Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
37 May 2020
reconnaissance and intensive (BLM 2004; NPS 2009). The choice of survey category depends on the level of effort required for a particular project, which can vary depending on the nature of the properties or property types, the possible adverse effects on such properties, and agency requirements (NPS and ACHP 1998). The selection of field survey techniques and level of effort must be responsive to the management needs and preservation goals that direct the survey effort.
For any survey, it is important to consider the full range of historic properties that may be affected, either directly or indirectly, and consider strategies that will minimize any adverse effects and maximize beneficial effects on those properties (BLM 2004; NPS 2009; NPS and ACHP 1998).
The current survey (completed November 15, 2018) can be classified as intensive since shortinterval transect spacing and full documentation of cultural resources was completed. Survey staff exceeded the applicable Secretary of Interior Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeological survey. Dudek archaeologist William Burns, MA, RPA surveyed the entire APE with transects spaced no more than 15 meters apart and oriented along cardinal directions where possible.
Survey direction and location was adjusted for the presence of grape vines that were present through the central and southern portions of the Project APE. Survey crew was equipped with a Trimble Geo7X Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver with sub-meter accuracy. Location-specific photographs were taken using an IPhone 7 equipped with 8 MP resolution and georeferenced PDF maps of the project area. Accuracy of this device ranged between 2 meters and 5 meters.
Subsurface exposures were opportunistically sought out and inspected near rodent burros, as well as along natural and human-made erosional features.
4.3 Subsurface Testing
4.3.1 Extended Phase I Testing
Dudek developed an XPI exploratory program in order to address the research questions outlined above. The intent of XPI investigations is to build upon Phase I survey information. Three hollow stem 6-inch auger borings and five STPs, measuring 0.5 x 0.25 m, were excavated at predetermined locations placed with the intent of providing a general understanding of the present subsurface conditions throughout the Project site. These locations were set with the goal of assessing the level of previous subsurface disturbance and presence of fill within the Project site, and the potential for soils to support the presence of cultural material and deposits associated with the three previously recorded sites in the vicinity: CA-NAP-406, CA-NAP-843, and CA-NAP-1008.
4.3.2 Phase II Testing
Further excavations within the APE were necessary to fully understand the extent of disturbances resulting from the previous levee project and soils changes. The intent of Phase II investigations Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
38 May 2020
is to build upon Phase I survey and XPI information. Ground penetrating radar (GPR) was utilized in transects and blocks to locate subsurface anomalies. Ten hollow stem 6-inch auger borings and twenty STPs, measuring 0.5 x 0.25 m, were excavated at anomaly locations discovered though GPR as well as pre-determined locations placed with the intent of providing a general understanding of the present subsurface conditions throughout the Project site. These locations were set with the goal of assessing the level of previous subsurface disturbance and presence and depth of fill within the Project site, and the potential for soils to support the presence of cultural material and deposits associated with the three previously recorded sites in the vicinity: CA-NAP-406, CA-NAP-843, and CA-NAP-1008. Excavation units are shown relative to the October 2009 Google Earth imagery within Figure 3. Active construction activities for the prior levee project are observable within this imagery.
Excavations units, including both auger and STP samples, were excavated and recorded in 20 cm arbitrary levels from the surface and screened using 1/8 inch mesh. Accurate vertical provenience was allowed by the short intervals of the hand-excavated augurs and STPs. Augers can be excavated more rapidly, with less disturbance, and to greater depths than STPs. STPs require removal of more soil than augers. However, this unit type also provides for a larger sample when looking for buried cultural deposits and allow for direct inspection of subsurface soil profiles along their exposed side walls. All removed soil soils and units were examined for midden-like soils and other cultural characteristics based on color, texture, consistency, stickiness, plasticity, and the presence of artifacts. Depositional characteristics and indications of past disturbance and/or fill were documented. Field notes were taken on Dudek auger and STP forms. All holes were backfilled using removed soils after sampling. Topsoil or grass was placed back on the surface of all excavated areas and restored to their previous appearance as best possible. A series of overview and excavation photographs were taken to document the current surface and subsurface conditions in each area. Any artifacts identified were documented using field forms, photographed, then bagged with labels identifying their subsurface provenience. Artifacts found during XPI excavations were buried on site in the corresponding backfilled unit within 10-20 cm of the surface.
Artifacts found during Phase II excavations were collected and returned to Dudek’s office for analysis.
4.4 Ground Penetrating Radar
Dudek has in-house GPR equipment and dedicated personnel trained in its use. The Dudek GPR is a wheeled device approximately the size of a child’s wagon, and can be pushed across the ground in a pre-defined survey pattern that is tracked by a GPS devise. A Sensors and Software, Ltd., Noggin 250 GPR unit was used to collect all data, using the SmartCart configuration. This allowed investigators an opportunity to observe any potential anomalies in real time as they walked the site. The GPR was set up to record data to a maximum depth of 8 meters (approximately 26 feet).
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
39 May 2020
A Trimble GeoXt device with sub-meter accuracy was used to collect locational information for each line and grid. GPR is non-invasive and uses electromagnetic fields to probe subsurface contexts for objects and changes in soil or material properties. Generally summarized, an antenna sends a finite frequency non-dispersive wave through the ground. This wave is then scattered and/or reflected back as “anomalies” with interpretable characteristics. While the location of anomalies can be identified in the field, and GPR survey strategies adjusted to focus on these areas in real-time, results are post-processed through software for the final results. By walking continuous linear transects and grids, this software allows for generation of three dimensional horizontal and visual mapping of subsurface features. This is most effective with historical or modern built environment features constructed of materials such as asphalt, brick, concrete, metal, wood, and other materials that would stand out against the surrounding soil matrix.
Raw GPR data is processed analyzed using GPR Slice (v7) software to create 2-dimensional vertical radargram images and time-slice horizontal (plan view) images for the Project site. Timeslice imagery is generated through post-processing of grids within a specific area. These can be viewed vertically from the surface to provide rough 3-dimensional renderings of subsurface anomalies, if present. Radargrams are also visible for review real-time on the GPR display during linear transects. Subsurface features as represented as hyperbolas, with the slope and size of the hyperbola related to the size and shape of the object. Round, linear features, such as enclosed waterlines and pipes, can be identified as smooth hyperbolae when crossed perpendicularly and as a solid line when the GPR runs parallel to the direction of the feature. Consecutive time-slice images are stitched from
Twenty-six transects lines and two grids (Grid-01: 10 m by 10 m, Grid-02: 10 m by 7.5 m) were tested. Their locations decided on attempting to avoid areas of high disturbance, based of older aerial satellite images (Figure 4). GPR was performed in order to identify potential subsurface archaeological features and signs of the extent of disturbance in the APE.
Based on review of records search information, the results of the XPI testing, and historical aerial imagery, transects for Lines 1 through 9, Grid-01, and Grid-02 were placed in the middle of the APE. The placement of this GPR study areas were to avoid the areas of highest disturbance seen in the 2009 aerial images while targeting locations intersecting the likely extended boundary of CA-NAP-406.
GPR transect Lines 1-19 were placed intersecting and just north of the boundary of CA-NAP-406 as it has been indicated to extend to within the Project APR by previous studies (Bartoy et al. 2005:
90). Grid-01 (10 m by 10 m) was comprised of 21 parallel lines oriented north-south (0.5 m interval) and 21 parallel lines oriented east-west (0.5 m interval) and Grid-02 (10 m by 7.5 m) was comprised of 16 parallel lines oriented north-south (0.5 m interval) and 21 parallel lines oriented Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
40 May 2020
east-west (0.5 m interval). Both grids and were placed near the central area of the APE, within the likely expanded site boundaries of CA-NAP-406 as indicated by previous studies. GPR transect Lines 20-25 were placed along the northern boundary of the over-excavated area located immediately north of the extant vineyards. After completing the GPR data acquisition and initial field analysis of the data, high-potential anomalies were ground-truthed through excavation of STPs to assess the GPR anomalies and surface observations.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
41 May 2020
Figure 3. Extended Phase I and Phase II Testing Relative to 2009 Aerial Imagery Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
42 May 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
43 May 2020
Figure 4. GPR Investigation Area
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
44 May 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
45 May 2020
5 RESULTS
This section presents the results of the records search and the field survey of the current study.
5.1 Survey Results
A Phase I Survey of the entire Project APE was completed November 15, 2018. The southern half of the Project APE was occupied by grape vines, allowing for approximately one-half of the ground surface to be directly visible. Low-laying grasses were present throughout the northern half of the Project APE, restricting visibility of the ground surface to less than 10% in most areas on this initial site visit (see Figures 5-6). Evidence for buried cultural deposits was opportunistically sought through inspection of natural or artificial erosion/excavation exposures and the spoils from rodent burrows. The Project APE has been subject to a number of past disturbances. The most notable of these have included present and past agricultural activities, as well as likely earth moving work in the northernmost portion of the Project APE. No artifacts were observed on the surface during survey, however visibility was highly restricted in most areas by low-laying vegetation and organic debris.
Figure 5. Overview of Auger-1 Location, view northward
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
46 May 2020
5.2 Extended Phase I and Phase II Results
Dudek archaeologist, William Burns performed XPI testing from November 15, 2018 to November 17, 2018. Dudek archaeologists Adam Giacinto, William Burns, Ross Owen, Nicholas Hanten, Kolin Taylor, Jessica Borges, and Brad Comeau performed Phase II testing from January 20, 2020 to January 24, 2020. Results of these excavations are provided in Table 3.
Table 3. Extended Phase I and Phase II Testing Results
Unit ID Depth
(cmbs) Results Artifacts Recovered Soil Description
AT-01
0-20 Negative None 2.5Y 5/3 Light olive brown clay silt with gravel, compact 20-40 Positive 1 obsidian shatter 2.5Y 5/3 Light olive brown clay silt with gravel, compact: 1 obsidian shatter fragment
40-60 Negative None 2.5Y 6/2 Light brown gray clay silt with gravel, compact.
