Pleasanton City Council
December 17, 2024

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 19
June 2, 2022
Thinner lifts may be necessary to achieve the recommended level of compaction of the backfill due to equipment limitations. Compaction should be performed by mechanical means only.

Water jetting or flooding to attain compaction of backfill should not be permitted.

6.2.7 Considerations for Soil Moisture and Seepage Control Subgrade soil and engineered fill should be compacted at moisture content meeting our recommendations. Consideration should be given to reducing the potential for water infiltration from the exterior to under the buildings through utility lines crossing the building perimeter. In utility lines crossing beneath perimeter foundations, permeable backfill should be terminated at least 1 foot outside of the perimeter foundation. Impermeable material, such as concrete or clay soil, should be used for the entire trench depth to act as a seepage cutoff.

Where concrete slabs or pavements abut against landscaped areas, the base rock layer and subgrade soil should be protected against saturation. Water if allowed to seep into the subgrade soil or pavement section could reduce the service life of the improvements. Methods that may be considered to reduce infiltration of water include: 1) subdrains installed behind curbs and slabs in landscape areas; 2) vertical cut-offs, such as a deepened curb section, or equivalent, extending at least 2 inches into the subgrade soil; and 3) use of a drip or controlled irrigation system for landscape watering.

6.2.8 Wet Weather Construction
If site grading and construction is to be performed during the winter rainy months, the owner and contractors should be fully aware of the potential impact of wet weather. Rainstorms can cause delay to construction and damage to previously completed work by saturating compacted pads or subgrades, or flooding excavations.

Earthwork during rainy months will require extra effort and caution by the contractors. The contractors are responsible for protecting their work to avoid damage by rainwater. Standing pools of water should be pumped out immediately. Construction during wet weather conditions should be addressed in the project construction bid documents and/or specifications. We recommend the contractors submit a wet weather construction plan outlining procedures they will employ to protect their work and to minimize damage to their work by rainstorms.

6.3 Foundations

6.3.1 General
The Geotechnical Engineer should review the foundation plans and details before construction and observe the foundation excavations during construction to determine if the foundation excavations extend into suitable bearing material. Prior to placement of concrete, foundation excavations should be cleaned of loose soils. If unsuitable soils are encountered in the foundation excavations, the soils should be removed as recommended by our Geotechnical

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 20
June 2, 2022
Engineer and replaced with approved material such as compacted engineered fill or lean concrete.

Foundation excavations should not be allowed to dry before placement of concrete. If visible cracks appear in the foundation excavations, the excavations should be thoroughly moisture conditioned beginning at least 2 days prior to placement of concrete to close all cracks. It is also important that the base of the foundation excavations not be allowed to become excessively wet, resulting in soft soils. Water should not be allowed to pond in the bottom of the excavations.

Areas that become water damaged should be over-excavated to a firm base. The foundation excavations should be monitored by our representative for compliance with appropriate moisture control and to confirm the adequacy of the bearing materials.

6.3.2 Post-tensioned Slabs (Residential Buildings)
The proposed residential structures may be supported on post-tensioned (PT) slab foundations bearing on properly moisture-conditioned and compacted soil subgrades. Preparation of soil subgrade, moisture conditioning, and compaction of soil and engineered fill should be as recommended in the “Earthwork” section (Section 6.2) of this report.

The following parameters may be used with the 2004 PTI “Design of Post-Tensioned Slabs-onGround, Third Edition” manual for design of the PT slabs.

Table 6.3.2-1: Parameters for Design of Post-tensioned Slabs Constructed on Native Subgrade Soil Parameters Scenario 1 – PT on native soil Scenario 2 – PT with effects from liquefaction-induced settlements
em (center lift) 9 feet 9 feet
em (edge lift) 5 feet 9 feet
ym (center lift) 0.25 inch 2 inches
ym (edge lift) 0.25 inch 2 inches
Allowable soil bearing pressure = 2,000 psf for dead plus live loads, with a one-third increase when including transient loads, such as wind or seismic A deepened edge, minimum 6 inches wide, should be constructed along the perimeter of the PT slabs. The deepened edge should extend to at least 18 inches below the bottom of the PT slabs.

The deepened edge can help reduce moisture infiltration to under the PT slabs.

Where interior building grades are higher than the exterior grades, the perimeter foundation elements should be designed to resist the lateral soil pressure and surcharge loads acting on the foundations. The bottom of the perimeter foundations should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest finish grades, excluding landscaping soils which are typically not compacted and should not be considered for structural support.

We understand the PT slabs will be constructed on 1 to 2 inches of sand over a 15-mil visqueen

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 21
June 2, 2022
vapor barrier over compacted subgrade soil. Sand has been used for protection of the vapor barrier during construction and to allow dissipation of concrete mix water during curing. The use of sand, or equivalent material, should be determined by the project structural engineer or architect. A lower water-cement ratio (0.45 to 0.50) will help reduce the permeability of the concrete and, hence, vapor transmission through the slabs.

Settlements under building loads are expected to be primarily elastic. Post construction total and differential settlements of the PT slabs under non-seismic conditions are anticipated to be less than 1 and ½ inch, respectively. Refer to the “Liquefaction” section of this report for additional liquefaction-induced ground settlement.

6.3.3 Structural Mats (Commercial Buildings)
The proposed commercial buildings may each be supported on a structural mat foundation bearing on properly moisture-conditioned and compacted soil subgrades. Preparation of soil subgrade, moisture conditioning, and compaction of soil and engineered fill should be as recommended in the “Earthwork” section (Section 6.2) of this report.

The mats may be designed using a net allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf due to dead plus live loads, with a one-third increase when including transient loads such as wind or seismic.

The mats should have a thickness of at least 10 inches. A vertical modulus of subgrade reaction, Kv1, of 75 psi/in may be used in design of the mat.

Resistance to lateral loads may be developed from friction between the bottom of the mats and the supporting subgrade. Mats bearing on undisturbed on-site soil or engineered fill may be designed using an ultimate friction coefficient of 0.25 between the mats and supporting subgrade.

The mats should be designed for a total post-construction settlement of 2 inches, with about 1 inch of differential settlement over a distance of about 25 feet.

To reduce the potential for water infiltration from the exterior to under the mats, the perimeter of the mats should be thickened to serve as a water cut-off. The bottom of the thickened edges should extend at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent finish grade and have a width of at least 6 inches. Please note the thickened edges are not intended to be structural elements of the mat foundations unless as designed by the structural engineer.

6.3.4 Grid Foundations (Commercial Buildings)
In lieu of structural mats, the proposed commercial buildings may each be supported on a grid foundation system consisting of structurally interconnected continuous footings in a grid pattern (isolated footings are not recommended). The foundations should bear on engineered fill or undisturbed on-site soil. Preparation of soil subgrade, moisture conditioning, and compaction of soil and engineered fill should be as recommended in the “Earthwork” section (Section 6.2) of

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 22
June 2, 2022
this report.

The continuous footings may be designed for a net allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) due to dead plus live loads, with a one-third increase when including transient loads such as wind or seismic. The footing bottom should be at least 24 inches below pad grade or lowest adjacent finish grade, whichever provides a deeper embedment. Footings should be at least 12 inches wide. The continuous footings should be structurally interconnected to form a grid system for increase rigidity. Spacing between continuous footings should be between 13 and 17 feet, center to center. Footings should be reinforced as determined by the project Structural Engineer.

Resistance to lateral loads may be developed from a combination of friction between the bottom of foundations and the supporting subgrade, and by passive resistance acting against the vertical sides of the foundations. Footings bearing on native soil or engineered fill may be designed using an ultimate friction coefficient of 0.3 between the foundations and supporting subgrade, and an ultimate passive resistance of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf, equivalent fluid weight) acting against the embedded sides of the foundations. The passive pressure can be assumed to act starting at the top of the lowest adjacent grade in paved areas. In unpaved areas, the passive pressure can be assumed to act starting at a depth of 1 foot below grade. It should be noted that the passive resistance value discussed above is only applicable where the concrete is placed directly against undisturbed soil or engineered fills. Voids created by the use of forms should be backfilled with property compacted engineered fill or with concrete.

The continuous footing systems should be designed for a total post-construction settlement of 2 inches, with about 1 inch of differential settlement over a distance of about 25 feet.

To maintain the desired support, the bottom of footings adjacent to utility trenches or buried structures should be below an imaginary plane having an inclination of 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical, extending upward from the bottom edge of the adjacent utility trenches or structures. If the footings are closer than the recommended distance, the project Geotechnical Engineer should be consulted for recommendations.

6.3.5 Conventional Footings (Retaining Walls, etc.)
Footings, continuous and isolated, may be used to support auxiliary structures such as site retaining walls. Footings should bear on undisturbed native soil and/or properly compacted engineered fill. Preparation of soil subgrade, moisture conditioning, and compaction of soil and engineered fill should be as recommended in the “Earthwork” section (Section 6.2) of this report.

These footings may be designed using the parameters given under Section 6.3.4 above except that the footing embedment depth may be reduced to at least 18 inches below pad grade or lowest adjacent finish grade, whichever provides a deeper embedment.

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 23
June 2, 2022

6.4 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade

6.4.1 Interior Slabs-on-grade
The interior building slabs of the residential buildings will be the post-tensioned slabs.

If grid foundations are used for the commercial buildings, the building floors may consist of conventional concrete slabs-on-grade. Concrete slabs-on-grade should be constructed over properly water conditioned and compacted subgrade soil, prepared per our recommendations in the “Earthwork” section (Section 6.2) of this report. Soil subgrades MUST be maintained in a moist condition prior to placement of concrete for the concrete slabs. Design of reinforcement, joint spacing, etc. is the responsibility of the design engineer.

Slabs that will be covered with moisture sensitive floor coverings or where vapor transmission through the slab is undesirable should be underlain by at least 4 inches of capillary break material such as free draining, ¾-inch by No. 4 clean crushed rock. A visqueen layer should be placed over the capillary break material. The visqueen should be a high-quality polymer at least 15 mils thick that is resistant to puncture during slab construction. Laps between sheets and openings should be taped. Typically, the membrane and the slab are separated by 2 inches of sand but this should be determined by the structural engineer and architect.

A lower water-cement ratio (0.45 to 0.50) will also help reduce the permeability of the floor slab.

It should be understood that the recommended plastic membrane is not intended to waterproof the concrete slab floor. If waterproofing is desired, the project designers and/or a flooring expert should be contacted.

6.4.2 Exterior Concrete Slabs-on-grade
Exterior concrete slabs-on-grade for this project will be limited to driveways and exterior flatwork. These slabs should be constructed on properly moisture conditioned and compacted subgrade soil as recommended in the “Earthwork” section (Section 6.2) of this report. Soil subgrades should be maintained in a moist condition prior to placement of concrete for the concrete slabs. Design of reinforcement, joint spacing, etc. is the responsibility of the design engineer.

Exterior concrete slabs-on-grade should be cast free from adjacent foundations or other nonheaving edge restraints. This may be accomplished by using a strip of 1/2-inch asphaltimpregnated felt divider material between the slab edges and the adjacent structure. Frequent construction or control joints should be provided in all concrete slabs where cracking is objectionable. Continuous reinforcing or dowels at the construction and control joints will also aid in reducing uneven slab movements.

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 24
June 2, 2022

6.5 Retaining Walls
Retaining walls will include the basement perimeter walls about 5 feet high and landscaping walls with exposed height on the order of 2 feet. Retaining walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressure and surcharge forces acting on the walls. Lateral pressures will depend on the degree of movement the walls are allowed (or desired), the type of backfill, the magnitude of external loads, and subsurface drainage provisions.

For static loading conditions, the walls may be designed using at-rest or active soil pressure.

At-rest soil pressure should be used for walls where movement at the top of walls is restrained or undesirable, such as the basement walls. Wall movements could cause settlement of backfill and structures supported on the backfill. Active soil pressure may be used for retaining walls where the top of walls is free to deflect and resulting movement of the backfill is acceptable. The at-rest and active soil pressures given below are for level backfill surface and for either drained or undrained backfill condition.

Table 6.5-1: Recommended Lateral Soil Pressures (Equivalent Fluid Weights) for Level Ground Condition Drained Backfill(1) Undrained Backfill(2)
Active(3) 45 pcf 82 pcf
At-rest 55 pcf 92 pcf
Seismic surcharge(4) 28 pcf 28 pcf
Notes:

1. Lateral soil pressures for drained backfill may be used above groundwater level with drainage provided behind walls.

2. Lateral soil pressures for undrained backfill should be used below groundwater level or where drainage is not provided behind walls.

3. To develop active soil pressures, wall movements of about 0.005H to 0.01H may be necessary for cohesive soils, with up to 0.005H for cohesionless soils.

4. Seismic surcharge, if required per building code or structural design, should be applied as an inverted equivalent fluid pressure (inverted triangle) with the resultant force at 0.6H above the wall bottom (H is the height of the design plane from the wall bottom to the ground surface above).

Pressures due to static external loads should be added to the soil pressures recommended above in the wall design. For uniform vertical load at the ground surface, the additional lateral pressure on the walls should be calculated as a uniform pressure equal to the magnitude of the vertical load multiplied by a factor. For level backfill slope, the factor is 0.38 for active soil condition and

0.5 for at-rest soil condition. For other slope inclinations and other types of surcharge loads, such as vehicle loads, point loads, strip loads, consult our office for specific recommendations.

Foundations for retaining walls may consist of footings designed using the recommendations in the Foundations Section 6.3.5 of this report.

Wall Drains (drained backfill condition): For walls designed using lateral soil pressures under drained backfill condition, a subsurface drain should be installed behind each wall extending from

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 25
June 2, 2022
the wall bottom to about 1 foot below finished grade. The drain should consist of a 12-inch minimum wide blanket of drainage material consisting of either Class 2 Permeable material (Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section 68) or clean, 1/2 to 3/4-inch maximum size crushed rock or gravel. If crushed rock or gravel is used, it should be encapsulated in a geotextile filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Filter fabric is optional if Class 2 Permeable material is used. The top 1 foot below finish grade should be backfilled with compacted clayey soil to reduce infiltration of surface water.

A 4-inch minimum diameter, perforated, schedule 40 PVC (or equivalent) pipe should be installed (with perforations facing down) along the base of each wall on a 2-inch thick bed of drain rock, regardless whether drain rock or pre-fabricated drainage panel is used. The pipes should be sloped to drain by gravity to a proper collection system and be discharged at a proper outlet as designed by the project Civil Engineer.

Wall Compaction: Backfill against retaining walls should be compacted as discussed in the “Earthwork” Section of this report. Over-compaction should be avoided because increased compaction effort can result in lateral pressures significantly higher than those recommended above. Backfill placed within 3 feet of the walls should be compacted with hand-operated equipment.

6.6 Vehicle Pavements
Vehicle pavements for this project will include an interior street, access drives, and the commercial parking lot. These pavements will primarily serve automobiles and light pickup trucks, with occasional heavy vehicles, such as delivery and garbage trucks. If the pavements are constructed prior to completion of construction, the pavements will be subject to construction traffic including heavy delivery and concrete trucks.

An R-value of 38 was measured on a bulk sample of soil collected from the site. For design purposes, an R-value of 25 was used to calculate the pavement sections tabulated below using the Caltrans pavement section design procedures.

DESIGN TRAFFIC
INDEX

HOT MIX ASPHALT
(inches)
CLASS 2 AGGREGATE BASE
(inches)
TOTAL
(inches)

5.0 3.0 6.5 9.5

5.5 3.0 8.0 11.0

6.0 3.5 8.5 12.0

6.5 3.5 10.0 13.5
Pavement sections should be constructed on soil subgrades that have been prepared as outlined in the “Earthwork” section of this report. The upper 8 inches of soil subgrade in pavement areas should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. The full section of aggregate base and aggregate subbase should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. Evaluation of relative compaction should be based on ASTM D1557, latest edition.

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 26
June 2, 2022
The Class 2 Aggregate Base material should conform to Section 26 of the Caltrans Standard Specifications and the Class 2 Aggregate Subbase material should conform to Section 25 of the Caltrans Standard Specifications.

6.7 Surface and Subsurface Drainage
Engineering design of grading and drainage at the site is the responsibility of the project Civil Engineer. We suggest the following for consideration by the project Civil Engineer, as appropriate.

Sufficient surface drainage should be provided to direct water away from buildings, foundations, concrete slabs-on-grade and pavements, and towards suitable collection and discharge facilities.

Ponding of surface water should be avoided by establishing positive drainage away from all improvements.

6.8 Stitch Piers Along Existing Creek Bank
As discussed in Section 5.5 above, stitch piers will be installed along the top of the existing creek bank. Stitch piers should consist of drilled, cast-in-place, reinforced concrete piers. Minimum pier diameter should be 24 inches. Center to center spacing between piers should be no more than 2 times of the pier diameter. The upper portion of the stitch piers above the toe of creek bank elevation should be designed to retain the soil and surcharge forces behind the piers, with recommendations in Section 6.5 “Retaining Walls” above. Resistance to vertical and lateral loads should be from the lower portion of the piers below the toe of creek bank elevation.

For vertical dead plus live loading, a net allowable adhesion value of 500 pounds per square foot may be assumed along the pier shafts. This value may be increased by one-third when including transient loads, such as wind or seismic. The upper portion of the piers above the bottom of creek bank elevation should be ignored in the calculation of vertical pier capacity. End bearing capacity of the piers should also be ignored.

The lateral load capacity of a stitch pier is a function of the stiffness of the surrounding soils, the stiffness of the pier, the allowable deflection at the top of the pier, the allowable moment capacity of the pier cross section, and the pier top connection (fixed head vs. free head).

Table 6.8-1 below provides soil parameters for use in L-Pile analysis of the stitch piers.

Table 6.8-1 L-Pile Parameters for Drilled Stitch Piers(1) Depth Below Ground
Surface (feet)
L-Pile Soil
Type
SPT N1,60
(blows/ft)
Ø
(degrees)
Cu
(psf) Ɛ50
K
(pci)
Unit Weight
(pcf)
Static Condition
0 – 21 Sand neglect --- --- --- --- ---
21 – 25(2) Sand 60 36 0 --- 400 121
25 – 50 Sand 63 36 0 --- 200 58(3)
Liquefaction Condition
0 – 21 Sand neglect --- --- --- --- ---

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 27
June 2, 2022
Table 6.8-1 L-Pile Parameters for Drilled Stitch Piers(1) Depth Below Ground
Surface (feet)
L-Pile Soil
Type
SPT N1,60
(blows/ft)
Ø
(degrees)
Cu
(psf) Ɛ50
K
(pci)
Unit Weight
(pcf)
21 – 25(2) Sand --- 0 1500(4) 0.0071 200 121
25 – 50 Sand --- 0 2000(4) 0.0063 250 58(3)
Notes:

1. Parameters based on CPT-2 and CPT-3.

2. Groundwater at 25 feet.

3. Buoyant unit weight below groundwater.

4. Undrained shear strength estimated by CLiq on CPT-2 and CPT-3.

If water is encountered in the pier holes, concrete should be placed using the “tremie” method to displace the water to the surface.

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 28
June 2, 2022
7 PLAN REVIEW, EARTHWORK AND FOUNDATION OBSERVATION
Post-report geotechnical services by Geo-Logic Associates (GLA), typically consisting of preconstruction design consultations and reviews and construction observation and testing services, are necessary for GLA to confirm the recommendations contained in this report. This report is based on limited sampling and investigation, and by those constraints may not have discovered local anomalies or other varying conditions that may exist on the project site. Therefore, this report is only preliminary until GLA can confirm that actual conditions in the ground conform to those anticipated in the report. Accordingly, as an integral part of this report, GLA recommends post-report, construction related geotechnical services to assist the project team during design and construction of the project. GLA requires that it perform these services if it is to remain as the project Geotechnical Engineer-of-record.

During design, GLA can provide consultation and supplemental recommendations to assist the project team in design and value engineering, especially if the project design has been modified after completion of our report. It is impossible for us to anticipate every design scenario and use of construction materials during preparation of our report. Therefore, retaining GLA to provide post-report consultation will help address design changes, answer questions and evaluate alternatives proposed by the project designers and contractors.

Prior to issuing project plans and specifications for construction bidding purposes, GLA should review the grading, drainage and foundation plans and the project specifications to determine if the intent of our recommendations has been incorporated in these documents. We have found that such a review process will help reduce the likelihood of misinterpretation of our recommendations which may cause construction delay and additional cost.

Construction phase services can include, among other things, the observation and testing during site clearing, stripping, excavation, mass grading, subgrade preparation, fill placement and compaction, backfill compaction, foundation construction and pavement construction activities.

Geo-Logic Associates would be pleased to provide cost proposals for follow-up geotechnical services. Post-report geotechnical services may include additional field and laboratory services.

Geotechnical Study
475 & 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, California
Project PA20.1055.00 29
June 2, 2022
8 LIMITATIONS
In preparing the findings and professional opinions presented in this report, Geo-Logic Associates (GLA) has endeavored to follow generally accepted principles and practices of the engineering geologic and geotechnical engineering professions in the area and at the time our services were performed. No warranty, either express or implied, is provided.

The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based, in part, on information that has been provided to us. In the event that the general development concept or general location and type of structures are modified, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid unless we are retained to review such changes and to make any necessary additions or changes to our recommendations. To remain as the project Geotechnical Engineer-of-record, GLA must be retained to provide geotechnical services as discussed under the Post-report Geotechnical Services section of this report.

Subsurface exploration is necessarily confined to selected locations and conditions may, and often do, vary between these locations. Should conditions different from those described in this report be encountered during project development, GLA should be consulted to review the conditions and determine whether our recommendations are still valid. Additional exploration, testing, and analysis may be required for such evaluation.

Should persons concerned with this project observe geotechnical features or conditions at the site or surrounding areas which are different from those described in this report, those observations should be reported immediately to GLA for evaluation.

It is important that the information in this report be made known to the design professionals involved with the project, that our recommendations be incorporated into project drawings and documents, and that the recommendations be carried out during construction by the contractor and subcontractors. It is not the responsibility of GLA to notify the design professionals and the project contractors and subcontractors.

The findings, conclusions, and recommendations in this report are applicable only to the specific project development on this specific site. These data should not be used for other projects, sites, or purposes unless they are reviewed by GLA or a qualified geotechnical professional.

Report prepared by,
Geo-Logic Associates
Chalerm (Beeson) Liang
GE 2031
Fs/csl
Copy: Robson Homes, Richard Yee

FIGURES

PROJECT
PA20.1055
FIGURE
1 SITE PLAN (EXISTING DEVELOPMENT) 475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
6300 San Ignacio Avenue,
Suite A
San Jose, California 95119
Phone (408) 778-2818
Drafted By:

Date: Checked By:

Revision:

June 2022

CAMBRIANNA DRIVE

EUNEVAREPAT
SCALE (feet)0 20 40 60 80 100
Existing
Creek

Explanation
DH-4 Exploratory drill hole CPT-3 Cone penetration test hole Bulk sample

PROJECT
PA20.1055
FIGURE
2 SITE PLAN (PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT)
475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
6300 San Ignacio Avenue,
Suite A
San Jose, California 95119
Phone (408) 778-2818
Drafted By:

Date: Checked By:

Revision:

June 2022

CAMBRIANNA DRIVE

EUNEVAREPAT
SCALE (feet)0 20 40 60 80 100
Base: Untitled and undated site layout drawing provided by Robson Homes on November 17, 2021.

St.JohnStreet
DH-3
DH-1
DH-2
DH-4
CPT-1
CPT-2
CPT-3
B-1
Existing Creek
Existing Housek Vicinity Map (no scale)
Lot 8
Lot 9
Lot 10Lot 11
Lot 12
Lot 13
Lot 14
Lot 4 Lot 5 Lot 6 Lot 7
Lot 3
Lot 2
Lot 1
Lot 15

PROJECT
PA20.1055
FIGURE
3 LOCATIONS OF PROJECT SITE AND
ZONE 7 MONITORING WELL 16P5
475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
6300 San Ignacio Avenue,
Suite A
San Jose, California 95119
Phone (408) 778-2818
Compiled by:

Reviewed by:

Date:

Revision:

Approximate location
of project site
Approximate location of
Zone 7 Water Agency
monitoring well
BASE: Map showing location of their monitoring well 16P5 provided by Zone 7 Water District, via email on December 15, 2020.

June 2022

Notes: 1. Well 16P5 was dry between 7/24/2014 and 10/5/2014.

2. Top of well at elevation 354.51 feet. Bottom of well elevation unknown.3. Water level readings were typically taken monthly.

Drafted By: BL DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER FIGUREDate: June 2022 ZONE 7 WELL 16P5 4Checked By: 475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET Revision: PROJECT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PA20.1055
6300 San Ignacio Avenue
Suite A
San Jose, California 95119
Phone (408) 778-2812
0 102030
405060708090
100
67-tcO-80
77-tcO-80
87-tcO-80
97-tcO-80
08-tcO-80
18-tcO-80
28-tcO-80
38-tcO-80
48-tcO-80
58-tcO-80
68-tcO-80
78-tcO-80
88-tcO-80
98-tcO-80
09-tcO-80
19-tcO-80
29-tcO-80
39-tcO-80
49-tcO-80
59-tcO-80
69-tcO-80
79-tcO-80
89-tcO-80
99-tcO-80
00-tcO-80
10-tcO-80
20-tcO-80
30-tcO-80
40-tcO-80
50-tcO-80
60-tcO-80
70-tcO-80
80-tcO-80
90-tcO-80
01-tcO-80
11-tcO-80
21-tcO-80
31-tcO-80
41-tcO-80
51-tcO-80
61-tcO-80
71-tcO-80
81-tcO-80
91-tcO-80
02-tcO-80
teef,retawdnuorGothtpeD
Date

DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER
ZONE 7 WELL 16P5
475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
well was dry between 7/24/2014 & 10/5/2014

RECOMMENDED BUILDING SETBACK
475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
6300 San Ignacio Avenue, Suite A
San Jose, California 95119
Phone (408) 778-2818
Compiled by:

Reviewed by:

Date:

Revision:

June 2022
5 FIGURE

PROJECT
PA20.1055
Building setback: at least 10 ft beyond crest of projected 2:1 (h:v) line Existing creek bank
Projected 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) line from toe of existing bank Schematic Only – Not to Scale

PROJECT
PA20.1055
FIGURE
6 POST-TENSIONED SLAB

TYPICAL SECTION
475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
6300 San Ignacio Avenue,
Suite A
San Jose, California 95119
Phone (408) 778-2818
Compiled by:

Reviewed by:

Date:

Revision:

Exterior finish grade, slope to drain
Post-tensioned Slab, thickness per structural design
18-inch minimum
embedment below
bottom of posttensioned slab
6-inch wide
thickened edge
Moisture-conditioned and compaction
slab subgrade soil per geotechnical report
Subgrade Preparation and Thickened Edge for Post-tensioned Slab Foundations Post-tensioned slab
See detail above for
post-tensioned slab
subgrade preparation
Footing (if required by
structural engineer)
Perimeter thickened edge
designed to retain soil behind
Exterior finish grade,
slope to drain
18 inch minimum embedment to
bottom of thickened edge or
required footing
Foundation Embedment for Post-tensioned Slabs with Differential Grades Note:

1. Refer to geotechnical report for detailed recommendations.

Schematic Only – Not to Scale
June 2022

APPENDIXA
KEYSTOSOILCLASSIFICATION
DRILLHOLELOGS,
AND
CONEPENETRATIONTESTPLOTS

KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION - FINE GRAINED SOILS
(50% OR MORE IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE)
(modified from ASTM D2487 to include fine grained soils with intermediate plasticity)

MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP

SYMBOLS GROUP NAMES

SILTS AND
CLAYS
(Liquid Limit
less than 35)
Low
Plasticity
Inorganic PI < 4 or plots
below “A” line ML Silt, Silt with Sand or Gravel, Sandy or Gravelly Silt, Sandy or Gravelly Silt with Sand or Gravel Inorganic PI > 7 or plots on
or above “A” line CL
Lean Clay, Lean Clay with Sand or Gravel, Sandy or
Gravelly Lean Clay, Sandy or Gravelly Lean Clay with Sand or Gravel
Inorganic PI between 4
and 7 CL-ML Silty Clay, Silty Clay with Sand or Gravel, Sandy or Gravelly Silty Clay, Sandy or Gravelly Silty Clay with Sand or Gravel Organic See footnote 3 OL Organic Silt (below “A” Line) or Organic Clay (on or above “A” Line) (1,2)

SILTS AND
CLAYS
(35 ≤ Liquid
Limit < 50)
Intermediate
Plasticity
Inorganic PI < 4 or plots
below “A” line MI Silt, Silt with Sand or Gravel, Sandy or Gravelly Silt, Sandy or Gravelly Silt with Sand or Gravel Inorganic PI > 7 or plots on
or above “A” line CI Clay, Clay with Sand or Gravel, Sandy or Gravelly Clay, Sandy or Gravelly Clay with Sand or Gravel Organic See footnote 3 OI Organic Silt (below “A” Line) or Organic Clay (on or above “A” Line) (1,2)

SILTS AND
CLAYS
(Liquid Limit
50 or
greater)
High
Plasticity
Inorganic PI plots below
“A” line MH
Elastic Silt, Elastic Silt with Sand or Gravel, Sandy or Gravelly Elastic Silt, Sandy or Gravelly Elastic Silt with Sand or Gravel
Inorganic PI plots on or
above “A” line CH Fat Clay, Fat Clay with Sand or Gravel, Sandy or Gravelly Fat Clay, Sandy or Gravelly Fat Clay with Sand or Gravel Organic See note 3 below OH Organic Silt (below “A” Line) or Organic Clay (on or above “A” Line) (1,2)

1. If soil contains 15% to 29% plus No. 200 material, include “with sand” or “with gravel” to group name, whichever is predominant.

