of this report.

2.2 Laboratory Testing
Geotechnical laboratory testing was conducted on selected soil samples collected from our drill holes. These tests included moisture content, dry density, Atterberg limits, sieve analysis, hydrometer, and percentage passing a No. 200 sieve. An R-value test was performed on the bulk sample collected from the site. The laboratory test results are presented on the drill hole logs at the corresponding sample depths. Graphic presentations of the results of the Atterberg limits, sieve analysis, hydrometer, and R-value tests are presented on separate sheets in Appendix B In addition to geotechnical testing, one selected soil sample was sent to CERCO Analytical for corrosivity analysis. A brief report from CERCO Analytical with the corrosivity test results is included in Appendix B.

Page 572 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 6
June 2, 2022
3 FINDINGS

3.1 Surface Conditions
The 475 St. John Street parcel is currently occupied by the Barone’s Restaurant building in the southern portion and the 493 St. John Street parcel is occupied by a residence in the southwestern portion. The northern approximately 90 to 100 feet of the two parcels are occupied by the Arroyo del Valle Creek (trending easterly-westerly). The remainder of the 475 St.

John Street parcel is occupied by miscellaneous structures, patio, and lawn. The remainder of the 493 St. John Street parcel is occupied by a paved parking lot. Ground surface slopes down gently from north to south with a vertical relief of roughly 2 to 2.5 feet across the property. There are isolated mature trees.

The topographic information prepared by RJA indicates the creek bank along the northern portion of the two parcels is about 19 to 21 feet high with inclination of roughly 1.5:1 to 2:1 (horizontal:vertical). The creek appeared to be dry at the time of our site investigation in late October 2020.

3.2 Subsurface Conditions
Subsurface soils encountered in our drill holes and CPT probes can be generalized as alluvium. In the four drill holes, a pavement section consisting of approximately 3 inches of asphalt concrete over approximately 4 inches of base rock was encountered at the surface.

In DH-1, subsurface soils below the pavement section consist of very stiff sandy silt of low plasticity to a depth of about 4 feet bgs, stiff lean clay of low plasticity to a depth of about 12 feet bgs, and medium dense to dense poorly graded sand to the maximum explored depth of about 20 feet bgs.

In DH-2, subsurface soils below the pavement section consist of very stiff sandy silt of low plasticity to a depth of about 12 feet bgs, very dense silty sand to a depth of about 17 feet bgs, and very dense well graded sand with gravel and clay to the maximum explored depth of about 20 feet bgs.

In DH-3, subsurface soils below the pavement section consist of stiff to hard sandy silt of low plasticity to a depth of about 6 feet bgs, dense poorly graded sand with clay to a depth of about 12 feet bgs, medium dense to dense well graded sand with gravel and clay to a depth of about

22.5 feet bgs, medium dense to very dense poorly graded sand with gravel and clay to a depth of about 48 feet bgs, and dense to very dense well graded gravel with sand and clay to the maximum explored depth of about 50 feet bgs.

In DH-4, subsurface soils below the pavement section consist of very stiff to hard sandy silt of low plasticity to a depth of about 6 feet bgs, and dense to very dense well graded sand with gravel and clay to the maximum explored depth of about 20 feet bgs.

Page 573 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 7
June 2, 2022
In CPT-1, the interpreted soil behavior types consist of clayey silt to silty clay to a depth of about 20 feet bgs, and layers of silty sand to sandy silt and clean sand to silty sand to the to the maximum explored depth of approximately 50 feet bgs.

In CPT-2, the interpreted soil behavior types consist of clean sand to silty sand and clayey silt to silty clay to a depth of about 6.5 feet bgs, and clean sand to silty sand to the maximum explored depth of approximately 30 feet bgs.

In CPT-3, the interpreted soil behavior types consist of clean sand to silty sand and clayey silt to silty clay to a depth of about 5.5 feet bgs, and clean sand to silty sand to the maximum explored depth of approximately 50 feet bgs.

3.3 Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered at a depth of about 48 feet bgs in DH-3, CPT-1, and CPT-3 at the time of our exploration in November 2020. Groundwater was not encountered in the other drill holes and CPT-2 because they did not extend to that depth.