Rock impasses at 60 cmbs
AT-02
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with gravel, compact
20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with gravel, compact
40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with gravel, compact
AT-03 0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with gravel, compact
Figure 6. Overview of STP-2, view westward toward levee Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
47 May 2020
Unit ID Depth
(cmbs) Results Artifacts Recovered Soil Description
20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with gravel, compact
40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with gravel, compact
AT-04
0-20 Positive 1 green bottle glass
fragment
10YR 4/1 Dark gray silty clay, no gravels: 1 fragment
green bottle glass
20-40 Negative None 10YR 4/1 Dark gray clay, < 2% angular gravels 40-60 Negative None 10 YR 4/1 Dark gray clay < 5% angular gravels 60-80 Negative 4 obsidian debitage 10 YR 4/1 Dark gray clay < 5% angular gravels. Rock impasse at 75 cmbs
AT-05
0-20 Negative None 2.5 YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown clay loam 20-40 Positive 2 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam with increased sand content
40-60 Positive 2 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam with increased sand content
60-80 Positive 1 obsidian debitage 10YR 2/2 Very dark brown silty loam with increased grit, moderately compact. Rock impasse at 80 cmbs
AT-06
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam 20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam 40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam 60-80 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam 80-100 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam 100-120 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam 120-140 Negative None 2.5Y 4/3 Olive brown sandy silt, with 20% gravel. 140-160 Negative None 2.5Y 4/3 Olive brown sandy silt, with 20% gravel. 160-180 Negative None 2.5Y 4/3 Olive brown sandy silt, with 20% gravel. 180-200 Negative None 2.5Y 4/3 Olive brown sandy silt, with 20% gravel. Auger terminated at 187 cmbs
AT-07
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam, gradual increase in sand content with depth
20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam, gradual increase in sand content with depth
40-60 Negative None 10YR 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy loam 60-80 Negative None 10YR 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy loam 80-100 Negative None 10YR 5/3 Brown sandy clay, coarse sand with 15% angular gravels. Rock impasse at 90 cmbs
AT-08
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown clay loam 20-40 Negative None 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay loam, increased sand, <5% small cobbles and gravel
40-60 Negative None 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay loam, increased sand, <5% small cobbles and gravel
60-80 Negative None 2.5Y 4/3 Olive brown sandy silt, some oxidation present Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
48 May 2020
Unit ID Depth
(cmbs) Results Artifacts Recovered Soil Description
80-100 Negative None 2.5Y 4/4 Olive brown sandy silt, some oxidation present AT-09
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam
20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown silty loam
40-60 Negative None 10 YR 3/2 Very dark gray brown silty clay loam. Rock impasse at 55 cmbs
AT-10
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty loam with coarse sand
20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown silty clay loam 40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown silty clay loam. Rock impasse at 53 cmbs
AT-11
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/1 Very dark gray clay silt
20-40 Negative None 2.5Y 3/3 dark olive brown silty clay 40-60 Negative None 2.5Y 3/3 dark olive brown silty clay 60-80 Negative None 2.5Y 3/3 dark olive brown silty clay 80-100 Negative None 2.5Y 2.5/1 Black silty clay
100-120 Negative None 2.5Y 2.5/1 Black silty clay
120-140 Negative None 2.5Y 2.5/1 Black silty clay
140-160 Negative None 2.5Y 2.5/1 Black silty clay
AT-12
0-20 Positive 1 obsidian debitage 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay loam 20-40 Positive 2 obsidian debitage 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay loam 40-60 Negative None 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay loam 60-80 Negative None
2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown sandy clay loam, with 20% small-medihm gravels and cobbles. Rock impasse at 70
cmbs
AT-13
0-20 Positive 1 obsidian flake 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown silty loam 20-40 Negative None 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown silty loam 40-60 Negative None 2.5Y 4/1 dark geay silty clay loam with oxidation throughout
60-80 Negative None 2.5Y 2.5/1 black silty clay loam, compact 80-100 Negative None 2.5Y 2.5/1 black silty clay loam, compact 100-120 Negative None 2.5Y 2.5/1 black silty clay loam, compact 120-140 Negative None 10YR 4/1 dark gray mottled with 10YR 4/3 brown clay loam, compact
140-160 Negative None 2.5Y 5/2 grayish brown sandy clay loam 160-180 Negative None 2.5Y 5/2 grayish brown sandy clay loam 180-200 Negative None 2.5Y 5/2 grayish brown sandy clay loam 200-220 Negative None 2.5Y 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy clay loam 220-240 Negative None 2.5Y 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy clay loam 240-260 Negative None 2.5Y 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy clay loam Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
49 May 2020
Unit ID Depth
(cmbs) Results Artifacts Recovered Soil Description
260-280 Negative None 2.5Y 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy loam, water table at 280 cmbs
STP-01
0-20 Positive
21 obsidian flakes, 1
retouched obsidian
flake
10YR 3/2 very dark gray brown loamy clay with gravel,
compact
20-40 Positive 45 obsidian flakes 10YR 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay silt, compact STP-02
0-20 Positive 9 obsidian flakes 2.5Y 5/3 Light olive brown clay silt with gravel, compact 20-40 Positive 44 obsidian flakes 10YR 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay silt, compact STP-03
0-20 Positive 3 obsidian flakes, 1
chert flake 2.5Y 5/3 Light olive brown clay silt with gravel, compact 20-40 Positive 3 obsidian flakes 10YR 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay silt, compact STP-04
0-20 Positive 14 obsidian flakes 10YR 3/3 Dark Brown sandy clay silt with gravel, compact 20-40 Positive 8 obsidian flakes 10YR 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay silt, compact STP-05
0-20 Positive 34 obsidian flakes 10YR 4/2 Dark grayish brown loamy clay with gravel, compact
20-40 Positive
63 obsidian flakes, 1
obsidian
chopper/scraper
10YR 3/2 Very dark gray brown clay silt, compact
STP-08
0-20 Positive 50 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 very dark gray brown loamy clay, lightly compacted, with <5% small rounded gravels
20-40 Positive 44 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 very dark gray brown loamy clay, lightly compacted, with <5% small rounded gravels
40-60 Positive 4 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 very dark gray brown loamy clay, lightly compacted, with <2% small rounded gravels
60-80 Negative None 10YR 4/3 Brown clay with <2% small angular and rounded gravels
80-100 Negative None 10YR 4/4 Dark yellowish brown sandy clay, <5% gravel and cobbles
100-120 Negative None 10YR 4/4 Dark yellowish brown sandy clay, <5% gravel and cobbles. Terminated at 105 cmbs due to water table
STP-09
0-20 Positive 21 obsidian debitage 2.5Y 3/1 Very dark gray silty clay with <10% angular gravel 20-40 Positive 14 obsidan debitage,
modern plastic 2.5Y 3/1 Very dark gray silty clay with <10% angular gravel 40-60 Positive
21 obsidian debitage,
brick fragment,
wooden lathe
fragment, and modern
plastic
2.5Y 3/1 Very dark gray silty clay with <10% angular gravel 60-80 Positive
21 obsidian debitage,
1 obsidian retouched
edge tool, brick
fragment
2.5Y 3/2 very dark gray brown sandy silt with <15%
angular gravel, very compact
80-100 Positive 22 obsidian debitage,
brick fragment
2.5Y 3/2 very dark gray brown sandy silt with <15%
angular gravel, very compact
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
50 May 2020
Unit ID Depth
(cmbs) Results Artifacts Recovered Soil Description
100-120 Positive 1 obsidian debitage
Auger - 2.5Y 3/2 very dark gray brown clay loam with
<15% angular gravel, slightly compact. Rock impase at
120 cmbs
STP-10
0-20 Positive 1 obsidian biface, 17
obsidian debitage 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown silty clay loam 20-40 Positive
3 obsidian debitage, 2
glass fragments,
plastic, and aluminum
2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown silty clay loam, increasing clay content and compaction with depth
40-60 Positive 1 obsidian debitage 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown sandy silty clay loam 60-80 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown sandy silt 80-100 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown sandy silt 100-120 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray brown sandy silt 120-140 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 3/1 Very dark gray sandy clay 140-160 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 3/2 Very dark gray coarse sand. Terminated at 160 cmbs
STP-11
0-20 Positive 6 obsidian debitage 7.5YR 3/2 dark brown loamy clay with <5% rounded gravel 20-40 Positive 3 obsidian debitage 7.5YR 3/2 dark brown loamy clay with <5% rounded gravel 40-60 Positive 3+ pieces of plastic 10YR 3/2 dark grayish brown loam with <5% rounded gravel
60-80 Negative None 7.5YR 3/4 dark brown loam
80-100 Negative None 80-90 cmbs: 7.5YR 3/4 dark brown loam 90-100 cmbs: coarse gray sand
STP-12
0-20 Positive 3 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy silt 20-40 Positive 6 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy silt 40-60 Positive 13 obsidian debitage
40-50 cmbs: 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy silt
50-60: 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown sandy silt with ~50% cobbles
60-80 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown sandy silt with ~50% cobbles. Terminated at 75 cmbs due to rock impasse
STP-14
0-20 Negative None 10YR 4/3 Brown sandy loam with <5% gravel 20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy loam with <5% gravel 40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy loam with <5% gravel, cobbles at 55 cmbs
STP-16
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay 20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay 40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay, 55cmbs increased cobbles (5-10 cm diam.)
STP-17
0-20 Positive 1 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown sandy loam with angular cobbles (5-15 cm diam.)
20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown sandy loam with angular cobbles (5-15 cm diam.)
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
51 May 2020
Unit ID Depth
(cmbs) Results Artifacts Recovered Soil Description
40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown sandy loam with angular cobbles (5-15 cm diam.)
STP-18
0-20 Negative None
10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown sandy loam with <5%
angular gravels. Angular cobbles (4-8 cm diam.) at 15
cmbs
20-40 Negative None 10YR 4/1 Dark gray loamy clay, < 2% angular gravels, clobbles (~10 cm diam.)
40-60 Negative None 10YR 4/1 Dark gray loamy clay, < 2% angular gravels, clobbles (~10 cm diam.)
STP-19
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay 20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown loamy clay with cobbles (4-8 cm diam.)
40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown loamy clay with cobbles (4-8 cm diam.)
STP-21
0-20 Positive 1 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with <5% angular gravels
20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with <5% angular gravels
40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown loamy clay with <5% angular gravels
STP-22
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy loam with <5% gravel 20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy loam with <5% gravel 40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy loam with >50% cobbles (4- 10 cm diam.)
STP-23
0-20 Positive 1 obsidian debitage 2.5Y 3/2 Dark Brown clay silt 20-40 Negative None 2.5Y 3/2 Dark Brown clay silt
40-60 Negative None 2.5Y 3/2 Dark Brown clay silt
60-80 Negative None Auger - 60-70 cmbs: 2.5Y 3/2 Dark brown clay silt 70-80 cmbs: 2.5Y 2.5/1 Black silty clay
80-100 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 2.5/1 black silty clay 100-120 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 2.5/1 black silty clay 120-140 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 2.5/1 black silty clay 140-160 Negative None Auger - 2.5Y 2.5/1 black silty clay STP-24
0-20 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy silt
20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy silt
40-60 Negative None 10YR 3/3 Dark brown sandy silt
STP-25
0-20 Positive 1 obsidian debitage 7.5YR 3/2 Dark brown sandy loam with 5% large cobbles (5-15 cm diam.)
20-40 Positive 1 historic ceramic 7.5YR 3/2 Dark brown sandy loam with 70% large cobbles (5-15 cm diam.)
STP-26
0-20 Negative None 7.5YR 3/2 Dark brown silty sandy loam 20-40 Negative None 7.5YR 3/2 Dark brown silty sandy loam Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
52 May 2020
Unit ID Depth
(cmbs) Results Artifacts Recovered Soil Description
40-60 Negative None 7.5YR 3/2 Dark brown silty sandy loam with 50% cobbles (5-15 cm diam.)
STP-27
0-20 Negative None 10YR 4/2 Dark grayish brown loamy clay with ~50% gravel 20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark gray sandy clay with ~50% gravel 40-60 Positive 12 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown clay with 10% gravels:
12 obsidian debitage
60-80 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown sandy loam with 10% gravels
80-100 Negative None 10YR 2/2 Very dark brown sandy loam 100-120 Negative None 10YR 2/2 Very dark brown sandy loam 120-140 Negative None 10YR 2/2 Very dark brown sandy loam. Terminated at 130 cmbs
STP-28
0-20 Positive 6 obsidian debitage 10YR 4/2 Dark grayish brown silty clay 20-40 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown clay 40-60 Negative None 2.5YR 3/1 Very dark grayish brown
60-80 Negative None Auger - 2.5YR 4/1 Very dark gray sandy clay 80-100 Negative None Auger - 2.5YR 4/1 Very dark gray sandy clay 100-120 Negative None Auger - 2.5YR 4/1 Very dark gray sandy clay 120-140 Negative None Auger - 2.5YR 4/1 Very dark gray sandy clay 140-160 Negative None Auger - 2.5YR 4/1 Very dark gray sandy clay STP-29
0-20 Positive 6 obsidian debitage 10YR 2/2 Very dark brown clay 20-40 Positive 3 obsidian debitage 10YR 2/2 Very dark brown clay 40-60 Positive 4 obsidian debitage 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty clay 60-80 Positive 1 obsidian debitage, 3
glass fragments 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty clay 80-100 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty clay 100-120 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty clay 120-140 Negative None 10YR 3/2 Very dark grayish brown silty clay 140-160 Negative None 5Y 3/1 Very dark gray silty clay. Terminated at 150 cmbs.