2. If soil contains ≥30% plus No. 200 material, include “sandy” or “gravelly” to group name, whichever is predominant. If soil contains ≥15% of sand or gravel sized material, add “with sand” or “with gravel” to group name.

3. Ratio of liquid limit of oven dried sample to liquid limit of not dried sample is less than 0.75.

CONSISTENCY

UNCONFINED

SHEAR STRENGTH
(KSF)

STANDARD

PENETRATION
(BLOWS/FOOT) Plasticity Chart
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Plasticity Index
Liquid Limit
"U" Line "A" Line
CH or OH
MH or OH CI
or
OI
MI
or
OI
CL
or OL
CL-ML
ML or OL
VERY SOFT < 0.25 < 2
SOFT 0.25 – 0.5 2 – 4
FIRM 0.5 – 1.0 5 – 8
STIFF 1.0 – 2.0 9 – 15
VERY STIFF 2.0 – 4.0 16 – 30
HARD > 4.0 > 30

MOISTURE CRITERIA
Dry Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the
touch
Moist Damp, but no visible water
Wet Visible free water, usually soil is below the
water table

GEO-LOGIC ASSOCIATES

KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION – COARSE GRAINED SOILS
(MORE THAN 50% IS LARGER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE)
(modified from ASTM D2487 to include fines with intermediate plasticity)

MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP
SYMBOLS GROUP NAMES1

GRAVELS
(more than
50% of
coarse
fraction is
larger than
No. 4 sieve
size)
Gravels
with less
than 5%
fines
Cu ≥ 4 and
1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3 GW Well Graded Gravel, Well Graded Gravel with Sand Cu < 4 and/or
1 > Cc > 3 GP Poorly Graded Gravel, Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand Gravels
with 5% to
12% fines
ML, MI or MH
fines
GW-GM Well Graded Gravel with Silt, Well Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand
GP-GM Poorly Graded Gravel with Silt, Poorly Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand
CL, CI or CH
fines
GW-GC Well Graded Gravel with Clay, Well Graded Gravel with Clay and Sand
GP-GC Poorly Graded Gravel with Clay, Poorly Graded Gravel with Clay and Sand
Gravels
with more
than 12%
fines
ML, MI or MH
fines GM Silty Gravel, Silty Gravel with Sand
CL, CI or CH
fines GC Clayey Gravel, Clayey Gravel with Sand
CL-ML fines GC-GM Silty Clayey Gravel; Silty, Clayey Gravel with Sand SANDS
(50% or
more of
coarse
fraction is
smaller than
No. 4 sieve
size)
Sands with
less than
5% fines
Cu ≥ 6 and
1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3 SW Well Graded Sand, Well Graded Sand with Gravel Cu < 6 and/or
1 > Cc > 3 SP Poorly Graded Sand, Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel Sands with
5% to 12%
fines
ML, MI or MH
fines
SW-SM Well Graded Sand with Silt, Well Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel
SP-SM Poorly Graded Sand with Silt, Poorly Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel
CL, CI or CH
fines
SW-SC Well Graded Sand with Clay, Well Graded Sand with Clay and Gravel
SP-SC Poorly Graded Sand with Clay, Poorly Graded Sand with Clay and Gravel
Sands with
more than
12% fines
ML, MI or MH
fines SM Silty Sand, Silty Sand with Gravel
CL, CI or CH
fines SC Clayey Sand, Clayey Sand with Gravel
CL-ML fines SC-SM Silty, Clayey Sand; Silty, Clayey Sand with Gravel

US STANDARD SIEVES 3 Inch ¾ Inch No. 4 No. 10 No. 40 No. 200

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE

COBBLES & BOULDERS GRAVELS SANDS SILTS AND CLAYS

RELATIVE DENSITY
(SANDS AND GRAVELS)

STANDARD

PENETRATION
(BLOWS/FOOT)

1. Add “with sand” to group name if material contains 15% or greater of sand-sized particle. Add “with gravel” to group name if material contains 15% or greater of gravel-sized particle.

Very Loose 0 - 4
Loose 5 – 10 MOISTURE CRITERIA
Medium Dense 11 – 30 Dry Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch Dense 31 - 50 Moist Damp, but no visible water
Very Dense 50+ Wet Visible free water, usually soi is below the water table

GEO-LOGIC ASSOCIATES

DATE: DH‐ 1
PROJECTNUMBER:

LOGGEDBY:

HOLEELEVATION:

D=3"OD,2½"IDSplit‐spoon
X=2½"OD,2"IDSplit‐spoon
I=StandardPenetrometer(2"ODSPT)
S=Sloughinsample
SOILTYPE
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWSPER
FOOT
POCKETPEN
(tsf)
%PASSING
#200SIEVE
LIQUID
LIMIT
WATER

CONTENT
PLASTICITY
INDEX
DRYDENSITY
(pcf)
FAILURE
STRAIN(%)
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH(psf)
ML S
D
D 3.25 65 22 14 2 100
S
CL D
D 1.75 23 92
S
D
D 1.0 19 106
SP
S
D
D
S
D
D 12 114
PAGE:
20 GEO‐LOGICASSOCIATES 1of1
18 dense 19
48 16
17 14
27 15
12 13
9 5
17 lightbrown 10
11 8
9 6
7 4
DESCRIPTIONOF
EARTHMATERIALS
PavementSection(±3"ACover±4"Base)
1 2 11
‐‐‐
SAMPLER: GROUNDWATERDEPTH: Initial: ‐‐‐ Final: ‐‐‐ 3 11/13/2020 LOGOFEXPLORATORYDRILLHOLE
PROJECTNAME: 475&493St.JohnStreet,Pleasanton,CA PA20.1055 DRILLRIG: MobileB‐61,automatichammer FS
HOLEDIAMETER: 8‐inchhollowstemauger
BOTTOMOFHOLE=20Feet
Nogroundwaterencountered
POORLYGRADEDSAND:Brown,moist,medium
dense
SANDYSILT:Brown,moist,verystiff;with
LEANCLAY:Brown,moist,stiff

DATE: DH‐ 2
PROJECTNUMBER:

LOGGEDBY:

HOLEELEVATION:

D=3"OD,2½"IDSplit‐spoon
X=2½"OD,2"IDSplit‐spoon
I=StandardPenetrometer(2"ODSPT)
S=Sloughinsample
SOILTYPE
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWSPER
FOOT
POCKETPEN
(tsf)
%PASSING
#200SIEVE
LIQUID
LIMIT
WATER

CONTENT
PLASTICITY
INDEX
DRYDENSITY
(pcf)
FAILURE
STRAIN(%)
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH(psf)
ML S
D
D 1.25 5
S
D
D 1.0 5 96
S
D
D 4.5+ 9 104
SM
S
D
D
SW‐
SC
S
D
D
PAGE:
20 GEO‐LOGICASSOCIATES 1of1
18 19
72 16
17 15
13 hard
14 11
12 PA20.1055
DRILLRIG: MobileB‐61,automatichammer FS
2 HOLEDIAMETER: 8‐inchhollowstemauger ‐‐‐
SAMPLER: GROUNDWATERDEPTH: ‐‐‐ Final: ‐‐‐
DESCRIPTIONOF
EARTHMATERIALS
PavementSection(±3"ACover±4"Base)
1 22
11/13/2020 LOGOFEXPLORATORYDRILLHOLE
PROJECTNAME: 475&493St.JohnStreet,Pleasanton,CA Initial:
4 brown 28
5 33
10 3
70 6
9 7
8 BOTTOMOFHOLE=20Feet
Nogroundwaterencountered
SILTYSAND:Lightbrown,moist,verydense
WELL GRADEDSANDwithGRAVELandCLAY:
Brown,moist,very dense;finetocoarsesand,
finegravel
SANDYSILT:Lightbrown,moist,verystiff;with

DATE: DH‐ 3
PROJECTNUMBER:

LOGGEDBY:

HOLEELEVATION:

D=3"OD,2½"IDSplit‐spoon
X=2½"OD,2"IDSplit‐spoon
I=StandardPenetrometer(2"ODSPT)
S=Sloughinsample
SOILTYPE
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWSPER
FOOT
POCKETPEN
(tsf)
%PASSING
#200SIEVE
LIQUID
LIMIT
WATER

CONTENT
PLASTICITY
INDEX
DRYDENSITY
(pcf)
FAILURE
STRAIN(%)
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH(psf)
ML S
D
D 4.5+ 7 123
S
D
D 1.75 8 94
SP‐
SC
S
D
D 7 2
S
D
D 4 122
S
D
D 8 5
PAGE:
20 GEO‐LOGICASSOCIATES 1of3
18 19
15 16
17 14
34 15
12 13
SW‐
SC
4 stiff
5 11
11 8
9 10
39 11/13/2020 LOGOFEXPLORATORYDRILLHOLE
PROJECTNAME: 475&493St.JohnStreet,Pleasanton,CA PavementSection(±3"ACover±4"Base)
1 2 70
6 7
PA20.1055
DRILLRIG: MobileB‐61,automatichammer FS
DESCRIPTIONOF
EARTHMATERIALS
HOLEDIAMETER: 8‐inchhollowstemauger ‐‐‐
SAMPLER: GROUNDWATERDEPTH: Initial: ‐‐‐
Final: 48ft
3 WELLGRADEDSANDwithGRAVELandCLAY:
Brown,moist,mediumdenseto dense;fineto
coarsesand,withfinegravel
POORLYGRADEDSANDwithCLAY:Brown,
moist,dense
SANDYSILT:Brown,moist,hard;withmostly

DATE: DH‐ 3
PROJECTNUMBER:

LOGGEDBY:

HOLEELEVATION:

D=3"OD,2½"IDSplit‐spoon
X=2½"OD,2"IDSplit‐spoon
I=StandardPenetrometer(2"ODSPT)
S=Sloughinsample
SOILTYPE
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWSPER
FOOT
POCKETPEN
(tsf)
%PASSING
#200SIEVE
LIQUID
LIMIT
WATER

CONTENT
PLASTICITY
INDEX
DRYDENSITY
(pcf)
FAILURE
STRAIN(%)
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH(psf)
S
I
I
S
I
I
S
I
I 8 7
S
I
I
PAGE:
20 32
32 38
GEO‐LOGICASSOCIATES
37 38
35 2of3
39 40
33 34
31 32
36 29
dense 30
27 28
25 26
23 24
SP‐
SC
DESCRIPTIONOF
EARTHMATERIALS
21 22
HOLEDIAMETER: 8‐inchhollowstemauger
SW‐
SC
‐‐‐
SAMPLER: GROUNDWATERDEPTH: Initial: ‐‐‐
Final: 48ft
PROJECTNAME: 475&493St.JohnStreet,Pleasanton,CA PA20.1055 DRILLRIG: MobileB‐61,automatichammer FS
11/13/2020 LOGOFEXPLORATORYDRILLHOLE
WELLGRADEDSANDwithGRAVELandCLAY
(continued)
POORLY GRADEDSANDwithGRAVELandCLAY:
Brown,moist,mediumdense;finetocoarse
sand,finetocoarsegravel

DATE: DH‐ 3
PROJECTNUMBER:

LOGGEDBY:

HOLEELEVATION:

D=3"OD,2½"IDSplit‐spoon
X=2½"OD,2"IDSplit‐spoon
I=StandardPenetrometer(2"ODSPT)
S=Sloughinsample
SOILTYPE
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWSPER
FOOT
POCKETPEN
(tsf)
%PASSING
#200SIEVE
LIQUID
LIMIT
WATER

CONTENT
PLASTICITY
INDEX
DRYDENSITY
(pcf)
FAILURE
STRAIN(%)
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH(psf)
S
I
I
SW‐
SC S
I
I 8 8
PAGE:
55 56
39 40
SP‐
SC
GROUNDWATERDEPTH:
GEO‐LOGICASSOCIATES 3of3
59 60
57 58
53 54
51 52
50 47
48 49
45 46
43 44 densetoverydense
DESCRIPTIONOF
EARTHMATERIALS
41 42
SAMPLER: Initial: ‐‐‐
Final: 48ft
DRILLRIG: MobileB‐61,automatichammer FS
HOLEDIAMETER: 8‐inchhollowstemauger ‐‐‐
11/13/2020 LOGOFEXPLORATORYDRILLHOLE
PROJECTNAME: 475&493St.JohnStreet,Pleasanton,CA PA20.1055 BOTTOMOFHOLE=50Feet
WELLGRADEDGRAVELwithSANDandCLAY:
Brown,moist,densetoverydense;fineto
POORLYGRADEDSANDwith GRAVELand

DATE: DH‐ 4
PROJECTNUMBER:

LOGGEDBY:

HOLEELEVATION:

D=3"OD,2½"IDSplit‐spoon
X=2½"OD,2"IDSplit‐spoon
I=StandardPenetrometer(2"ODSPT)
S=Sloughinsample
SOILTYPE
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
BLOWSPER
FOOT
POCKETPEN
(tsf)
%PASSING
#200SIEVE
LIQUID
LIMIT
WATER

CONTENT
PLASTICITY
INDEX
DRYDENSITY
(pcf)
FAILURE
STRAIN(%)
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH(psf)
ML S
D
D 24 7 3 94
S
D
D 1.5 8 95
SW‐
SC
S
D
D 15
S
D
D
S
D
D
PAGE:
20 GEO‐LOGICASSOCIATES 1of1
18 19
56 16
17 14
53 15
12 13
22 verystiff
5 57
10 11
8 9
6 7
3 4
DESCRIPTIONOF
EARTHMATERIALS
PavementSection(±3"ACover±4"Base)
1 2 52
‐‐‐
SAMPLER: GROUNDWATERDEPTH: Initial: ‐‐‐
Final: ‐‐‐
11/13/2020 LOGOFEXPLORATORYDRILLHOLE
PROJECTNAME: 475&493St.JohnStreet,Pleasanton,CA PA20.1055 DRILLRIG: MobileB‐61,automatichammer FS
HOLEDIAMETER: 8‐inchhollowstemauger
BOTTOMOFHOLE=20Feet
Nogroundwaterencountered
WELL GRADEDSANDwithGRAVELandCLAY:
Brown,moist,densetovery dense;fineto
coarsesand
SANDYSILT:Brown,moist,verystifftohard;

Geo-Logic Associates
Project 475 & 493 St John St Operator BH-ZG Filename SDF(380).cptJob Number PA20.1055.00 Cone Number DDG1496 GPSHole Number CPT-01 Date and Time 11/13/2020 8:24:54 AM Maximum Depth 51.02 ftEST GW Depth During Test 48.00 ft Net Area Ratio .8Cone Size 15cm squared Soil Behavior Referance *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0 700
TIP
TSF 0 7

FRICTION
TSF 0 5
Fs/Qt
% 0 120
SPT N
0 12
1 - sensitive fine grained 2 - organic material 3 - clay 4 - silty clay to clay 5 - clayey silt to silty clay 6 - sandy silt to clayey silt 7 - silty sand to sandy silt 8 - sand to silty sand 9 - sand 10 - gravelly sand to sand 11 - very stiff fine grained (*)12 - sand to clayey sand (*)

CPT DATA
DEPTH
(ft)
SOIL

BEHAVIOR
TYPE

Geo-Logic Associates
Project 475 & 493 St John St Operator BH-ZG Filename SDF(382).cptJob Number PA20.1055.00 Cone Number DDG1496 GPSHole Number CPT-02 Date and Time 11/13/2020 10:46:17 AM Maximum Depth 30.68 ftEST GW Depth During Test 48.00 ft Net Area Ratio .8Cone Size 15cm squared Soil Behavior Referance *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0 700
TIP
TSF 0 7

FRICTION
TSF 0 5
Fs/Qt
% 0 120
SPT N
0 12
1 - sensitive fine grained 2 - organic material 3 - clay 4 - silty clay to clay 5 - clayey silt to silty clay 6 - sandy silt to clayey silt 7 - silty sand to sandy silt 8 - sand to silty sand 9 - sand 10 - gravelly sand to sand 11 - very stiff fine grained (*)12 - sand to clayey sand (*)

CPT DATA
DEPTH
(ft)
SOIL

BEHAVIOR
TYPE

Geo-Logic Associates
Project 475 & 493 St John St Operator BH-ZG Filename SDF(381).cptJob Number PA20.1055.00 Cone Number DDG1496 GPSHole Number CPT-03 Date and Time 11/13/2020 9:55:23 AM Maximum Depth 51.02 ftEST GW Depth During Test 48.00 ft Net Area Ratio .8Cone Size 15cm squared Soil Behavior Referance *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0 700
TIP
TSF 0 7

FRICTION
TSF 0 5
Fs/Qt
% 0 120
SPT N
0 12
1 - sensitive fine grained 2 - organic material 3 - clay 4 - silty clay to clay 5 - clayey silt to silty clay 6 - sandy silt to clayey silt 7 - silty sand to sandy silt 8 - sand to silty sand 9 - sand 10 - gravelly sand to sand 11 - very stiff fine grained (*)12 - sand to clayey sand (*)

CPT DATA
DEPTH
(ft)
SOIL

BEHAVIOR
TYPE

APPENDIXB
LABORATORYTESTRESULTS
 

ATTERBERG LIMITS
Summary Report
ASTM D-4318
Client : Project No: Lab Log No.:

Robson Homes LLC
Project Name: Report Date:
475 & 493 St. St. John Street

LIQUID PLASTIC PLASTIC

LSN LIMIT LIMIT INDEX
4699A o DH-1 @ 2-2.5 22 20 2
4699B  DH-4 @ 2-2.5 24 21 3
This testing is based upon accepted industry practice as well as the test method listed. These results apply only to the samples supplied and tested for the above referenced job.

L : Labexcel \ Projects \ Client \ Robson Homes LL \ PA20.1055.00 \ 4699-PI-Base.xls Print Date: Entered By: Reviewed By: LLN:

DCN: PI-rp (rev. 9/18/12) RZS PP

DESCRIPTION
brown sandy silt (ML)
brown sandy silt
4699
November 24, 2020
4699
SAMPLE

IDENTIFICATION
PA20.1055.00
SAMPLE
11/29/20
SYMBOL
0 10
20 30
40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

PLASTIC INDEX (PI)

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)

PLASTICITY CHART

CL - ML
ML or OL
MH or OH
CL or OL
CH or OH
U - Line
A - Line

PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
Test Report
ASTM D-6913 / D-7928, (replacing D-422)
Method B:(+/-0.1%)
Client : Project No: Lab Sample No:

ROBSON HOMES LLC PA20.1055.00 4699A
Project Name: Report Date:
475 & 493 ST. JOHN STREET
COARSE
Description
Size Passing, mm D60 = D10 = 5 micron (%) = 16
Coefficient of Curvature, Cc: Coefficient of Uniformity, Cu: 37.19 Fineness Modulus = 0.12 Note: * Percentages are +/- 0.1% based on computer rounding as allowed by ASTM D-6026-01 Section 5.2.3.

This testing is based upon accepted industry practice as well as the test method listed. These results apply only to the samples supplied and tested for the above referenced job.

L : Labexcel \ Projects \ Client \ Client Name \ 4699 \ 4699A-ma Print Date: Entered By: Reviewed By: LSN:

DCN: MA-rp (rev. 6/27/12) RZS PP 4699A

0.07 Symbol
DH-1 @ 2-2.5 brown sandy silt (ML)

4.08 D30 = 0.02
Sample ID
US STANDARD SIEVE SIZE No.

FINE

US SIEVE SIZE, INCHES
FINE

BOULDERS COBBLES
November 24, 2020
GRAVEL
MEDIUM
SAND
COARSE

SILT AND CLAY
11/29/20

HYDROMETER
% Gravel % Sand

0.00 0.0 35.1 64.9
% Silt - Clay
6" 3" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 30 40 50 100 200
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
1000.00 100.00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 0.00
Percent Retained
Percent Passing
Particle Diameter, mm

'R' VALUE CA 301
Project 475 & 493 St. John St. Date: 11/22/20 By: LD
Job #: PA20.1055 Sample : Bulk
Soil Type: Brown, Sandy Silt w. Gravel

TEST SPECIMEN A B C D
Compactor Air Pressure psi 70 250 300
Initial Moisture Content % 4.2 4.2 4.2
Water Added ml 80 60 40
Moisture at Compaction % 11.1 9.4 7.7
Sample & Mold Weight gms 3215 3238 3232
Mold Weight gms 2095 2097 2098
Net Sample Weight gms 1120 1141 1134
Sample Height in. 2.459 2.472 2.461
Dry Density pcf 124.2 127.8 129.7
Pressure lbs 2075 4965 7830
Exudation Pressure psi 165 395 623
Expansion Dial x 0.0001 2 47 70
Expansion Pressure psf 9 204 303
Ph at 1000lbs psi 60 35 23
Ph at 2000lbs psi 123 59 40
Displacement turns 4.83 4.13 3.79
R' Value 13 51 66
Corrected 'R' Value 13 51 66

FINAL 'R' VALUE
By Exudation Pressure (@ 300 psi): 38
By Epansion Pressure : 32
TI = 5

APPENDIXC
RESULTSOFLIQUEFACTIONANALYSES
 

L I Q U E F A C T I O N A N A L Y S I S R E P O R T
Input parameters and analysis data
Robertson (2009)
Robertson (2009)
Based on Ic value

7.50 0.85
.

G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

Project title : 475 & 493 St. John Street Location : Pleasanton, CA GeoLogismiki
Geotechnical Engineers
Merarhias 56
http://www.geologismiki.gr
CPT file : CPT-01

48.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
No
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Clay like behavior
applied:

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

All soils
No
N/A
Method based
Summary of liquefaction potential
CLiq v.2.1.6.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 12/15/2020, 3:55:20 PM Project file: E:\1A_Beeson\1_Active Projects\PA20.1055.00 475 & 493 St John Street\Engineering\CLiq\[email protected] 1

This software is licensed to: Geo-Logic Associates CPT name: CPT-01 C P T b a s i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n p l o t s ( n o r m a l i z e d ) CLiq v.2.1.6.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 12/15/2020, 3:55:20 PM 3 Project file: E:\1A_Beeson\1_Active Projects\PA20.1055.00 475 & 493 St John Street\Engineering\CLiq\[email protected] SBTn legend

1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to siltyclay 5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data
Robertson (2009)Robertson (2009)Based on Ic value7.500.8548.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval:Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

25.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
N/AYesYesAll soilsNoN/A

This software is licensed to: Geo-Logic Associates CPT name: CPT-01 L i q u e f a c t i o n a n a l y s i s o v e r a l l p l o t s CLiq v.2.1.6.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 12/15/2020, 3:55:20 PM 5 Project file: E:\1A_Beeson\1_Active Projects\PA20.1055.00 475 & 493 St John Street\Engineering\CLiq\[email protected] F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Input parameters and analysis data Robertson (2009)Robertson (2009)Based on Ic value7.500.8548.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval:Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

25.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
N/AYesYesAll soilsNoN/A
Almost certain it will liquefyVery likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefyAlmost certain it will not liquefy Very high riskHigh riskLow risk

L I Q U E F A C T I O N A N A L Y S I S R E P O R T
Input parameters and analysis data
Robertson (2009)
Robertson (2009)
Based on Ic value

7.50 0.85
.

G.W.T. (in-situ):

G.W.T. (earthq.):

Average results interval:

Ic cut-off value:

Unit weight calculation:

Project title : 475 & 493 St. John Street Location : Pleasanton, CA GeoLogismiki
Geotechnical Engineers
Merarhias 56
http://www.geologismiki.gr
CPT file : CPT-03

48.00 ft

25.00 ft
3 2.60
Based on SBT
No
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Clay like behavior
applied:

Limit depth applied:

Limit depth:

MSF method:

All soils
No
N/A
Method based
Summary of liquefaction potential
CLiq v.2.1.6.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 12/15/2020, 3:56:35 PM Project file: E:\1A_Beeson\1_Active Projects\PA20.1055.00 475 & 493 St John Street\Engineering\CLiq\[email protected] 1

This software is licensed to: Geo-Logic Associates CPT name: CPT-03 C P T b a s i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n p l o t s ( n o r m a l i z e d ) CLiq v.2.1.6.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 12/15/2020, 3:56:35 PM 3 Project file: E:\1A_Beeson\1_Active Projects\PA20.1055.00 475 & 493 St John Street\Engineering\CLiq\[email protected] SBTn legend

1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to siltyclay 5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data
Robertson (2009)Robertson (2009)Based on Ic value7.500.8548.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval:Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

25.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
N/AYesYesAll soilsNoN/A

This software is licensed to: Geo-Logic Associates CPT name: CPT-03 L i q u e f a c t i o n a n a l y s i s o v e r a l l p l o t s CLiq v.2.1.6.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 12/15/2020, 3:56:35 PM 5 Project file: E:\1A_Beeson\1_Active Projects\PA20.1055.00 475 & 493 St John Street\Engineering\CLiq\[email protected] F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Input parameters and analysis data Robertson (2009)Robertson (2009)Based on Ic value7.500.8548.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval:Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height:

25.00 ft32.60Based on SBTNoN/A
N/AYesYesAll soilsNoN/A
Almost certain it will liquefyVery likely to liquefyLiquefaction and no liq. are equally likelyUnlike to liquefyAlmost certain it will not liquefy Very high riskHigh riskLow risk

APPENDIXD
RESULTSOFSLOPESTABILITYANALYSES

1.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 360350340330320310300
Color Name
HorzSeismicCoef.:0
Model Unit
Weight(pcf)
Cohesion'(psf)
Phi'(°)
SandandGravel Mohr-Coulomb 126 0 36SandySilt Mohr-Coulomb 126 100 25 GroundwaterDepth=25feet Section1.5:1_Static
StJohnSt_StabilitySection04.gsz12/16/2020 1:150

1.5 1

1.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 360350340330320310300
Color Name SlopeStabilityMaterialModel Unit
HorzSeismicCoef.:0
Weight(pcf)
EffectiveCohesion(psf)
EffectiveFrictionAngle(°)
SandandGravel Mohr-Coulomb 126 0 36SandySilt Mohr-Coulomb 126 100 25 GroundwaterDepth=el342feet Section1.5:1_Static StJohnSt_StabilitySection05c.gsz 03/22/2022 1:150

1.5 1

1.04 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 360350340330320310300
Color Name
HorzSeismicCoef.:0.25
Model Unit
Weight(pcf)
Cohesion'(psf)
Phi'(°)
SandandGravel(25'-35') Mohr-Coulomb 126 1,500 0SandandGravel(35'-47') Mohr-Coulomb 126 2,400 0SandandGravel(47'-50') Mohr-Coulomb 126 800 0SandandGravel(6'-25') Mohr-Coulomb 126 0 36SandySilt Mohr-Coulomb 126 2,000 0 GroundwaterDepth=25feet Section1.5:1_Seismic
StJohnSt_StabilitySection06.gsz12/16/2020 1:150

1.5 1

1.7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 360350340330320310300
Color Name
HorzSeismicCoef.:0
Model Unit
Weight(pcf)
Cohesion'(psf)
Phi'(°)
SandandGravel Mohr-Coulomb 126 0 36SandySilt Mohr-Coulomb 126 100 25 GroundwaterDepth=25feet Section2:1_Static
StJohnSt_StabilitySection07b.gsz12/16/2020 1:150
2 1

1.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 360350340330320310300
HorzSeismicCoef.:0
Color Name SlopeStabilityMaterialModel Unit
Weight(pcf)
EffectiveCohesion(psf)
EffectiveFrictionAngle(°)
SandandGravel Mohr-Coulomb 126 0 36SandySilt Mohr-Coulomb 126 100 25 GroundwaterDepth=el342feet Section2:1_Static StJohnSt_StabilitySection08c.gsz 03/22/2022 1:150
2 1

1.09 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 360350340330320310300
Color Name
HorzSeismicCoef.:0.25
Model Unit
Weight(pcf)
Cohesion'(psf)
Phi'(°)
SandandGravel(25'-35') Mohr-Coulomb 126 1,500 0SandandGravel(35'-47') Mohr-Coulomb 126 2,400 0SandandGravel(47'-50') Mohr-Coulomb 126 800 0SandandGravel(6'-25') Mohr-Coulomb 126 0 36SandySilt Mohr-Coulomb 126 2,000 0 GroundwaterDepth=25feet Section2:1_Seismic
StJohnSt_StabilitySection09.gsz12/16/2020 1:150
2 1

Appendix E
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigation

D R A F T

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE

ASSESSMENT AND SUBSURFACE

INVESTIGATION
475 AND 493 SAINT JOHN STREET

PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:

Robson Homes, LLC
San Jose, CA
Prepared By:

Ramboll US Consulting, Inc.