Based on groundwater level information provided by Zone 7 Water Agency for monitoring well 16P5 (closest to the site), the highest groundwater level was about 25 feet bgs and the lowest groundwater level was about 67 feet bgs between October 8, 1976 and November 17, 2020 (Note: the well was dry between July 24 and October 5, 2014). Figure 3 depicts the approximate location of well 16P5 with respect to the subject site. Figure 4 depicts the recorded depth to groundwater in well 16P5 in a graph.

It should be noted that fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to seasonal variations in rainfall and temperature, water level in the adjacent creek, pumping from wells, regional groundwater recharge program, irrigation, or other factors that were not evident at the time of our investigation.

3.4 Variations in Subsurface Conditions
Our interpretations of soil and groundwater conditions, as described in this report, are based on information obtained during this study. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on these interpretations. Please realize the site has undergone different phases of development and grading. Therefore, it is likely that undisclosed variations in subsurface conditions exist at the site, particularly old foundations, abandoned utilities, and areas of deep and loose fill.

Careful observations should be made during construction to verify our interpretations. Should variations from our interpretations be found, we should be notified to evaluate whether any revisions should be made to our recommendations.

Page 574 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 8
June 2, 2022
4 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 Earthquake Faulting
The Greater San Francisco Bay Area is seismically dominated by the active San Andreas Fault system, the tectonic boundary between the northward moving Pacific Plate (west of the fault) and the North American Plate (east of the fault). This movement is distributed across a complex system of generally strike-slip, right-lateral, and subparallel faults.

Potential sources of significant earthquake ground shaking at the site include several active and potentially active faults in the Greater San Francisco Bay area, as well as faults farther afield. The faults were first compiled on the State’s Fault Activity Map (Jennings, 1974; Jennings and Bryant, 2010). This map has now been integrated into the US Geological Survey’s Quaternary Fault and Fold Database and made available as a .kmz “drape” over Google Earth terrain files.

The distance to a seismic source (fault) is defined by the NGA relationships as the closest distance to the seismogenic zone, be it in the subsurface or at the surface; distances may therefore differ from distances measured on the ground surface. The distances shown on the table below are for reference only, as they are horizontal distances from the site to the surface trace of the seismic source, and not necessarily the closest distance to a (dipping) seismogenic zone. These distances were measured using the US Geological Survey’s Quaternary Fault and Fold Database, with major faults listed in approximate order of distance from the site; not all sources are listed in the summary table below.

Table 4.1-1: Distance and Orientation to Nearby Faults
Fault Name Approximate Distance Orientation from Site
Calaveras (northern section) 3.5 km Southwest
Hayward (southern section) 13.6 km Southwest
Greenville 16 km Northeast
San Andreas (Peninsula section) 43.8 km Southwest

4.2 Ground Accelerations
According to the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Standard 7-16, the spectral response acceleration at any period can be taken as the lesser of the spectral response accelerations from the probabilistic and deterministic ground motion approaches. The U.S. Seismic Design Maps tool available at the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC) website was used for this purpose to retrieve seismic design parameter values for design of buildings at the subject site. Two levels of ground motions are considered in the Application: Risk-targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) and Design Earthquake (DE), with both probabilistic and deterministic values defined in terms of maximum-direction rather than geometric-mean, horizontal spectral acceleration (Sa). The probabilistic MCER spectral response accelerations are represented by a 5 percent damped acceleration response spectrum having a 1 percent probability of collapse within a 50-year period and in the direction

Page 575 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 9
June 2, 2022
of the maximum horizontal response. The probabilistic Design Earthquake (DE) Sa value at any period can be taken as two-thirds of the MCER Sa value at the same period.

Using the SEAOC Seismic Design Maps application, a site Class D, and the latitude and longitude of the site (latitude 37.664512º N, longitude -121.875365º W), the calculated geometric mean peak ground acceleration adjusted for site class effects (PGAM) for the MCEG (Geometric Mean Maximum Considered Earthquake) is 0.848g.