STP-30
0-20 Positive 2 obsidian debitage 2.5Y 3/2 Dark brown sandy loam 20-40 Positive 1 obsidian debitage 2.5Y 3/2 Dark brown sandy loam 40-60 Negative None 2.5Y 3/1 Very dark grayish brown sandy loam 60-80 Negative None 2.5Y 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy silt with 40% large cobbles
80-100 Negative None 2.5Y 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy silt 100-120 Negative None 2.5Y 4/2 Dark grayish brown sandy silt Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
53 May 2020
Archaeological testing did not result in the identification of intact cultural deposits. Results indicate artifact frequencies were highest in the central (near CA-NAP-406) and northern (CANAP-1008) portions of the Project APE. Most cultural material was recovered from shallower contexts (above 60 cmbs). Modern debris was encountered to 100 cmbs. Artifacts consisted predominantly of small obsidian tertiary flakes. These findings are generally consistent with the assemplage documented for Phase II excavations completed for the St. Helena Flood Control Project along the western side of the central portion of the Project APE (Bartoy et al. 2005). This study suggested that a gray sandy clay sterile soil sub-stratum was present approximately 1.5 m below the surface (Schneider et al. 2013: 27).
The portion of the APE north of the existing vineyards was confirmed to be covered by a layer of fill extending to at least 100 cmbs (3.28 ft). A soil shoulder of this approximate height marks the extent of this graded fill along the eastern perimeter of the APE, north of the vineyard. A ditch, as well as narrow lower terrace, is present east of this berm where native soils could be encountered at shallow depths. October 2009 Google Earth imagery (as previously included in Figure 3) does show the distribution of fill in this area. At the time of the prior levee project, the area was used for staging of equipment. It is unclear from this imagery if underlying native soils were graded, ripped, or otherwise prepped prior to the distribution of fill. A large area of likely excavation is also visible within the 2009 imagery just north of the existing vineyard.
The patterning shown by the distribution of artifacts in this area is somewhat unclear. In general, artifacts are clearly associated with soils approximately 60 cmbs or shallower, below which the presence of artifacts substantially decreases. The areas nearest the recorded boundaries of CANAP-406, notably STP-9, did yield relatively high frequencies of artifacts to depths up to 100 cmbs. However, modern construction waste (brick) was also found within this unit at this same depth. Based on this distribution of cultural material, it seems most likely that soils and/or artifacts associated with CA-NAP-406 were spread throughout the APE at a later stage of the levee project. This likely occurred after grading and partial leveling of soils from outside of CA-NAP-406, which helps explain both why the distribution of artifacts remains relatively vertically constrained and why there is not a clear soil transition between the different levels of graded soils.
The areas of the APE within the vineyard, while previously disturbed through agricultural activities, were not capped by redistributed soils during the levee project. As such, these areas would have the highest potential for intact cultural deposits to persist. The total assemblage of artifacts recovered from all excavation units within this area included four fragments of obsidian debitage and one possibly historical-era ceramic fragment. All material was recovered from the upper 40 cmbs. It is most likely that soils within the vineyard are likely representative of the native soils underlying fill to the north, consisting of sandy loam with increased frequencies of rock at depth.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
54 May 2020
5.3 Ground Penetrating Radar Review
GPR data collection was performed on January 14 and 15, 2020 by Brad Comeau, Adam Giacinto, and William Burns. Twenty-six transects lines and two square grids were tested. The transect lines were organized into two groups. Lines 1 to 19 were placed close to the center of the Project site and ran E/W across the entirety of the APE. These lines had no major hits, though a few stronger anomalies were ground-truthed with STPs. The STPs were generally irrigation lines; no cultural features were encountered. Lines 20-26 were placed farther south from Line 1-19. Line 20 registered an anomaly at 118 m east along the transect, at a depth of approximately 0.5 m (Figure 7). This anomaly was investigated with STP 11, however the STP failed to locate a feature and was likely reflective of a soil change or subsurface cobble. A few other minor hits along Line 20- 26 were investigated with STPs, though none revealed any features. Radargrams generated through linear transects provided an approximate cross section of stratigraphy across the entire APE, east to west. GPR data indicates a soil change between approximately 0.5 m and 1.5 m (Figure 7). This clearly aligns with soil profiles revealed through STPs and auger bores, which display a disturbed fill from the ground surface, transitions to a subsurface alluvium between 0.5 m and 1.5 m. The two grids, Grid-01 and Grid-02, contained no substantial GPR findings.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
55 May 2020
Figure 7. GPR Line 20 Anomaly
Figure 8. GPR General Soil Profile (Line 5)
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
56 May 2020
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
57 May 2020
6 SUMMARY AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 Summary
This study has consisted of a CHRIS records search of the Project APE and a half-mile radius, NAHC Sacred Lands File search, intensive-level pedestrian survey, XPI subsurface probing, Phase II excavations, and a GPR investigation. A NAHC Sacred Lands File did not indicate the presence of any Native American cultural resources in or near the Project APE. Dudek did not contact Native American representatives as part of these efforts, however the City has notified and consulted with NAHC-listed Tribal representatives pursuant to AB 52. One tribe, the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, has responded to this outreach with a request for a copy of the present report. A record of consultation is on file with the City.
Records on file with the NWIC provided documentation of three previously recorded archaeological sites within the Project APE (CA-NAP-406, CA-NAP-843, and CA-NAP-1008).
An additional five archaeological sites have been identified in the immediate vicinity of the Project. Two of these have been determined NRHP/CRHR eligible. CA-NAP-406 has been determined to be eligible for listing on the NRHP listing under Criterion D with SHPO concurrence. CA-NAP-843 and CA-NAP-1008 were determined with SHPO concurrence to be ineligible for NRHP/CRHR listing based on a lack of sufficient data potential and integrity.
XPI exploratory probing confirmed that soil containing archaeological material associated with CA-NAP-406, CA-NAP-843 and CA-NAP-1008 is present within the Project APE. Phase II excavations and research were able to identify a layer of disturbed fill/redistributed soils across the northern half of the APE which contained the cultural material in its upper layers (generally less than 60 cmbs but as deep as 100 cmbs). It is likely that this upper layer of fill is comprised largely of redeposited and otherwise disturbed cultural deposits associated with CA-NAP-406.
Soils identified below the fill was not found to contain cultural deposits or substantial frequencies of cultural material. CA-NAP-843 and CA-NAP-1008 have been subject to previous evaluation efforts, and are not NRHP/CRHR eligible. No intact cultural deposits were identified as a result of XPI, Phase II, and GPR investigations.
6.2 Review of Potential Impacts
The City is the lead agency responsible for compliance with the CEQA. Compliance with Section 106 may also be required. According to CEQA (Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852), a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect (adverse effect) on the environment and the cultural resource itself. A substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource would be constituted by physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
58 May 2020
alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired. Once a baseline understanding of resource distribution and significance is understood, the CEQA process provides that some impacts may be made to be less than significant with application of mitigation.
Effects on historic properties under Section 106 of the NHPA are defined in the assessment of adverse effects in 36 CFR Sections 800.5(a)(1). An adverse effect is found when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Consideration shall be given to all qualifying characteristics of a historic property, including those that may have been identified subsequent to the original evaluation of the property’s eligibility for the National Register. Adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the undertaking that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance or be cumulative. Compliance with Section 106 requires, the criteria of adverse effect are applied to historic properties, if any exist in the Project APE. If no historic properties are identified in the APE, a finding of “no historic properties affected” will be made for the proposed Project. If there are historic properties in the APE, application of the criteria of adverse effect will result in Project-related findings of either “no adverse effect” or of “adverse effect”.
CA-NAP-843 and CA-NAP-1008 fall within the APE. These have both been determined ineligible for CRHR/NRHP-listing with concurrence from SHPO. Previous investigations appear to have included the portions of these resources intersecting the present Project APE. Impacts to CA-NAP843 and CA-NAP-1008 would not represent a significant effect, although appropriate management strategies to account for unanticipated impacts will require consideration.
CA-NAP-406 has been determined to be eligible for CRHR (Criterion 4) and NRHP (Criterion D) listing. Previous investigations evaluating this resource were restricted to portions of this resource located immediately west of the present Project APE. Prior to the presently documented investigations, the actual distribution, composition, and significance of archaeological deposits associated with this resource within the present Project APE remained undetermined. Based on the results of archaeological excavations and a GPR investigation no intact deposits or features associated with CA-NAP-406 appear to extend to within the APE. Disturbed and redeposited archaeological material within the APE is not CRHR/NRHP eligible. As such, effects to known cultural resources resulting from the Project as presently designed would be less than significant, No Historic Properties Affected.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
59 May 2020
6.3 Recommendations
While archaeological resources were identified within the Project APE, all observed cultural material was identified within disturbed and redeposited context. The exact depth, area, and severity of previous disturbances remains somewhat unclear. The vertical APE of the Project is as deep as 6 feet below the existing ground surface for utility trenching and 1.5 feet below the existing grade for general ground preparation. There is some potential to encounter unanticipated significant cultural resources during Project activities, most notably where intact remnant deposits associated with CA-NAP-406 could be present. Based on the results of XPI, Phase II, and GPR investigations, such deposits have the highest potential to be present deeper than two feet beneath the present grade in areas located north of the planned Starr Avenue expansion. Portions of the APE to the south, presently occupied by vineyards, have a higher potential to contain intact cultural deposits at shallower depth. In addition, it should be noted that numerous human burials have been identified in nearby areas, although not within the Project APE.
Based on identified sensitivity for encountering unanticipated significant cultural resources and human remains, archaeological monitoring is recommended. The following plan has been prepared with the intent of aiding in future cultural monitoring efforts.
Monitoring Roles and Responsibilities
The requirement for a Native American monitor shall be determined by the City in consultation with traditionally culturally affiliated tribes. Archaeological monitors should be present during all initial ground-disturbing activities with the potential to encounter cultural resources. Prior to the initiation ground-disturbing work, construction crews will be made aware of the potential to encounter cultural resources and the requirement for cultural monitors to be present during these activities. Archaeological monitoring may be adjusted (increase, decreased, or discontinued) at the recommendation of the qualified archaeological principal investigator meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards, and in consultation with the City, based on inspection of exposed cultural material and the observed potential for soils to contain intact cultural deposits or otherwise significant archaeological material.
The archaeological monitor shall be provided a copy of this technical report and its pertinent appendices to inform their monitoring efforts. The archaeological shall have the authority to temporarily halt work to inspect areas as needed for potential cultural material or deposits. In the event that potentially intact archaeological deposits or features are exposed during construction activities for the proposed project, all construction work occurring within 100 feet of the find shall immediately stop until the archaeological principal investigator can evaluate the significance of the find and determine whether or not additional study is warranted. The work exclusion buffer Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
60 May 2020
may be adjusted as appropriate to allow work to feasibly continue at the recommendation of the archaeological principal investigator. Should it be required, temporary flagging may be installed around this resource in order to avoid any disturbances from construction equipment. The potential for project avoidance of potentially significant cultural resources should be a primary consideration as part of this initial process. Significance of the find will be assessed as outlined by CEQA (14 CCR 15064.5(f); PRC Section 21082). If the archaeological principal investigator observes the discovery to be potentially significant under CEQA or Section 106 of the NHPA, additional efforts such as preparation of an archaeological treatment plan, testing, and/or data recovery may be warranted prior to allowing construction to proceed in this area.
In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, if potential human remains are found the county coroner shall be immediately notified of the discovery. The coroner will provide a determination within 48 hours of notification. No further excavation or disturbance of the identified material, or any area reasonably suspected to overlie additional remains, shall occur until a determination has been made. If the county coroner determines that the remains are, or are believed to be, Native American, they shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. In accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, the NAHC must immediately notify those persons it believes to be the most likely descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. Within 48 hours of their notification, the MLD will recommend to the lead agency their preferred treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.