Emeryville, CA
Date
November 6, 2020
Project Number
1690019049

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Environmental Professional Statement Ramboll

SIGNATURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL STATEMENT
I declare that, to the best of my professional knowledge and belief, I meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR 312.

I have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history and setting of the subject property. I have developed and performed all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

D R A F T
___________________________________
Anne Gates, P.E.

Senior Managing Consultant
Ramboll US Consulting, Inc.
2200 Powell Street, Suite 700
Emeryville, CA

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Contents i Ramboll

CONTENTS

1. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1

1.1 Site Summary 1

1.2 Recognized Environmental Conditions 1

1.3 Other Findings 1

2. INTRODUCTION 3

2.1 Purpose 3

2.2 Scope of the Assessment 3

2.3 Significant Assumptions 4

2.4 Reliance and General Limitations 4

3. SITE DESCRIPTION 6

3.1 Site Setting 6

3.2 Current Use of the Site 8

3.3 Current Uses of Adjoining Properties 9

4. REVIEW OF PUBLIC RECORDS AND OTHER INFORMATION SOURCES 10

4.1 Environmental Regulatory Database Review 10

4.2 Historical Uses of the Site and Adjacent Sites 13

4.3 Review of Local and State Agency Information 16

4.4 Previous Environmental Assessments and Activities 16

4.5 Environmental Lien Record Search 16

4.6 User-Provided Information 16

5. SITE RECONNAISSANCE 17

5.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions 17

5.2 General Site Setting and Observations 17

6. SOIL AND SOIL VAPOR SAMPLING 20

6.1 Pre-Field Activities 20

6.2 Soil Sampling and Soil Vapor Well Installation 20

6.3 Soil Vapor Sampling 22

6.4 Additional Shallow Soil Sampling 22

6.5 Hazardous Waste Characterization Analysis 24

7. FINDINGS, OPINION, AND CONCLUSIONS 25

7.1 Findings, Opinions, and Conclusions 25

7.2 Analysis of Data Gaps 26

8. REFERENCES 27

8.1 Documents 27

8.2 Interviews 27

9. ASTM DEFINITIONS 28

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Contents ii Ramboll
TABLES
Table 1: Metals in Soil Samples
Table 2: Detected Organochlorine Pesticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Soil Samples Table 3: Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples Table 4: Naturally-Occurring Asbestos in Soil Samples
Table 5: VOCs in Soil Vapor Samples

FIGURES
Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Site Layout
Figure 3: Sample Location Map
Figure 4: Shallow Soil Samples with Lead Exceedances

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Site Photographs
Appendix B: Environmental Database Report
Appendix C: Historical Research Documentation
C.1: Topographic Maps
C.2: Aerial Photographs
C.3: Abstract of City Directories
C.4: Historical Fire Insurance Maps
Appendix D: Site-Owner Provided Figure
Appendix E: Environmental Lien and AUL Search
Appendix F: Laboratory Analytical Reports
Appendix G: Qualifications of Environmental Professionals

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Summary of Conclusions 1 Ramboll

1. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
Ramboll US Corporation (“Ramboll”; formerly Ramboll Environ US Corporation) was retained by Robson Homes, LLC (“Robson Homes”) to perform a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and Phase II subsurface investigation at 475 and 493 Saint John Street in Pleasanton, California (herein referred to as the “site”; see Figure 1). Ramboll’s assessment was conducted in connection with the due diligence and potential purchase of the property. The objective of the Phase I ESA, which was conducted in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM International’s Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process E1527- 13 (the “ASTM Standard”), was to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), as defined in the ASTM Standard (see Section 2.1).

1.1 Site Summary
The approximately 2.29-acre site is located on Saint John Street in Pleasanton, California (Figure 2).

The site is owned by Joseph and Maricela Barone and is comprised of two adjoining parcels, assessor parcel numbers (APNs) 94-114-7 (475 Saint John Street) and 94-114-8 (493 Saint John Street). The parcel located at 475 Saint John Street (“Eastern Parcel”) is improved with Barone’s Italian restaurant, which includes a covered dining patio, adjoining portable restrooms, multiple small storage structures along the perimeter of the parcel, and an outdoor dining/event space. The parcel located at 493 Saint John Street (“Western Parcel”) is improved with a single-family residence, an accessory dwelling unit, one detached garage structure, two detached permanent structures (used for general storage and an exercise room), two shipping containers for restaurant storage, and an asphalt paved parking lot utilized for restaurant parking located north of the residence. A paved road trends northeastsouthwest down the center of the site for access to the parking lot.

The site was improved with two single-family residential structures as early as the 1880s. By the 1970s, the residence at 475 Saint John Street was converted to a restaurant. After the Barone family purchased the site in 1995, improvements were made to the restaurant and residence. Following the improvements, the site generally appeared as it does today.

1.2 Recognized Environmental Conditions
Ramboll performed a Phase I ESA of the site in conformance with the scope and limitations of the ASTM Standard and a Phase II subsurface investigation of the site. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section 7.2 of this report. This assessment has revealed the following REC in connection with unrestricted residential use of the site:
• Areas of Elevated Lead in Shallow Soil. Results from soil sampling conducted by Ramboll in September and October 2020 identified concentrations of lead in shallow soil above regulatory screening criterion for residential land use, as discussed in Section 6 of this report. The shallow soil with elevated lead appears to be located in the vicinity of current and former structures at the site. The vertical extent of the elevated lead appears to be limited to the upper 2 feet. The horizonal extent could not be fully delineated due to the presence of on-site structures.

1.3 Other Findings
Although not a considered REC based on currently available information, Ramboll identified the following other findings. The term “other finding” is not defined by ASTM; rather, Ramboll uses the term to connote areas of contingent risk that are not clearly defined by the ASTM Standard.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Summary of Conclusions 2 Ramboll
• Potential Former Underground Storage Tank (UST). The EDR report identified a former 1,000-gallon unleaded gasoline UST at the site on the Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System Underground Storage Tank (SWEEPS UST) database. The current site owner was unaware of current or former USTs at the site. The former site owner reportedly recalls her husband removing the UST from the southwest corner of the parking lot in the early 1990s and provided a hand-drawn sketch of the possible location (see Appendix D). Ramboll contacted the City of Pleasanton Fire Department (Fire Department), the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH), and the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB), but none of the agencies reported having records of the UST.

Ramboll advanced two borings to 10 feet below ground surface (bgs) in the vicinity of the potential former UST. No soil staining, odors, or other evidence of the potential fuel UST were observed by Ramboll field personnel. Soil sampling conducted in the vicinity of the potential former UST location also did not detect fuel constituents. Soil vapor sampling detected benzene slightly above the residential regulatory screening criteria at one of the two locations in the vicinity of the potential former UST (SV04); however, SV04 is in the parking lot and concentrations of benzene are commonly detected at these concentrations in vehicle use areas. No additional fuel constituents or by-products were detected in soil vapor samples above regulatory screening criteria for unrestricted residential land use. No further investigation is recommended at this time.
• Nearby Dry-Cleaning Sites. Several dry-cleaning facilities are located in relatively close proximity to the site as discussed in more detail in Section 4.1.3. Several of these facilities have identified chlorinated solvents in soil vapor and/or groundwater above regulatory screening criteria. These off-site properties potentially pose a contamination concern to the subject site. To address the potential contamination concern, soil vapor sampling was performed at the site, as discussed in Section 6.3. Based on the results of the soil vapor sampling conducted by Ramboll at the site, these dry-cleaning properties are not considered of concern for the site.

De minimis conditions identified during this review are discussed in Section 7.1.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Introduction 3 Ramboll

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 Purpose
Ramboll was retained by Robson Homes to conduct a Phase I ESA and subsurface soil and soil vapor investigation of the approximately 2.3-acre site at 475 and 493 Saint John Street in Pleasanton, California (APNs 94-114-7 and 94-114-8, respectively). Ramboll’s assessment was conducted in connection with the due diligence and potential purchase of the property. The purpose of the assessment was to identify RECs, which are defined in the ASTM Standard as:
“The presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions.”

2.2 Scope of the Assessment
Ramboll completed the following tasks, consistent with the ASTM Standard, during its Phase I ESA of the property:
• A visit to the site by Michael Gaffney of Ramboll on September 1, 2020 to observe the exterior and interior features of the site and to identify the uses and conditions specified in the ASTM Standard.

In addition, Ramboll observed the adjoining properties from the site or adjacent public thoroughfares. Photographs taken during the site visit are included in Appendix A. • An interview was conducted during the September 1, 2020 site visit with Mr. Joe Barone, site owner. Mr. Barone has resided at the site and operated the restaurant since purchasing the site in 1995. The aforementioned individual is referred to herein as “site owner”. The site owner interviewed by Ramboll was identified as having good knowledge of the uses and physical characteristics of the site. The site owner contacted the previous site owner for additional information in regard to the potential former UST at the site. The aforementioned individual is referred to herein as “former site owner”. Ramboll did not contact the former site owner. • Visits to the site by Ramboll in September and October 2020 to collect soil and soil vapor samples. • A review of information contained in federal and state environmental databases, as obtained from the sources noted below:
- A radius report prepared by EDR, Inc. (EDR, see Appendix B) in September 2020 presents the results of searches of federal and state databases for the subject site, as well as properties near the subject site. The radius searched for each database, as well as the databases themselves, were selected in accordance with the ASTM Standard. - The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s) Envirofacts database, which provides site information contained in multiple USEPA regulatory databases. - The USEPA’s Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) database, which provides information on sites’ enforcement and compliance history. - The State of California’s RWQCB GeoTracker online database and the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Envirostor online database.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Introduction 4 Ramboll
- The California Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division’s (CalGEM) Well Finder, which contains information regarding the geographic distribution of oil and gas wells.
• A review of standard historical sources (included as Appendix C) and local agency inquiries, as defined in the ASTM Standard. The following resources were reviewed:
- Readily available historical sources, including (where available) historical topographic maps and aerial photographs, city directories, and Sanborn Maps, to develop a history of the previous uses of the site and surrounding area.
- Historical and site-specific information obtained from the following local agencies: City of Pleasanton Community Development Department (Building Department) and the Alameda County Assessor’s Office (Assessor’s Office). The Fire Department identified that they have general inspection documentation related to the Eastern Parcel, but the Fire Department had not provided Ramboll with the inspection reports at the time this report was completed. The ACDEH and the SFRWQCB did not have documents pertaining to the site. • A review of physical setting sources, as defined in the ASTM Standard, including:
- The current United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map that shows the area on which the site is located.
- Geologic, hydrogeologic, or hydrologic sources as provided in the EDR report. • A search for environmental liens or other activity and use limitations (AULs) for the site, provided by EDR (as shown in Appendix E). Ramboll ordered the lien search using parcel numbers 94-114- 7 and 94-114-8 as obtained from the local tax assessor’s office and other online resources. • A review of any information provided by the user of this assessment, including information consistent with Appendix X3 of the ASTM Standard. Pertinent information, if any, is discussed in the appropriate sections of this report.

This assessment was conducted in accordance with the methodology specified in ASTM Standard E1527-13, as agreed upon by Ramboll and Robson Homes in September 2020.

2.3 Significant Assumptions
In conducting this review, no significant assumptions were made, except for the following:
• Site-specific field measurements or other detailed hydrogeological information was not publicly available or reasonably ascertainable. In the absence of such data, Ramboll has assumed that the flow direction of shallow groundwater beneath the site and in the local vicinity generally mimics surface topography. Therefore, in evaluating potential on-site impacts from off-site sources, those off-site facilities not located adjacent to or within one-quarter mile upgradient of the subject site are not considered to represent a significant concern to the subject site. This interpretation is based on the assumption that a hazardous material released to the subsurface generally does not migrate laterally within the unsaturated soil for a significant distance, while a hazardous material may migrate in groundwater in a generally downgradient direction.

2.4 Reliance and General Limitations
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Robson Homes, LLC and affiliated entities including Santa Clara Development Company, Sun Lakes Construction Company of California, and

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Introduction 5 Ramboll
Vesta Real Estate Company Inc., and such other persons or entities whose reliance is explicitly authorized in writing by Ramboll.

Under the ASTM Standard, this report is considered current only until April 7, 2021 (a period of 180 days from the date of the most recent site visit on October 9, 2020). The conclusions presented in this report represent Ramboll’s best professional judgment based upon the information available and conditions existing as of the date of this report. In performing its assignment, Ramboll must rely upon publicly available information, information provided by the client, and information provided by third parties. Accordingly, the conclusions in this report are valid only to the extent that the information provided to Ramboll was accurate and complete. This review is not intended as legal advice, nor is it an exhaustive review of site conditions or facility compliance.

The scope of work for this assessment did not include an asbestos survey or inspection of existing buildings. Other issues considered outside the scope of the ASTM Standard and this review include radon, lead in drinking water, wetlands, cultural and historic resources, ecological resources, endangered species, and high voltage power lines.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Site Description 6 Ramboll

3. SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1 Site Setting
The site is located on Saint John Street in Pleasanton, Alameda County, California. According to the Assessor’s Office, the APNs for the site are 94-114-7 (475 Saint John Street, the “Eastern Parcel”) and 94-114-8 (493 Saint John Street, the “Western Parcel”). The site is approximately 2.3-acres in area and is located in downtown Pleasanton (Figure 1). The Eastern Parcel is improved with Barone’s, an Italian restaurant. The restaurant is located on the southern portion of the parcel with a concrete patio for outdoor dining/event space on the northern portion of the parcel. The Western Parcel is improved with a two-story residence with a basement, a one-story accessory dwelling unit, three small accessory garages/storage structures, and two shipping containers used for storage. The northern portion of Western Parcel is an asphalt paved parking area for Barone’s restaurant. The site was historically used for single-family residential homes.

The site is accessed from Saint John Street at the southern site boundary. A paved road trends northeast-southwest in the center of the site from the southern site boundary to the northern parking lot. An intermittent steam, Arroyo Valle, intersects the northern site boundary. There are no other on-site surface water bodies.

Table A provides an overview of physical setting and utility information for the site.

Table A: Physical Setting and Utility Information
Conditions Source Description
Topography
Elevation (above
mean sea level)
USGS topographic
map; Google
Earth
Ranges from approximately 329 feet on the northern portion of the site to 350 feet on the southern portion of the site.

Topographic
Gradient
USGS topographic
map; visual
observations
Relatively flat on the majority of the site, with a gentle downward slope to the south. Steep downward slope to the stream bed at the north site boundary. Regional topography slopes gently downward to the southwest.

Hydrology
Surface Water
Runoff
Visual
observations
Enters Arroyo Valle stream at the northern site boundary. Enters municipal storm drains in public thoroughfare south of the site.

Percolates into the ground surface at unpaved areas throughout the site.

Nearest Surface
Water Body to the
Site
USGS topographic
map; Google
Earth
Arroyo Valle intersects the northern site boundary. Arroyo Valle flows into Alameda Creek southwest of the site, which then flows into the San Francisco Bay.

Flood Plain FEMA*; site owner Site owner reported no known occurrences of flooding at the site. The northern portion of the site is located within a 100-year flood zone.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Site Description 7 Ramboll
Table A: Physical Setting and Utility Information
Conditions Source Description
Wetlands NWI*; Visual
observations
There are no federally-designated wetlands on-site, but federally registered wetlands are located approximately 400 feet east of the site in the vicinity of Arroyo Valle.

Geology and Hydrogeology
Presumed
Direction of
Shallow
Groundwater Flow
USGS topographic
map;
Groundwater
monitoring reports
for nearby
properties
reviewed on the
GeoTracker
database
(approximately
600 to 1,000 feet
from the site)
Based on the regional topographic gradient to the west-northwest, shallow groundwater underneath the site is presumed to flow to the west-northwest. Based on nearby property’s groundwater monitoring reports, regional groundwater flow direction is variable. Groundwater monitoring reports for a facility approximately 1,000 feet south of the site (560 Main Street) detected a west-northwest groundwater flow direction. Groundwater monitoring reports for a facility approximately 600 feet northeast of the site (1024 Main Street) detected a northnortheast groundwater flow direction.

Depth to
Groundwater
Groundwater
monitoring reports
for nearby
properties
reviewed on the
GeoTracker
database
Groundwater monitoring reports for nearby properties indicate that depth to groundwater ranges between approximately 30 and 40 feet bgs.

On-site Wells Site owner; visual
observations
No production or monitoring wells onsite.

Nearest
Groundwater
Supply Wells
EDR database
report
One federally-registered public supply well is present between oneeighth of a mile and one-quarter mile south-southeast of the site. Two federally-registered wells and three state-registered wells are present within one-half mile of the site.

Geologic
Conditions
Visual
Observations; soil
boring logs from
nearby properties
reviewed on the
GeoTracker
database
(approximately
1,000 feet south
of the site)
Ramboll observed heterogeneous site soils, predominantly composed of silt, sandy silt, and fine-grained sand to 10 feet bgs. Boring logs from a nearby site indicate that regional soils are fine grained silts and clays to approximately 30 feet bgs, followed by coarser clayey sand and silty gravel to approximately 50 feet bgs (AdvancedGeo Environmental, 2018).

Site Utility Information
Electricity Supplier Site owner Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Site Description 8 Ramboll
Table A: Physical Setting and Utility Information
Conditions Source Description
Natural Gas
Supplier
Site owner Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)
Use of Fuel Oil for
Building Heat
Site owner No current or former use of fuel oil reported.

Water Supplier Site owner City of Pleasanton
Sanitary Sewer Site owner City of Pleasanton
Septic Systems Site owner No identified current or former septic systems.

Notes:

FEMA = Federal Emergency Management Agency; NWI = National Wetlands Inventory * - Source was provided in the EDR database report.

3.2 Current Use of the Site
The eastern portion of the site is improved with Barone’s, an Italian restaurant, and an outdoor event center. The restaurant occupies the southern portion of the Eastern Parcel. The northern portion of the Eastern Parcel is outdoor dining and event space. The restaurant kitchen (located inside the northern portion of the restaurant building) has a small above-ground grease trap located below the kitchen sinks. None of the current site operations include the use of significant quantities of chemicals. Chemical storage is primarily limited to minor quantities of various detergents and cleaning agents stored in a small partial basement within the kitchen. Additionally, small quantities of paint for restaurant maintenance and gasoline for landscaping equipment are stored within a shed along the western boundary of the restaurant. Multiple small structures along the Eastern Parcel boundaries are used for restaurant and event storage, including furniture, alcohol, glassware, and various outdoor food service equipment.

The southern portion of the Western Parcel is improved with the personal residence of the site owner.

Adjacent to the north of the main residence is an accessory dwelling unit occupied by the site owner’s family. Accessory structures north of the residence include an approximately 150 square-foot structure used as a personal gym, an approximately 200 square-foot single-car garage, an approximately 200 square-foot garage used for restaurant storage, and a small shipping container used for restaurant and furniture storage. The northwest portion of the site is an asphalt paved parking area for the restaurant. The southern portion of the asphalt paved parking area is occupied by a shipping container storing restaurant equipment, an aluminum shed storing wood debris, bikes, and other miscellaneous items, two cargo trailers, dumpsters, and approximately ten empty 20-pound propane tanks.

According to the site owner, site operations have remained generally consistent since he purchased the site in 1995.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Site Description 9 Ramboll

3.3 Current Uses of Adjoining Properties
The property is located in a mixed residential and commercial land use area. Residential areas are located adjacent to the west of the site. Based on discussions with site owner, Ramboll’s visual observations from the property boundary and public rights-of-way, and a limited review of publicly available information, a general determination of the current use of adjacent properties is described in Table B.

Table B: Current Use of Adjacent Properties
Direction Property/Land Use Ramboll’s Observations
North Arroyo Valle, beyond which is a strip
mall.

No apparent exterior manufacturing or chemical storage
operations were observed. No concerns were noted.

East The Rose Hotel and Farmers Insurance
Office Building.

No apparent exterior manufacturing or chemical storage
operations were observed. No concerns were noted.

South Saint John Street, beyond which is
residential and the Pleasanton
Chamber of Commerce.

No apparent exterior manufacturing or chemical storage
operations were observed. No concerns were noted.

West Residential. No apparent exterior manufacturing or chemical storage operations were observed. No concerns were noted.

Notes:

During the site visit, Ramboll walked or drove by the borders of these properties that are adjacent to the subject site. Ramboll did not enter the neighboring properties to the north or south.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Review of Public Records and
Other Information Sources 10 Ramboll

4. REVIEW OF PUBLIC RECORDS AND OTHER

INFORMATION SOURCES

4.1 Environmental Regulatory Database Review
Ramboll contracted with EDR in August 2020 to prepare a summary of listings in federal and state agency databases for the site and facilities within applicable radii of the property, as specified by the ASTM standard.0F
1 A copy of the EDR report is presented in Appendix B.

4.1.1 Database Review for Site
Ramboll reviewed the results of the state and federal environmental database searches performed by EDR (see Appendix B) and also searched the GeoTracker and Envirostor online databases. The site, specifically Western Parcel, is listed on environmental databases, as detailed below. • Residential Home (493 Saint John Street). The Western Parcel is listed on the SWEEPS UST database related to a 1,000-gallon unleaded gasoline UST. As detailed in Section 2.2, the SFRWQCB, ACDEH, and the Fire Department did not have documentation of a UST formerly or presently at the site. The site owner was unaware of a UST at the site. However, the former site owner reportedly recalls her husband removing a UST with a backhoe in the 1980s or 1990s.

Based on a hand drawn map from the former site owner (included in Appendix D), the potential former UST was located on the western portion of the site in the vicinity of the trees in the parking lot. Prior to intrusive sampling at the site, Ramboll contracted with Subdynamic Locating Services (Subdynamic) for utility locating. Additionally, Subdynamic scanned the vicinity of the potential former UST with a magnetometer and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) but could not detect buried metal or changes in lithology related to a UST or backfill of an excavation.1F 2 Ramboll advanced two
borings (SV03 and SV04) in the vicinity of the potential former UST to 10 feet bgs and collected soil samples. Ramboll field personnel did not observe evidence of any staining or odors. Soil sampling results from 10 feet bgs did not detect total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg), diesel (TPH-d), or motor oil (TPH-mo). Soil vapor sampling conducted in the vicinity of the potential former UST location did not detect fuel constituents above regulatory screening criteria (other than benzene, a common detected constituent in parking lots). Soil and soil vapor sampling performed at the site is further discussed in Section 6.

The site is also listed on the following databases related to regulatory compliance: Facility and Manifest Data (HAZNET) and Hazardous Waste Tracking System (HWTS). Listings on these databases, by themselves, are not necessarily indicative of contamination.

4.1.2 Database Review for Adjoining Properties
According to the environmental database search report, no adjoining sites are listed on databases that are indicative of a potential contamination concern.
1 EDR uses the term “radii” to refer to the ASTM terminology “approximate minimum search distance” in the environmental database report.
2 Metal objects including a shed, storage container, and cargo trailers in the vicinity of the potential former UST created interference with the magnetometer and limited the geographic extent of the area scanned by GPR.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Review of Public Records and
Other Information Sources 11 Ramboll

4.1.3 Database Review for Other Surrounding Properties
Ramboll has identified a number of non-adjoining facilities that represent a potential contamination concern to the subject site due to past releases on these facilities and possible migration onto the subject site, as detailed below.
• Chevron #9-3934 (T0600101715). Chevron #9-3934 is a former gas station located at 780 main street, Pleasanton, California, approximately 250 feet east-southeast and upgradient of the site. The property is listed on the GeoTracker, leaking underground storage tank (LUST), SWEEPS UST, Historical UST (Hist UST), EDR Historical Auto, Cortese, Historical Cortese, California Environmental Reporting System (CERS), and Alameda County Contaminated Sites (CS) databases. Alameda County Local Oversight Program (LOP) issued case closure on January 2, 1996. Additional documentation is not readily available on GeoTracker. Ramboll issued a records request to ACDEH, ACDEH LOP, and the SFRWQCB. The ACDEH and SFRWQCB did not have any records for the facility. The ACDEH LOP has not yet responded to Ramboll’s record request. Based on the case closure status, this property does not present a contamination concern for the subject site.
• Purity Cleaners. Purity cleaners was a former dry-cleaning facility that operated between 1975 and 1982. The facility was located at 722 Main Street, Pleasanton, California, approximately 300 feet southeast and upgradient from the site. The facility is listed on the EDR Historical Cleaner database. While a listing on the database is not indicative of a contamination concern and no other information is known about the facility beside its former operational use, based on the historical use of PCE at dry cleaning facilities during the 1970s and 1980s, this off-site property potentially poses a contamination concern to the subject site. To address the potential contamination concern, soil vapor sampling was performed at the site, as discussed in Section 6.3.

Based on the results of the soil vapor sampling conducted by Ramboll at the site, the Purity Cleaners property is not considered to be of concern for the site. • Main Street Property (T10000008158). Main Street Property was occupied by an auto repair shop from the late 1930s to the late 1960s as well as a gasoline service station from the late 1930s to the early 1950s. The facility is located at 927 Main Street, Pleasanton, California, approximately 350 feet northeast and cross-gradient from the site. The facility is listed on the GeoTracker, LUST, Alameda County CS, Cortese, and CERS databases. Soil, groundwater, and/or soil gas sampling were completed at the facility in November 2015, October 2016, and July 2017 by Environmental Risk Assessors or ATC Associates, Inc. Maximum groundwater concentrations of TPH-g (1,400 micrograms per liter (µg/L)), TPH-d (1,000 µg/L), and total petroleum hydrocarbons as Stoddard Solvent (TPH-ss) (1,400 µg/L) were in excess of the SFRWQCB environmental screening levels (ESLs) of 100 µg/L. The groundwater plume appears to be localized and has not migrated offsite. Additionally, the most proximal groundwater sample to the site did not detect TPH-g, TPG-d, and TPH-ss. The facility received case closure from ACDEH LOP on February 26, 2018 under the SWRCB’s Low Threat UST Closure Policy. ACDEH LOP issued residential land use restrictions for the facility. Based on the case closure documentation the Main Street Property is not considered to be of concern for the site.
• Unocal #0543 (T0600100048). Unocal is a former gasoline service station that had two 10,000-gallon gasoline USTs and one 500-gallon waste oil UST. The facility was located at 992 Main Street, Pleasanton, California, approximately 450 feet northeast and cross-gradient from the site. The facility is listed on the GeoTracker, LUST, Alameda County CS, Cortese, Historical Cortese, SWEEPS UST, Hist UST and CERS databases. Subsurface investigations were conducted

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Review of Public Records and
Other Information Sources 12 Ramboll
at the facility beginning in November 1992. Initial groundwater sampling conducted by MPDS Services, Inc. revealed concentrations of TPH-g and benzene in excess of regulatory screening criteria with concentrations of 1,600 µg/L and 28 µg/L, respectively. Five monitoring wells at the facility were sampled quarterly from September 1993 through January 1995, and only two wells revealed elevated contaminant concentrations. The facility received case closure from the ACDEH LOP on September 12, 1997 due to the relatively small and localized plume. Based on the case closure documentation, the Unocal facility is not considered to be of concern for the site. • Mobil #04-H6J (T0600100909). The former Mobil gas station was located at 1024 Main Street in Pleasanton, California, approximately 500 feet northeast and cross-gradient from the site. The facility is listed on the GeoTracker, LUST, Alameda County CS, Cortese, Historical Cortese, SWEEPS UST, California Facility Inventory Database UST (CA FID UST), Hist UST, and CERS databases. Four USTs were removed from the former service station on October 17, 1989. Soil samples collected during the tank removal revealed TPH-g in soil at concentrations up to 2,400 parts per million (ppm). Approximately 260 cubic yards of soil were excavated beneath the former USTs. In March 1995, vapor and groundwater extraction systems were installed at the facility with four dual-purpose vapor/groundwater extraction wells and five vapor extraction wells.