4.3 Seismicity
The Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities’ (WGCEP) estimates of the probabilities of major earthquakes are now in their sixth iteration, with the greatest changes in approach being the inclusion of multifold rupture scenarios, in the progressive consideration of more potential seismic sources, the possibility of earthquakes on unrecognized faults, and the inclusion of the notion of fault “readiness”. Current estimates (WGCEP, 2014) for the San Francisco region indicate a 72% probability of a large (magnitude 6.7 or greater) earthquake in the San Francisco Bay area as a whole over the 30-year period beginning in 2014; this overall probability is greater than the previous (WGCEP, 2007) probability of 63%, due mainly to the inclusion of multi-fault rupture scenarios. The estimate for the Calaveras fault alone is 14.4% (revised up from the 7% presented by WGCEP, 2007); for the (northern) San Andreas fault alone,

27.4% (revised upward from the WGCEP (2007) value of 21%); and for the Hayward fault, 45.3% (revised upward from the WGCEP (2007) value of 31%).

4.4 Liquefaction
Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated granular soils, and certain fine-grained soils, lose their strength due to build-up of excess pore water pressure during cyclic loading, such as from earthquakes. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are saturated, clean, loose, fine-grained sands and non-plastic silts. Certain gravels, plastic silts, and clays are also susceptible to liquefaction. The primary factors affecting soil liquefaction include: 1) intensity and duration of seismic shaking; 2) soil type; 3) relative density of granular soils; 4) moisture content and plasticity of fine-grained soils; 5) overburden pressure; and 6) depth to ground water.

Our review of the California Geological Survey (CGS) Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation indicates the project area is located in a liquefaction hazard zone.

CPT-1 and CPT-3 were used in a site-specific liquefaction assessment. Our liquefaction assessment was based on a PGA value of 0.85g, earthquake moment magnitude of 7.5, and a groundwater level of 25 feet bgs. The results of our analysis indicate that some of the underlying soils may liquefy when subject to shaking of the design earthquake. The estimated liquefactioninduced ground settlement is roughly 2 inches. The estimated Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) is about 4 to 6. For LPI between 0 and 5, the risk of liquefaction is low. For LPI between 5 and 15, the risk of liquefaction is high. For LPI of 4 to 6, the risk of liquefaction may be interpreted as low to moderate. The results of our liquefaction analysis are presented in Appendix C.

Page 576 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 10
June 2, 2022
For comparison purposes, we have also evaluated the liquefaction potential for groundwater at a depth of 40 feet bgs, the average groundwater level from the data provided by Zone 7 Water Agency. For groundwater level at 40 feet bgs, the estimated liquefaction-induced ground settlement is roughly 3/4 to 1 inch and the estimated LPI is less than 2.6.

Please note that liquefaction-induced ground settlements are in addition to settlements caused by building loads.

The groundwater level used in our liquefaction analysis was based on our review of depth to groundwater information provided by Zone 7 Water Agency for monitoring well 16P5 (closest to the site) between October 8, 1976 and November 17, 2020 (a period of 44 years). Figure 3 depicts the location of well 16P5 with respect to the project site and Figure 4 is a graphic illustration of the recorded depth to groundwater in well 16P5. According to the Zone 7 data, the highest recorded groundwater level was about 25 feet bgs and the lowest recorded groundwater level was about 67 feet bgs, excluding the period between July 24 and October 5, 2014 during which the well was dry. Therefore, in our opinion, a groundwater depth of 25 feet is reasonable to represent the high groundwater level in our liquefaction analysis.

Based on our past experience, we expect the post-tensioned slab foundations proposed for the residential units of this project can be designed to accommodate the estimated 2 inches of total liquefaction settlements (predicted 1 inch of differential settlements). We understand the project structural engineer, Gouvis Engineering, will design the post-tensioned slabs to accommodate the estimated total and differential liquefaction-induced settlements.

Post-tensioned slabs are not planned for the proposed commercial buildings. Foundation options to mitigate the potential impact of soil liquefaction for the commercial buildings include structural mats or grid foundations as discussed in Sections 6.3.3 and 6.3.4 below.