Reporting Requirements
Daily monitoring logs will be completed by onsite archaeological monitor. Within 60 days following completion of construction, the qualified archaeological principal investigator shall provide an archaeological monitoring report to the City. This report shall include the results of the cultural monitoring program (even if negative), including a summary of any findings or evaluation/data recovery efforts, and supporting documentation that demonstrates all mitigation measures defined in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) were appropriately met. Appendices should include archaeological monitoring logs and documentation relating to any newly identified or updated cultural resources. This report shall be submitted to the NWIC once considered final.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
61 May 2020
7 REFERENCES
16 U.S.C. 470–470x-6. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. 36 CFR 60. National Register of Historic Places.
36 CFR 800.1–800.16 and Appendix A. Protection of Historic Properties. 48 FR 44720–44726. “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Federal Agency Historic Preservation Programs Pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act.” April 24, 1998.
Bartoy, Kevin and John Holson. 2007. Pacific Legacy IncorporatedRevised Historic Properties Treatment Plan for Archaeological Sites CA-NAP-399, CA-NAP-406, CA-NAP-413, and CA-NAP-863, St. Helena Flood Protection Project, City of St. Helena, Napa County.
Prepared by Pacific Legacy for the USACE. On file with the NWIC as report S-043810.
Bartoy, Kevin, John Holson, Lauren Rosenthal, and Heather Blind. 2005. Archaeological Investigation and Evaluation of Eight Sites in the Napa River Floodplain for the St.
Helena Flood Protection Project, City of St. Helena, Napa County, California (Vol 1:
Report. Vol 2: Appendices). Prepared by Pacific Legacy for the USACE. On file with the NWIC as report S-043810.
BLM (Bureau of Land Management). 2004. “The Foundations for Managing Cultural Resources.” Section 8100 in the BLM Manual. Release no. 8-72. December 3, 2004.
Bennyhoff, J.A. 1994. “A Delta Intrusion to the Bay in the Late Middle Period in Central California.” In Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by James A. Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson, edited by R.E.
Hughes, 7–13. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility no. 52.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Multiple sections. State of California.
Chartkoff, J.L. 1998. “California Culture Area.” In Archaeology of Prehistoric Native America:
An Encyclopedia, edited by G.E. Gibbon and K.M. Ames, 104–112. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data.
Fredrickson, D.A. 1974. “Cultural Diversity in Early Central California: A View from the North Coast Ranges.” Journal of California Anthropology 1(1): 41–53.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
62 May 2020
Fredrickson, D.A. 1994. “Archaeological Taxonomy in Central California Revisited.” In Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by James A.
Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson, edited by R.E. Hughes, 91–103. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility no 52.
Golla, V. 2007. “Linguistic Prehistory.” In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by T.L. Jones and K.A. Klar, 71–82. New York, New York:
Altamira Press.
Golla, Victor. 2011. California Indian Languages. University of California Press, Berkeley. pp 191-194.
Grunsky, F. R. 1989. Pathfinders of the Sacramento Region: They Were There Before Sutter. Sacramento County Historical Society.
Heizer, R. 1978. “Introduction.” In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, 1–6. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, edited by W.C. Sturtevant. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Heizer, Robert F. and A.B. Elsasser. 1980. The Natural World of the California Indians.
University of California Press, Berkeley.
Heizer, R. and K.M. Nissen. 1973. The Human Sources of California Ethnography. Berkeley, California: University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley.
Heizer, Robert F., and M.A. Whipple. 1971. The California Indians. A Source Book. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Hildebrandt, W.R. 2007. “Northwest California: Ancient Lifeways among Forested Mountains, Flowing Rivers, and Rocky Ocean Shores.” In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by T.L. Jones and K.A. Klar, 83–97. Lanham, Maryland:
Altamira Press.
Johnson, J.R., and J.G. Lorenz. 2006. “Genetics, Linguistics, and Prehistoric Migrations: An Analysis of California Indian Mitochondrial DNA Lineages.” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 26:33–64.
Kroeber, A.L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78. New York, New York: Dover Publications Inc.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Cultural Resources Inventory, Extended Phase I, and Phase II Report for the Hunter Subdivision Project, Napa County, California
10839
63 May 2020
Milliken, R., T. Fitzgerald, M.G. Hylkema, R. Groza, T. Origer, D.G. Bieling, A. Leventhal, R.S.
Wiberg, A. Gottsfield, D. Gillette, V. Bellifemine, E. Strother, R. Cartier, and D.A.
Fredrickson. 2007. “Punctuated Culture Change in the San Francisco Bay Area.” In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by T.L. Jones and K.A. Klar, 99–123. Lanham, Maryland: Altamira Press.
Napa County Historical Society. 2019. http://wordpress.napahistory.org/wordpress/programs/ napa-valley-history-tours/st-helena-bike-tour. Accessed March 20, 2019.
Sawyer, Jesse O. 1978. Wappo. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 256–263.
Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Schneider, Tsim D., Lori D. Hager, Samantha S. Schell, Lucian N. Schrader, and John Holson. 2013. Pacific Legacy Incorporated Archaeological Data Recovery at CA-NAP-399, CANAP-406, CA-NAP-413, and CA-NAP-863 for the St. Helena Flood Protection Project, City of St. Helena, Napa County, California. Prepared by Pacific Legacy for the USACE.
On file with the NWIC as report S-043810.
Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO). 2009. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service “Soils.” Accessed via Google Earth Soilweb
William Self Associates (WSA). 2017. Hunter Subdivision Project Revised EIR, IV. Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures, E. Cultural and Paleontological Resources.
Agenda Item #5.7.
APPENDIX A (CONFIDENTIAL)
NWIC Records Search Results
Agenda Item #5.7.
APPENDIX B
SHPO Concurrence Letter for the St Helena Flood
Control Project
Agenda Item #5.7.
JAN-02-2007 15:17
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY
OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
P.O. 60)( 942896
SACRAMENTO, CA 94296.()()01
(916) 653-6624 Fu: (916) 853-9824
[email protected]<s.ca.gov
www.ohp.parks.c:a.gov
December 14, 2006
Cookie Hirn
Cultural Resources Officer
State Water Resources Control Board
Division of Financial Assistanc~
1001 I Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
I RECEIVED
I DEC28Z006
I l,;iVtSION CF
i FINAt-~ ASSISTANCF.
P.02
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Govsmcr
Reply to: EPA060919A
RE: Request for Section 106 consultation, St. Helena CQmprehensive Flood Protection Project, Napa County, SRF NO. C-06·6093-110.
Dear Ms. Him,
Thank you for your Jetter dated 19 September 2006 regarding the above referenced undertaking. Your letter indicates your request for consultation in order to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations at 36 CFA Part 800, Is prompted by the use of an United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) capitalization grant, administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWACB) State Revolving Fund (SRF) program, to assist the City of St. Helena and the Napa County Flood Control District with financing of a comprehensive flood protection project. The SWRCB has been delegated authority to act on behalf of the USEPA in carrying out Section 106 responsibilities under the terms of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement Among the Environmental Protection Agency, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the National Conference of State Hi$faric Preservation Officers Concerning Compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act under EPA's State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund Program (1990). As the project will also Involve a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), you have consulted with the ACOE and they have agreed that the SWRCB will act as lead agency in fulfilling collective responsibilities under Section 106.
It is my understanding tttat the proposed undertaking involves a number of interrelated construction components designed to provide flood protection and restore habitat. These components are illustrated on the submittal labeled Enclosure 1 and include: extensive modification of a floodplain terrace on the southern bank of a section of the Napa River (Terrace 8), relocation of up to 17 mobile homes currently residing on Terrace B, restoration of approximately 600 feet of shoreline in the Terrace B area, construction of an approximately 2000 foot long levee using the soil removed from Terrace B with the excess soils disposed upon the Miller and Hunter Parcels, installation of a ditch system, construction of a detention basin and pumping facility, installation of a 30-inoh storm drain, construction of a new floodwall, and undergrowth clearing for vegetation management referred to as "Element C". It is also my understanding that previously proposed components regarding work on Terrace A and at the nearby wastewater treatment plant are no longer included In the undertaking.
Your letter also describes the Area of Potential Effects (APE), Native American consultation, efforts to identify Historic Properties, requests concurrence on determinations of eligibility for eight identified archaeological sites, and concludes with a request for concurrence on an adverse effect finding for the undertaking. These determinations and findings are supported by the following enclosed documents:
Agenda Item #5.7.
JAN-02-2007 15:17
Cookie Him
November 27, 2006
2of4
Enclosure 1. APE map
EPA060619A
Enclosure 2. Extended Archaeological Survey Report for the St. Helena Flood Protection Project, City of St. Helena, Napa County, California. January 2005.
Enclosure 2a Addendum Archaeological Survey of the Hunter Parcel, St Helena, Napa County, California. May 2006.
Enclosure 3. Archaeological Investigation and Evaluation of Eight Sites in the Napa River Floodplain tor the St. Helena Flood Protection Project, City of St. Hefe'?a, Napa County, California Draft Report. July 2005. {Evaluation Report).
Enclosure 4. DRAFT Memorandum of Agreement Among the California State Water Resources Control Board, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the California State Historic Preservation Office Regarding the Construction of the St. Helena Comprehensive Flood Protection Project (2006 Plan), Napa County, California. {MOA)
Based on my review of the enclosed documents, I agree th~t the APE is adequate to encompass the various components of the proposed undertaking and those efforts to identify historic properties within the APE meet the reasonable and good faith standard. One of the identified archaeological sites, CA-NAP-1007, lies outside the currently defined APE and is therefore removed from further consideration for the present undertaking.
The SW RCB and the ACOE have determined that four of the remaining identified archaeological sites (CA-NAP-413, 843, 1008, and 1009H) lack sufficient data potential and integrity to meet the criteria for National Register eligibility. I concur that CA-NAP-843, 10081 and 1009H are not eligible.
P.03
As discussed in e-mail and telephone conversations, my questions regarding the potential of site CA-NAP-413 to yield important information have been resolved with the agreement that the eligibility of CA-NAP-413 will be deferred, and a final determination made in conjunction with the archaeological treatment plan prepared and implemented as a component of the resolution of adverse effects. A signature block is included at the end of this letter for you to acknowledge your agreement that the eligibility of CA-NAP-413 is yet to be determined, and that I have correctly understood the various components of the proposed undertaking. At your earliest convenience, please submit a copy of the signed letter for inclusion in our files.
The SWRCB and the ACOE have determined that three sites (CA-NAP-399, 406 and 863) are eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion D. I concur that these sites are eligible based on their potential to yield information important to regional prehistory.
As avoidance of impacts has been considered, and it has been determined that the objectives of the proposed undertaking are important and cannot be met without destroying or damaging the identified Historic Properties, I concur with your adverse effect finding.
While I am able to concur on the above determinations and finding based on the submitted documentation, I request the Draft Evaluation Report be finalized in accordance with the Secretary of the Interiors Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation and the State of California guidance on Archaeological Resource Management Reports. The revised version should include photographs of the site areas and excavations, photographs or illustrations of recovered formal artifacts, and a more detailed presentation of the results of the Agenda Item #5.7.
JAN-02-2007 1s:1s
Cookie Him
November 27, 2006
3of 4
EPA060619A
mechanical trenching program with a focus on characterization of the depositional history of the project areas landforms.
While use of the Harris (1989) single context recording system (aka Harris Matrix) was employed during site excavation, it is not fully represented in the reporting, i.e. there is no graphic depiction of a matrix displaying the stratigraphic relationships of the contexts identified at the sites. There also seems to be a lack of integration of the indivldual sites stratigraphy with each other and with the broader geomorphic history of the area. As geomorphology is integral to the design of the proposed flood control features, a geoarchaeological approach to interpretation of site formation processes would seem a natural fit for this project.
Additional consultation on the excavation methods, and other sampling strategies, proposed to resolve the adverse effects of the undertaking is necessary. Formal comments on the MOA, and attached Historic Properties Treatment Plan (HPTP)1 submitted to initiate consultation regarding resolution of adverse effects under Section 800.6 are forthcoming. In the interim it is recommended that the SWRCB initiate revisions to the HPTP by reviewing recent data and research trends in the Napa region, e.g. Carpenter and Mikkelsen 2005, Gilreath and Wohlgemuth 2004, Martin and Meyer 2005, White 2002, and Wohlgemuth 2006.