The system operated for five years, during which, the system processed and discharged 3,854,430 gallons of groundwater and removed 27,218 pounds of hydrocarbons. Groundwater monitoring was conducted at the facility from 1990 to 2009, during which time concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons generally decreased over time. The facility received case closure from ACDEH Environmental Protection Division on July 14, 2010. Based on the case closure documentation and remediation activities, the Mobil facility is not considered to be of concern for the site. • Family Cleaners (T10000008245). Family Cleaners is a dry-cleaning facility located at 618 Main Street, Suite A, Pleasanton, California, approximately 800 feet south and potentially upgradient from the site. The facility is listed as pending review on GeoTracker and is listed on the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) Listings, EDR Historical Cleaner, and Non-Case Info databases. The facility has operated as a dry cleaner from 1982 to present. The SFRWQCB requested a source investigation because of historic PCE use at the facility. The source investigation, performed by Northgate Environmental Management, inc., identified PCE in soil vapor in excess of the SFRWQCB commercial ESL of 2,100 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) with concentrations up to 9,495 µg/m3. The source investigation also identified PCE in all three grab groundwater samples in excess of the Maximum Contaminant Level of 5 µg/L with concentrations between 7.3 and 11 µg/L. Based on the potential release of PCE from the former dry cleaner and unknown extent of the groundwater plume, this off-site property potentially poses a contamination concern to the subject site. To address the potential contamination concern, soil vapor sampling was performed at the site, as discussed in Section 6.3. Based on the results of the soil vapor sampling conducted by Ramboll at the site, the Family Cleaners property is not considered to be of concern for the site.
• American Cleaners (Former) (T10000008240). The former dry-cleaning facility was located at 555 Main Street, Pleasanton, California, approximately 0.2 miles south and potentially upgradient from the site. The facility is listed as an open case on GeoTracker and the Cleanup Program Sites-Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups (CPS-SLIC) databases. A dry-cleaning facility operated from approximately 1920 to 1992. In 2017 and 2018, soil, groundwater, and soil vapor investigations were conducted at the facility by AdvancedGeo Environmental. In 2017, indoor air samples inside the former dry-cleaning facility exceeded the SFRWQCB commercial ESL for PCE of 2.1 ug/m3 with a concentration of 21 ug/m3. In 2018, permanent groundwater monitoring wells and dual-depth soil vapor probes were installed on and off the property. The

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Review of Public Records and
Other Information Sources 13 Ramboll
local groundwater flow direction is to the northwest. The maximum groundwater concentrations of PCE and TCE exceeded the MCL of 5 ug/L with respective concentrations of 20,000 ug/L and 10,000 ug/L. The maximum concentrations of PCE and TCE detected in soil vapor samples were 38,000,000 ug/m3 and 450,000 ug/m3, respectively, in excess of their respective SFRWQCB Commercial ESLs of 2,100 ug/m3 and 3,000 ug/m3. A workplan for additional subsurface characterization and development of a soil vapor extraction system is planned for the property.

Based on the known subsurface impacts of chlorinated solvents from the former dry cleaner and the unknown extent of the groundwater plume, this off-site property potentially poses a contamination concern to the subject site. To address the potential contamination concern, soil vapor sampling was performed at the site, as discussed in Section 6.3. Based on the results of the soil vapor sampling conducted by Ramboll at the site, the Family Cleaners property is not considered to be of concern for the site.
• Pleasanton French Laundry (Former) (T10000008241). Two former dry-cleaning facilities were located nearly adjacent to one another at 220 Division Street and 555 Main Street, Pleasanton, California, approximately 0.2 miles south-southeast of the site and potentially upgradient from the site. The facilities are listed jointly as an open case on GeoTracker and the CPS-SLIC databases. Dry-cleaning operations were conducted at the facilities from approximately 1943 to 1978. In 2019, Trinity Source Group, Inc. conducted active and passive soil vapor sampling, soil sampling, and grab groundwater sampling at the facility. Twenty-six passive soil vapor probes were sampled, four of which detected PCE above the SFRWQCB commercial ESL of 67 ug/m3 with a maximum concentration of 1,777.68 ug/m3. During active soil vapor sampling, nine of ten samples detected PCE above the SFRWQCB commercial ESL of 67 ug/m3. PCE was not detected in groundwater in excess of the California MCL of 5 ug/L. Based on the limited detections of chlorinated solvents in groundwater, this off-site property is unlikely to pose a contamination concern to the subject site.

4.2 Historical Uses of the Site and Adjacent Sites

4.2.1 Past Uses of the Site
Sanborn maps dating back to 1888 indicate the site was originally developed for residential purposes, with two single family residential structures on the southern portion of the site (one residence each where the current residence and restaurant are located). Additionally, between 1888 and 1907, up to five ancillary structures were located in the northern portion of the Eastern Parcel, utilized as a chicken incubator, hen coop, and general storage sheds. By 1953, the additional structures in the northern portion of the Eastern Parcel were removed. The Eastern Parcel was developed into a restaurant by the mid-1970s. In 1995, the restaurant became Barone’s. By 2012, The Eastern Parcel appears in its current configuration with the majority of the parcel landscaped for outdoor dining and events at the restaurant.

Between 1888 and 1907, two ancillary structures were on the Western Parcel, both utilized as a hen house. At least between 1943 and 1953, up to nine structures were one the Western Parcel, utilized as an accessory dwelling unit, paint storage, general storage, and a garage. Between at least 1969 and 1987, the Western Parcel was owned by Loretto Winery, Ltd.; therefore, minor historical agriculture operations may have been conducted at the site. Aerial imagery does not indicate a change from residential operations during the Loretto Winery ownership. By 1998, the Western Parcel appears in its current configuration with the residence remodeled, and the parking lot paved.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Review of Public Records and
Other Information Sources 14 Ramboll

4.2.2 Interview with Site owner
An interview was conducted during the site visit on September 1, 2020 with Mr. Joseph Barone. Mr.

Barone has been the site owner and restaurant owner, along with his wife Maricela, since 1995. Mr.

Barone’s knowledge of previous tenants and their operations is limited.

According to Mr. Barone, the Western Parcel has always been used as a single-family home. Prior to the Barone’s ownership in 1995, the northern portion of the Western Parcel was undeveloped grassland. Mr. Barone reported that a carriage repair shed was located at the southwest corner of the (now) parking lot prior to the Barone’s ownership. The Barone’s paved the site shortly after purchasing the property. According to Mr. Barone, a single-family home was located on the Eastern Parcel until it was converted to a restaurant called “Casanovas” in the 1980s. Mr. Barone reported no septic tanks currently or historically at the site.

Mr. Barone interviewed the previous owner, who reportedly recalls her former husband removing a UST from approximately the southwest corner of the parking lot, as described in Section 4.1.1. The former site owner provided Mr. Barone with a hand-drawn sketch of the potential former UST location (Appendix D).

According to Mr. Barone, chemical storage has always been limited to the small quantities of paint and cleaning agents that are currently on the site, utilized for general restaurant or residence maintenance. No chemical spills or cleanups have occurred at the site.

A summary of Ramboll’s key observations from the available historical sources is presented in Table C.

Table C: Summary of Key Observations from Historical Sources for the Subject Site Historical Source Key Observations Regarding Site History Sanborn Maps (1888,
1893, 1898, 1903, 1907,
1943, 1953)
The 1888 Sanborn shows the site developed with two residential structures on the southern portion of the site. The parcel lines appear to be changed, separating each parcel in two. One small unmarked structure is shown on the northern portion of the Western Parcel, and two small structures in the northern portion of the Eastern Parcel, one of which is unmarked and the other is a stable.

The 1893 and 1898 Sanborn Maps show the residence on the Western Parcel as having a water tank on the roof and two structures utilized as henhouses in the northern portion of the parcel. The Eastern Parcel shows two structures in the northern portion of the parcel, one a stable and one utilized as a warehouse.

The 1903 Sanborn Map shows the Western Parcel unchanged. The Eastern Parcel has two additional structures (four total) two of which are indicated as hen coops, one as a chicken incubator, and one a wood-shed.

The 1907 Sanborn Map shows the parcel lines in the approximate modern configuration. The Western Parcel had one of the hen house structures removed.

The Eastern Parcel has four sheds and one stable in the northern portion of the parcel.

The 1943 Sanborn Map shows the Western Parcel with an accessory dwelling unit, a garage, a paint storage shed, and five unmarked structures. The Eastern Parcel has one unmarked structure on the northern portion of the parcel.

The 1953 Sanborn Map shows three structures removed from the Western Parcel and only the residence on the southern portion remains. The Eastern Parcel has a garage behind the residence and no other structures on the parcel. No concerns are noted.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Review of Public Records and
Other Information Sources 15 Ramboll
Table C: Summary of Key Observations from Historical Sources for the Subject Site Historical Source Key Observations Regarding Site History Aerial Photographs and
Satellite Imagery1
(1939, 1940, 1949, 1958,
1963, 1966, 1979, 1982,
1993, 1998, 2003-2020)
The 1939 through 1958 aerial photographs depict the site developed with singlefamily residences on the southern portion of the site. The majority of the site is undeveloped grassland with a few small structures across the central and northern portions of the site. The 1963 aerial photograph shows the Western Parcel with a garage and an additional shed behind the main residence, but there is not an accessory dwelling unit as depicted in the 1943 and 1953 Sanborn Maps.

Additionally, the Eastern Parcel has a paved driveway to the garage behind the residence. The 1982 aerial photograph shows a structure in the northern portion of the site, potentially a grouping of umbrellas. The 1993 aerial photograph shows changes to the Eastern Parcel after being converted into a restaurant. The 2003 aerial photograph shows the additional dwelling unit adjacent to the north of the residence on the Western Parcel. The 2007 aerial photograph shows the residence on the Western Parcel in its general configuration with the large tress behind the residence removed and additional garage structures present. Aerial photographs from 2007 to 2020 show the site in its current configuration with only minor changes: the shipping container north of the residence appears (2010) and the concrete patio north of the restaurant is extended northward including a concrete path to the northern gazebo (2010). No concerns are noted.

Topographic Maps
(1906, 1941, 1947, 1953,
1961, 1968, 1873, 1980,
2012)
The 1906 through 2012 topographic maps do not show development on the site. No concerns are noted.

City Directory
(1975 and 2014)
The occupants of the 475 Saint John Street address (the Eastern Parcel) are listed as Latrattoria Patio and Villa La (1980); Casanovas Restaurant (1989); Casanovas Ristorante (1995); Barone’s Restaurant and Casanovas (2000); Barone’s (2005); Barone’s Restaurant (2010-2017).

The occupants of the 493 Saint John Street address (the Western Parcel) are listed as Earl Trimingham (1975-1989); unknown occupant (2000); Joseph Barone (2005- 2017).
1 In addition to aerial photographs provided by EDR, Ramboll viewed historical satellite imagery provided via Google Earth. Printed copies were not obtained, and imagery dates were not independently verified.

4.2.3 Past Uses of Adjacent Sites
From the late 1800s, the property adjacent to the west of the site was a single-family dwelling unit with accessory structures that stored oil and paint. By 1943, Garatti Winery processing facility was developed adjacent to the west of the site. By 1993, the residential complex adjacent to the west of the site was developed. Properties south of the site were primarily used for residential land use starting in the late 1800s and have become mixed-use residential and commercial over time.

Properties north of the site, beyond Arroyo Valle, were mostly undeveloped land until the construction of Del Valle Parkway in 1993; beyond which is commercial land use including a former vehicle service station (see “Main Street Property” in Section 4.1.1). Since the late 1800s, the properties east of the site have primarily been used for commercial operations (carriage painting, hotels, printing shop, etc.). By 2003, the Rose Hotel and Farmers Insurance building east of the site appear in their modern configuration.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Review of Public Records and
Other Information Sources 16 Ramboll

4.3 Review of Local and State Agency Information
Ramboll visited or otherwise contacted local governmental agencies and regulatory bodies for information relating to the site. An overview of the findings of this review is presented in Table D.

Table D: Local Agency Information for the Site
Agency Contacted /
Document Reviewed Information Obtained
Alameda County
Assessor
A parcel map for the site area was reviewed at the Alameda Clara County Assessor’s website. The Alameda County parcel map depicts the site APNs as 94-114-7 and 94- 114-8.

City of Pleasanton
Building Department
Ramboll reviewed available public records delivered to Ramboll electronically by the Building Department. Building Department records included design reviews and construction permit applications by James Fazzari starting in 1988 for additions to Casanova’s Ristorante at 475 Saint John Street. Records also included various construction permit applications by the Barones starting in 1995 for both improvements to the restaurant at 475 Saint John Street and the residence at 493 Saint John Street.

City of Pleasanton Fire
Department
Ramboll requested any available records from the City of Pleasanton Fire Department. The Fire Department did not have any records in regards to USTs or in regards to the Western Parcel. The Eastern Parcel has inspection reports with violations for servicing the fire extinguisher, dry rot on the back deck of the restaurant, and required earthquake strapping for the water heater.

Alameda County
Department of
Environmental Health
Ramboll requested any available records from the ACDEH for information regarding soil or groundwater investigations, USTs, LUSTs, hazardous materials inspections, or violations/permits for the site. Ramboll was informed that no records were found for the site addresses.

4.4 Previous Environmental Assessments and Activities
No previous environmental assessments have been conducted at the site.

4.5 Environmental Lien Record Search
A review of EDR Environmental Lien Search Report dated September 1, 2020 was conducted to identify environmental liens or AULs imposed by judicial authorities with respect to APNs 94-114-7 and 94-114-8. No environmental liens or AULs were found. The EDR Environmental Lien Search Report is attached as Appendix E.

4.6 User-Provided Information
Ramboll provided Robson Homes with a User Questionnaire (consistent with Appendix X3 of the ASTM Standard) that requested information relating to environmental liens, AULs, specialized knowledge of the property, property value diminution, chain-of-title, or any other commonly known or obvious indications of site contamination, that was not otherwise provided to Ramboll. The user did not provide any information that was not otherwise obtained and reviewed by Ramboll.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Site Reconnaissance 17 Ramboll

5. SITE RECONNAISSANCE

5.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions
Ramboll conducted multiple site visits in September and October 2020. During the site visits, observations of the site were made to evaluate if any RECs, as defined in Chapter 2, are present.

5.2 General Site Setting and Observations
Ramboll made observations concerning all issues specified in Sections 9.4.2 through 9.4.4 of the ASTM E1527-13 Standard. The presence or absence of each issue of environmental interest or concern is noted in Table E. Additional information regarding observed and historical items is provided in the sections following the table.

Table E: Summary of Site Reconnaissance Observations
Issue ASTM
Section Observation
Interior and Exterior Issues
Current use(s) of the property 9.4.2.1 See Section 3.2
Past use(s) of the property 9.4.2.2 See Section 4.2
Hazardous substances and petroleum products used, treated, stored, disposed of, or generated on the property in connection with identified present or past uses

9.4.2.3 Present
(see Section 5.2.1)
Storage tanks:

Underground storage tanks (fill ports, vent pipes, manholes) Aboveground storage tanks

9.4.2.4 Potentially Historically
Present (see Section 5.2.2)
Absent
Odors (strong, pungent or noxious) 9.4.2.5 Absent
Pools of liquid, standing surface water or sumps 9.4.2.6 Present (see Section 5.2.3)
Drums of hazardous substances or petroleum products
(five-gallon, 55-gallon or totes)

9.4.2.7 Present
(see Section 5.2.1)
Hazardous substance and petroleum product containers
(not necessarily in connection with identified uses)

9.4.2.8 Present
(see Section 5.2.1)
Unidentified substance containers suspected of containing hazardous substances or petroleum products

9.4.2.9 Absent

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Site Reconnaissance 18 Ramboll
Table E: Summary of Site Reconnaissance Observations
Issue ASTM
Section Observation
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Electrical equipment on-site (e.g., transformers, capacitors) Electrical equipment known or likely to contain PCBs
Hydraulic equipment on-site (e.g., elevators, truck dock lifts) Hydraulic equipment known or likely to contain PCBs

9.4.2.10 Absent
Absent
Absent
Absent
Interior Issues
Heating/cooling systems 9.4.3.1 Present
Stains or corrosion on interior floors, walls or ceilings (except for staining from water)

9.4.3.2 Absent
Floor drains and interior sumps 9.4.3.3 Present
(see Section 5.2.3)
Exterior Issues
Pits, ponds or lagoons on property or adjacent sites 9.4.4.1 Absent Stained soil or pavement 9.4.4.2 Absent
Stressed vegetation (from other than insufficient water) 9.4.4.3 Absent On-site solid waste disposal; areas apparently filled or graded by non-natural causes; or mounds or depressions suggesting solid waste disposal

9.4.4.4 Absent
Wastewater or other liquid (including storm water) or any discharge into a drain, ditch, underground injection system or stream on or adjacent to the property

9.4.4.5 Present
(see Section 5.2.4)
Wells (including dry wells, irrigation wells, injection wells, abandoned wells, or other wells)

9.4.4.6 Absent
Septic systems or cesspools 9.4.4.7 Absent
Notes:

Observations noted in this table and discussed further below are based on information obtained during the site visit and from a review of the sources summarized in Section 4.

See the ASTM Standard for a detailed description of the issues included in each referenced ASTM section.

Per the ASTM Standard, fluorescent light ballasts likely to contain PCBs do not need to be noted.

N/A – Not applicable

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Site Reconnaissance 19 Ramboll

5.2.1 Hazardous Material Use and Storage
During Ramboll’s site visits in September 2020, the only petroleum products identified were two high density polyethylene (HDPE) five-gallon gasoline canisters used for fueling landscaping equipment.

The gasoline canisters were stored on the floor inside a shed northwest of the restaurant. Multiple 20- pound propane tanks, which are utilized to fuel space heaters at the outdoor dining area, are present north of the restaurant. Additionally, multiple containers of paint and stain are stored in one and fivegallon containers in storage sheds north of the restaurant. Multiple one-gallon containers of washing machine detergent, surface cleaners, and dish soaps are stored on a shelving unit in the partialbasement area of the kitchen. The only chemicals Ramboll observed in the on-site residence were small quantities of general cleaners. No evidence of release was observed in any of the aforementioned areas.

5.2.2 Potential Historical UST
As discussed in Section 4.1.1, the former site owner reportedly recalls her husband removing the UST from the southwest corner of the parking lot in the early 1990s and provided a hand-drawn sketch of the possible location (see Appendix D). Ramboll contacted the Fire Department, ACDEH, and RWQCB, but none of the agencies reported having records of a UST. As discussed in Section 4.1.1, Subdynamic scanned the vicinity of the potential former UST with a magnetometer and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) but could not detect buried metal or changes in lithology related to a UST or backfill of an excavation. Ramboll advanced two borings to 10 feet bgs in the vicinity of the potential former UST. No soil staining, odors, or other evidence of a release were observed by Ramboll field personnel. Soil sampling conducted in the vicinity of the potential former UST location did not detect fuel constituents. Soil vapor sampling conducted in the vicinity of the potential former UST location detected benzene slightly above the residential regulatory screening criteria at one of the two locations in the vicinity of the potential former UST (SV04); however, SV04 is in the parking lot and concentrations of benzene are commonly detected in vehicle use areas. No additional fuel constituents or by-products were detected in soil vapor samples above regulatory screening criteria for unrestricted residential land use.

5.2.3 Pools of Liquid, Standing Surface Water, or Sumps During the September 2020 site walk, the site owner stated there are a total of five sumps beneath the Western Parcel. Two of the sumps are located below the residence for the basement and three of the sumps are located in the landscaping in the front of the house. The sumps are utilized for flood control. No sumps are located on the Eastern Parcel.

5.2.4 Stormwater
Stormwater runoff at the site primarily discharges onto the street and eventually to the municipal storm drains on Saint John Street. However, some stormwater likely discharges to Arroyo Valle, the stream intersecting the northern portion of the site.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Soil and Soil Vapor Sampling 20 Ramboll

6. SOIL AND SOIL VAPOR SAMPLING
In September and October 2020, Ramboll conducted soil and soil vapor sampling activities at the site.

Figure 3 shows the sample locations. Tables 1 through 4 summarize the results of soil sample analyses and Table 5 summarizes the results of soil vapor sample analysis. The laboratory analytical reports are provided in Appendix F.

The soil sampling analytical results were compared to applicable USEPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) for residential land use, Cal/EPA DTSC-modified RSLs for residential land use, and SFRWQCB ESLs for residential land use. In the case of arsenic, concentrations were compared to naturallyoccurring background levels.2F 3 For simplicity, RSLs, DTSC-modified RSLs, and ESLs will herein be referred to as “regulatory screening criteria”.

6.1 Pre-Field Activities
Ramboll prepared a site-specific health and safety plan (HASP) and notified Underground Service Alert (USA) of the sampling activities at least two working days prior to the start of intrusive sampling, as required by law. Ramboll contracted with Subdynamic to perform utility locating, Penecore Drilling to perform drilling activities for soil sample collection and soil vapor well installation, McCampbell Analytical, Inc. (MAI) to perform soil sample analyses, and Eurofins Calscience to perform soil vapor sample analysis.

6.2 Soil Sampling and Soil Vapor Well Installation
Soil sampling and soil vapor well installation activities were performed on September 3, 2020. A total of eight borings (SV01 through SV08) were advanced to approximately 5.5 feet bgs using direct push technology (DPT) drilling equipment with 2.25-inch diameter casing. Locations SV03 and SV04 were advanced in the approximate location of the potential former UST. The other six locations were installed along site boundaries and across the site for general coverage. Continuous soil cores were collected, observed for visual or olfactory indications of a release, and screened for VOCs with a photoionization detector (PID). The borings were then completed as soil vapor wells in accordance with the Cal/EPA DTSC Active Soil Gas Investigations Advisory (Cal/EPA 2015 – herein after referred to as “the Advisory”), with soil vapor probes placed at 5 feet bgs. Approximately 6 inches of sand was placed in the bottom of each borehole. A stainless-steel sampling probe connected to Teflon tubing was placed on top of the sand layer and an additional 6 inches of sand was placed on top of the sampling probe. Approximately 1 foot of dry granular bentonite was placed on top of the sand layer and the remainder of the borehole was backfilled with neat cement. An air-tight valve was placed on the end of each Teflon® tube, and each well was completed with a traffic-rated flush-mount well vault.

At six of the eight borings (SV01, SV02, SV05 through SV08), soil samples were collected from first encountered native soil (approximately 0.5 feet bgs), 2 feet, and 3 feet bgs. At borings SV03 and SV04, soil borings adjacent to the soil vapor well location were advanced to ten feet bgs, soil samples were collected from first encountered native soil (approximately 0.5 feet bgs), 2 feet, 3 feet, 5 feet, 8 feet, and 10 feet bgs. The samples were placed in laboratory-supplied glass sample jars, placed on ice in a cooler, and delivered to MAI for analysis under chain-of-custody documentation. The 0.5 feet bgs samples collected from each location were analyzed for California Assessment Manual (CAM) 17 3 Duvergé, Dylan Jacques. 2011. Establishing Background Arsenic in Soil of the Urbanized San Francisco Bay Region.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Soil and Soil Vapor Sampling 21 Ramboll
metals using EPA Method 6020, organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) using EPA Method 8081A, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) using EPA Method 8082. The 10 feet bgs samples from borings SV03 and SV04, installed in the vicinity of the potential former UST location, were also analyzed for TPH-g, TPH-d, and TPH-mo by EPA Method 8015M. While field screening, Ramboll detected PID readings from sample locations SV02, SV05, SV06, SV07, and SV08; therefore, one sample from each aforementioned location was analyzed for TPH-g, TPH-d, and TPH-mo. Additionally, the location and depth with the single highest PID reading, the sample at SV07 collected from 0.5 feet bgs, was analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260B. All soil samples collected from 2, 3, 5, and 8 feet bgs that were not analyzed for VOCs or TPH were temporarily placed on hold at the laboratory pending review of shallow soil sample results. Select deeper samples at SV01, SV02, SV04, and SV08 were analyzed for lead and/or arsenic, as discussed below.

In addition to the chemical analysis described above, two three-point composite samples were collected for analysis of naturally-occurring asbestos (NOA) by California Air Resources Board (CARB) Method 435. One three-point composite was comprised of road base rock samples collected from locations SB03, SB04, and SB05 and the other three-point composite was comprised of 0.5 feet bgs samples of first encountered native soil from locations SB03, SB04, and SB05.

6.2.1 Soil Sampling Results
Soil sampling results are presented in Tables 1 through 4 and laboratory analytical reports are included in Appendix F.

With the exception of lead and arsenic, metals concentrations were detected below regulatory screening criteria. At SV04, the 0.5 feet bgs sample detected arsenic at a concentration of 13 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), exceeding the naturally-occurring background level of 11 mg/kg.

The sample at SV04 collected at 2 feet bgs was subsequently analyzed for arsenic, which was detected at a concentration of 7.0 mg/kg, below the naturally-occurring background level. At sample locations SV01, SV02, and SV08, samples collected at 0.5 feet bgs had concentrations of lead of 350 mg/kg, 99 mg/kg, and 1,600 mg/kg, respectively. These concentrations are above the regulatory screening criterion for residential land use for lead of 80 mg/kg. At all three locations, the deeper samples from 2 and 3 feet bgs were subsequently analyzed for lead and lead concentrations were below the regulatory screening criterion for residential land use.

OCPs were detected in five of the eight samples. All detected pesticide concentrations were below the respective regulatory screening criteria for residential land use. PCBs were detected in one of the eight samples (0.5 ft bgs at SV05) but at concentrations below the regulatory screening criteria for residential land use.

TPH-g was not detected in any of the seven samples analyzed. TPH-d was detected at only one location (0.5 ft bgs at SV07), and TPH-mo was detected at two locations (0.5 ft bgs at SV02 and SV07). Concentrations of TPH-d and TPH-mo were at least two orders of magnitude below residential regulatory screening criteria for residential land use.

VOCs were not detected above laboratory reporting limits in the 0.5 ft bgs sample at SV07. NOA was not detected in the two composite samples analyzed.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Soil and Soil Vapor Sampling 22 Ramboll

6.3 Soil Vapor Sampling
Soil vapor sampling was performed on September 8 and 9, 2020. In accordance with the Advisory, soil vapor samples were collected using individually-cleaned and certified 1-liter stainless steel Summa canisters and flow controller assemblies provided by Eurofins Calscience. Prior to purging or sampling, a shut-in test was conducted to check for leaks in the above-ground sampling system. To conduct the shut-in test, the above-ground sampling system was assembled and attached to the soil vapor well with its valve in the closed position. The sampling system was then evacuated to a minimum measured vacuum of 100 inches of water and a vacuum gauge on the flow controller assembly was observed for at least one minute. Prior to sampling, and in accordance with the Advisory, sample locations were purged and a leak check was conducted using a sampling shroud in which an atmosphere of a suitable leak check compound (e.g., helium) was generated. After purging, the valve on the Summa canister was then opened, allowing sample air to fill the canister at a rate no greater than 200 cubic centimeters per minute (cc/min). The canister valve was closed when approximately - 4 to -5 inches of mercury in vacuum remained inside the canister. Each canister was labelled and shipped to the analytical laboratory under chain-of-custody documentation for chemical analysis of VOCs by EPA Method TO-15.

6.3.1 Soil Vapor Sampling Results
Soil vapor sampling results are presented in Table 5 and laboratory analytical reports are included in Appendix F.

Chloroform was detected at a concentration of 490 µg/m3 at sample location SV01, exceeding the regulatory screening criterion for residential land use of 4.1 µg/m3. Chloroform is a byproduct of potable water treatment and as a result, detections of chloroform are often related to use of potable water at the site and are not considered indicative of site contamination. Chloroform was detected at one other sample location, SV06, below regulatory screening criterion. No further investigation is warranted.

Benzene was detected at a concentration of 3.5 µg/m3 at sample location SV04, only slightly exceeding the regulatory screening criterion for residential land use of 3.2 µg/m3. Benzene was not detected in any other soil vapor samples. Benzene is a component of gasoline and is often found in soil vapor near areas of vehicle use. The low concentration detected is likely related to stormwater infiltration from the overlying parking lot and not indicative of widespread site contamination. No further investigation is warranted.

No other VOCs were detected above regulatory screening criteria in the soil vapor samples collected at the site.

6.4 Additional Shallow Soil Sampling
To determine the horizontal extent of elevated lead in shallow soil, step-out soil sampling was performed on October 9, 2020. Step-out soil samples were collected from 0.5 and 2.0 feet bgs at locations surrounding SV01, SV02, and SV08. In addition, soil samples were also collected at and in the vicinity of SB01, advanced in the vicinity of former hen houses on the Western Parcel. No staining or odor was noted in any of the soil samples. No elevated PID readings were observed during the step-out sampling. The step-out soil sampling locations are described below in Table F. Figure 3 shows the locations of the step-out soil samples that were analyzed.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Soil and Soil Vapor Sampling 23 Ramboll
Table F: Step-Out Soil Sample Location Summary
Sample
Identification
Step-Out
Sample
Identification Location Description
SB01 SB01 Shallow soil in asphalt paved parking area in the vicinity of former hen coops
SB01-N1 Shallow soil in asphalt paved parking area approximately 30 feet north of SB01
SB01-SE1 Shallow soil in asphalt paved parking area approximately 30 feet southeast of SB01
SB01-SW1 Shallow soil in asphalt paved parking area approximately 25 feet southwest of SB01
SV01 SV01-N1 Shallow soil in grass approximately 30 feet west of SV01 SV01-N2 Shallow soil in landscaping approximately 30 feet north of SV01 SV01-W1 Shallow soil in landscaping approximately 70 feet north of SV01 SV02 SV02-N1 Shallow soil in asphalt paved parking lot approximately 25 feet north of SV02
SV02-N2 Shallow soil in asphalt paved parking lot approximately 55 feet north of SV02
SV02-W1 Shallow soil in grass approximately 30 feet west of SV02 SV02-W2 Shallow soil in grass approximately 70 feet west of SV02 SV08 SV08-N1 Shallow soil in landscaping approximately 35 feet north of SV08 SV08-N2 Shallow soil in grass approximately 75 feet north of SV08 SV08-NW1 Shallow soil in grass approximately 110 feet northwest of SV08 SV08-S1 Shallow soil in landscaping approximately 25 feet south of SV08 SV08-S2 Shallow soil in landscaping approximately 55 feet south of SV08 SV08-SW1 Shallow soil in landscaping approximately 80 feet southwest of SV08
SV08-W1 Shallow soil in asphalt paved parking lot approximately 100 feet west of SV08
The shallow borings were advanced to 2 feet bgs by Penecore Drilling using a hand auger. Ramboll placed soil from 0.5 and 2.0 feet bgs in laboratory-provided glass jars and submitted to MAI under chain of custody procedures. Initially, only the 0.5 feet bgs samples were analyzed for lead by USEPA Method 6020 from location SB01 and the step-out locations closet to SV01, SV02, and SV08.