4.5 Lateral Spreading and Creek Bank Stability
Lateral spreading is horizontal movement of soil toward a free face, such as a creek bank, typically associated with liquefaction. Liquefaction-induced lateral spreading can also occur on mild slopes (flatter than 5%) underlain by loose sands and a shallow groundwater table. If liquefaction occurs, the unsaturated overburden soil can slide as intact blocks over the lower, liquefied deposit, creating fissures and scarps. The potential for lateral spreading in general mirrors the potential for liquefaction, and the depth of the liquefiable soil layers with respect to the creek banks.

To evaluate stability of the creek bank and potential lateral spreading magnitude, we performed a static and pseudo-static slope stability analysis using the computer program SLOPE/W. The soil properties used in our analysis were developed using our drill hole and CPT data and are shown in Table 4.5-1 below.

Page 577 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 11
June 2, 2022
Table 4.5-1: Soil Properties for Slope Stability Analysis Depth Below
Ground Surface
(feet)
Soil
Static Analysis Pseudo-static Analysis
Cohesion
(psf)
Friction Angle
(degrees)
Cohesion
(psf)
Friction Angle
(degrees)
0 – 6 Sandy Silt 100 25 2000 0
6 – 25 Sand & Gravel 0 36 0 36
25 – 35 Sand & Gravel 0 36 1500* 0
35 – 47 Sand & Gravel 0 36 2400* 0
47 - 50 Sand & Gravel 0 36 800* 0
* Estimated residual shear strength for liquefiable soils.

The minimum static and pseudo-static factors of safety with respect to sliding were calculated on a 21-foot high creek bank inclined at 1.5:1 and 2:1 (horizontal:vertical). The results of our analysis are shown in Table 4.5-2 below.

Table 4.5-2: Factor of Safety from Slope Stability Analysis Bank Inclination
Factor of Safety
Static, GW @ El. 327 ft(1) Static, GW @ El. 342 ft(1,2) Pseudo-static, GW @ El. 327 ft(3)

1.5:1 (h:v) 1.3 1.2 1.04
2:1 (h:v) 1.7 1.5 1.09
Notes:

1. Top of creek bank at elevation 352 feet.

2. 100-year design flood elevation of 342 feet provided by project civil engineer.

3. A seismic coefficient of 0.25 was used in the pseudo-static analysis.

As shown in Table 4.5-2 above, the calculated factor of safety (FS) of the creek bank inclined at

1.5:1 (h:v) is 1.2 to 1.3, below the minimum acceptable FS of 1.5. For creek bank inclined at 2:1 (h:v), the FS is about 1.5 to 1.7 for static conditions and 1.09 for pseudo-static conditions. The results of our slope stability analysis are presented in Appendix D.

The results of our slope stability analysis also suggest that sloughing of the creek bank surficial soil may occur. Sloughing may occur naturally due to weight of the material, during water flow in the creek, or as a result of seismic shaking. This is common for slopes consisting of granular soil with little or no fines.

To estimate the probable lateral displacements of the creek bank during seismic events, we performed a seismic slope displacement analysis following the Bray & Travasarou (2007) procedures. The analysis was based on the failure circle with a factor of safety of roughly unity (FS≈1) and a seismic velocity of 350 m/s estimated from the CPT data. The results of our analysis suggest the probable lateral displacement near the top of the creek bank would be on the order of 8 inches under the design earthquake.

Refer to Section 6.1 of this report for recommended maximum creek bank inclination and minimum set back distance from crest of creek bank for structures and improvements and

Page 578 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 12
June 2, 2022
Section 6.8 for stitch piers information.

4.6 Seismic Design Parameters
Design of the proposed structures should comply with design for structures located in seismically active areas. Structures should be designed in accordance with the requirements of governing jurisdictions and applicable building codes. GLA evaluated ASCE 7-16 seismic design parameters for the site using the SEAOC U.S. Design Maps application. The table below lists the seismic design parameters for the site. Note that, because the Mapped Spectral Acceleration at 1.0- second Period (S1) value for the site is larger than 0.2 g, a site response analysis may be required, in accordance with Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16.