I look forward to our continued consultation of this undertaking. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact Todd Jaffke at (916) 653-8902, or by e-mail at [email protected].
Sincerely,
~.;(~~y
Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA · State Historic Preservation Officer MWD/tj
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date:.~~~~~~~~-
Cooki e Hirn, Cultural Resources Officer, State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Financial Assistance, Sacramento, CA.
References
Carpenter, Kand P. Mikkelsen
2005 Lithic Production and Craft Specialization in the Middle Period: Data Recovery Excavations at CA·NAP-172. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. Submitted to State Water resources Control Board. Sacramento, and City of Calistoga, California.
Gilreath, A.J. and E. Wohlgemuth
2004 Investigations at Lemmon's Quarry, CA·NAP-117/118. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. Submitted to California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Santa Rosa Office. •
Martin, T. and J. Meyer
P.04
Agenda Item #5.7.
JAN-02-2007 1s:1s
Cookie Him
November 27. 2006
4of4
EPA080619A
2005 Archaeological Data Recovery at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916), State Route 29, Napa, California. Report prepared for Caltrans District 04, Oakland.
White, G
2002 Cultural Diversity and Culture Change in Prehistoric Clear Lake Basin: Final Reporl of the Anderson Flat Project. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis Publication 13.
University of California Davis.
Wohlgemuth, E.
2006 Extended Phase I Investigation at CA-NAP-710/H, -711, and-805, and Phase II Investigations at CA-NAP-710/H and ·712, along State Route 29 near St. Helena, Napa County, California. Draft report prepared for Caltrans District 04, Oakland.
P.05 Agenda Item #5.7.
APPENDIX C
NAHC Sacred Lands File Search and AB 52
Notification Letters
Agenda Item #5.7.
Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
1550 Harbor Blvd., Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
(916) 373-3710
(916) 373-5471 – Fax
[email protected]
Information Below is Required for a Sacred Lands File Search Project: Hunter Subdivision Project (10839-09)
County: Napa
USGS Quadrangle Name: Saint Helena, CA
Township: 8 North Range: 6 West Section(s): 25, 30, 31, 36 Company/Firm/Agency: Dudek
Contact Person: Adam Giacinto, M.A., RPA
Street Address: 853 Lincoln Way, Suite 208
City: Auburn Zip: 95603
Phone: 530.863.4653 Fax: 530.887.1250
Email: [email protected]
Project Description: The project is assessing current cultural resources constraints for a proposed subdevelopment. The City of Saint Helena is the CEQA lead agency. Dudek is requesting a Sacred Lands File search as part of the cultural resources Inventory process. Please provide contacts for appropriate traditionally geographically affiliated Native American representatives and/or organizations from whom this information may be also requested. (See attached Project Location Map)
Agenda Item #5.7.
29 Records Search
Hunter Subdivision Project
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-Minute Series Saint Helena Quadrangle
Township 8N; Range 6W, 5W; Sections 25, 30, 31, 36
Date: 9/14/2018 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j1083901\MAPDOC\Cultural\Records_Search_Map.mxd 0 1,000 2,000Feet
Study Area
1/2 Mile Buffer
1:24,000
0 250 500Meters
Agenda Item #5.7.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Governor
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
Environmental and Cultural Department
1550 Harbor Blvd., Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
(916) 373-3710
October 10, 2018
Adam Giancinto
DUDEK
Sent by Email: [email protected]
Number of Pages: 2
RE: Hunter Subdivision Project, Saint Helena, Napa County Dear Mr. Giacinto:
A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File was completed for the area of potential project effect (APE) referenced above with negative results. Please note that the absence of specific site information in the Sacred Lands File does not indicate the absence of Native American cultural resources in any APE.
I suggest you contact all of those listed, if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. The list should provide a starting place to locate areas of potential adverse impact within the APE. By contacting all those on the list, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the NAHC requests that you follow-up with a telephone call to ensure that the project information has been received.
If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from any of these individuals or groups, please notify me. With your assistance we are able to assure that our lists contain current information. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact via email: [email protected].
Sincerely,
Sharaya Souza
Staff Services Analyst
(916) 573-0168
Agenda Item #5.7.
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contacts List
10/10/2018
Charlie Wright, Chairperson
P.O. Box 1630
Williams 95987
(530) 473-3274 Office
Wintun / Patwin
,CA
(530) 473-3301 Fax
Cortina Rancheria - Kletsel Dehe Band of Wintun Indians Jose Simon III, Chairperson
P.O. Box 1035
Middletown 95461
(707) 987-3670 Office
Pomo ,CA Lake Miwok
(707) 987-9091 Fax
Middletown Rancheria
Scott Gabaldon, Chairperson
2275 Silk Road
Windsor 95492
(707) 494-9159
Wappo
,CA
[email protected]
Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley
Anthony Roberts, Chairperson
P.O. Box 18
Brooks 95606
(530) 796-3400
Wintun (Patwin)
,CA
[email protected]
(530) 796-2143 Fax
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
This list is current as of the date of this document and is based on the information available to the Commission on the date it was produced.
Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code,Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code, or Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native American Tribes for the proposed: Ash, Inc./Bel Air Greens General Hunter Subdivision Project, Saint Helena, Napa County.
Agenda Item #5.7.
City of St. Helena
Planning Department
1480 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
April 23, 2018
Cortina Band of Indians
Charlie Wright, Chairperson
P.O. BOX 1630
Williams, CA 95987
RE: Proposed Hunter Subdivision (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057) File No. PL2010-40
Mr. Wright,
This letter provides notice, pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3.1(d), that the City of St.
Helena is in receipt of a development application subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Assembly Bill 52. The City of St. Helena recognizes the importance of preserving tribal cultural resources and respectfully invites you to consult on and participate in the review process for this project.
Project Location: The project site is located in the northeast portion of the City, at the eastern terminus of Adams Street, north of Starr Avenue and west of the Napa River (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057), see attached vicinity map.
Project Description: The proposed project includes a request to approve a Tentative Map to subdivide the existing 16.9-acre parcel into 51 single-family lots, one 3.4-acre parcel, and a 0.06- acre remainder parcel. The project design also includes onsite water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure to tie into the City’s existing system and the extension of Adams Street and Starr Avenue to connect to the City’s roadway system, in keeping with the City’s 1993 General Plan Circulation Element
Upon receipt of this notice, the Cortina Band of Indians has thirty (30) days to request consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21083.3.1, 21083.3.2, and 21083.3. If the Cortina Band of Indians provides the City of St. Helena with confidential information subject to Public Resources Code §21082.3(c), Government Code §6254.10, or Government Code Section §6254(r), we request that it be explicitly labeled and packaged to prevent inadvertent public disclosure.
If you have any questions and/or would like to request consultation, please contact me at 707- 968-2659 or [email protected].
Agenda Item #5.7.
Page | 2
Noah Housh,
Planning and Community Improvement Director
City of St. Helena
ATTACHMENT: Vicinity Map
Agenda Item #5.7.
City of St. Helena
Planning Department
1480 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
April 23, 2018
The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria
Greg Sarris, Chairperson
6400 Redwood Drive, Ste 300
Rohnert Park 94928
RE: Proposed Hunter Subdivision (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057) File No. PL2010-40
Mr. Sarris,
This letter provides notice, pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3.1(d), that the City of St.
Helena is in receipt of a development application subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Assembly Bill 52. The City of St. Helena recognizes the importance of preserving tribal cultural resources and respectfully invites you to consult on and participate in the review process for this project.
Project Location: The project site is located in the northeast portion of the City, at the eastern terminus of Adams Street, north of Starr Avenue and west of the Napa River (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057), see attached vicinity map.
Project Description: The proposed project includes a request to approve a Tentative Map to subdivide the existing 16.9-acre parcel into 51 single-family lots, one 3.4-acre parcel, and a 0.06- acre remainder parcel. The project design also includes onsite water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure to tie into the City’s existing system and the extension of Adams Street and Starr Avenue to connect to the City’s roadway system, in keeping with the City’s 1993 General Plan Circulation Element
Upon receipt of this notice, the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria has thirty (30) days to request consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21083.3.1, 21083.3.2, and 21083.3. If the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria provides the City of St. Helena with confidential information subject to Public Resources Code §21082.3(c), Government Code §6254.10, or Government Code Section §6254(r), we request that it be explicitly labeled and packaged to prevent inadvertent public disclosure.
If you have any questions and/or would like to request consultation, please contact me at 707- 968-2659 or [email protected].
Agenda Item #5.7.
Page | 2
Noah Housh,
Planning and Community Improvement Director
City of St. Helena
ATTACHMENT: Vicinity Map
Agenda Item #5.7.
29 Project Location
Hunter Subdivision Project
SOURCE: USDA NAIP Imagery (2016); Napa County GIS (2015) Date: 2/13/2018 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j1083901\MAPDOC\PD\Figure1_ProjectOverview.mxd 00 0.25 .5
Miles
St. Helena City
Boundary
Project Site
FIGURE 1
Vallejo Benicia
Fairfield
Fairfield
Dixon
Vacaville
Hercules
Napa
Yountville
St.
Helena
Calistoga
Clearlake
San
Rafael
Novato
Winters Davis
Petaluma
Sonoma
Rohnert
Park
Sebastopol
Windsor
Healdsburg
Woodland
Cloverdale
Santa Rosa
Santa Rosa
Suisun
City
Colusa County
Lake County
Napa County
Sonoma County
Yolo County
Marin County Solano
County
101
116
221
281
128
16 53
121
175
12 113
12 128
29 1
680
505
5 80
Project Site
Agenda Item #5.7.
City of St. Helena
Planning Department
1480 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
April 23, 2018
The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria
Gene Buvelot
6400 Redwood Drive, Ste 300
Rohnert Park 94928
RE: Proposed Hunter Subdivision (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057) File No. PL2010-40
Mr. Buvelot,
This letter provides notice, pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3.1(d), that the City of St.
Helena is in receipt of a development application subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Assembly Bill 52. The City of St. Helena recognizes the importance of preserving tribal cultural resources and respectfully invites you to consult on and participate in the review process for this project.
Project Location: The project site is located in the northeast portion of the City, at the eastern terminus of Adams Street, north of Starr Avenue and west of the Napa River (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057), see attached vicinity map.
Project Description: The proposed project includes a request to approve a Tentative Map to subdivide the existing 16.9-acre parcel into 51 single-family lots, one 3.4-acre parcel, and a 0.06- acre remainder parcel. The project design also includes onsite water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure to tie into the City’s existing system and the extension of Adams Street and Starr Avenue to connect to the City’s roadway system, in keeping with the City’s 1993 General Plan Circulation Element
Upon receipt of this notice, The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria has thirty (30) days to request consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21083.3.1, 21083.3.2, and 21083.3. If The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria provides the City of St. Helena with confidential information subject to Public Resources Code §21082.3(c), Government Code §6254.10, or Government Code Section §6254(r), we request that it be explicitly labeled and packaged to prevent inadvertent public disclosure.
If you have any questions and/or would like to request consultation, please contact me at 707- 968-2659 or [email protected].
Agenda Item #5.7.
Page | 2
Noah Housh,
Planning and Community Improvement Director
City of St. Helena
ATTACHMENT: Vicinity Map
Agenda Item #5.7.
29 Project Location
Hunter Subdivision Project
SOURCE: USDA NAIP Imagery (2016); Napa County GIS (2015) Date: 2/13/2018 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j1083901\MAPDOC\PD\Figure1_ProjectOverview.mxd 00 0.25 .5
Miles
St. Helena City
Boundary
Project Site
FIGURE 1
Vallejo Benicia
Fairfield
Fairfield
Dixon
Vacaville
Hercules
Napa
Yountville
St.