Concentrations of lead exceeded the residential regulatory screening criterion of 80 mg/kg at 9 of the 13 0.5 feet bgs sample locations analyzed: SV01-N1 (110 mg/kg), SV01-N2 (100 mg/kg), SV01-W1

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Soil and Soil Vapor Sampling 24 Ramboll
(89 mg/kg), SV02-W1-0.5 (110 mg/kg), SV02-W2 (91 mg/kg), SV08-N1 (120 mg/kg), SV08-S1 (220 mg/kg), SV08-S2 (130 mg/kg), SV08-SW1 (99 mg/kg).

All sample locations that detected lead in excess of the residential regulatory screening criterion at 0.5 feet bgs had the 2.0 feet bgs sample analyzed for lead. None of the 2.0 feet bgs step-out samples detected lead concentrations exceeding regulatory screening criterion. Areas of elevated lead appear to be present in shallow soil in the vicinity of current and former structures at the site. Soil sample locations with lead exceedances in shallow soil are noted on Figure 4. Laboratory analytical results are summarized in Table 1.

6.5 Hazardous Waste Characterization Analysis
As noted above, areas of elevated lead are present in the vicinity of current and former site structures. Select samples collected in these areas were analyzed for Soluble Threshold Limit Concentrations (STLCs) and Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) concentrations for comparison to California and federal hazardous waste thresholds, respectively.

Multiple samples with lead concentrations exceeding 10 times the STLC concentration for California hazardous waste (10x STLC Pb = 50 mg/kg) and 20 times the TCLP concentration for federal hazardous waste (20x TLCP Pb = 100 mg/kg) were analyzed, as shown in Table 1.

Of the samples analyzed for STLC lead, 0.5 feet samples from locations SV01, SV08-N1, and SV08-S1 exceeded the STLC threshold of 5.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L) for California hazardous waste. In addition, the lead concentration in the 0.5 feet sample at SV08 exceeded the Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) threshold of 1,000 mg/kg for California hazardous waste. None of the samples analyzed for TCLP lead exceeded federal hazardous waste thresholds. In the event soil in the areas which exceed California hazardous waste criteria (near SV08, SV01, SV08-N1, and SV08-S1) were to be excavated and removed from the site, this soil may require disposal offsite as a California hazardous waste. STLC and TCLP results are summarized in Table 1.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Findings, Opinion, and Conclusions 25 Ramboll

7. FINDINGS, OPINION, AND CONCLUSIONS
Ramboll performed a Phase I ESA in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E1527-13 and a Phase II Subsurface Investigation of the site between September and October 2020.

The objective of the ESA was to identify RECs, as defined in the ASTM Standard. A list of key definitions presented in the ASTM Standard is provided in Section 9 at the end of this report. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section 7.2.

7.1 Findings, Opinions, and Conclusions

7.1.1 Recognized Environmental Conditions
Ramboll performed a Phase I ESA of the site in conformance with the scope and limitations of the ASTM Standard and a Phase II Subsurface Investigation of the site. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section 7.2 of this report. This assessment has revealed the following REC in connection with unrestricted residential use of the site:
• Areas of Elevated Lead in Shallow Soil. Results from soil sampling conducted by Ramboll in September and October 2020 identified concentrations of lead in shallow soil above regulatory screening criterion for residential land use, as discussed in Section 6 of this report. The shallow soil with elevated lead appears to be located in the vicinity of the current and former structures at the site. The vertical extent of the elevated lead appears to be limited to the upper 2 feet. The horizonal extent could not be fully delineated due to the presence of on-site structures.

7.1.2 Other Findings
Although not a considered REC based on currently available information, Ramboll identified the following other findings. The term “other finding” is not defined by ASTM; rather, Ramboll uses the term to connote areas of contingent risk that are not clearly defined by the ASTM Standard. • Potential Former UST. The EDR report identified a former 1,000-gallon unleaded gasoline UST at the site on the Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System Underground Storage Tank (SWEEPS UST) database. The current site owner was unaware of any present or former USTs at the site. The former site owner reportedly recalls her husband removing the UST from the southwest corner of the parking lot in the early 1990s and provided a hand-drawn sketch of the possible location. Ramboll contacted the City of Pleasanton Fire Department (Fire Department), the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH), and the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB), but none of the agencies reported having records of the UST. Ramboll advanced two borings to 10 feet below ground surface (bgs) in the vicinity of the potential former UST. No soil staining, odors, or other evidence of the potential fuel UST were observed by Ramboll field personnel. Soil sampling conducted in the vicinity of the potential former UST location also did not detect fuel constituents. Soil vapor sampling detected benzene slightly above the residential regulatory screening criteria at one of the two locations in the vicinity of the potential former UST (SV04); however, SV04 is in the parking lot and concentrations of benzene are commonly detected at these concentrations in vehicle use areas. No additional fuel constituents or by-products were detected in soil vapor samples above regulatory screening criteria for unrestricted residential land use. No further investigation is recommended at this time.
• Nearby Dry-Cleaning Sites. Several dry-cleaning facilities are located in relatively close proximity to the site as discussed in more detail in Section 4.1.3. Several of these facilities have

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Findings, Opinion, and Conclusions 26 Ramboll
identified chlorinated solvents in soil vapor and/or groundwater above regulatory screening criteria. These off-site properties potentially pose a contamination concern to the subject site. To address the potential contamination concern, soil vapor sampling was performed at the site, as discussed in Section 6.3. Based on the results of the soil vapor sampling conducted by Ramboll at the site, these dry-cleaning properties are not considered of concern for the site.

7.1.3 De Minimis Conditions
De minimis conditions are those that do not represent a material risk of harm to public health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Ramboll identified the following de minimis condition related to the site:
• Historical Site Use for Agricultural Purposes. According to the Alameda County Assessor’s Office, the site was owed by Loretto Winery LTD from at least August 25, 1969 to October 16, 1987. Aerial photographs dating back to 1939 do not depict agricultural operations at the site. A winery’s processing operations are located adjacent to the west of the site as early as 1939.

Given the aerial images and reported residential historical site use, it is unlikely pesticides and other agricultural chemicals were applied to the property during the Loretto Winery LTD ownership. Ramboll collected shallow soil samples (locations SV01 through SV08) that were analyzed for organochlorine pesticides. All organochlorine pesticide concentrations were below regulatory screening criteria for unrestricted residential land use. No further investigation is recommended at this time.

7.2 Analysis of Data Gaps
The ASTM Standard defines a data gap as “a lack of or inability to obtain information required by the practice despite good faith efforts by the environmental professional to gather such information.” A data gap is only significant if other information obtained during the ESA, or professional experience, raises reasonable concerns and affects the ability of the environmental professional to identify whether a given issue is a REC. The ASTM Standard requires that the ESA report identify and comment on significant data gaps.

Limiting conditions and deviations to the ASTM Standard for the assessment are discussed below. • The earliest readily available aerial image that indicates specific site uses is dated 1939 and shows that at least a portion of the property was already developed for agricultural uses. ASTM defines agricultural site use as a “developed” site use. Due to extended age of the site, it was not possible to interview representatives dating back to the site’s first developed agricultural use. • Within the primary residence and the accessory dwelling unit, Ramboll observed areas identified by the site owner as having chemical or hazardous materials storage. In the primary residence Ramboll observed the laundry room, located on the ground-floor in the northwest corner of the house. The site owner stated there is no chemical or hazardous material storage in the accessory dwelling unit; therefore, Ramboll personnel only observed the living room from the eastern dwelling entrance.

None of the exceptions, deletions, deviations, or site reconnaissance limitations noted above are considered to represent significant data gaps.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
References 27 Ramboll

8. REFERENCES

8.1 Documents
AdvancedGeo Environmental. 2018. “Site Assessment Report.” October 2015.

EDR. 2020. “The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package: Inquiry Number 6173597.11.” August 31.

EDR. 2020. “EDR Building Permit Report, Inquiry Number 6173597.8.” August 31.

EDR. 2020. “The EDR-City Directory Abstract, Inquiry Number 6173597.5.” September 2.

EDR. 2020. “EDR Environmental Lien Search and AUL Search, Inquiry Number 6173597.7.” September 1.

EDR. 2020. “EDR Historical Topo Map Report, Inquiry Number 6173597.4.” August 31.

EDR. 2020. “The EDR Property Tax Map Report, Inquiry Number 6173597.6.” August 31.

EDR. 2020. “The EDR Radius Map Report, Inquiry Number: 6173597.2r.” August 31.

EDR. 2020. “Certified Sanborn® Map Report, Inquiry Number 6173597.3.” August 31.

Environmental Risk Assessors. “Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment.” November 2017.

Environmental Risk Assessors. 2016. “Soil and Groundwater Investigation Report.” October.

ETIC Engineering, Inc. 2009. “Soil Vapor Sampling Report.” September.

Northgate Environmental Management, inc. 2018. “Source Investigation Report.” May.

Trinity Source Group, inc. 2019. “Completion Report.” September.

8.2 Interviews
Joe Barone. 2020. Site Owner. Personal interview. September 1.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
ASTM Definitions 28 Ramboll

9. ASTM DEFINITIONS
The following definitions are presented in the ASTM Standard:

REC - Recognized Environmental Condition:

The presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: 1) due to release to the environment; 2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or 3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.

CREC - Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition:

A recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority, with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls.

HREC - Historical Recognized Environmental Condition:

A past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls.

De minimis Condition:

A condition that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies.

Data Gap / Significant Data Gap:

A lack of or inability to obtain information required by the practice despite good faith efforts by the environmental professional to gather such information. A data gap is significant if other information and/or professional experience raises concerns involving the data gap.

Please note that the term “other finding” is not defined by ASTM; rather, Ramboll uses the term to connote areas of contingent risk that are not clearly defined by the ASTM Standard.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll
TABLES

D R A F T
Table 1: Metals in Soil Samples
SCDC Pleasanton
475 and 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, CA
Sample
Location
Sample Depth
(feet bgs) Sample Date Antimony Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Lead STLC Lead
(mg/L)
TCLP Lead
(mg/L) Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Selenium Vanadium Zinc SB01 0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 64 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 9/3/2020 1.0 8.1 190 0.95 65 12 37 350 14 0.10 0.44 0.56 83 ND<0.50 36 270

2.0 9/3/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 71 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

3.0 9/3/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 26 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 110 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 89 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 9/3/2020 0.66 7.0 210 ND<0.50 65 13 31 99 3.4 ND<0.10 0.61 0.60 78 ND<0.50 43 120

2.0 9/3/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 16 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

3.0 9/3/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 7.9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 110 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 19 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SV03 0.5 9/3/2020 0.70 7.6 210 ND<0.50 76 14 33 46 -- -- 0.14 0.65 100 ND<0.50 43 160

0.5 9/3/2020 0.85 13 280 0.52 130 18 38 77 -- -- 0.18 0.77 150 ND<0.50 47 160

2.0 9/3/2020 -- 7.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SV05 0.5 9/3/2020 0.78 7.1 180 ND<0.50 70 11 34 36 -- -- 0.099 0.72 90 ND<0.50 39 99 SV06 0.5 9/3/2020 0.75 8.1 210 ND<0.50 74 13 34 57 -- -- 0.22 0.87 97 ND<0.50 47 100 SV07 0.5 9/3/2020 0.73 7.1 190 1.5 70 13 34 70 -- -- 0.17 ND<0.50 110 ND<0.50 39 100

0.5 9/3/2020 0.83 8.0 220 ND<0.50 79 13 37 1,600 -- ND<0.10 0.19 0.63 99 0.58 43 100

2.0 9/3/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

3.0 9/3/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 120 6.7 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 30 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 220 9.1 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 14 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 130 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 99 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2.0 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

0.5 10/9/2020 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 70 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 31 11 15,000 71 120,000a 23 3,100 80 1b 390 820 390 390 23,000 USEPA Duvergé USEPA Cal/EPA USEPA USEPA USEPA Cal/EPA Cal/EPA USEPA Cal/EPA USEPA USEPA USEPA TTLC 500 500 10,000 100 2,500 8,000 2,500 1,000 -- -- 20 3,500 2,000 100 2,400 5,000 10x STLC 150 50 1,000 10 50 800 250 50 -- -- 2.0 3,500 200 10 240 2,500 20x TCLP -- 100 2,000 20 100 -- -- 100 -- -- 4.0 -- -- 20 -- -- Notes:

Only compounds detected above the laboratory reporting limit are included in the table and are shown in bold.

All data are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).

Blue shading denotes detected concentrations in excess of residential screening criteria.

Orange shading denotes exceedance above STLC/TCLP value. a
= screening value is for Chromium III
b
= screening value is for Elemental Mercury
California Assessment Manual 17 (CAM17) metals analyzed by EPA Method 6020. -- = not analyzed or not available
bgs = below ground surface
Cal/EPA = California Envrionmental Protection Agency
mg/L = milligrams per liter
ND = not detected at or above the laboratory reporting limit shown STLC = Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration; Source: California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 3.

TCLP = Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure; Source: 40 CFR 261, appendix II, 1993 ed., as amended by 58 FR 46040, Aug 31, 1993.

USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency
SV02
SV08
SV01
Screening Criteria Source
Residential Screening Criteria
SV08-N1
SV08-N2
SV08-S1
SV08-S2
SV08-SW1
SV01-N1
SV01-N2
SV01-W1
SV02-N1
TCLP Lead
Threshold = 5.0
mg/L
United States Evironmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2020. Regional Screening Levels for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites. May.

Hazardous Waste
Screening Criteria
Sources:

California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA). 2020. Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note Number 3, Issue: DTSC developed modified screening levels based on the U.S. EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) for use in the Human Health Risk Assessment process at hazardous waste sites and permitted facilities. June.

Duvergé, Dylan Jacques. 2011. Establishing Background Arsenic in Soil of the Urbanized San Francisco Bay Region.

SV02-W1
SV02-W2
SV08-W1
SV04
STLC Lead
Threshold = 5.0
mg/L

D R A F T
Table 2: Detected Organochlorine Pesticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Soil Samples SCDC Pleasanton
475 and 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, CA
a-Chlordane g-Chlordane p,p-DDD p,p-DDE p,p-DDT Dieldrin Endrin
aldehyde Aroclor 1260
SV01 0.5 9/3/2020 0.012 0.0050 ND<0.0010 0.040 0.0082 0.0055 ND<0.0010 ND<0.050 SV02 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<0.050 ND<0.050 ND<0.050 0.053 ND<0.050 ND<0.050 ND<0.050 ND<2.5 SV03 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<1.0 SV04 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<0.50 ND<0.50 ND<0.50 ND<0.50 ND<0.50 ND<0.50 ND<0.50 ND<25 SV05 0.5 9/3/2020 0.0017 0.0033 0.0014 0.21 0.077 0.0044 0.0020 0.14 SV06 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<0.10 ND<0.10 ND<0.10 0.11 ND<0.10 ND<0.10 ND<0.10 ND<5.0 SV07 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<0.020 ND<1.0 SV08 0.5 9/3/2020 0.0083 0.0048 ND<0.0010 0.31 0.062 0.0017 ND<0.0010 ND<0.050 -- -- 1.9 2.0 1.9 0.034 -- 0.24
-- -- USEPA USEPA USEPA DTSC -- DTSC
Notes:

Only compounds detected above the laboratory reporting limit are included in the table and are shown in bold.

All data are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).

Blue shading denotes detected concentrations in excess of residential screening level.

Organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) analyzed by EPA Method 8081A.

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) analyzed by EPA Method 8082. -- = not analyzed or not available
bgs = below ground surface
Cal/EPA = California Envrionmental Protection Agency
DDE = dichlorodiphenylethylene
DDT = dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
ND = not detected at or above the laboratory reporting limit shown OCP = organochlorinated biphenyls
PCB = polychlorinated biphenyls
USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency
USEPA. 2020. Regional Screening Levels for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites. May.

DTSC - California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA). 2020. Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note Number 3, Issue: DTSC developed modified screening levels based on the U.S. EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) for use in the Human Health Risk Assessment process at hazardous waste sites and permitted facilities. June.

Organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) PCBs
Screening Criteria Source
Sources:

Residential Screening Criteria
Sample Date
Sample Depth
(feet bgs)
Sample
Location

DRAFT
Table 3: Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil Samples SCDC Pleasanton
475 and 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, CA
TPH-g TPH-d TPH-mo
SV02 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<1.0 ND<1.0 17 --
SV03 10.0 9/3/2020 ND<1.0 ND<1.0 ND<5.0 --
SV04 10.0 9/3/2020 ND<1.0 ND<1.0 ND<5.0 --
SV05 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<1.0 ND<1.0 ND<5.0 --
SV06 3.0 9/3/2020 ND<1.0 ND<1.0 ND<5.0 --
SV07 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<1.0 1.1 21 All ND*
SV08 3.0 9/3/2020 ND<1.0 ND<1.0 ND<5.0 --
430 260 12,000 --
Notes:

Compounds detected above the laboratory reporting limit are shown in bold.

All data are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).

Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) analyzed by EPA Method 8015 Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) analyzed by EPA method 8260 * Reporting limits vary for different samples based on laboratory dilution factors. -- = not analyzed or not available
bgs = below ground surface
ND = not detected at or above the laboratory reporting limit shown RWQCB = Regional Water Quality Control Board
TPH-g = total petroleum hydrocarbons gasoline range (C6-C12) TPH-d = total petroleum hydrocarbons diesel range (C10-C23) TPH-mo = total petroleum hydrocarbons motor oil range (C18-C36) RWQCB Residential ESL
Sources:
a San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB). 2019. Environmental Screening Levels Direct Exposure Human Health Risk Levels (Table S-1). Revision 2 VOCs
Sample
Location
Sample Depth
(feet bgs) Sample Date
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)

DRAFT
Table 4: Naturally-Occurring Asbestos in Soil Samples
SCDC Pleasanton
475 and 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, CA
Sample ID
Depth Below
Ground Surface
(feet) Sample Date Visual Estimation
Percent Asbestos in
Matrix
Asbestos Type(s)
Detected
NOA-Base 0 to 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<0.25% ND<0.25% None
NOA-0.5 0.5 9/3/2020 ND<0.25% ND<0.25% None
Notes:

Sample NOA-Base is a composite of 0 to 0.5 feet below ground surface samples SV03-NOA-base, SV04-NOA-base, SV05-NOA-base Sample NOA-0.5 is a composite of native soil samples SV03-NOA-0.5, SV04-NOA-0.5, SV05-NOA-0.5.

NOA analyzed by CARB Method 435
CARB 435 = California Air Resources Board Method 435; June 6, 1991.

ID = identification
ND = not detected at or above the laboratory limit of quantification shown NOA = Naturally-Occurring Asbestos

DRAFT
Table 5: VOCs in Soil Vapor Samples
SCDC Pleasanton
475 and 493 St. John Street, Pleasanton, CA
Sample Type
Sample Location SV01 SV02 SV03 SV04 SV05 SV06 SV07 SV08 Sample Depth (feet bgs) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Sample Date 9/9/2020 9/8/2020 9/8/2020 9/8/2020 9/8/2020 9/8/2020 9/8/2020 9/8/2020 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND<7.4 ND<7.4 ND<7.4 ND<7.4 10 ND<7.4 ND<7.4 ND<7.4 -- 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND<2.5 ND<2.5 ND<2.5 ND<2.5 5.1 ND<2.5 ND<2.5 ND<2.5 -- 2-Butanone (MEK) 6.3 ND<4.4 ND<4.4 ND<4.4 ND<4.4 ND<4.4 ND<4.4 ND<4.4 170,000 Acetone 37 10 16 16 10 5.0 12 24 1,100,000
Benzene ND<1.6 ND<1.6 ND<1.6 3.5 ND<1.6 ND<1.6 ND<1.6 ND<1.6 3.2 Carbon disulfide ND<6.2 6.6 ND<6.2 ND<6.2 ND<6.2 ND<6.2 ND<6.2 ND<6.2 -- Chloroform 490 ND<2.4 ND<2.4 ND<2.4 ND<2.4 3.1 ND<2.4 ND<2.4 4.1 Dichlorodifluoromethane (R-12) ND<2.5 ND<2.5 2.8 2.7 2.8 ND<2.5 ND<2.5 ND<2.5 -- Isopropanol 15 ND<12 ND<12 ND<12 ND<12 ND<12 ND<12 ND<12 -- m,p-Xylene ND<8.7 ND<8.7 ND<8.7 ND<8.7 11 ND<8.7 ND<8.7 13 3,500 o-Xylene ND<2.2 ND<2.2 ND<2.2 2.9 6.4 ND<2.2 ND<2.2 5.4 3,500 PCE 9.1 ND<3.4 3.4 ND<3.4 ND<3.4 ND<3.4 ND<3.4 ND<3.4 15 Toluene 2.0 10 2.0 ND<1.9 3.6 ND<1.9 ND<1.9 4.1 10,000
Notes:

Only compounds detected above the laboratory reporting limit are included in the table; positive results are shown in bold.

All data are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).

Blue shading denotes detected concentrations in excess of residential screening level. -- = not available/applicable
bgs = below ground surface
ND = not detected at or above the laboratory reporting limit shown SV = Soil Vapor Sampling Location
cis-1,2-DCE = cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Freon 113 = 1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-Trifluoroethane
MEK = methyl ethyl ketone
PCE = Tetrachloroethene
Screening Criteria Source:

Residential
Screening Criteria
for Soil Gas
Vapor Intrusion
All samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method TO-15.

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB). 2019. Summary of Soil Vapor ESLs:

Subslab/Soil Gas Vapor Intrusion: Human Health Risk Levels (Table SG-1). July. Rev 2.

Soil Vapor

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll

FIGURES

SITE VICINITY MAP
PROJECT: 169000XXXX | DATED: 23-Sep-20 | DESIGNER: rmso LEGEND FIGURE 01

RAMBOLL US CORPORATION A RAMBOLL COMPANY
Service Layer Credits: USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation Program, Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography 0 1,000 2,000
Feet
!(
Ná
475 and 493 Saint John Street
Pleasanton, California
Q:\DRAWINGS\MikeGaffney-475-493SaintJohn\475-493-Saint John_Locmap.mxd Map Scale: 1:1:24,000;
Map Center: 121°52'31"W 37°39'53"N

KEY MAP
t

SITE LAYOUT
PROJECT: 1690019049 | DATED: 10/26/2020 | DESIGNER: mgaffney LEGEND
Approximate Site Boundary
FIGURE 02

RAMBOLL US CORPORATION A RAMBOLL COMPANY
Service Layer Credits: © 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 Maxar ©CNES (2020) Distribution Airbus DS 0 75 150
Feet
!(
Ná
475 and 493 Saint John Street
Pleasanton, California
Q:\DRAWINGS\MikeGaffney-475-493SaintJohn\475-493-Saint John_Layout.mxd

SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
PROJECT: 169000XXXX | DATED: 10/23/2020 | DESIGNER: mgaffney FIGURE 03

RAMBOLL US CORPORATION A RAMBOLL COMPANY
Service Layer Credits: © 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 Maxar ©CNES (2020) Distribution Airbus DS 0 50 100
Feet
!(
Ná
475 and 493 Saint John Street
Pleasanton, California
Q:\DRAWINGS\MikeGaffney-475-493SaintJohn\475-493-Saint John_SampleLocationMap.mxd !( Soil Sample Location
#* Soil and Soil Vapor
Sample Location
Approximate Site
Boundary
LEGEND

PROJECT: 1690019049 | DATED: 10/23/2020 | DESIGNER: mgaffney FIGURE 04

RAMBOLL US CORPORATION A RAMBOLL COMPANY
Service Layer Credits: © 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 Maxar ©CNES (2020) Distribution Airbus DS 0 50 100
Feet
!(
Ná
475 and 493 Saint John Street
Pleasanton, California
Q:\DRAWINGS\MikeGaffney-475-493SaintJohn\475-493-Saint John_Step-OutSampleLocationMap-20201021.mxd

SHALLOW SOIL SAMPLES

WITH LEAD EXCEEDANCES
NOTES
bgs: below ground surface
mg/kg: milligrams per kilogram
LEGEND
!( Soil Sample Location - No Lead
Exceedance
!(
Soil Sample Location - Lead
concentration in the 0.5 feet
bgs sample exceeds the residential
screening criteria of 80 mg/kg
Approximate Site Boundary

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll

APPENDIX A

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll

APPENDIX B

ENVIRONMENTAL DATABASE REPORT
EDR conducted its searches for the standard environmental record sources and the minimum search distances, as specified by the ASTM Standard. The ASTM Standard uses the terminology “approximate minimum search distance” to refer to the radii searched in the environmental database report.

EDR conducted the search of environmental databases in December 2017. Because the environmental databases themselves are sometimes not updated by the specific regulatory agencies for periods of up to one year or more (depending on the database and the state), the database search conducted herein will not necessarily list any facility or site for which an environmental investigation/listing has been initiated subsequent to the last update.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll

APPENDIX C

HISTORICAL RESEARCH DOCUMENTATION

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll
APPENDIX C.1

TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll
APPENDIX C.2

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll
APPENDIX C.3

ABSTRACT OF CITY DIRECTORIES

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll
APPENDIX C.4

HISTORICAL FIRE INSURANCE MAPS

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll

APPENDIX D

SITE OWNER PROVIDED FIGURE

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll

APPENDIX E

ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN AND AUL SEARCH

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll

APPENDIX F

LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORTS

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment D R A F T
and Subsurface Investigation
Ramboll

APPENDIX G

QUALIFICATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS

Appendix F
Roadway Construction Noise Model Results

Construction Noise
Construction Vibration
Vibration Annoyance
Phase 1 Noise Level @ 50 ft Multi-family to the west Exisiting Residential Commercial to East Distance 110 65 110
Demolition 81 74.152 78.721 74.152
Site Preparation 81 74.152 78.721 74.152
Grading 84 77.152 81.721 77.152
Building Construction 82 75.152 79.721 75.152
Paving 87 80.152 84.721 80.152
Vibration @ 25 ft Multi-family to the west Exisiting Residential Commercial to East 110 65 110
Vibratory Roller 0.21 0.023 0.050 0.023
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.010 0.021 0.010
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.008 0.018 0.008
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.000 0.001 0.000
Vibration @ 25 ft Multi-family to the west Exisiting Residential Commercial to East VdB 110 65 110
Vibratory Roller 94 75 82 75
Large Bulldozer 87 68 75 68
Loaded Trucks 86 67 74 67
Small Bulldozer 58 39 46 39 Page 692 of 893
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 09/20/2023
Case Description: Demolition
**** Receptor #1 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
----------- -------- ------- ------- -----
Demolition Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0
Equipment
---------
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
----------- ------ ----- ----- ----- -------- --------- Excavator No 40 80.7 50.0 0.0
Front End Loader No 40 79.1 50.0 0.0
Dozer No 40 81.7 50.0 0.0

Results
-------
Noise Limits (dBA)
Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Calculated (dBA) Day Evening
Night Day Evening Night
---------------- -------------- -------------
-------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax
Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
---------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Excavator 80.7 76.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Front End Loader 79.1 75.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Dozer 81.7 77.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total 81.7 81.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 09/20/2023
Case Description: Site Preparation
**** Receptor #1 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
----------- -------- ------- ------- -----
Site Preparation Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0
Equipment
---------
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
----------- ------ ----- ----- ----- -------- --------- Roller No 20 80.0 50.0 0.0
Dozer No 40 81.7 50.0 0.0
Excavator No 40 80.7 50.0 0.0

Results
-------
Noise Limits (dBA)
Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Calculated (dBA) Day Evening
Night Day Evening Night
---------------- -------------- -------------
-------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax
Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
---------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Roller 80.0 73.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Dozer 81.7 77.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Excavator 80.7 76.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total 81.7 81.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 09/20/2023
Case Description: Grading
**** Receptor #1 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
----------- -------- ------- ------- -----
Grading Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0
Equipment
---------
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
----------- ------ ----- ----- ----- -------- --------- Dozer No 40 81.7 50.0 0.0
Grader No 40 85.0 50.0 0.0
Scraper No 40 83.6 50.0 0.0

Results
-------
Noise Limits (dBA)
Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Calculated (dBA) Day Evening
Night Day Evening Night
---------------- -------------- -------------
-------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax
Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
---------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Dozer 81.7 77.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Grader 85.0 81.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Scraper 83.6 79.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total 85.0 84.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 09/20/2023
Case Description: Building Construction
**** Receptor #1 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
----------- -------- ------- ------- -----
Building Construction Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0
Equipment
---------
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
----------- ------ ----- ----- ----- -------- --------- Grader No 40 85.0 50.0 0.0
Backhoe No 40 77.6 50.0 0.0
Backhoe No 40 77.6 50.0 0.0

Results
-------
Noise Limits (dBA)
Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Calculated (dBA) Day Evening
Night Day Evening Night
---------------- -------------- -------------
-------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax
Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
---------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Grader 85.0 81.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Backhoe 77.6 73.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Backhoe 77.6 73.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total 85.0 82.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 09/20/2023
Case Description: Paving
**** Receptor #1 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
----------- -------- ------- ------- -----
Paving Residential 65.0 55.0 50.0
Equipment
---------
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
----------- ------ ----- ----- ----- -------- --------- Paver No 50 77.2 50.0 0.0
Vibrating Hopper No 50 87.0 50.0 0.0
Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 50.0 0.0

Results
-------
Noise Limits (dBA)
Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)

----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Calculated (dBA) Day Evening
Night Day Evening Night
---------------- -------------- -------------
-------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax
Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
---------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Paver 77.2 74.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Vibrating Hopper 87.0 84.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Concrete Saw 89.6 82.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total 89.6 86.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Attachment 2
Carrier 38AUD25 HVAC System

38AUZ / 38AUD
60 Hz Air Cooled Condensing Units
with Puronr (R---410A) Refrigerant
6 to 20 Nominal Tons
Sizes: 07 ---25
Product Data
C09227
38AUZ07--14 shown
Carrier’s air-cooled air conditioning split systems:

S provide a logical solution for commercial needs
S have a rugged, dependable construction
S are available in single and circuit scroll compressor capacity control
S have cooling capability up to 125_F (52_C) ambient
and down to 40_F (4_C) ambient standard

FEATURES / BENEFITS
The Gemini 38AU series outdoor air cooled condensing
units matched with Carrier’s 40RU series indoor air
handlers offer a wide variety of options for your HVAC
application needs. Whether it’s first cost with the 38AU single compressor models or superior part load
performance from the two compressor models, this series is designed for long, dependable operation as a rooftop or on-the-ground installation. All Gemini 38AU and 40RU
series units use PuronR R--410A refrigerant. Together,
they create a reliable split system that provides easy
solutions to a wide range of commercial HVAC needs.