Table 4.6-1: Seismic Design Parameters Based on 2019 CBC & ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Parameter Value
Site Class D
Site Coefficient, Fa 1.0
Site Coefficient, Fv 1.7
Mapped Spectral Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, Ss 1.85 g Mapped Spectral Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, S1 0.68 g Spectral Acceleration at 0.2-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, SMS 1.85 g Spectral Acceleration at 1.0-second Period Adjusted for Site Class, SM1 1.16 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, SDS 1.23 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, SD1 0.77 g Long-period Transition Period, TL 8 sec.

Note: The site would be Site Class F because it is underlain by liquefiable soils. But if the fundamental period of vibration of the structures is equal to or less than 0.5 second, the Site Class can be determined by assuming there is no liquefaction (ASCE 7-16 Section 20.3.1). Therefore, Site Class D was selected for this project. If the fundamental period of vibration of the structures is larger than 0.5 second, contact our office for a site-specific seismic response analysis.

Page 579 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 13
June 2, 2022
5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Based on our geotechnical evaluation, it is our opinion the project site may be developed as discussed in this report, provided our geotechnical recommendations are incorporated in the design and construction of the project. Our opinions, conclusions, and recommendations are based on our understanding of the proposed development, data review, properties of soils encountered in subsurface exploration, laboratory test results, and engineering analyses.

Geotechnical considerations for this project are discussed below.

5.1 Ground Rupture
The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Because no active or potentially active faults are known to cross the site, it is reasonable to conclude that the risk of fault rupture through the project site is low.

5.2 Seismic Shaking
The project site is located in an area of high seismicity. Based on general knowledge of the site seismicity, it should be anticipated that, during their useful life, the proposed structures will be subject to at least one severe earthquake (magnitude 7 to 8+) that could cause considerable ground shaking at the site. It is also anticipated that the site will periodically experience small to moderate magnitude earthquakes.

5.3 Liquefaction
The results of our liquefaction analysis indicate that some of the subsurface soils are prone to liquefaction when subject to seismic shaking. The estimated liquefaction-induced total ground settlements are on the order of 2 inches. The potential differential settlements would be on the order of 1 inch. The proposed residential buildings will be supported on post-tensioned slab foundations and the proposed commercial buildings will be supported on either structural mats or grid foundation systems. We understand the project structural engineer will design the foundations to accommodate the estimated seismic settlement plus static settlement from building loads (less than 1 inch).

5.4 Slope Stability and Lateral Deformations
The results of our slope stability analysis indicate the calculated factor of safety (FS) of the creek bank at an inclination of 1.5:1 (h:v) is 1.3, below the minimum acceptable FS of 1.5. For creek bank inclination of 2:1 (h:v), the FS is about 1.7 for static conditions and 1.09 for pseudo-static conditions (seismic coefficient of 0.25). At the 100-year flood water elevation of 342 feet, the FS is 1.2 for creek bank inclination at 1.5:1 (H:V) and 1.5 for creek bank inclination at 2:1 (H:V).

Stability of the creek bank under earthquake loading and 100-year flood condition was not considered because of the low probability of earthquake coinciding with periods of high water (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Manual EM 11102-1913, 2000).

Page 580 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 14
June 2, 2022
The results of our lateral deformation analysis of the creek bank indicate a lateral displacement of about 8 inches near the top of the creek bank. The stitch piers to be installed along the top of the existing creek bank would provide additional lateral resistance to help reduce potential lateral displacement of soil behind the stitch piers.

The current plan is to use hardscape in the backyards of Lots 8 through 14 with area drains to collect and direct storm water away from the creek behind these lots. This approach should help reduce infiltration of storm water into the soil behind the creek bank which could impact creek bank stability.

Refer to the Section 6.1 of this report regarding maximum creek bank inclination and minimum horizontal set-back distance from the crest of creek bank for the proposed structures and improvements.

5.5 Creek Bank Erosion
As discussed in Section 4.5 above, sloughing of the creek bank surficial soil may occur, especially in the relatively clean granular sand and gravel soilsin the lower portion of the creek bank. During the meeting with the City on March 15, 2022, the use of sheet piles, stitch piers, or other appropriate means to protect the creek bank from future erosion was discussed. The City stated their preference for stitch piers because of the undesirable impact of installing sheet piles including the size of equipment, and noise and vibration associated with driving sheet piles.