Helena
Calistoga
Clearlake
San
Rafael
Novato
Winters Davis
Petaluma
Sonoma
Rohnert
Park
Sebastopol
Windsor
Healdsburg
Woodland
Cloverdale
Santa Rosa
Santa Rosa
Suisun
City
Colusa County
Lake County
Napa County
Sonoma County
Yolo County
Marin County Solano
County
101
116
221
281
128
16 53
121
175
12 113
12 128
29 1
680
505
5 80
Project Site
Agenda Item #5.7.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 3:38 PM
To: Noah Housh
Subject: Proposed Hunter Subdivision
Dear Noah Housh,
The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, a federally recognized Tribe and sovereign government has received your correspondence requesting information on a project located at Proposed Hunter Subdivision. The Tribe has reviewed the location of the project and we have determined it is not in our traditional ancestral territory, therefore have no comments on this project, at this time. We appreciate the opportunity to review the project proposal. If you have any additional questions regarding this letter please feel free to email my office at [email protected] or call the office at (707) 566-2288.
Sincerely,
Buffy McQuillen
Tribal Heritage Preservation Officer (THPO)
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) Office: 707.566.2288; ext. 137
Cell: 707.318.0485
FAX: 707.566.2291
Antonette Tomic
THPO Administrative Assistant
Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria
6400 Redwood Drive, Suite 300
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
Office: 707.566.2288, ext. 143
Fax: 707.566.2291
[email protected]
please consider our environment before printing this email.
Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria and Tribal TANF of Sonoma & Marin - Proprietary and Confidential CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This transmittal is a confidential communication or may otherwise be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this transmittal is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify this office at 707-566-2288, and immediately delete this message and all its attachments, if any. Thank you Agenda Item #5.7.
City of St. Helena
Planning Department
1480 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
April 23, 2018
Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians
Jose Simon III, Chairperson
P.O. Box 1035
Middletown, CA 95461
RE: Proposed Hunter Subdivision (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057) File No. PL2010-40
Mr. Simon,
This letter provides notice, pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3.1(d), that the City of St.
Helena is in receipt of a development application subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Assembly Bill 52. The City of St. Helena recognizes the importance of preserving tribal cultural resources and respectfully invites you to consult on and participate in the review process for this project.
Project Location: The project site is located in the northeast portion of the City, at the eastern terminus of Adams Street, north of Starr Avenue and west of the Napa River (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057), see attached vicinity map.
Project Description: The proposed project includes a request to approve a Tentative Map to subdivide the existing 16.9-acre parcel into 51 single-family lots, one 3.4-acre parcel, and a 0.06- acre remainder parcel. The project design also includes onsite water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure to tie into the City’s existing system and the extension of Adams Street and Starr Avenue to connect to the City’s roadway system, in keeping with the City’s 1993 General Plan Circulation Element
Upon receipt of this notice, the Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians has thirty (30) days to request consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21083.3.1, 21083.3.2, and 21083.3. If the Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians provides the City of St. Helena with confidential information subject to Public Resources Code §21082.3(c), Government Code §6254.10, or Government Code Section §6254(r), we request that it be explicitly labeled and packaged to prevent inadvertent public disclosure.
If you have any questions and/or would like to request consultation, please contact me at 707- 968-2659 or [email protected].
Agenda Item #5.7.
Page | 2
Noah Housh,
Planning and Community Improvement Director
City of St. Helena
ATTACHMENT: Vicinity Map
Agenda Item #5.7.
29 Project Location
Hunter Subdivision Project
SOURCE: USDA NAIP Imagery (2016); Napa County GIS (2015) Date: 2/13/2018 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j1083901\MAPDOC\PD\Figure1_ProjectOverview.mxd 00 0.25 .5
Miles
St. Helena City
Boundary
Project Site
FIGURE 1
Vallejo Benicia
Fairfield
Fairfield
Dixon
Vacaville
Hercules
Napa
Yountville
St.
Helena
Calistoga
Clearlake
San
Rafael
Novato
Winters Davis
Petaluma
Sonoma
Rohnert
Park
Sebastopol
Windsor
Healdsburg
Woodland
Cloverdale
Santa Rosa
Santa Rosa
Suisun
City
Colusa County
Lake County
Napa County
Sonoma County
Yolo County
Marin County Solano
County
101
116
221
281
128
16 53
121
175
12 113
12 128
29 1
680
505
5 80
Project Site
Agenda Item #5.7.
City of St. Helena
Planning Department
1480 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
April 23, 2018
Mishewal Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley
Vincent Salsedo
P.O. BOX 1086
Santa Rosa, CA 95402
RE: Proposed Hunter Subdivision (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057) File No. PL2010-40
Mr. Salsedo,
This letter provides notice, pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3.1(d), that the City of St.
Helena is in receipt of a development application subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Assembly Bill 52. The City of St. Helena recognizes the importance of preserving tribal cultural resources and respectfully invites you to consult on and participate in the review process for this project.
Project Location: The project site is located in the northeast portion of the City, at the eastern terminus of Adams Street, north of Starr Avenue and west of the Napa River (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057), see attached vicinity map.
Project Description: The proposed project includes a request to approve a Tentative Map to subdivide the existing 16.9-acre parcel into 51 single-family lots, one 3.4-acre parcel, and a 0.06- acre remainder parcel. The project design also includes onsite water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure to tie into the City’s existing system and the extension of Adams Street and Starr Avenue to connect to the City’s roadway system, in keeping with the City’s 1993 General Plan Circulation Element
Upon receipt of this notice, the Mishewal Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley has thirty (30) days to request consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21083.3.1, 21083.3.2, and 21083.3.
If the Mishewal Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley provides the City of St. Helena with confidential information subject to Public Resources Code §21082.3(c), Government Code §6254.10, or Government Code Section §6254(r), we request that it be explicitly labeled and packaged to prevent inadvertent public disclosure.
If you have any questions and/or would like to request consultation, please contact me at 707- 968-2659 or [email protected].
Agenda Item #5.7.
Page | 2
Noah Housh,
Planning and Community Improvement Director
City of St. Helena
ATTACHMENT: Vicinity Map
Agenda Item #5.7.
29 Project Location
Hunter Subdivision Project
SOURCE: USDA NAIP Imagery (2016); Napa County GIS (2015) Date: 2/13/2018 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j1083901\MAPDOC\PD\Figure1_ProjectOverview.mxd 00 0.25 .5
Miles
St. Helena City
Boundary
Project Site
FIGURE 1
Vallejo Benicia
Fairfield
Fairfield
Dixon
Vacaville
Hercules
Napa
Yountville
St.
Helena
Calistoga
Clearlake
San
Rafael
Novato
Winters Davis
Petaluma
Sonoma
Rohnert
Park
Sebastopol
Windsor
Healdsburg
Woodland
Cloverdale
Santa Rosa
Santa Rosa
Suisun
City
Colusa County
Lake County
Napa County
Sonoma County
Yolo County
Marin County Solano
County
101
116
221
281
128
16 53
121
175
12 113
12 128
29 1
680
505
5 80
Project Site
Agenda Item #5.7.
City of St. Helena
Planning Department
1480 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
April 23, 2018
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
Leland Kinter, Chairperson
P.O. BOX 18
Brook, CA 95606
RE: Proposed Hunter Subdivision (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057) File No. PL2010-40
Mr. Kinter,
This letter provides notice, pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3.1(d), that the City of St.
Helena is in receipt of a development application subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Assembly Bill 52. The City of St. Helena recognizes the importance of preserving tribal cultural resources and respectfully invites you to consult on and participate in the review process for this project.
Project Location: The project site is located in the northeast portion of the City, at the eastern terminus of Adams Street, north of Starr Avenue and west of the Napa River (Assessor’s Parcel 009-030-057), see attached vicinity map.
Project Description: The proposed project includes a request to approve a Tentative Map to subdivide the existing 16.9-acre parcel into 51 single-family lots, one 3.4-acre parcel, and a 0.06- acre remainder parcel. The project design also includes onsite water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure to tie into the City’s existing system and the extension of Adams Street and Starr Avenue to connect to the City’s roadway system, in keeping with the City’s 1993 General Plan Circulation Element
Upon receipt of this notice, the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation has thirty (30) days to request consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21083.3.1, 21083.3.2, and 21083.3. If the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation provides the City of St. Helena with confidential information subject to Public Resources Code §21082.3(c), Government Code §6254.10, or Government Code Section §6254(r), we request that it be explicitly labeled and packaged to prevent inadvertent public disclosure.
If you have any questions and/or would like to request consultation, please contact me at 707- 968-2659 or [email protected].
Agenda Item #5.7.
Page | 2
Noah Housh,
Planning and Community Improvement Director
City of St. Helena
ATTACHMENT: Vicinity Map
Agenda Item #5.7.
29 Project Location
Hunter Subdivision Project
SOURCE: USDA NAIP Imagery (2016); Napa County GIS (2015) Date: 2/13/2018 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j1083901\MAPDOC\PD\Figure1_ProjectOverview.mxd 00 0.25 .5
Miles
St. Helena City
Boundary
Project Site
FIGURE 1
Vallejo Benicia
Fairfield
Fairfield
Dixon
Vacaville
Hercules
Napa
Yountville
St.
Helena
Calistoga
Clearlake
San
Rafael
Novato
Winters Davis
Petaluma
Sonoma
Rohnert
Park
Sebastopol
Windsor
Healdsburg
Woodland
Cloverdale
Santa Rosa
Santa Rosa
Suisun
City
Colusa County
Lake County
Napa County
Sonoma County
Yolo County
Marin County Solano
County
101
116
221
281
128
16 53
121
175
12 113
12 128
29 1
680
505
5 80
Project Site
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
APPENDIX D
Ground Penetrating Radar Results
Agenda Item #5.7.
GRID01
10 x 10 m
21 X lines, 21 Y lines
0.5m spacing
Starting point: SW corner
Transects progress in a forward/reverse direction (alternating direction) GRID02
7.5 x 10 m
16 X lines, 21 Y lines
0.5m spacing
Starting point: SW corner
Transects progress in a forward/reverse direction (alternating direction)
LINESET
# Feet Meters
L-1 303.7639696 92.5827399
L-2 135.4376145 41.27937047
L-3 136.0253088 41.45849095
L-4 304.739171 92.87996678
L-5 305.3310671 93.06036791
L-6 308.6705208 94.07818372
L7 307.208955 93.63272021
L-8 310.0050917 94.48494109
L-9 307.2382551 93.64165044
L-10 313.3336194 95.49942682
L-11 311.6784213 94.99494706
L-12 314.0050929 95.70408196
L-13 315.0704754 96.0287947
L-14 136.9952042 41.75410064
L-15 176.8782512 53.90986016
L-16 316.4090042 96.43675837
L-17 318.9322955 97.20582002
L-18 319.5485919 97.393658
L-19 321.0521732 97.85192722
Agenda Item #5.7.
L-20 401.1411849 122.2618668
L-21 403.4247082 122.9578507
L-22 404.9017897 123.4080432
L-23 122.7124776 37.40093801
L-24 251.2389221 76.57388665
L-25 406.1657642 123.7932838
L-26 406.5474007 123.9096009
Filtering
Radar files to regain using AGC gain
Regain to boxcar using 1x1
Boxcar to background filter using auto setting
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
February 22, 2011
File: 1610.01altr.doc
Willowglen HomesV 900 College Avenue
Santa Rosa, California 95401
Attention: Mr. Ben Van Zutphen
Re: Updated'Geotechn_icalEngineering Report
7 EvaluationofShallowSoilConditionsan_d V Recommendations for Subgrade Preparation and Grading Specifications FutureResidential Development
Landsof Hunter , AdamsStreet
’ St."Helena, California
2 introduction
This updated report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation of the shallow soil conditions underlying the future Adams Street (Hunter Parcel) residential development, located on Adams Street in St. Helena, California (Site LocationMap, Figure 1). In 2009 our firm conducted an investigation of the shallow soil conditions at the project site, and published a report dated August 13, 2009 summarizing the field and laboratory data collected from ten exploratory borings drilled during our earlier study in 2009, and presenting our geotechnical recommendations for site preparation and grading at the project site. Subsequent to our earlier study and report, we understand that approximately 27,000 cubic yards of engineered fill has been placed on the Hunter parcel (during summer 2010) as a part of the City of St. Helena Flood Protection Project. The purpose of our services at this time is to provide an updated summary of the shallow soil conditions underlying the project site in order that we canprovide revised recommendations for proper subgrade preparation beneath future development areas.