Constructed for long life
The 38AUZ single circuit and 38AUD dual circuit, scroll compressor models are designed and built to last. The
high efficient designed outdoor coil construction allows for a more efficient design in a smaller cabinet size that utilizes an overall reduction in refrigerant charge. Where conditions require, special coil coating coil protection option is available. Cabinets are constructed of prepainted galvanized steel, delivering unparalleled protection from the environment. Inside and outside surfaces are protected to ensure long life, good looks, and reliable operation.

Safety controls are used for enhanced system protection and reliability.

Each unit utilizes the Comfort Alert diagnostic and
troubleshoot control system. This protects the units
operation and provides valuable diagnostic information
when required.

2 FEATURES AND BENEFITS (cont.)
Factory-installed options (FIOPs)
Certified and pre--engineered factory-installed options (FIOPs) allow units to be installed in less time, thereby reducing installed cost. FIOPs include:

S low ambient controls which provide cooling operation
down to --20_F (--29_C) ambient temperatures
S non-fused disconnect
S 115-v GFI (ground fault interrupter) convenience outlet, powered and non--powered available
S special coil coating coil protection
S louvered hail guard
Efficient operation
These air cooled condensing units will provide EER’s up to 11.5 which meets ASHRAE 90.1 efficiency levels. The
38AU dual compressor models provide two (2) stages of
cooling for remarkable partial load performance.

This high efficiency will help reduce overall operating cost and energy consumption.

Controls for performance dependability
The 38AU condensing units offer operating controls and
components designed for performance dependability. The
high efficiency hermetic scroll compressor is engineered for long life and durability. The compressors include
vibration isolation for quiet operation. The high-pressure switch protects the entire refrigeration system from
abnormally high operating pressures. A low-pressure
switch protects the system from loss of charge. These
units also include anti-short-cycling protection, which helps to protect the units against compressor failure.

All units include a crankcase heater to eliminate liquid slugging at start-up. Each unit comes standard with the Comfort Alertt control system. This provides:

S System Go LED indicator
S Fault LED indicator
S Compressor fault LED indicator
S Phase loss protection
S Phase reversal protection
S Safety pressure indicator
S Anti--short cycle protection
The latest safety standards for 38AUZ/D units are assured through UL, Canada approvals (6 to 12.5 ton units) and
ETL, Canada approvals (15 and 20 ton units).

Innovative Carrier 40RU packaged air
handlers are custom matched to 38AUZ/D
condensing units
Information on matching 40RU DX packaged air handler
follows for convenience. See separate product data for
more details. The 40RU Series has excellent fan
performance, efficient direct-expansion (DX) coils, a
unique combination of indoor-air quality features, and is easy to install. Its versatility and state-of-the-art features help to ensure economical performance of the split system both now and in the future.

Indoor--air quality (IAQ) features
The unique combination of IAQ features in the 40RU
Series air handlers help to ensure that only clean, fresh, conditioned air is delivered to the occupied space.

Direct-expansion (DX) 4 row cooling coils prevent the
build-up of humidity in the room, even during part-load conditions.

Standard 2-in. (51mm) disposable filters remove dust and airborne particles from the occupied space for cleaner air.

The pitched, non-corroding drain pan can be adjusted for a right-hand or left-hand connection to suit many
applications and provide positive drainage and prevent
standing condensate.

The accessory economizer can provide ventilation air to improve indoor-air quality by using demand control
ventilation. When used in conjunction with Carrier
Comfort System and CO2 sensors, the economizer admits
fresh outdoor air to replace stale, recirculated indoor air.

Economy
The 40RU Series packaged air handlers provide reduced
installation expense and energy-efficient performance.

Quick installation is ensured by the multipoise design.

Units can be installed in either the horizontal or vertical configuration without modifications. Fan motors and
contactors are pre--wired and thermostatic expansion
valves (TXVs) are factory-installed on all 40RU models.

High efficiency, precision-balanced fans minimize air
turbulence, surging, and unbalanced operation, cutting
operation expenses.

The economizer accessory precisely controls the blend of outdoor air and room air to achieve comfort levels. When the outside air enthalpy is suitable, outside air dampers can fully open to provide “free” cooling without
energizing mechanical cooling.

Rugged dependability
The 40RU series units are made to last. The die-formed
galvanized steel panels ensure structural integrity under all operating conditions. Galvanized steel fan housings are securely mounted to a die-formed galvanized steel fan
deck.

Rugged pillow-block bearings (40RU14) are securely
fastened to the solid steel fan shaft with split collets and clamp locking devices. Smaller unit sizes have spider-type bearings.
38AU

3 FEATURES AND BENEFITS (cont.)
Coil flexibility
Model 40RU direct- expansion coils have galvanized steel casings; inlet and outlet connections are on the same end.

The coils are designed for use with PuronR (R--410A)
refrigerant and have 3/8-in. diameter copper tubes
mechanically bonded to aluminum sine-wave fins. The
coils include matched, factory-installed thermostatic
expansion valves (TXVs) with matching distributor
nozzles and offers a removable power element and
extended connections.

Easier installation and service
The multipoise design and component layout ensures
quick unit installation and operation. Units can be
converted from horizontal to vertical operation by simply repositioning the unit. Drain pan connections are
duplicated on both sides of the unit. The filters, motor, drive, TXVs, and coil connections are all easily accessed by removing a single side panel.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
FEATURES / BENEFITS 1 ........................

MODEL NUMBER NOMENCLATURE 4 ............

AHRI CAPACITY RATINGS 5 .....................

SOUND POWER LEVELS 5 .......................

PHYSICAL DATA 6 ..............................

DIMENSIONS 8 .................................

OPTIONS AND ACCESSORIES 11 .................

SELECTION PROCEDURE 14 .....................

TYPICAL WIRING SCHEMATIC 15 ................

PERFORMANCE DATA 17 ........................

ELECTRICAL DATA 42 ..........................

APPLICATION DATA 46 .........................

TYPICAL PIPING AND WIRING 50 ................

GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS 54 ......................
38AU

4 MODEL NUMBER NOMENCLATURE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
3 8 A U Z A 1 4 A 0 G 6 -- 0 A 0 A 0 _____________ ____ Model Type Brand / Packaging
38AU = Air Cooled Cond. Unit 0 = Standard
Puronr R --- 410A Refrigerant 1 = LTL Packaging
Type of Coil Electrical Options
D = Dual Circuit, A/C Scroll Compressor A = None
Z = Single Circuit, A/C Scroll Compressor C = Non ---Fused Disconnect Refrigerant Options Service Options
A = Standard 0 = None
B = Low Ambient Controls 1 = Un---powered Convenience Outlet C = Hot Gas By ---Pass 2 = Powered Convenience Outlet
(38AUD 12, 16, 25 Models only)
D = Single circuit, two ---stage Factory Assigned
(07, 08 models only) A = Default
E = Single circuit, two ---stage with Low
Ambient Controls (07, 08 models only) Base Unit Controls 0 = Electro ---Mechanical Controls
Nominal Tonnage
07 = 6 Tons Design Rev
08 = 7.5 Tons --- = Catalog Model Number
12 = 10 Tons
14 = 12.5 Tons Voltage
16 = 15 Tons 1 = 575/3/60
25 = 20 Tons 5 = 208/230/3/60
6 = 460/3/60
Factory Assigned
A = Default Coil Options (Condenser)
With Round Tube/Plate Fin Design
Factory Assigned A = Al/Cu Standard
0 = Default B = Pre Coat Al/Cu
C = E ---Coat Al/Cu
E = Cu/Cu
M = Al/Cu Standard with louvered hail guard
N = Pre Coat Al/Cu with louvered hail guard
P = E ---Coat Al/Cu with louvered hail guard
R = Cu/Cu --- Louvered hail guard
Use of the AHRI Certified
TM Mark indicates a
manufacturer’s
participation in the
program For verification
of certification for individual
products, go to
www.ahridirectory.org.

Certified to ISO 9001
38AUZ --- 6 to 12.5 Ton
38AUD --- 10 to12.5 Ton
38AUD/Z --- 15 to 20 Ton
38AU

5 AHRI* CAPACITY RATINGS

UNIT COOLING

STAGES COMPRESSORS
NOM.

CAPACITY
(TONS)

NET COOLING

CAPACITY
(MBH)
TOTAL
POWER
(kW)
EER IEER IEER w/
2 ---SPEED
38AUZ(A,B)07/40RU07 1 1 6 71.0 6.2 11.5 12.2 N/A
38AUZ(A,B)08/40RU08 1 1 7.5 92.0 8.2 11.2 11.8 N/A
38AUZ12/40RU12 1 1 10 117.0 10.4 11.2 12.0 N/A
38AUZ14/40RU14 1 1 12.5 148.0 13.5 11.0 12.0 N/A
38AUZ16/40RU16 1* 2 15 184.0 16.4 11.2 13.2 14.3
38AUZ25/40RU25 1* 2 20 240.0 21.8 11.0 12.5 13.6
* Single circuit with two (tandem) compressors. See application tip #38TIP --- 10 --- 03 for staging capabilities.

UNIT COOLING

STAGES COMPRESSORS
NOM.

CAPACITY
(TONS)

NET COOLING

CAPACITY
(MBH)
TOTAL
POWER
(kW)
EER IEER IEER w/
2 ---SPEED
38AUZ(D,E)07/40RU07 2 1 6 70.0 5.8 12.0 12.2 14.0
38AUZ(D,E)08/40RU08 2 1 7.5 92.0 8.2 11.2 11.8 12.9
38AUD12/40RU12 2 2 10 117.0 10.4 11.2 11.6 13.0
38AUD14/40RU14 2 2 12.5 148.0 13.5 11.0 12.0 12.5
38AUD16/40RU16 2 2 15 184.0 16.4 11.2 11.8 12.6
38AUD25/40RU25 2 2 20 240.0 21.8 11.0 11.2 12.0
LEGEND
AHRI --- Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration
Institute
ASHRAE --- American Society of Heating, Refrigerating
and Air Conditioning, Inc.

EER --- Energy Efficiency Ratio
IEER --- Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio
NOTES

1. Rated in accordance with AHRI Standard 340/360, as appropriate.

2. Ratings are based on:

Cooling Standard: 80_F (27_C) db, 67_F (19_C) wb indoor air temp and 95_F (35_C) db outdoor air temp.

IEER Standard: 80_F (27_C) db, 67_F (19_C) wb indoor air temp and 4 various outdoor temperatures.

3. All units comply with ASHRAE 90.1 Energy Standard for minimum EER and IEER requirements.

SOUND POWER LEVELS, dB

UNIT COOLING

CIRCUITS
OUTDOOR SOUND (dB)
A ---WEIGHTED 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
RTPF --- Round Tube/Plate Fin Coil Design
38AUZ07 1&2 85 89.3 85.0 82.0 82.7 80.2 75.2 71.0 66.0
38AUZ08 1&2 85 89.3 85.0 82.0 82.7 80.2 75.2 71.0 66.0
38AUZ12 1 83 86.6 81.9 85.7 80.0 77.1 74.6 69.2 65.8
38AUD12 2 84 86.3 85.8 81.4 81.9 79.5 75.1 71.9 68.9
38AUZ14 1 84 89.1 85.7 83.0 81.1 79.3 74.9 69.7 62.2
38AUD14 2 83 81.7 80.9 82.2 80.4 78.2 73.6 69.7 65.4
38AUZ16 1 83 86.7 81.2 78.9 80.4 78.0 74.2 70.2 65.0
38AUD16 2 83 86.7 81.2 78.9 80.4 78.0 74.2 70.2 65.0
38AUZ25 1 85 91.0 85.0 80.0 86.0 79.0 73.0 68.0 63.0
38AUD25 2 85 91.0 85.0 80.0 86.0 79.0 73.0 68.0 63.0
LEGEND
dB = Decibel
NOTE: Outdoor sound data is measure in accordance with AHRI standard 270. 38AU

6 PHYSICAL DATA
Single Circuit Models with RTPF --- Round Tube/Plate Fin Coil Design 38AUZ(A,B)07 38AUZ(D,E)07 38AUZ(A,B)08 38AUZ(D,E)08 38AUZ12 38AUZ14 38AUZ16 38AUZ25 Refrigeration System
# Circuits / # Comp. / Type
1/1/
Scroll
1/1/
2 Stage Scroll
1/1/
Scroll
1/1/
Digital Scroll
1/1/
Scroll
1/1/
Scroll
1/2/
Scroll
1/2/
Scroll
R ---410a charge A/B (lbs) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 System charge w/ fan coil* 14.0 14.0 17.0 18.0 20.0 43.0 43.0 38.0 Metering device TXV TXV TXV TXV TXV TXV TXV TXV
High ---press. Trip / Reset
(psig) 630 / 505 630 / 505 630 / 505 630 / 505 630 / 505 630 / 505 630 / 505 630 / 505 Low---press. Trip / Reset
(psig) 54 / 117 54 / 117 54 / 117 54 / 117 54 / 117 54 / 117 54 / 117 54 / 117 Cond. Coil
Material (Fin/Tube) Al/Cu Al/Cu Al/Cu Al/Cu Al/Cu Al/Cu Al/Cu Al/Cu Coil type RTPF RTPF RTFP RTPF RTPF RTPF RTPF RTPF
Rows / FPI 2 / 17 2 / 17 2 / 17 2 / 17 2 / 17 3/ 17 2 / 17 2 / 17 Total face area (ft2) 17.5 17.5 17.5 23.0 25.1 31.8 23.5 x 2 25.0 x 2 Cond. fan / motor
Qty / Motor drive type 2 / direct 2 / direct 2 / direct 2 / direct 2 / direct 2 / direct 3 / direct 4 / direct Motor HP / RPM 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 Fan diameter (in) 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
Nominal Airflow (cfm) 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 9,000 12,000 Watts (total) 610 610 610 610 610 610 970 1150
* Approximate system charge with about 25 ft piping of sizes indicated with matched 40RU Dual Circuit Models with RTPF --- Round Tube/Plate Fin Coil Design 38AUD12 38AUD14 38AUD16 38AUD25
Refrigeration System
# Circuits / # Comp. / Type 2 / 2 / Scroll 2 / 2 /Scroll 2 / 2 / Scroll 2 / 2 / Scroll R ---410a charge A/B (lbs) 9.0 /9.0 9.0 / 9.0 9.0 / 9.0 9.0 / 9.0 System charge w/ fan coil* 11.0 / 11.0 22.0 / 22.0 22.0 / 22.0 19.0 / 19.0 Metering device TXV TXV TXV TXV
High ---press. Trip / Reset (psig) 630 / 505 630 / 505 630 / 505 630 / 505 Low ---press. Trip / Reset (psig) 54 / 117 54 / 117 54 / 117 54 / 117 Cond. Coil
Material (Fin/Tube) Al/Cu Al/Cu Al/Cu Al/Cu
Coil type RTPF RTPF RTPF RTPF
Rows / FPI 2 / 17 3 / 17 2 / 17 2 / 17
total face area (ft2) 25.1 31.8 23.5 x 2 25.0 x 2
Cond. fan / motor
Qty / Motor drive type 2 / direct 2 / direct 3 / direct 4 / direct Motor HP / RPM 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 1/4 / 1100 Fan diameter (in) 22 22 22 22
Nominal Airflow (cfm) 6,000 6,000 9,000 12,000
Watts (total) 610 610 970 1150
* Approximate system charge with about 25 ft piping of sizes indicated with matched 40RU 38AU

Attachment 3

2.5-ton Carrier 24ABA4030 HVAC System

COOL YOUR HOME WITH

A CARRIER AIR CONDITIONER
Carrier offers real choices
for efficient and reliable
home comfort

* Upon timely registration, the warranty period is five years if not registered within 90 days of installation except in jurisdictions where warranty benefits cannot be conditioned upon registration.
+ Air conditioner models may not be sold in every region. ** Based on Carrier testing, all data was run with the systems cycling once they met the assumed home load. The assumed load at AHAM conditions (80/70, 80) is the capacity of the variable-speed running continuously in dehumidification mode. The difficult conditions load was determined by a Wrightsoft® load calculation for a home in Florida at 69 OD 72/63 ID. This condition was provided by a customer in Florida as “worst case”.

Turn to the experts at Carrier for real solutions for your home cooling needs. Our comprehensive selection of air conditioners have been designed to fit virtually any home and a variety of budgets. From our innovative and intelligent Infinity® System line with variable-speed, two-stage, and single-stage options...to Performance™ Series deluxe two-stage and single-stage choices…and the value-driven Comfort™ Series single-stage models, our air conditioners offer summertime comfort you can depend on.

Carrier air conditioners represent years of design, development and testing with one goal in mind – maximizing your family’s comfort. Along the way, we have created new technologies that deliver the outstanding quality and energy efficiency you demand while staying ahead of industry trends and global initiatives. Check out the side-by-side comparison below to see which model is right for you.

Air Conditioner
Options+
Infinity® System Performance™ Series Comfort™ Series
24VNA6 24VNA9 24ANB1 24ANB7 24ANB7**C
(Coastal) 24ANB6 24ACB7 24APB6 24ACC6 24ACB3 24ABC6 24AAA5 24ACC4 24ACA4**C(Coastal) 24ABB3 Efficiency Efficiency
Cooling SEER
(up to) 26.0 19.0 17.0 16.0 17.0 16.5 13.0 16.5 17.0 14.0 13.0 Compressor Type
Fully variable-speed
with capacity range
from 25-100%
Five-stage
variable-speed
with capacity range
from 25-100%
Two-stage with
high-stage at 100% capacity
and low-stage at 75% capacity
Single-stage
at 100% capacity
at all times
Two-stage with
high-stage at 100%
capacity and low-stage
at 75% capacity
Single-stage
at 100% capacity at all times
Single-stage
at 100% capacity at all times
ENERGY STAR®
• • • • • • • • • - • - - - -
Comfort Features Comfort Features
Sound level
(as low as) 51 dBA 60 dBA 71 dBA 72 dBA 72 dBA 66 dBA 72 dBA 68 dBA 73 dBA 70 dBA 76 dBA 75 dBA 75 dBA 73 dBA 73 dBA Humidity Control
Ideal Humidity System™ Technology
offers excellent humidity control and is
capable of removing up to 400% more
moisture than standard systems.**
Enhanced Standard Enhanced Standard Standard
Durability Durability
Cabinet Protection
WeatherArmor™ Ultra provides durability with a galvanized steel cabinet, louvered coil guard and baked-on powder paint to protect against dings, dents and weather-based threats.

WeatherArmor Ultra
WeatherArmor provides durability with a galvanized steel cabinet, wire coil guard and baked-on powder paint to protect against dings, dents and weather-based threats.

Recommended Thermostat Recommended Thermostat
Infinity®
System Control • • • • • • - - - - - - - - -
ecobee,
Powered by Carrier - - - - - - • • • • • • • • •
Peace of Mind Peace of Mind
Limited Parts
Warranty* 10-Year 10-Year 10-Year
Replacement Limited
Warranty* 10-Year - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Designed To Fit Your Home – And Your Budget Designed with Your Comfort in Mind

carrier.com 1-800-CARRIER
©2021 Carrier. All Rights Reserved.

Manufacturer reserves the right to discontinue, or change at any time, specifications or designs without notice or without incurring obligations.

Third-party trademarks and logos are the property of their respective owners. 01-824-119-01
07/2021
In 1902, a determined engineer answered one of mankind’s most nagging questions: How do we make hot, sticky, indoor air go away? In creating the world’s first modern air conditioning system, Willis Carrier forever changed indoor life, and, more than a century later, the corporation that bears his name takes inspiration from his example.

Carrier strives to improve on our founder’s breakthroughs, introducing new technologies that make life at home even cooler.

Today, a nationwide network of experts continues to advance Willis Carrier’s lifework. Your expert Carrier dealer is equipped to evaluate your home and create a customized system designed around your lifestyle.

MORE THAN A

CENTURY OF COOL

ATTACHMENT 2
ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON APPROVING THE APPLICATIONS FOR: (1) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REZONING (P21-1173) OF TWO PARCELS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 2.3

ACRES IN AREA FROM CENTRAL-COMMERCIAL (C-C) TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-MIXED-USE (PUD-MU) DISTRICT; (2) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PUD-146) TO: (A) RETAIN THE TWO-STORY

SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AND CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY ADDITION TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOME; (B) DEMOLISH THE DETACHED

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, BARONE'S RESTAURANT, AND ALL
OTHER STRUCTURES AND SITE MODIFICATIONS; AND (C) CONSTRUCT 14 DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, ANDTWO COMMERCIAL

BUILDINGS WITH A PUBLIC PLAZA AND PARKING LOT, NEW PRIVATE

STREET, AND RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS, SUBJECT TO THE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 475 AND 493 SAINT JOHN STREET
WHEREAS, on December 15, 2021, Robson Homes applied for: (1) an addendum to the Downtown Specific Plans Final Environmental Impact Report; (2) Planned Unit Development Rezoning (P21-1173) two parcels totaling approximately

2.3-acres in area from C-C (Central-Commercial) to PUD-MU (Planned Unit Development-Mixed-Use) District, and (3) a PUD-MU development plan (PUD-146) to:
(a) retain the two-story single-family home and construct an approximately 1,360- square-foot two-story addition to the north side of the home; (b) demolish the detached accessory dwelling unit, Barone's restaurant, and all other structures and site modifications; and (c) construct 14 detached single-family homes, and two commercial buildings totaling approximately 3,125 square feet in area with a public plaza, new private street, and related site improvements located 475 St. John Street (APN 094- 0114-007-00) and 493 St. John Street (APN 094-0114-008-00) (hereinafter “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Retail/Highway/Service Commercial Business and Professional Offices, Public Health and Safety Wildland Overlay in the General Plan and Downtown Commercial, Arroyo, and Open Space-Arroyo in the Downtown Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pleasanton is the lead agency on the Project, and the City Council is the decision-making body for the proposed approval of the Project; and WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting of October 23, 2024, the Planning Commission considered the written agenda report, all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and staff recommendations, and then recommended approval of the Project to the City Council; and

Ordinance No.

WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public meeting of December 17, 2024, the City Council considered the written agenda report, all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and staff/Planning Commission recommendations.

WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and the purposes of the PUD ordinance based on the considerations set forth in this ordinance.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Prior to taking action on the Project, and at a properly noticed public meeting, the City Council reviewed written and oral staff reports, conducted a public hearing on the Project and took testimony, and received into the record all pertinent documents related to the Project (collectively, the “Record Evidence”). The City Council’s determination is based on the Record Evidence, which is incorporated into this Ordinance by reference.

Section 2. On December 17, 2024, the City Council independently reviewed and analyzed the September 2024 Addendum to the Downtown Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (“DSP FEIR”) (SCH#2001032014) and adopted the September 2024 Addendum to the DSP FEIR.

Section 3. Findings for approval of PUD Development Plan.

With respect to Case No. PUD-146, the City Council makes the following findings and determinations with respect to each of the considerations for a PUD Development Plan as required by Section 18.68.110 of the PMC:

1. Whether the plan is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare:

The Project, as conditioned, meets all applicable City standards concerning public health, safety, and welfare. The Project would include the installation of all required on-site utilities with connections to municipal systems to serve the new development.

The Project will not generate volumes of traffic that cannot be accommodated by existing City streets and intersections in the area. The structures would be designed to meet the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, Fire Code, and other applicable City codes. Adequate access would be provided to the structures for police, fire, and other emergency response vehicles. Stormwater run-off from the site will be treated before leaving the site. Construction hour limits and dust suppression requirements would minimize construction impacts on the surrounding residents and tenants. The Project is compatible with the adjacent uses and would be consistent with the existing scale and character of the area. Therefore, the City Council found the proposed PUD development plan is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare, and this finding can be made.

Ordinance No.

2. Whether the plan is consistent with the City's General Plan and any applicable specific plan:

The Property’s General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan Land Use Designations of Retail/Highway/Service Commercial Business and Professional Offices and Downtown Commercial designations permit mixed uses including mixed residential and commercial development, at the densities and intensities proposed by the project; thus, the Project would be consistent with the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan Land Use Designations. The project would retain as undeveloped open space the area within the Public Health and Safety Wildland Overlay and Arroyo and Open Space Arroyo designations. The proposed project is located near public transportation, within proximity to the services and amenities of the Downtown area, and in an area already developed with adequately sized infrastructure. In addition, the project would preserve the commercial square-footage utilized on-site. The project would provide housing opportunities within the downtown, as well as new/replacement active commercial uses centered on a new outdoor plaza, consistent with General Plan and Specific Plan policies that seek to promote the downtown as a vibrant mixed-use district.

3. Whether the plan is compatible with previously developed properties in the vicinity and the natural, topographic features of the site:

The project site is surrounded by a variety of uses: single-family homes, townhomes, apartments, offices, and a restaurant, and is within close proximity to personal services. As conditioned, staff believes that the proposal would be compatible with the surrounding uses. The buildings have been sited to minimize impacts on surrounding neighbors to the extent feasible and have been designed to reduce their perceived mass. New landscaping would be installed throughout the site to enhance off-site views and the PUD development plan is compatible with the previously developed properties in the area and downtown. The project would include construction of residences towards the northern portion of the project, near the undevelopable area of the project site. The proposed lots adjacent to the undevelopable area would be set back 20 feet from the top of the existing bank and there would be no modifications to the bed, bank, or the Arroyo del Valle as a result of this development.

4. Whether grading takes into account environmental characteristics and is designed in keeping with the best engineering practices to avoid erosion, slides, or flooding to have as minimal an effect upon the environment as possible.

There is a gradual slope to the south and a relatively steep downward slope leading to the Arroyo del Valle Stream bed to the north. Grading is proposed in areas on the relatively flat portion of the site to maintain residential structure heights similar to adjacent residential properties when creating flat pad lots, in addition to grading for bio-retention areas, a parking lot, and the hammerhead street. Grading for building pads is expected to reach six and a half feet below the surface and excavations for utility lines and stormwater infrastructure would reach as much as nine feet below

Ordinance No.

the surface. Grading would likely result in approximately 4,200 cubic yards of material being exported from the site. The Arroyo del Valle stream is north of the project site. Development would not include modifications to the bed, bank or channel of Arroyo del Valle.