Stitch piers will be installed along the top of the existing creek bank on Lot 8 through 14 to reduce the potential for creek bank erosion impacting the backyards of these lots. The stitch piers are not intended to prevent erosion of the creek bank soil in front of the piers. The stitch piers, together with the hardscape and area drains discussed in the section above, are intended to address the City’s review comment regarding creek bank erosion, and to allow the hardscape in the backyards of Lots 8 through 14 to extend to the stitch piers. Stitch piers should consist of drilled, cast-in-place, reinforced concrete piers. Refer to Section 6.8 below for recommendations for design of the stitch piers.

5.6 Expansion Potential of Surficial Soils
The surface and near-surface soils encountered in our drill holes consist generally of silty sand with gravel. These granular soils have a low expansion potential; therefore, soil expansion should not be a significant concern at this site.

5.7 Existing Improvements
Existing improvements at the site include miscellaneous structures, sheds, trailers, containers, underground utilities, isolated trees, and possibly old wells, septic tanks, and leach fields. Prior to construction, the existing structures and improvements should be removed and the resulting

Page 581 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 15
June 2, 2022
excavations should be properly backfilled with engineered fill under the observation and testing of the project Geotechnical Engineer.

Page 582 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 16
June 2, 2022
6 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Building Set-back
The inclination of the existing creek bank along Lots 8 through 14 is between roughly 1.5:1 (h:v) and 1.9:1 (h:v), with an average of about 1.6:1 (h:v). For this project, buildings should be set back at least 10 feet beyond the crest of the projected 2:1 (h:v) bank from the toe of the existing creek bank, as shown in Figure 5 of this report.

Stitch piers will be installed along the top of the existing creek bank; therefore, the exterior concrete slabs in the backyards of Lots 8 through 14 may extend to the stitch piers.

Our review of the Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by RJA, dated May 26, 2022, included in the Vesting Tentative Map package, indicates the proposed houses on Lots 8 through 14 will be located at least 20 feet from the top of the existing creek bank, per City’s review letter dated February 25, 2022. Based on our assessment, this 20-foot setback from top of existing creek bank meets our recommended 10-foot setback from the crest of the projected 2:1 (h:v) bank from existing toe of bank.

6.2 Earthwork

6.2.1 Site Preparation, Clearing and Stripping
Prior to grading, construction areas should be cleared of all structures and foundations, obstructions, deleterious materials, abandoned or designated utility lines, designated trees, and other below grade obstacles encountered during the clearing operation. Tree stumps should be grubbed. Roots with diameter of about 1 inch or larger or length of about 3 feet or longer should be removed. Depressions, excavations, and holes that extend below the planned finish grades should be cleaned and backfilled with engineered fill compacted to the requirements given under the section of "Engineered Fill Placement and Compaction." After clearing, the site should be stripped to sufficient depth to remove vegetation and organicladen topsoil. Stripped material may be stockpiled for use in landscape areas if approved by the project landscape architect; otherwise, it should be removed from the site. For planning purposes, an estimated stripping depth of 2 to 4 inches may be assumed in unpaved areas. The actual stripping depth should be determined in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer at the time of construction.

6.2.2 Excavation, Temporary Construction Slopes, and Shoring Excavations for this project are expected to include demolition excavations, over-excavation of loose and disturbed soils, cuts to achieve design grades and to construct the basements, trenching to construct new underground utilities, and foundation excavations. Excavations and temporary construction slopes should be constructed in accordance with the current CAL-OSHA

Page 583 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 17
June 2, 2022
safety standards and local jurisdiction. The stability and safety of excavations, braced or unbraced, is the responsibility of the contractor. Care should be exercised when excavating in the proximity of existing structures and improvements.

Contractors are responsible for the design, installation, maintenance, and removal of temporary shoring and bracing systems. The presence of existing structures, pavements, and underground utilities must be incorporated in the design of the shoring and bracing systems.