This updated report re-summarizes the informationincluded in the earlier August 13, 2009 report, and includes a discussion of the additional 27,000 cubic yards of engineered fill placed on the Hunter Parcel as a part of the City of St. Helena Flood Protection Project during the summer of 2010.
In accordance with our agreement dated July 28, 2009, the scope of our services in 2009 included the excavation of ten shallow exploratory borings, laboratory testing of selected soil samples, and the preparation of our report dated August 13, 2009 which summarized our field observations and test results, and presented our geotechnical conclusions and recommendations with respect to future grading at the site. in order to update our report to reflect the current shallowsoil conditionssubsequent to the placement of engineered fillat the situ relative compaction of the recently placed engineered ?ll. Finally,we have reviewed field density testing conducted by Kleinfelder between June 10 and October 8, 2010 during, the placement of the fillon the Hunter Parcel. ’ . 1333 N. McDowell Boulevard, Suite C, Petaluma, California 94954 Phone 707 765-6140 Fax 707 765-6222 Agenda Item #5.7.
ENGINEERING GROUP l
Willowglen Homes
-
r
l
M
T February 22,2011
Page2
’
.
it is noted"thatwhen more detailed planning is availablefor the-proposed residential development, design-level geotechnical investigations (including much deeper borings and additional soil sampling) shouldbe undertaken for the design, permitting, and construction of the project.
Based on our understanding, the project site ‘encompasses an area of roughlylten to fifteen ' acresof nearly level to gently sloping terrain. The site has been used untilrecently as a vineyard. A former.pond, measuring roughly one hundred and thirty feet in diameter, was iocated near the"northeasternportion of the parcel, as approximately shown. on the Site Plan, Figure ~2.AThe pond has been backfilled with undocumented, uncompacted fill. Some excavations (exploratory trenches) were made during 2009 (by others) at various locationson the site, extending to a depth of up to roughly four feet, to investigate archeological impacts at the site.‘ It is thought that these exploratory trenches are also backfilled with undocumented, uncompacted fill. - We understand that excess clean soil generated during the construction of the adjacent St.
Helena Flood Protection Project was placed as an engineered, compacted ?ll over a significant portion of the Hunter parcel during the summer of 2010. The planned grading on the Hunter parcel is shown on a grading plan prepared by Mead & Hunt Engineers and dated January 2009.with a latest revision of June 4, 2010. We understand that fills of up to three to fourfeet in thickness were placed relative to the former site grades. in general, the new fill placed during 2010 is thicker along the eastern portion of the Hunter Parcel, and thinner along the western portion of the site. Based on our understanding that roughly 27,000 cubic yards of fillwas placed on the HunterParcel during 2010, the average depth of fillover the graded portion of the site would be approximately two feet.
' We understand that at somefuture date, the Hunter parcel may be developed as a residential subdivision, including one, two, or three story residential structures, asphalt paved streets and concrete driveways, underground utilities, and associated improvements. No specific development plans are availableat this time, however.
Subsurface Exploration and Laboratory Testing
Ten shallow exploratory borings were drilled at the site on July 21, 2009 using four inch diameter manual bucket auger‘ drillingequipment. The borings were drilled to depths ranging between three and nine feet beneath the existing ground surface at that time. The approximate locations of the exploratory borings are shown on the attached Site Plan, Figure 2. As the borings were drilled, relatively undisturbed samples of the various soil layers encountered were obtained using a 2.5 inch diameter sampler driven into the bottom of the boring using a 35 were prepared by our representative in the field based on cuttings emerging from the borings and observation of the collected samples. Occasional editing of the field logs was based on a closer examination of the samples in our laboratory and on the results of laboratory tests conducted on some of the samples. The logs of the borings, along with a soil classi?cation chart, are presented in Figures A-1through A-‘ll.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Willowglen Homes"
»
_
* February 22, 2011
The collected samples were subjected to laboratory testing, including unconfined compressive strength, moisture content, and dry density determinations on most of the collected samples. A bulk sample representative of the near surface soil (between a depth of roughly one to three feet below the former existing grade) was collected and usedto obtain a laboratory compaction curve, based on ASTM D1557. The results of the laboratory compaction curve are shown on the attached Figure A~12.
Shallow Soil Conditions
Based "on the ten exploratory borings drilled during our 2009 study.‘ and subsequent observations at the site, the shallow soil pro?le beneath the Hunter Parcel currentlyconsistsof a layer of recent, compacted fillhaving a thickness of typicallyone to four feet (average depth two feet), underlain by a thin layer of older fill(scarified and recompacted native soil) composed of stiff, relatively dry, light brown clayey silt with somesand extending to a depth of between 6 inches and 18 inches beneath the bottom of the new fill layer. Beneath the stiff light brown clayey silt, soft to medium stiff dark brown, moist, clayey silt was encountered, extending typically to a depth of four to seven feet beneath the current ground surface (three feet below the former ground surface). The medium stiff dark brown clayey silt typically grades denser, lighter in color, and with a lower moisture content below a depth of four to seven feet relative to the existing site grade (three feet below the bottom of the new filllayer). The exception to this typical soil profile is found in the former pond area (exploratory boring 4). in the former pond area, soft to medium stiff mottled light brown to dark brown clayey silt (fill),was encountered, extending to a depth of approximately ten feet beneath the existing ground surface. Beneath the fill in boring 4, stiff light gray brown clayey silt with sand (undisturbed native soil) was encountered, extending to the maximum depth drilled (thirteen feet relative to the current site grades). No groundwater was encountered in-any of the borings at the time of drilling.
However, it is anticipated that the shallow groundwater level beneath the site will vary seasonally, and may be higher during certain times of the year.
Based on our laboratory testing, the soft to mediumstiff dark brown clayey silt found at a depth of between roughly six inches and 36 inches beneath the‘ bottomof the recent, compacted fill layer is unsuitable toleave in place beneath new engineered fillsthat at some time in the future will support a residential development. The dark brown clayey silt layer (between 0.5 and 3 feet) was found to typicallyhave a moisture content of five to ten percent or more over optimum (as defined by the laboratory compaction curve, ASTMD1557), and was found to have an insitudry density of only approximately eighty percent of the laboratory maximum density (ASTM D1557). Engineered fills are typically compacted‘ to at least 90 percent of the laboratory maximumdensity.
Based on our understanding of the grading operation undertaken during summer 2010 to place to existing ground surface prior to the placement andcompaction of new fill.’Therefore, the three foot thick layer of soft, weak natural soil remains beneath the recently placed and compacted filllayer.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Willowglen Homes
A February22, 2011
Conclusions and Recommendations
in our opinion, based on -theten exploratory borings drilled as a part of our study, the site is underlain by a shallow layer of soft to medium stiff dark brown clayey silt that typicallyextends to a minimum depth of three feet beneath the bottom of the recentlyplaced fill layer. In our opinion, this layer of soft to medium stiff clayey silt must be overexcavated, moisture conditioned to permit proper compaction, and then be replaced as compacted, engineered fill priorto the construction of new homes and other improvements ontthe Hunter parcel. it is not acceptable to place compacted, engineered fill(designed to support future development)» on the Hunter Parcel without first overexcavating and recompacting the existing weak surface layer, due to the anticipated settlement of the weak soil layer as a result of the loads imposed by the new fill, as well as future building loads. Settlement of the weak soil layer, if left in place beneath the recently placed compacted fill, could lead to damage to new residential structures, streets, utilities, and concrete flatwork supported over the weak soil layer.
Specifically, prior to the development of the project site, we recommend that all of the recently _ placed (2010) fill,and the upper 2.5 feet of soil (measured from the bottom of the new filllayer) should be overexcavated and the overexcavatedsoil aerated or moisture conditioned, as necessary, to permit proper compaction. Based on an average thickness of the new filllayer of two feet, the average depth of the required overexcavationand recompaction of the site is 4.5 feet. The bottom of the excavated area-should then be scarified to a minimum depth of eight inches, moisture conditioned to permit proper compaction, and then be recompacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent (based on ASTM D1557) to provide a smooth, uniform, and unyielding surface. Fill can then be placed in thin.lifts (uncompacted thickness eight inches orless), moisture conditioned to permit proper compaction, and compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent. Soil used as fill should be clean and free of organic or toxic contamination, and should not have rock pieces larger than six inches in diameter or more than 15 percent by weight of rock pieces larger than 2.5 inches in diameter. in the former pond area,located roughly as shown on the attached Site Plan, Figure 2, the required depth of overexcavation willbe roughly ten feet relative to the current site grades. The bottom of the overexcavated area should be scari?ed to a depth of eight inches, moisture conditionedto permit proper compaction, and compacted to a minimumdegree of compaction of 90 percent. Fillcan then be placed as described above.
It is possible that there may be areas on the site where weak soil extends to a depth greater than seven feet below the existing grade (or greater than three feet below the bottom of the recent filllayer). In‘general, aside from the former pond area, we.believe that an overexcavation depth of 2.5 feet (measured from the bottom of the new filllayer) willbe sufficient. However, if ' Agenda Item #5.7.
I V! I‘ ENGINEERING GROUP
WillowglenHomes ,
A
r
A
A 9 February22,2011
Page5
Supplemental Services
ConstructionObservation‘ «StTesting
During constructioln,» including any gradingoperation, ourrepresen'tative must be present intermittently-to verify that the soil conditions are as anticipated and to observe and test the geotechnicalportions of the work, including overexcavation of existing weak surface soil, scarification and recompaction at the bottom of_the overexcavatedareas, and placementand compaction of fills.
A Design Level» Geotechnical.investigationA When more detailed. plans areavailable for the proposedresidential development, amuch more detailed geoteohnical study should beiundertaken. This study would includemuch deeper borings, additional soil sampling, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses, including an evaluation of liquefaction potential and settlement potential based on an evaluation of the deeper soil conditions beneath the site.
If you have any questions about ourfindings and conclusions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitateto call us -atyour convenience.
Yours very truly,
MILLERPACIFlCENGlNEERlNG GROUP
Daniel S. Caldwell
Geotechnical Engineer No. 2006
(Expires 9/30/11)
Attachments: 1-2, AppendixA: A-1-A-12
Agenda Item #5.7.
SITE LOCATION
SCALE
1000 2000
1000METERS SW 220 SITE LOCATIONMAP
”°"°°»C*‘ 949" Lands of Hunter“‘5’3”'3“‘“ Adams Street A CALIFORNIAconporwnon, 9 2009, ALLRIGHTSRESERVED F 415 I 3824450 Saint Helena, California FILE:095034 5LM,o\vg www.milIcrpac.com Project No. 09-5084 Date: 8/11/09 FIGURE Agenda Item #5.7.
com
oLun<+
Agenda Item #5.7.
MAJOR DIVISIONS S
CLEAN GRAVEL
I )3'33 u _ _ _ Eii E
Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures
clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures
GRAVEL
with ?nes
Well-graded sands or graveily sands, littleor no ?nes
CLEAN SAND
' Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, littleor no?nes COARSE GRAINED SOILS over 50% sand and gravel
SAND A g‘.5
1‘E
‘ Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures
with ?nes
' " " C, d d d _xt 3 $3;
ayey sa 3 sa ay u e
' _. .9, n , n - ml T
.,f'.