Erosion control and dust suppression measures would be documented in the building and improvement plans and will be administered by the City’s Building and Engineering Divisions. City building code requirements would ensure that building foundations, on-site driveways, and parking areas are constructed on properly prepared surfaces. The proposed development would provide adequate drainage to prevent flooding. Parking lot and roof drainage would drain into landscaped bioretention areas that would filter contaminants before entering the arroyo and, ultimately, the bay. The proposed project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. A portion of the project site is within a designated flood zone, the northern area adjacent to Arroyo del Valle, though as conditioned, development would ensure conservation of the Arroyo Del Valle through design and best management practices. There is no proposed development or grading within 20 feet of the top of a watercourse bank, which would minimize risks associated with flood hazards and redirection of flood flows.

5. Whether streets and buildings have been designed and located to complement the natural terrain and landscape:

The Property is in a developed area of the City and would not involve the extension of any new public streets (the new street is private). The new development would be located on the more level areas of the proposed project site, and as described in Finding 3, the grading has been designed to integrate the development into the terrain. The proposed residences would be compatible in size and scale with surrounding structures. New landscaping including large box-sized trees would be installed to mitigate the loss of the existing landscaping and trees.

6. Whether adequate public safety measures have been incorporated into the design of the plan:

The public improvements associated with the Project would be consistent with City design standards. The existing driveway entrance is located and configured to provide adequate line-of-sight viewing distance for vehicles and to facilitate efficient ingress/egress to and from the proposed project site. The internal street meets City standards for emergency vehicle access and turn-around. Adequate access would be provided to all structures for police, fire, and other emergency vehicles. The new residences and commercial structures would be required to meet the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, Fire Code, other applicable City codes, and State of California energy and accessibility requirements. The new residences and commercial structures would be equipped with automatic fire suppression systems (sprinklers).

Ordinance No.

7. Whether the plan conforms to the purposes of the PUD District:

The proposed PUD development plan conforms to the purposes of the PUD district.

One of the purposes of the PUD district is to ensure the desires of the Applicant and the community are understood and approved prior to commencement of construction. The proposed project implements the purposes of the PUD Ordinance in this case by providing a mixed-use project that is well-designed and wellintegrated with the existing development in the vicinity, that fulfills the desires of the Applicant, and that meets the City’s General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan goals and policies. By taking advantage of the flexibility of the PUD district while complementing the minimum development standards of the surrounding residential neighborhoods, and of the commercial district which this site serves as a transition, the applicant and staff have been able to work together to design the Project in a manner most appropriate for this use. Through the PUD process, the Project has provided the Applicant and the City with a development plan that optimizes the use of this site in a sensitive manner.

Section 4. The City Council has considered the findings made in Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-2024-17, and hereby adopts the same findings by this reference, and based upon the City Council’s own independent review and considerations, the City Council hereby approves Planned Unit Development Plan (PUD-146), as reflected in the plans dated, “Received September 6, 2024,” for Robson Homes, LLC, subject to the Conditions of Approval,, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated into this ordinance by reference.

Section 5. Approves the Planned Unit Development rezoning (P21-1173) of two parcels located at 475 and 493 St. John Street, totaling approximately 2.3-acres in area, from C-C (Central-Commercial) to PUD-MU (Planned Unit Development-Mixed-Use) District.

Section 6. The Zoning Map of the City of Pleasanton, on file with the City Clerk, designating and dividing the City into zoning districts, is hereby amended to Zoning Unit Map No.____, attached hereto as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by this reference.

A summary of this ordinance shall be published once within fifteen (15) days after its adoption in “The Valley Times,” a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Pleasanton, and the complete ordinance shall be posted for fifteen (15) days in the City Clerk’s office within fifteen (15) days after its adoption.

Section 7. This ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption. The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pleasanton on December 17, 2024, and DGRSWHG at a regular meeting on ______________, 2025 by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Ordinance No.
______________________________
Jack Balch, Mayor

ATTEST:
____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Ordinance No.

EXHIBIT A

DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
P21-1173, PUD-146, and Tract 8631
475 St. John Street (APN 094-0114-007-00)
493 St. John Street (APN 094-0114-008-00)
December 17, 2024
The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this approval, that (s)he is required to satisfy and maintain compliance with the conditions of approval below. Where approval by the Director of Community Development, Planning Division, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, City Attorney, Chief Building and Safety Official, Fire Department or other City staff is required, review shall be for compliance with all applicable conditions of approval, adopted policies and guidelines, ordinances, laws and regulations, and accepted practices related to the approval. In addition to complying with the conditions below, the applicant is required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws that pertain to this project whether or not specifically noted herein.

This approval is granted for (1) an addendum to the Downtown Specific Plan’s Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR); (2) Rezoning (P21-1173) two parcels totaling approximately 2.3-acres in area from C-C (Central-Commercial) to PUD-MU (Planned Unit Development-Mixed-Use) District, (3) a certificate of appropriateness to demolish structures, (4) a PUD-MU development plan (PUD-146) to: (a) retain the two-story single-family home and construct an approximately 1,360-square-foot two-story addition to the north side of the home; (b) demolish the detached accessory dwelling unit, Barone's restaurant, and all other structures and site modifications; and (c) construct: i) 14 detached single-family homes, and ii) two commercial buildings totaling approximately 3,125 square feet in area with a public plaza, new private street, and related site improvements; and (5) a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract 8631) to subdivide the 2.3 acres into 15 single-family lots, one commercial lot, and three private common space parcels for the proposed project located 475 St. John Street (APN 094- 0114-007-00) and 493 St. John Street (APN 094-0114-008-00). Development shall be substantially as shown on the project materials listed below:
a. Project plans, Vesting Tentative Map, Color and Material Board, etc., Exhibit B, prepared by Robert Hidey Architects, and RJA for Robson Homes, LLC, dated “Received” on September 6, 2024, and kept on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department.
b. Addendum to the Downtown Specific Plan FEIR prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., for Robson Homes, LLC, dated September 2024, and kept on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department. c. Arborist Report prepared by Monarch Consulting Arborists for Robson Homes, LLC, dated on November 19, 2021, and kept on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department.

Ordinance No.

d. Historic Resource Evaluation prepared by TreanorHL for Robson Homes LLC, dated February 25, 2021, and kept on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department.
e. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigation prepared by Ramboll US Consulting, Inc., dated November 6, 2020. f. Geotechnical Report prepared by Geo-Logic Associates, for Robson Homes, LLC, dated June 2, 2022, and kept on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department.
g. Noise and Vibration Assessment prepared by Salter for Robson Homes, LLC, dated December 13, 2021, and kept on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department.

The project materials listed above are collectively the “Approved Plans”.

THIS APPROVAL IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

1. APPROVAL AND REVISIONS: The proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the “Approved Plans”, except as modified by the following conditions. Minor changes to the plans may be allowed subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development if found to be in substantial conformance with the approved exhibits. Planning Division approval is required before any changes are implemented in site design, grading, architectural design, house colors or materials, green building measures, landscape material, etc.

2. EXPIRATION – MIXED-USE PUD: The PUD development plan approval shall lapse 2 years from the effective date of this ordinance unless a building permit is issued and construction has commenced and is diligently pursued towards completion, or the City has approved a time extension.

3. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CHECKLIST: The applicant shall submit a “Conditions of Approval Checklist” indicating all conditions in Exhibit A have been satisfied, incorporated into the building permit plans or improvements plans, and/or addressed. Said checklist shall be incorporated as one of the first four plan sheets of all building permit and engineering permit plan submittals for review by the City prior to issuance of permits.

4. PUD PERIOD: The building permit submittal will only be accepted after the ordinance approving the Planned Unit Development (PUD) development plan becomes effective, unless the applicant submits a signed statement acknowledging the plan check fees may be forfeited in the event the ordinance is overturned. In no case will a building permit be issued prior to the PUD ordinance being in effect.

Ordinance No.

5. LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION: To the extent permitted by law, the project applicant shall hold harmless, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), and indemnify the City, its City Council, its officers, commissions, employee and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and/or the applicant to attack, set aside, or void the approval of the project or any permit authorized hereby for the project, including without limitation, reimbursing the City its attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice.

PLANNING DIVISION – 925-931-5600
Site Development, Uses, and Building Design – Residential and Commercial

6. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND USES – NEW SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES:

The project site shall be developed in accordance with the approved PUD Development Plan as shown on the Approved Plans referenced herein.

Accessory structures are not allowed, and additions and/or expansions are not permitted to any of the new 14 single-family homes and lots. All other permitted and conditionally permitted uses for the detached, single-family homes shall be those found in Section 18.32 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC).

Accessory dwelling units and/or junior accessory dwelling units may be permitted in accordance with state law and the Pleasanton Municipal Code. Project Specific Condition.

7. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND USES – EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOME (493 ST. JOHN STREET): The project site shall be developed in accordance with the approved PUD Development Plan as shown on the Approved Plans referenced herein. Unless otherwise specific in the conditions of approval, all permitted and conditionally permitted uses shall be those found in Section 18.32 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC) and any future additions/expansions/modifications to the structure and/or site shall be subject to the site development standards of the R-1-10,000 District of the PMC. Project Specific Condition.

8. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND USES – COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES:

The project site shall be developed in accordance with the approved PUD Development Plan as shown on the Approved Plans referenced herein. Uses for the site shall be limited to:
a. Bars and brew pubs*
b. Emergency standby electricity generator, fuel cell, and/or battery facilities, photovoltaic facilities, small electricity generator facilities, and small fuel cell facilities, which meet the standards in Table 18.44.080 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code.
c. Microbreweries*
d. Personal services
e. Restaurants and catering establishments

Ordinance No.

f. Retail – Firearm sales, liquor stores, convenience markets, tobacco stores, secondhand stores, and pawnshops are prohibited. g. Special downtown accessory entertainment uses, as defined in Chapter

18.08 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code, which meet the standards found in Table 18.44.080 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code.
h. Wineries*
*The following conditions shall apply prior to approval and/or operation of the use:
(1) The zoning administrator finds adequate parking is available for said use;
(2) Menu service shall be available for patrons during the operation hours of the business;
(3) Alcohol service and consumption in the outdoor plaza area is allowed only upon specific approval by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) and shall be subject to all ABC
requirements. The business operator and their employees are responsible for supervising and controlling the activities of its customers in the outdoor plaza area, ensuring no disorderly behavior occurs in this area, that drinks are not taken outsdie of the outdoor plaza area, and there are no more customers in the outdoor plaza area than there are seats. The inability of the business operator and their employees to perform in this manner shall be cause for review and revocation of this use as it pertains to the service of alcoholic beverages in the outdoor plaza area. (4) Approval of a temporary/minor conditional use permit shall be required prior to live music, DJ music, or dancing in the outdoor plaza area.
(5) If the zoning administrator determines the use will be or is creating odor problems, an odor abatement device determined to be appropriate by the zoning administrator shall be installed within the exhaust ventilation system to mitigate brewery odors; (6) The applicant is in compliance with all applicable requirements of Chapter 9.04 (Noise Regulations) the Pleasanton Municipal Code; and
(7) If operation of the use results in conflicts pertaining to parking, noise, odors, traffic, or other factors, the zoning administrator may modify or add conditions to mitigate such impacts, or may revoke the zoning certificate for the use.

Project Specific Condition.

9. OUTDOOR PLAZA: If the commercial space/s are unleased/unoccupied, the property management is responsible for supervising and controlling the activities of patrons within the outdoor plaza area(s). If occupied by a tenant or tenants, the tenant/s is/or responsible for supervising and controlling the activities within the outdoor plaza area(s). The responsible party (property management or tenant) shall ensure no disorderly behavior occurs in the plaza. Project Specific Condition.

Ordinance No.

10. MAINTENANCE: The tenants of the commercial buildings shall maintain the subject property and the area surrounding the tenant spaces, in a clean and orderly manner at all times.

11. OUTDOOR STORAGE: There is to be no outdoor storage without prior approval by the City.

12. BUILDING PERMIT – COMMERCIAL TENANTS: Any tenant improvement plans shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for review and approval prior to operation. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to commencement of any work. The tenant (s) of the respective commercial spaces shall pay any required sewer fees, traffic impact fees, and all other fees the proposed use may be subject to prior to issuance of the tenant improvement building permit. The type and amount of the fees shall be those in effect at the time the building permit is issued.

13. BUILDING MATERIALS AND COLORS: The building materials and colors in the Approved Plans shall be stated on the building permit plans.

14. PAVING MATERIALS: The color, material, design, and product specifications for the paving materials used on-site shall be in conformance with the Approved Plans and included with the building permit submittal. Any proposed modifications to the final paving design details shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.

15. WINDOWS: Manufacturer type, design, material, and installation details for all windows within the project shall be specified for each unit/building in conformance with the Approved Plans in the building permit submittal. Any proposed modifications shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits.

16. MOCK-UP: The applicant shall set up a large material and color mock-up on site to confirm conformance with the Approved Plans prior to building permit issuance (or other time frame as approved by the Planning Division). Any proposed modifications shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division. At a minimum, the mock-up shall include the streetscape view, all structures, and paint samples.

17. COLOR SCHEME: The applicant shall paint a portion of the building with the color scheme in conformance with the Approved Plans. Primary and secondary (accent) paint colors should be painted next to each other on the building, to the extent feasible, for purposes of inspection for conformance with the Approved Plans. The colors shall not be considered in conformance with the Approved Plans until after inspection and verification by the Planning Division. Any proposed modifications shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division.

Ordinance No.

18. SIGN PROGRAM: Site and building signage for the commercial site shall be reviewed under a comprehensive sign program submitted to the Planning Division under a separate application.

19. FENCE/WALL: All fencing and walls shall be shown on the construction plans with the building permit submittal. The design and location must be approved by the Planning Division and comply with all setback requirements.

20. LIGHTING PLAN: The applicant shall submit a lighting plan with the building permit submittal. The plan shall include photometric contours, manufacturer’s specifications on the fixtures, and mounting heights. All exterior lighting including landscape lighting shall be directed downward and designed or shielded so as to not shine onto neighboring properties or streets. The photometrics shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineer and Director of Community Development prior to building permit issuance. The type and location of all exterior light fixtures shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to building permit issuance.

21. BUILDING SURVEY: The applicant shall submit a building survey and/or record of survey and a site development plan in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.68 of the PMC. These plans shall be approved by the Chief Building Official prior to building permit issuance. The site development plan shall include all required information to design and construct site, grading, paving, drainage, and utilities.

22. PAD AND SETBACK CERTIFICATION: The applicant shall submit a pad elevation certification prepared by a California licensed land surveyor or registered civil engineer to the Chief Building Official and Director of Community Development certifying the pad elevations and building locations (setbacks) are conforming to the approved plans, prior to receiving a foundation inspection for the structures.

23. BUILDING HEIGHT CERTIFICATION: The applicant shall submit a building height certification prepared by a California licensed land surveyor or civil engineer to the Director of Community Development before the first framing or structural inspection by the Building and Safety Division. The height of the structures shall be surveyed and verified as being in conformance to the approved building heights as shown on Exhibit B or as otherwise conditioned.

24. FINAL INSPECTION: Final inspection by the Planning Division is required prior to occupancy.

25. TRANSFORMERS: New electrical transformers shall be placed underground, or aboveground and screened from view to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. Details of the new electrical transformers, and any screening architecturally compatible with the building, shall be included in the building permit submittal and shall be subject to the review and approval of the

Ordinance No.

Director of Engineering/City Engineer and Director of Community Development prior to building permit issuance.

26. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT – SCREENING: The applicant shall effectively screen from view all ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment, and any other mechanical equipment, whether on the structure, on the ground, or on the roof, with materials architecturally compatible with the building. Screening details shall be shown on the plans submitted for building permit, the adequacy of which shall be determined by the Director of Community Development. All required screening shall be installed prior to final occupancy.

27. TRASH ENCLOSURE: All trash, refuse, and recycling shall be contained completely within enclosures. Containers shall be stored within the enclosures at all times except when being unloaded. The enclosures shall be sized to accommodate trash, recycling, and green waste containers in compliance with the Alameda County Mandatory Recycling Ordinance. The materials and colors of any new enclosures shall match or be compatible with the primary building on site and the gates shall be metal or solid wood unless otherwise approved by the Director of Community Development. Elevation drawings and plan details, including color and material of the enclosures noted, shall be included in the building permit submittal and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development prior to building permit issuance.

28. RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING PROGRAMS: The project shall comply with the current City/Pleasanton Garbage Service recycling and composting programs.

Green Building and Sustainability Measures

29. Climate Action Plan 2.0 Compliance: Prior to building permit issuance, a GHG Emission Compliance Checklist shall be provided, to the Planning Division for review and approval by the Director of Community Development. The measures shall be shown on the building permit plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division. The Checklist shall include notation indicating the sheet(s) the measure can be found. Prior to building permit final, all of the measures indicated on the approved checklist shall be inspected and approved by the City of Pleasanton.

30. ALL-ELECTRIC: This project is to have no new gas infrastructure installed. This shall be noted on the plans submitted for Building Permits.

Construction Practices and Noticing

31. WORK HOURS: All demolition and construction activities, inspections, plan checking, material delivery, staff assignment or coordination, etc., shall be limited to the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. No construction shall be allowed on State or Federal Holidays or Saturdays or Sundays. The Director of Community Development may allow earlier “start times” or later “stop times” for specific construction activities. All construction equipment shall meet Department

Ordinance No.

of Motor Vehicles (DMV) noise standards and shall be equipped with muffling devices. Prior to construction, the hours of construction shall be posted on site.

Project Specific Condition.

32. CONSTRUCTION PARKING: Campers, trailers, motor homes, or any other similar vehicle are not allowed on the construction site except when needed as sleeping quarters for a security guard subject to receipt of a temporary conditional use permit (per PMC 18.116.010.E).

33. CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS: A construction trailer shall be allowed to be placed on the project site for daily administration/coordination purposes during the construction period.

34. CONSTRUCTION AND PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN: The applicant shall prepare a construction and parking management plan to address impacts and parking demands during the construction phase of the project. The construction and parking management plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer and Director of Community Development prior to issuance of a demolition permit, or the first building permit, whichever comes first. The following items shall be incorporated into the construction and parking management plan:
a. Show truck route for construction and delivery trucks that does not include neighborhood residential streets, unless approved by the City Traffic Engineer;
b. Show construction vehicles and equipment parking area, materials storage, temporary fencing, construction trailer location, and construction contractors/workers parking area.
c. Sidewalk closure or narrowing is not allowed during on-site construction activities without prior approval by the City.

35. PORTABLE TOILETS: Portable toilets used during construction shall be kept on the project site and as far as possible from existing residences and shall be emptied regularly to prevent odor.

36. EXCESS SOIL AND SOIL STOCKPILING: All excess soil from the site shall be off hauled from the site and disposed of in a lawful manner. No temporary stockpiling of dirt on this site shall occur without specific review and approval by the Director of Community Development.

37. NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION: Prior to construction, the applicant shall notify neighbors within 300-feet of the project site of the construction schedule in writing. Such notice shall include contact names and numbers for property owner, agent or contractor.

38. DISTURBANCE COORDINATOR: The applicant shall designate a “disturbance coordinator” who shall be responsible for responding to any complaints regarding construction noise, dust, construction parking, etc. The coordinator (who may be

Ordinance No.

an employee of the general contractor) shall determine the cause of the complaint and shall require the implementation of reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. A telephone number of the disturbance coordinator shall be posted on the construction site fence and on the notification sent to neighbors adjacent to the site. The sign shall also list an emergency afterhours contact number for the disturbance coordinator, or designee.

39. CULTURAL RESOURCES/HUMAN REMAINS: If any prehistoric or historic artifacts, or other indication of cultural resources are found once the project construction is underway, all work shall stop within 20-meters (66 feet) of the find. A qualified archaeologist shall be consulted for an immediate evaluation of the find prior to resuming groundbreaking construction activities within 20 meters of the find. If the find is determined to be an important archaeological resource, the resource shall be either avoided, if feasible, or recovered consistent with the requirements of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. In the event that human remains are discovered during grading and construction of the project, work shall stop immediately. There shall be no disposition of such human remains, other than in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, Public Resources Section 5097.98, and Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5. These code provisions require notification of the County Coroner, who may then notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who in turn must notify the persons believed to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American for appropriate disposition of the remains. A similar note shall appear on the building permit and/or improvement plans.

Fees

40. FEES: The applicant shall pay any and all fees to which the project site may be subject, prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, or prior to recordation of the final map, whichever is applicable. The type and amount of the fees shall be those in effect at the time the permit is issued.

41. WATER FEES AND WATER METER CONNECTION FEES: Unless otherwise specified by the Development Agreement, the applicant shall pay the applicable Zone 7 and City connection fees and water meter cost for any water meters and irrigation meters, if applicable, prior to building permit issuance.

42. SEWER FEES: Unless otherwise specified by the Development Agreement, the applicant shall pay the applicable Dublin-San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) and City sewer permit fees prior to building permit issuance.

43. SCHOOL IMPACT FEES – RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION: Applicant shall pay school impact fees in accordance with the fee schedule established by Pleasanton Unified School District. Written proof of compliance with this condition shall be provided by applicant to the City, on a form generated by the PUSD, prior to building permit issuance.

Ordinance No.

44. SCHOOL IMPACT FEES – COMMERCIAL: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall pay the required commercial development school impact fee as prescribed by State law and as adopted by the Pleasanton Unified School District (PUSD).

45. RECORDED DISCLOSURES: All lots covered by this approval shall include separately recorded disclosure statements or restrictive covenants indicating the following:
a. Additions and/or modifications to the structures and garages are prohibited.
b. Residents, tenants, guests, etc., are prohibited from parking on the driveway apron.
c. Boats, trailers, campers, motor homes, and other recreational vehicles are not allowed to be parked or stored on-site.
d. Garages shall not be modified or used for storage in a manner that would interfere with the ability to park cars within the garages of the units and each resident shall utilize the garages for parking of vehicles only. e. The property is in an area subject to noise, activity, and traffic impacts associated with a downtown location;
f. The property is in the adjacency of the Union Pacific Railroad and possible noise, including noise from train whistles and horns, and vibration impacts from said railroad;

Wording for these disclosures and covenants shall be written in simple/plain language, shall be submitted to the City Attorney for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map, and shall be recorded over the project site by separate instrument.

46. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The applicant shall provide all initial buyers with copies of the final project conditions of approval.

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION – 925-931-5300

47. PHASED OCCUPANCY: If building occupancy is proposed to be phased, the applicant shall submit a phasing plan to the Chief Building and Safety Official for review and approval.

48. DIGITAL PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT: The applicant shall submit site plan and building information to the City’s Geographic Information Services (GIS) Division in a digital format prior to issuance of the building permit. All changes or revisions to the approved plans during construction which affect the digital submittal, shall be resubmitted for GIS review no later than 1 month prior to scheduling a final inspection. The updated digital submittal will be checked and approved before the building permit will be finalized and certificate of occupancy granted. For phased project, the digital submittal must be approved prior to the first occupancy of any phase. The information will be used for public safety and emergency response planning by the Police and Fire Departments. Refer to the

Ordinance No.

“Digital Plan Submittal Requirements” for necessary data and file formatting requirements.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT – ENGINEERING/LAND DEVELOPMENT – 925- 931-5650

49. PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT: Exception 3 from the Preliminary Title Report discusses a Public Service Easement (PSE) to the City of Pleasanton recorded on 06/22/1976, Series No. 76-99334. The Vesting tentative map TM3.1 shows this 10-foot PSE to be vacated. The applicant shall ask the City of Pleasanton to vacate the easement created by the 1976 Grant Deed. This process shall follow the procedure prescribed in California Streets and Highways Code §8300 et seq. (Address this condition prior to map approval). Project Specific Condition.

50. EASEMENTS: Referring to Sheet TM 5.1, the water meters that service Lots 8 through 14 are on the north side of Lot D. A Public Service Easement (PSE) should be granted to the City within Lot D to provide access from Street B to the water meters. Sheet TM 3.1 should be revised to show this easement (Address these conditions prior to map approval).

All dedicated public easements to the City shall be PSEs. Referring to Sheet TM

1.1 “Abbreviations”, the following items require additional clarification:
a. A PUE is defined as Public Utility Easement. Per Sheet TM 3.1, there is a PUE within Lot 3 offered for access and maintenance to an electrical transformer. If the access is intended for PG&E, the easement shall be granted specifically to PG&E according to their format. Another consideration is granting a PSE to the City thus permitting PG&E, who operates in Pleasanton under a franchise, a right to operate this equipment (also see similar item c below).
b. WLE should be relabeled as Private Water Line Easement (PWLE). Lot 15 requires an easement for maintenance and access to an electrical transformer. See Lot 3 for a similar easement.
c.

Project Specific Condition.

Ordinance No.

51. LEAD REMEDIATION: The applicant-submitted Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment report by Ramboll US Consulting includes the following finding:
“Results from soil sampling conducted by Ramboll in September and October 2020 identified concentrations of lead in shallow soil above regulatory screening criterion for residential land use…” This finding identifies a Recognized Environmental Concern. Elevated lead shall be remediated by the applicant according to governing regulations prior to any site disturbance, with evidence of said remediation submitted to the City of Pleasanton. (Address this condition prior to issuance of Building Permit for grading, demolition, or Building Construction, whichever occurs first). Project Specific Condition.

52. CORROSIVE SOILS: According to the Geotechnical Study by Geo-Logic Associates, collected soil samples have been classified as moderately corrosive.

As such, all buried iron, steel, cast iron, ductile iron, galvanized steel and dielectric coated street or iron shall be properly protected against corrosion depending on the critical nature of the structure. Project Specific Condition.

53. CREEK SETBACK: Site improvements that abut or are within close proximity to the top of the creek bank at Arroyo del Valle are subject to Pleasanton Municipal Code §9.14.090(B)(3) “Watercourse Protection” which reads, “Prohibited Acts. No person shall commit or cause to be committed any of the following acts, unless a written permit has first been obtained from the operations services director: Carry out development within 20 feet of the top of a bank.”
The Municipal Code allows City staff to consider designs that violate code standards if compelling technical information is presented by a recognized expert.

For this application, the applicant submitted a site-specific Geotechnical Investigation report by Geo-Logic Associates that addresses creek bank stability and liquefaction. The following report recommendations must be incorporated into the site design:

Stitch piers shall be installed along the top of the existing creek bank. Stitch piers shall consist of drilled, cast-in-place, reinforced concrete piers. Minimum pier diameter shall be 24 inches. Center-to-center spacing between piers shall be no more than two times the pier diameter. The upper portion of the stitch piers above the toe of creek bank elevation shall be designed to retain the soil and surcharge forces behind the piers. Resistance to vertical and lateral loads shall be from the lower portion of the piers below the toe of creek elevation. Project Specific Condition.

54. ACCESS TO CREEK: Lot D shall allow access to the creek for maintenance personnel. A locked gate shall be provided to prevent entry by unauthorized residents or the public. Project Specific Condition.

55. SANITARY SEWER BACKUPS: The plumbing fixtures proposed within the basements will be subject to back-up if an obstruction occurs in the City’s mainline sewer within Saint John Street. The basements shall therefore be serviced by a

Ordinance No.

sewage ejector system with a backflow prevention device to assure no sewage backups in the basements. Project Specific Condition.

56. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: These Conditions of Approval shall be depicted on a plan sheet(s) in the submitted plans for construction.

57. DESIGN PER CITY STANDARDS: All public improvements shall be designed in conformance with the City of Pleasanton Municipal Code and the City’s adopted Standard Specifications and Details in effect at the time of issuance of the permit(s). Said standards are available for download at:
http://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/gov/depts/engineering/standard.asp

58. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES FOR SERVICE: The Engineering Department assesses fees for services including plan-check, permit issuance, and inspection according to the City’s adopted Master Fee Schedule. These fees are separate and distinct from fees assessed by the Community Development Department (including Planning and Building Division fees). The applicant is responsible for payment of all Engineering Department fees prior to services rendered or permit issuance, whichever is first.

59. CITY ENGINEER SIGNATURE BLOCK: The following signature block shall be depicted on the first sheet of the plans submitted for construction: “Approval of these plans is for work within the street right-of-way and public utility systems within Public Services Easements unless otherwise noted. Approval of these plans does not release the developer of the responsibility for the correction of mistakes, errors, or omissions contained therein. If during the course of construction of the improvements public interest requires a modification or a departure from the specification and details of the City of Pleasanton or these plans, the City Engineer shall have the authority to require such modification or departure and to specify the manner in which same is to be made. Approved as to design only based upon information submitted hereon this [DAY] of [MONTH], [YEAR]. Adam Nelkie, P.E., City Engineer, [DATE]” (Address this condition prior to map plan approval).

60. CLEAN WATER PROGRAM (LARGE PROJECTS): Because the project creates and/or replaces more than 10,000 square feet (0.23 acres) of impervious surface, it is considered a Regulated Project according to Provision C.3.b of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit that regulates stormwater runoff in Alameda County. The Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program developed a C.3 Guidance Manual to assist applicants in addressing these regulations. The Guidance Manual is available for download at:
https://www.cleanwaterprogram.org/businesses/development.html.