Trench excavations adjacent to existing or proposed foundations should be above an imaginary plane having an inclination of 1½:1 (horizontal to vertical) extending down from the bottom edge of the foundations.

6.2.3 Subgrade Preparation
In areas to receive engineered fills, foundations, concrete slabs-on-grade, and pavements, the subgrade soils should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture-conditioned, and compacted in accordance with the recommendations given in the "Engineered Fill Placement and Compaction" section below. In building and concrete slab-on-grade areas, subgrade preparation should extend a minimum of 5 feet horizontally beyond the limits of the proposed structures and any adjoining flatwork, unless it is restricted by existing improvements. In pavement areas, subgrade preparation should extend a minimum of 3 feet beyond the back of the curbs or pavements.

Prepared soil subgrades should be non-yielding when proof-rolled by a fully loaded water truck or similar weight equipment. Moisture conditioning of subgrade soils should consist of adding water if the soils are too dry and allowing the soils to dry if the soils are too wet. After the subgrades are properly prepared, the areas may be raised to design grades by placement of engineered fill.

Wet soils should be anticipated during and after rainy months. Where encountered, unstable, wet or soft soil will require processing before compaction can be achieved. If construction schedule does not allow for air-drying, other means such as lime or cement treatment of the soil or excavation and replacement with suitable material may be considered. Geotextile fabrics may also be used to help stabilize the subgrade. The method to be used should be determined at the time of construction based on the actual site conditions. We recommend obtaining unit prices for subgrade stabilization during the construction bid process.

6.2.4 Materials for Fill
In general, on-site soils with an organic content of less than 3 percent by weight, free of deleterious materials or hazardous substances, and meeting the gradation requirements below may be used as engineered fill except where special material is required.

Engineered fill material should not contain rocks or lumps larger than 3 inches in greatest

Page 584 of 893 ends

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 18
June 2, 2022
dimension, should not contain more than 15 percent of the material larger than 1½ inches, and should contain at least 20 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. In addition to these requirements, import fill should have a low expansion potential as indicated by Plasticity Index of 15 or less (per ASTM D4318), or Expansion Index of less than 20 (per ASTM D4829).

All fills should be approved by the project Geotechnical Engineer prior to delivery to the site. At least 5 working days prior to importing to the site, a representative sample of the proposed import fill should be delivered to our laboratory for evaluation. Import fills should be tested and approved for residential use per the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) guidelines.

6.2.5 Engineered Fill Placement and Compaction
Engineered fill should be placed in horizontal lifts each not exceeding 8 inches in thickness, moisture conditioned to the required moisture content, and mechanically compacted to the recommendations below. Relative compaction or compaction is defined as the in-place dry density of the compacted soil divided by the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557, latest edition, expressed as a percentage. Moisture conditioning of soils should consist of adding water to the soils if they are too dry and allowing the soils to dry if they are too wet.

Engineered fills consisting of on-site or imported soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction with moisture content between about 1 and 3 percent above the laboratory optimum value. In pavement areas, the upper 8 inches of subgrade soil should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. Aggregate base in vehicle pavement areas should be compacted at slightly above the optimum moisture content to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction.

6.2.6 Utility Trench Backfill
Backfilling of utility trenches in public right-of-way and street areas should comply with City of Pleasanton Standard Specifications and Details, November 2016.

Backfilling of utility trenches in private areas may consist of pipe bedding extending from the bottom of the trench to about 1 foot above the top of pipe and backfill material above. Pipe bedding may consist of free-draining sand (less than 5% passing a No. 200 sieve), lean concrete or sand cement slurry. Sand, if used as bedding, should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction.

Above the pipe bedding, utility trenches may be backfilled with on-site soil or imported soil.

Trench backfill above the pipe bedding should be compacted to the requirements given in the section of “Engineered Fill Placement and Compaction.” Trench backfill should be capped with at least 12 inches of compacted, on-site soil similar to that of the adjoining subgrade. The backfill material should be placed in lifts not exceeding about 6 inches in uncompacted thickness.

Page 585 of 893 ends

Pleasanton City CouncilDecember 17, 2024

Pleasanton City Council
December 17, 2024