Regulated projects must include stormwater treatment measures in the site design to remove pollutants from stormwater upstream of any connection to the City’s or Alameda County’s stormwater conveyance networks. In addition, regulated projects must be subject to a Stormwater Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement between the City and property owner to assure long-term maintenance of the installed measures. The City’s Engineering Department will provide a

Ordinance No.

template agreement. Once executed, the agreement must be recorded against the property. (Address this condition prior to plan approval).

61. GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations from the project’s geotechnical investigation, as prepared by a California-licensed Geotechnical Engineer or Certified Engineering Geologist, shall be incorporated into the design of the improvements and/or explicitly noted on the plans. The author(s) of the geotechnical investigation shall certify on the plans that the design complies with their recommendations. During construction, the applicant must follow all recommendations.

62. SUBDIVISION MAPS: The subdivision of land is governed by Pleasanton Municipal Code Title 19, as well as the California Government Code §§66410- 66499.85 (Subdivision Map Act). All maps are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Recordation of the subdivision map shall be coordinated by the applicant’s title company, with one full-sized mylar copy of the recorded map returned to the City.

The following statement shall be included on the cover sheet of the map: “I, [INSERT NAME], City Engineer of the City of Pleasanton, County of Alameda, State of California, do hereby state that I have examined the herein embodied map entitled “[MAP NAME/NUMBER]” consisting of [NUMBER OF SHEETS] sheets, this statement being on Sheet 1 thereof and that the tract map was presented to me as provided by local ordinance. This map conforms with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and of any local ordinances applicable at the time of approval of the tentative map, and the subdivision as shown is substantially the same as it appeared on the tentative map, if any, and any approved alterations thereof. The name of the subdivider is as shown on the statement of owner upon this sheet.” “[INSERT NAME], P.E., Registration No. [INSERT], City Engineer, City of Pleasanton, County of Alameda, State of California [SIGNATURE LINE], [DATE], [SPACE FOR STAMP]” (Address this condition prior to map approval).

63. CITY CLERK’S STATEMENT: For final maps, the following statement shall be included on the cover sheet of the map: “I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk and Clerk of the Council of the City of Pleasanton, County of Alameda, State of California, do hereby state that this final map entitled ““[MAP NAME/NUMBER]” consisting of [NUMBER OF SHEETS] sheets, this statement being on Sheet [NUMBER] thereof, was presented to said Council of the City of Pleasanton, as provided by law at a regular meeting held on the [DAY] day of [MONTH], [YEAR] and that said Council of the City of Pleasanton did thereupon by motion duly passed and adopted at said meeting, approved said map and accepted on behalf of the public all parcels of land and easements as offered for dedication to the City of Pleasanton for public use in conformity with the terms of the offer of dedication.

The names of the subdividers are as shown on the Owner’s Statement upon Sheet

1. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this [DAY] day of [MONTH], [YEAR]. Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk, City of Pleasanton, Alameda County, State of California [SIGNATURE LINE]”. (Address this condition prior to map approval).

Ordinance No.

64. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT: Public improvements required as part of the subdivision must be either completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to map approval, or guaranteed by a Subdivision Agreement. The agreement requires the applicant to post financial security in the form of either a cash deposit, letter of credit, or surety bonds in amounts equivalent to the value of the public improvements. If surety bonds are utilized, the form of the bond language shall be consistent with California Government Code §66499.1 for faithful performance and §66499.2 for labor and materials. The amounts of the bonds shall be 100% of the total estimated value of the public improvements consistent with §66499.3. In addition, the City requires a warranty bond (often referred to as a maintenance bond) for 10% of the estimated value. The warranty bond shall be active for one-year following formal acceptance of the improvements. All submitted securities are subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. In addition, final maps and the associated Subdivision Agreement are subject to approval by the City Council. (Address this condition prior to map approval).

65. CITY SURVEYOR: The City utilizes the services of an outside consultant to certify the technical accuracy of subdivision maps as City Land Surveyor pursuant to California Government Code §66451.1. In order to provide this service, the consultant will submit a proposal to the City for the estimated cost of the work. The estimate will be presented to the applicant together with the City’s administrative markup according to the City’s adopted Master Fee Schedule.

Review of the subdivision map cannot commence until the applicant has submitted payment to the City for these costs. If the ultimate fee at the conclusion of the work is less than this payment, the applicant will be refunded the difference. If the ultimate fee is more than this payment, then the applicant shall submit payment for the difference before the consultant certifies the map.

The following statement shall be included on the cover sheet of the map: “I, [NAME PROVIDED BY CITY], P.L.S, Acting City Surveyor for the City of Pleasanton, Alameda County, California, do hereby state that I have examined this map entitled “[MAP NAME/NUMBER]”, and I am satisfied that said map is technically correct. [SIGNATURE LINE], [DATE], [SPACE FOR STAMP]” (Address this condition prior to map approval).

66. DEDICATIONS TO THE CITY: Dedications to the City shall conform to the following standards whether dedicated on a subdivision map or by recorded separate instrument: Public Service Easements (PSE) shall be granted to the City in accordance with Pleasanton Municipal Code §19.24.190 and 19.36.110. PSEs shall be offered as an easement for public purposes including but not limited to installation, construction, access, and maintenance of all public services facilities above and below the ground surface including poles, wires, conduits, vaults, cabinets, retaining walls, sanitary sewers, storm drains, gas lines, and water lines as well as all those public utilities and appurtenances thereto as subject to regulation under Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 13.04. Consistent with California Government Code Section 66439(d)(3), the offer shall include the statement, “The real property described below is dedicated as an easement for

Ordinance No.

public purposes…” (Address this condition prior to recordation of map or separate instrument title documents granting rights to the City).

67. DATUM FOR VERTICAL CONTROL: Vertical control surveying for all improvements to be constructed shall be based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). Any benchmarks used that relied on the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29) shall be converted to NAVD 88 when presented on plans. The location of the benchmark and source of data must also be disclosed on the plans. (Address this condition prior to plan approval).

68. SURVEY MONUMENTS FOR HORIZONTAL CONTROL: Final maps shall include sufficient durable survey monuments to allow the subdivision to be retraced in conformance with Pleasanton Municipal Code §19.24.220. Setting of monuments shall be in accordance with California Government Code §66495-66498. The surveyor shall give notice to the City Engineer when final monuments have been set, and when payment for said work has been received from the subdivider. (Address this condition prior to acceptance of improvements).

69. EXISTING WATER METER REMOVALS: The removal of existing water meters that will be permanently decommissioned shall be performed by City staff. The applicant shall contact the City’s Utility Billing Department at 925-931-5500 or [email protected] to initiate the meter removal process. Any outstanding water consumption charges must be paid in full prior to the meter removal as well as all fees associated with the disconnection. (Address this condition prior to acceptance of improvement or issuance of an Occupancy Permit).

70. UTILITY ENCLOSURES: Proposed utility enclosures including vaults, meter boxes, splice boxes, and pedestals shall be installed in the public right-of-way, in a public service easement (PSE), or in a utility company specific easement. The locations for utility enclosures shall be considered in the following order of preference: (1) PSE area behind public sidewalk; (2) park strip area between the roadway curb & gutter and the sidewalk; (3) within the public sidewalk set flush to grade; (4) within driveway approach areas set flush to the surface with traffic-rated lids. In no case shall an above-ground pedestal or utility cabinet obstruct sight-line visibility for vehicle drivers at intersections or driveways. Above-ground pedestals or utility cabinets are preferred within the side-yard area of a corner residential lot rather than the front-yard. Deviations from this standard must be approved by the City Engineer. (Address this condition prior to plan approval).

71. DRY UTILITIES (ELECTRICITY, CATV, TELECOM): All dry utilities including electricity, telecommunications, cable television, streetlights, alarm systems, etc. required to serve the project shall be installed underground from the point-ofconnection at the utility purveyor’s network to the service point. Aerial drops from utility poles will not be allowed without prior approval of the City Engineer. (Address this condition prior to plan approval).

Ordinance No.

72. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT: Any work performed within the City’s right-of-way, City easements, or City-owned property shall be subject to an Encroachment Permit as defined in Pleasanton Municipal Code Chapter 13.04. All encroachment permit work is subject to adopted City of Pleasanton Standard Specifications and Details, and shall be performed by properly licensed contractors as determined by the City Engineer. Said contractors must provide evidence of proper licensure, insurance and City-issued Business License upon application for a permit. (Address this condition prior to permit issuance).

73. CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT: This application is subject to a Construction General Permit according to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit No. CAS000002. The general permit is applicable to development sites that disturb one or more acres of land surface.

The applicant will be required to register the project with the State Water Board’s Stormwater Multi-Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTS) website. A Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) and a Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (QSP) must be responsible for permit compliance. The SMARTS system will generate a Waste Dischargers Identification (WDID) number, which must be printed on the grading and/or erosion control plans. (Address this condition prior to permit issuance).

74. TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL: Work in the public right-of-way or publicly accessible easement areas require submittal, review, approval, and implementation of a temporary traffic control plan. The plan shall be in writing and subject to review and approval of the City’s Traffic Engineer. The plan must conform to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), with specific emphasis on Part 6 “Temporary Traffic Control”.

If Flaggers will be utilized, said personnel must be trained in the proper fundamentals of flagging moving traffic before entering the right-of-way. The City may demand to see evidence of said training before allowing said personnel into the right-of-way.

Any alterations to pedestrian paths of travel must conform to current standards for the disabled. Any walking member of the public with a visual impairment (cane or guide dog) must be escorted through the construction zone. (Address this condition during construction).

75. HIGH VISIBILITY SAFETY APPAREL: All workers on foot who are exposed to the hazard of vehicular traffic shall wear warning garments such as vests, jackets, or shirts manufactured in accordance with the requirements of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA) 107- 2004 Performance Class 2, high visibility safety apparel and headwear, or any updates adopted by Cal OSHA. During hours of darkness, warning garments shall be retroreflective with visibility from a minimum 1,000 feet. (Address this condition during construction).

Ordinance No.

76. DROUGHT RESTRICTIONS: If the City Council declares a drought during a time when this development is under construction, as described in §9.30.010 et seq. of the Pleasanton Municipal Code, the applicant shall utilize only recycled water under Stage 1 or greater restrictions for all non-potable construction-related water needs. Recycled water is available at designated locations within the City, subject to the applicant’s receipt of a temporary hydrant meter from the Operations Service Center located at 3333 Busch Road. The applicant is responsible for all water costs based on current billing rates. (Address this condition during construction).

77. EXCAVATION SAFETY: All excavations must be performed in conformance with California Government Code Section 4216 et seq. No excavation shall occur until proper notice is provided to Underground Service Alert (usanorth811.org) by calling either 811 or 800-642-2444 at least 72-hours prior to the work so buried utilities can be marked. All excavations shall be covered or barricaded to prevent entry when work is inactive. Open excavations in the public right-of-way must be covered by skid-resistant steel plates that are firmly affixed to the surface with leading edges ramped. Excavations 5-feet and deeper require a protective system as defined by Cal-OSHA. If a shoring system or trench boxes will be utilized as the protective system, said system shall either be manufactured and installed according to manufacturer recommendations, or designed by a registered professional engineer and installed according to approved plans. No excavation shall be performed atop or adjacent to a high-risk facility until authorized by the owner of the facility. High-risk facilities are defined as gas transmission pipelines and hazardous liquid pipelines as regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (US DOT PHMSA) (Address this condition during construction).

78. POLLUTANT REDUCTION IN STORMWATER: At no time during construction of the project shall pollutants be allowed to enter, clog, or contaminate storm drainpipe networks or open stormwater channels in violation of Pleasanton Municipal Code §9.14.080 et seq. The applicant shall contain all trash and debris for proper disposal to authorized landfills or recyclers. Erosion control features shall be deployed during the rainy season that extends from October 1st to April 15th each year, or any time rain is forecast outside of this period. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be strictly followed. Street sweepers must be employed if soil or debris is tracked onto the public roads from vehicles exiting the site. Standard BMPs are available from the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Caltrans, and others. Notes and/or illustrations shall be added to the plans that describe the BMPs to be utilized during construction. The use of manufactured erosion control woven blankets and straw wattles that utilize plastic monofilament netting is specifically prohibited. (Address this condition during construction).

79. SWPPP REPORTING: Copies of any monitoring and/or sampling reports required by the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and submitted by the Legally Responsible Person (LRP) to the State of California’s SMARTS database shall also be submitted to the City of Pleasanton inspector assigned to the project. The LRP shall also submit to the City a copy of the required Annual Report no later

Ordinance No.

than September 1st of each year that construction is active or when erosion control features have been deployed. The report must include a summary of all sampling and analysis performed (Risk Levels 2 and 3 only), a log of all inspections performed including Rain Event Action Plans (REAP), a summary of any required corrective actions taken, and a summary of any violations. (Address this condition during construction).

80. DUST CONTROL: Dust control measures must be employed during all phases of construction to prevent airborne nuisance to neighboring properties. All stockpiles or unused materials that can create dust shall be covered or removed. Exposed soil areas shall be routinely watered until surfacing materials or landscaping is installed. Use of dust palliatives shall conform to Caltrans Standard Specification Section 18. Any damage caused by airborne dust to neighboring properties shall be cleaned with costs paid by the applicant. If the applicant fails the address dust as directed by the City, the City shall have the right to enter the property to effectuate the correction, with all costs paid by the applicant or levied as a lien against the applicant’s property. (Address this condition during construction).

81. PROPERTY NUISANCE: At no time during construction of the project shall the condition of the property become a nuisance as defined in Pleasanton Municipal Code §9.28.020. The City shall have the right to inspect the property for conditions that violate the code standard. If a nuisance is found, the applicant shall immediately submit a plan of correction. Depending on the severity of the nuisance, the City may suspend all construction work until the condition is corrected. Any of the following conditions shall be considered severe: Leaking chemicals that can cause environmental damage; open excavations or any excavation deeper than 4 feet that lacks proper shoring; unsecured materials that can fall to the ground causing damage or injury; open or exposed utilities that could cause electrical shock or contamination of sewer, potable water systems, groundwater wells, or storm drainage networks. If the applicant fails the address the nuisance as directed by the City, the City shall have the right to enter the property to effectuate the correction, with all costs paid by the applicant or levied as a lien against the applicant’s property. (Address this condition during construction).

82. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS: The City’s Geographic Information Systems (GIS) staff publishes digital maps that enable first responders to efficiently navigate to locations where calls for service have been requested. The maps are also shared with agencies and departments that provide other critical services to residents such as mail delivery. To keep these maps current, the City requires as-built plan or map information to be submitted by the applicant in a format that integrates with ArcGIS by ESRI. The “Digital Submittal Requirements” are available for download at the following weblink:
https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/gov/depts/gis.asp (Address this condition prior to acceptance of improvement or issuance of an Occupancy Permit).

83. DAMAGE TO EXISTING PUBLIC OR PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS: The applicant shall repair damage to existing public or private improvements on and near the

Ordinance No.

project site and along the haul route at the applicant’s expense if caused by construction activities. (Address this condition prior to acceptance of improvement or issuance of an Occupancy Permit).

FIRE DEPARTMENT – 925-454-2361
The Fire Prevention Bureau reviews building/civil drawings for conceptual on-site fire mains and fire hydrant locations only. Plan check comments and approval DO NOT include: 1.) Installation of the on-site fire mains and fire hydrants. Specific installation drawings submitted by the licensed underground fire protection contractor shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval; and 2.) Backflow prevention or connections to public water mains.

84. FIRE HAZARDS: The project developer shall keep the site free of fire hazards from the start of lumber construction until the final inspection.

85. FIRE CODE: All construction shall conform to the requirements of the 2021 Pleasanton Fire Code and local ordinances. All required permits shall be obtained prior to work commencement.

86. SITE SAFETY: Site safety during construction shall be in accordance with Fire Code chapter 33.

87. FIRE SPRINKLERS: Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed in all occupancies in accordance with the 2021 Pleasanton Building, Fire and Residential Codes with local amendments and ordinances.

88. FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES: Prior to any construction framing, the applicant shall provide adequate fire protection facilities, including, but not limited to a water supply and water flow in conformance to the City's Fire Department Standards able to suppress a major fire.

89. WATER FLOW AND CONTROL VALVES: All fire sprinkler system water flow and control valves shall be complete and serviceable prior to final inspection.

Prior to the occupancy of a building having a fire alarm system, the Fire Department shall test and witness the operation of the fire alarm system.

90. ELECTRICAL CONDUIT: Electrical conduit shall be provided to each fire protection system control valve including all valve(s) at the water connections.

The Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department requires electronic supervision of all valves for automatic sprinkler systems and fire protection systems.

91. LISTED: All commercial occupancies shall have valve tamper and water flow connected to a listed Central Station Service in accordance with NFPA 72. Fire Department plan check includes specifications, monitoring, installation, and alarm company certificates. Fire alarm control panel and remote annunciation shall be at location(s) approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. All systems shall be point identified by individual device and annunciated by device type and point.

Ordinance No.

92. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DECLARATION: A Hazardous Materials Declaration shall be provided for this tenant and/or use. The form shall be signed by the owner/manager of company occupying the suite/space/building. No building permit shall be issued until the Hazardous Materials Declaration is provided. The form is available from the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau.

93. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Should any operation or business activity involve the use, storage or handling of hazardous materials, the firm shall be responsible for contacting the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department prior to commencing operations. Please contact the Hazardous Materials Coordinator at 925/454- 2361.

94. FIRE HYDRANTS: Fire hydrants shall be installed at spacing not greater than 300 feet in industrial and commercial developments. Fire hydrants shall be installed at spacing not greater than 400 feet in residential developments.

95. FIRE LANE MARKING: On-site access ways, turn arounds, and internal drives shall be designated as fire lanes and identified as such by red curb striping and posted with signs at locations approve by the Fire Department. Signs shall be according to State standards and read “No Parking – Fire Lane” and must be shown on the plans. The red curb striping, sign location(s), and sign language shall be included in the building permit submittal for review and approval by the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department prior to building permit issuance. a. The following schedule for NO PARKING signs shall apply:

Width Requirements
36 feet or greater No requirements
Between 28 and 36 feet Post one side
Between 20 and 28 feet Post both sides
Less than 20 feet Not permitted
Cul-de-Sac Not permitted

96. FIRE VEHICLE TURNAROUNDS: Where Fire Department vehicle access through or around a site involves changes in direction or curves, inside radius of 45 feet and outside radius of 55 feet shall be provided to facilitate fire truck turning radius for entry and exit from the site. Dead-end access ways and internal drives shall not exceed 300 feet in length and shall terminate in cul-de-sacs no less than 96 feet in diameter or hammer-head (tee). Standards and options are available through the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau.

97. PREMISES IDENTIFICATION: Address numbers shall be installed on the front or primary entrance for all buildings. Minimum building address character size shall be 12-inch high by 1-inch stroke. In all cases address numerals shall be of contrasting background and clearly visible in accordance with the LivermorePage 735 of 893 Ordinance No.

Pleasanton Fire Department Premises Identification Standards. This may warrant field verification and adjustments based upon topography, landscaping or other obstructions.

98. RESIDENTIAL – NEW CONSTRUCTION: The following items shall be provided prior to any construction above the foundation or slab. a. Emergency vehicle access shall be provided to the site (tract), including areas where construction is occurring.
b. Designated construction material storage and construction worker parking shall not obstruct the emergency vehicle access route(s). c. On-site fire hydrants shall be in service. Fire hydrants shall be flushed and all valves open.

99. COMMERCIAL – NEW CONSTRUCTION: The following items shall be provided prior to any construction above the foundation or slab. a. Emergency vehicle access shall be provided to the site, including areas where construction is occurring. If Public Works Improvements are part of the project to access the site, an emergency vehicle access plan shall be submitted for review and approval to the Fire Department. b. If permanent access or site paving is not provided, the carrying capacity of the emergency vehicle access shall be 70,000 pounds under all weather conditions.
c. Site staging area(s) shall be provided for materials and equipment. All staging areas shall be outside of the emergency vehicle access route shown on the approved plans.
d. Where on-site fire hydrant(s) are required, they shall be installed, flushed and all valves open prior to any construction above the foundation or slab.

This includes concrete tilt-up and masonry buildings.
e. On-site fire hydrant(s) shall not be obstructed and shall be sufficiently above grade to have all hydrant valves and outlets accessible for emergency use.
f. Where a project is phased as part of the development, specific access, water supply and fire hydrant installations will be required as part of each phase. As needed a phasing plan with these improvements will be required.
g. Where on-site grading/utility plans are submitted for review and approval prior to building construction drawings, emergency vehicle access routes, fire hydrant locations, material staging areas, etc. shall be provided. 100. FINAL INSPECTION: Prior to request for final inspection, all access roads, onsite access and fire hydrants shall be provided. All fire hydrants shall be accepted, inspected and tested to applicable City Standards.

Ordinance No.

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DIVISION – 925-931-5672
Landscaping
101. LANDSCAPING: Detailed landscape and irrigation plans encompassing all planting areas, both on-site and off-site, shall be included in the building permit plans. All plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and shall provide the species, location, size, quantities, and spacing of all plants. Minimum plant sizes are 1-gallon containers for ground cover, 5-gallon containers for shrubs, and 15-gallon containers for trees. Plant species shall be of a droughttolerant nature and the irrigation design shall utilize low-volume drip, bubbler, or other water conserving irrigation systems to the maximum extent possible. The drawings shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Landscape Architect prior to building permit issuance.
102. WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE (WELO): The project shall comply with the City of Pleasanton’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) and Bay Friendly Basics Landscape Checklist. The applicant shall submit a Landscape Documentation Package in PDF format to the Landscape Architecture Division, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Landscape Architect prior to building permit issuance. The Landscape Documentation Package shall include:
a. Project Information;
b. Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet;
c. Soil management report;
d. Landscape design plan;
e. Irrigation design plan; and
f. Grading design plan.
103. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION: Upon completion of construction and prior to final inspection by the Building and Safety Division, the applicant’s landscape architect shall submit a Certificate of Completion Package in PDF format to the Landscape Architecture Division for review and approval. The Certificate of Completion Package shall include:
a. Project information sheet;
b. Certificate of installation according to the landscape documentation package;
c. Irrigation scheduling;
d. Schedule of irrigation, landscape and irrigation maintenance; e. Landscape irrigation audit report; and
f. Soil management report (if not previously submitted). 104. LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION: Prior to building permit final all landscaping shall be installed as shown on the approved building permit set and shall be inspected and approved by the Landscape Architecture Division.

Ordinance No.

105. REAR YARD LANDSCAPE: Each new residential unit shall include detailed landscape and irrigation plans for the rear yards. The units facing the arroyo shall have raised planters or another planter solution acceptable to the City’s Landscape Architect. Project Specific Conditions.
106. FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE: Each lot, where feasible as determined by the City’s Landscape Architect, shall include a small to medium sized tree and planting in the front yard walled areas between the residential units. Project Specific Conditions.
107. RIGHT-OF-WAY LANDSCAPE: Detailed landscape and irrigation plans for the right-of-way in front of the commercial property shall be included in the building permit plans. Plant species shall be of a drought-tolerant nature and the irrigation design shall utilize low-volume drip, bubbler, or other water conserving irrigation systems to the maximum extent possible.
108. CONCRETE CURBS: 6-inch vertical concrete curbs, with curb cuts or flush curbs with wheel stops, if determined to be acceptable by the Director of Engineering/City Engineer and Director of Community Development, shall be installed between all paved and landscape areas, in conformance with the City’s Standard Specifications and Details.
109. EROSION CONTROL: For purposes of erosion control, the applicant shall plant a hydro seed mixture designed by the applicant’s landscape architect and approved by the Landscape Architecture Division prior to installation. The erosion control shall be maintained by the applicant until permanent landscaping is in place.
110. BACKFLOW AND IRRIGATION METER SCREENING: All backflow prevention devices and above ground irrigation controls shall be located and screened to minimize their visual impacts. These devices with their proposed screening shall be shown on the landscaping and utility plans submitted with the building permit plans or improvement plans and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Landscape Architect prior to their installation. If above-ground, they shall be painted forest green or an equivalent dark-green color. Screens shall consist of berms, walls, or landscaping satisfactorily integrated into the landscape plan.

Landscape screens shall include shrubbery designed by species and planting density to establish a complete screen within 1 year from the date of planting.

Weather protection devices, such as measures to protect pipes from freezing, shall require approval by the City Landscape Architect prior to use; at no time shall fabric or other material not designed and/or intended for this purpose be wrapped around or otherwise placed on these devices. Project Specific Condition.
111. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE: The applicant and all future owners of the property shall, at no expense to the City, maintain all the landscaped areas related to the project in a healthful, attractive and reasonably weed-free manner

Ordinance No.

consistent with the approved landscape plan, for the duration of the existence of the project.
112. SITE LIGHTING: All site lighting shall be designed for consistency with the International Dark-Sky Association’s (IDA) Model Lighting Ordinance. This project site shall be considered to be in an LZ-1 zone for design purposes.

Lighting shall be subject to review and approval by the City Landscape Architect prior to building permit issuance. Project Specific Conditions.

Trees
113. TREE REPORT: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the tree report prepared by Richard Gessner, Monarch Consulting Arborists, dated November 19, 2021. No tree trimming or pruning other than that specified in the tree report shall occur. The applicant shall arrange for the Project Arborist to conduct a field inspection prior to building permit issuance to ensure all recommendations have been properly implemented. The Project Arborist shall certify in writing all recommendations have been followed. 114. TREE REMOVAL MITIGATION: Any trees approved to be removed by the City shall have its full value paid into the City’s Urban Forestry Fund. A credit for replanting trees shall be as follows:
a. $250 credit for a 15-gallon size replacement tree;
b. $500 credit for a 24-inch box size replacement tree; and c. $1,000 credit for a 36-inch box size replacement tree.

Project Specific Conditions.
115. TREE DISPOSITION PLAN: Provide a tree disposition plan that shows trees to remain, trees to be removed, the value of each tree, the total value of the trees to remain and be protected, and the total value of trees to be removed. The plan shall also include the tree protection recommendations from the arborist report.

Project Specific Condition.
116. TREE BOND: Any tree affected by development/construction must be protected per the Municipal Code. The applicant shall post cash, letter of credit, or other security satisfactory to the Director of Engineering/City Engineer, for all Heritage Trees and any other significant tree as deemed by the City Landscape Architect.

This bond or security will be for the value of the tree(s), up to a maximum of $100,000, and shall be held for a minimum of 1 year following acceptance of public improvements or completion of construction, whichever is later, and shall be forfeited if the trees are destroyed or substantially damaged. An arborist shall be onsite during any tree work (i.e. root pruning, trimming, setting up tree protection, etc.). The bond or security may be released early with a certification letter by the arborist confirming he/she was present during said tree work and work was performed in accordance with the arborist’s recommendations.

Ordinance No.

117. ROOT CUTTING: The applicant shall comply with the following tree root cutting requirements:
a. Roots 1-inch in diameter or larger to be removed shall be cleanly cut with a hand saw. Roots smaller than 1-inch in diameter are not considered to be significant and may be removed by the most efficient means. b. Roots larger than 2-inches in diameter and within 8-feet of the tree trunk shall not be cut or ground unless prior approval has been received from the Landscape Architecture Division.
c. Roots of any diameter farther than 8-feet from the tree trunk, which are in conflict with the proposed work may be ground a maximum of one-half of their diameter. Work of this nature shall only be performed using a mechanical stump grinder and only by personnel familiar with its operation.
d. Roots up to 6-inches in diameter and farther than 8-feet from the tree trunk may be removed if they are in conflict with the proposed work. Roots that are removed shall be cleanly cut using a hand saw. 118. ROOT CONTROL BARRIER: The applicant shall provide root control barriers and 4-inch perforated pipe for all trees located within 8-feet of pavement or other hardscape, determined by the City Landscape Architect. Root barriers shall be located along the edge of the pavement wherever the tree is within 8-feet of pavement or hardscape. Information and details shall be included in the landscape plan submittal for review and approval by the Landscape Architecture Division.
119. TREE PRUNING: Pruning shall be conducted by a certified arborist familiar with the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) pruning guidelines and shall comply with the guidelines established by the ISA, Tree Pruning Guidelines, current edition, to maintain the health of the trees.
120. TREE PROTECTION FENCING: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall install temporary 6-foot-tall chain-link fencing (or other fence type acceptable to the Landscape Architecture Division) outside of the existing tree drip lines. The location of the tree protection fencing shall be shown on the demolition plans (if applicable), grading, building, and/or landscape plans.

The fencing shall remain in place until final landscape inspection by the Landscape Architecture Division. Removal of such fencing prior to approval may result in a “stop work order.”
121. PROJECT PLANS: The following statements shall be printed on the demolition, grading and landscape plans where applicable to the satisfaction of the City Landscape Architect prior to issuance of building permits:
a. No existing tree may be trimmed or pruned without prior approval by the City Landscape Architect.
b. Utilize best efforts to locate any new utility trenches outside of the existing canopy of the trees to be saved. If this is not feasible, the applicant shall

Ordinance No.