1 Inorganic slits and very ?ne sands.rock?our, siltyor clayey line sends» or clayey silts V
’ withslight plasticity lS.”'-.rCLPSY inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity. gravely clays, sandy clays, siltyclays, iquid limit<50 /o A [San days | aOrganic silts and organic silt-clays of low plasticity Inorganic silts.micaceous or dlatomaceousfine sands orslits.elastic slits
SILTANDCLAY
“quid IImIt)50% /I‘ inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays FINE GRAINEDSOILS over 50% silt and clay
Organic clays of medium to high plasticity
HIGHLYORGANICSOILS Peat, muck.and other highlyorganic soils ‘I ROCK ", - 2: Undifferentiatedas to type or composition ’.v..-, #1.‘, M KEYTO BOINGANDTEST PIT SYMBOLS
CLASSIFICATIONTESTS STRENGTH TESTS
PI PLASTICITYINDEX TV FIELDTORVANE (UNDRAINEDSHEAR)
LL LIQUIDLIMIT UC LABORATORYUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSION
SA SIEVEANALYSIS TXCU CONSOLIDATEDUNDRAINEDTRIAXIAL
HYDROMETERANALYSIS TXUU UNCONSOLIDATEDUNDRAINEDTRIAXIAL PERCENTPASSING NO.200 SIEVE UC.CU.UU = 1/2 Deviator Stress P4 PERCENT PASSING NO.4 SIEVE
SAMPLERDRIVINGRESISTANCE
E Modi?edCaliiomiaand Standard Penetration Test samplers are driven 18 inches with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches per I Mopipigp cAi_ii=oRNiA @HANDSAMPLER blow. Blowsfor the initial6~inchdrive seat the sampler. Blows forthe ?nal 12-inch drive are recorded onto the logs. Sampler V
refusal is de?ned as 50 blows during a 6-inch drive. Examples of STANDARDPENETRATIONTEST MROCKCORE blow records are as follows:
25 sampler driven 12 inches with 25 blows a?e . .. _. h d . THIN-WALLEDI FIXEDPISTON X DISTURBEDOR
[mum 6 me We
BULKSAMPLE
Test boringand test pit logsare an interpretationotoonditionsencountered at the excavationlocationduring the time of exploration. Subsurface rock. 50/3" sampler driven3 inches with50 blows during soilor_water conditionsmayvaryindifferent locations within projectsite initial5.inchdriveOr baginning of?nal 12_inch and withthe passage of time. Boundaries between differing soil or rock drive descriptions are approximate and may indicatea gradualtransition. ,»,_-'504RedwoodBIvd.
I i".
slmm SOIL CLASSIFICATION I _______."°"‘°-CA 949" Lands of Hunter m-- Adams Street aw’=°=°- A—1 ‘I,
' ~ ACALlFORNlACORPORA‘?ON.02006,ALl. RIGHTSaeseaveo ?x Saint Helena.Canfomia i=ii.e:oMouai..uv.g www.miltexpac.com Pro'ecl No. 09-5084 Date: 8/11/09 FIGURE Agenda Item #5.7.
n: . § § ?g 5 BORING‘!
E E
{:3“Q E ,3. &‘ EQUIPMENT: 4" DiameterManual BucketAuger w on 0 at E, g E Ii’ 3E E E5 I: 3
35 5 g E g E:3 § : DATE: 7/21/09
I I 0 o: o
9 z >-9 ELEVATION: ~213.D—Feet*
9- I— z 5. ,4 O 0 or "J
‘ O O D <0 C0 5 0 D 3 *REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Elevation
CLAYEY SILT (ML)
Lightbrown,stiff,dry, Iow plasticity [FILL]
CLAYEY SILT (ML-CL)
Dark brown, medium stiff, moist, low plasticit
[ALLUVIUM]
CLAYEYSILT(ML-CL)
Lightgray brown, stiff, moist.low plasticit
[ALLUVIUM]
Bottom of boring at 6 feet, dry at time of drilling
— E
SYMBOL(3) NOTES: (1) METRIC EQUIVALENTSTRENGTH(kPa) = 0.0479x STRENGTH(psf) (2) METRICEQUIVALENTDRYUNITWEIGHTkNIm3=0.1571 x DRY UNITWEIGHT(pcf) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY BORINGLOG ~ ‘iif“';i'S04RedwuodB1vd.
‘ Novllo, CA94947 A CALIFORNIACORPORATION,O 2008.ALLRIGHTSRESERVED FILE:09-5O6¢.dw9 Lands of Hunter '3',,,',;,,—j “I” 382"“ Adams Street m? A-2
M5’ 3324"” Saint Helena, California
www.milIcrpac.com Project No. 095034 Date: 3/1 1/09 FIGURE Agenda Item #5.7.
Ir
. § g as: 5 BORING 2
E E $ ‘'3 E ,3‘ Q E EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter Manual BucketAuger co co 8 I E L”
E *5 31 E E3 2
'5 o. as5 I:
“L
0 Lu 3 33 53 g E.’g g 5‘: E 5 DATE: 7/21/09
1 :c o n: o
992 >-E 2 .. 2 ELEVATION: ~213.5-Feet‘
I— I- z I. _. O O at 0.) 8
4; _ O O D <0 I30 5 0 D 3 E-B
‘-0 ‘REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Eievatxon
CLAYEY SILT (ML)
Lightbrown,stiff, dry, low plasticity[FILL]
CLAYEYSILT(ML-CL)
Dark brown,-medium stiff.moist, low plasticit
[ALLUVIUM]
CLAYEYSILT (ML-CL)
Lightgray brown, stiff, moist, low plasticit
[ALLUVIUM]
Bottom of boring at 4 feet, dry at time of drilling
.\\\V %-
NOTES: (1) METRICEQUIVALENTSTRENGTH(kPa) = 0.0479 x STRENGTH(psf) (2) METRICEQUIVALENTDRYUNITWEIGHTkNIm3=0.1571 x DRYUNITWEIGHT (pd) (3)GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY " H" 504Redwood‘Blvd. Novato.CA 94947 'r:415 / 382-3444 17:05 I 382-3450 BORING LOG C Lands of Hunter m--- Adams Street W...-9§— A-3 FIGURE Saint Helena, California
Project No. 09-5084 Date: 8/11/09
A CALIFORNIAcomaoamou. o zooa,ALLnus:-rrsRESERVED FILE:09-50B4.dwg ‘ www.millerpac.com
Agenda Item #5.7.
m . I; E ‘E5 5 BORING3
0 D 3 ‘:3 E A Q EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter ManualBucket Auger "‘ I" 0
°' tr $ If A $ f? LIJ §
A IJJ u.| |‘_’
’_ 3 <3, " " 3 0 $ %Z 2 i- w -' . E 65 § E 3
I. It-I_J3 g E 8 DATE. 7/21/09
5 E 3E 9 35 EE EEELEVATION: ~2‘I4.0-Feet*
0 O :2 0) to E 0 :1 E co m *REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Elevation
CLAYEY SILT WITH SAND (ML)
Lightbrown, stiff, dry, Iowplasticity[FILL]
.——.-. CLAYEYSILT(ML-CL)
Dark brown.medium stiff,moist, low plasticit
[ALLUVIUM]
CLAYEYSILT(ML-CL)
Light gray brown, stiff, moist, low plasticit
[ALLUVIUM]
Minor3/4" subangular pebbles/gravelat 6'
Bottom
1 of boring at 7 feet, dry at time of driliing
NOTES: (1) METRICEQUIVALENTSTRENGTH (kPa) = 0.0479 x STRENGTH (psf) (2) METRICEQUIVALENTDRY UNITWEIGHTkNlm3=0.1571 x DRYUNITWEIGHT(put) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY ' BORINGLOG Lands of Hunter
-.;e_,,,,—- Adams Street mm-Ji A-4
Saint Helena, California
Project No. 09-5084 Date: 8/11/09 FIGURE “Iii II/Iiiii xiii iiazi. * .
_ I ‘I “‘
504RedwoodBlvd. Suite220
" i
{ Novato,CA94947
‘ T2415/ 382-3444 F9115/ 382-3450 ACALIFORNIACORPORATION,9 2006,ALLRIGHTSRESERVED FILE:09-I5OM.dwu www.mi1Icrpac.com Agenda Item #5.7.
BORING4
EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter Manual Bucket Auger
(3)
DATE: 7/21/O9
ELEVATION: ~213.0-Feet‘
‘REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Elevation
CLAYEY SILT (ML)
Lightbrown,mediumstiff.dry, lowplasticity[FILL]
CLAYEYSILT (MLaCL)
Mottled dark brown/light brown, soft to mediu
DTHER TEST DATA OTHERTEST DATA UNDRAINEDSHEAR STRENGTHpsi‘(1) BLOWS PER FOOT MOISTURE CONTENT (°/.) DRY UNIT WEIGHT pcf (2) SAMPLE =
swam \
stiff, moist, low to moderate plasticity [FILL]
CLAYEYSILTWITHSAND(ML)
Brown to light gray brown, stiff, moist, Io
plasticity[ALLUVIUM]
Bottomof boring at 9 feet, dry at time of drilling
NOTES: (1) METRIC EQUIVALENTSTRENGTH(I(Pa) = 0.0479 X STRENGTH(psf) (2) METRIC EQUIVALENTDRYUNITWEIGHTkN/m3=0.1571 x DRYUNITWEIGHT(pcf) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY BORING LOG Lands of Hunter r..,—n—— Adams Street ? A—5
Saint Helena, California
Project No. 09-5034 Date: 3/11/09 FIGURE
" 504Redwood Him. I: Suite 22a : Navato,CA94947
_ T2415/ 382-3444
I F1415 352-3450
A CALIFORNIACORPORATION,132008, ALLRIGHTS RESERVED FILE:09-s034.dv.g www.rniIIcrpac.mm Agenda Item #5.7.
. cg
‘ § 5 5 5 5 BORING5
E E 5 “Q 8 ,3.
. Q EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter ManualBucketAuger
0 cc E, V
A $ 3 u: E as g ,_ ,_E Q
I‘ “ Z 0 Z 2 I-- m 4
'5 E § § g EE D I E 3 DATE: 7/21/09
3: I _on: o
9 z >-9 2 2 ELEVATION: ~2’I3.0-Feet’
I-— I— Z i—A _l 0 0 ccI-U <: >— _ O 0 3 03 CD 5 0 0 3 ‘-0 V3 *REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Elevation
CLAYEY SILT WITH SAND (ML)
Light brown, mediumstiff, dry to moist, lo
plasticity [FILL]
CLAYEYSILT (ML-CL)
’ Dark brown.medium stiff,moist, low to moderate
plasticity [ALLUVIUM]
CLAYEY SILT WITHSAND (ML)
Lightgray brownto light brown.stiff, moist, lo
plasticity[ALLUVIUM]
Bottomof boring at 6 feet, dry at time of drilling
NOTES: (1%METRICEQUIVALENTSTRENGTH(kF’a)
= 0.0479 X STRENGTH(psi) (2 METRICEQUIVALENTDRYUNITWEIGHTkN/m3=0.1571 x DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY BORING LOG Lands of Hunter 35-: Adams Street €.a.rJ'§C— A-6 Saint Helena, California
' Project No. 09-5084 Dale: 8/11/09 FIGURE 504RedwoodBlvd. Suite220 Novaxo,CA 94947 T2415/ 3826444 F:4l5 / 382-3450 www.mill.cn7ac.com A CALIFORNIACORPORATION, O 2006, ALLRIGHTS RESERVED FILE:O9~5064.dm Agenda Item #5.7.
‘BORING6
EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter Manual Bucket Auger
DEPTH
DATE: 7/21/09
ELEVATION: -214.5-Feet‘
‘REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Elevation
CLAYEYSILT (ML)
Lightbrown, mediumstiff, dry, lowplasticitywith
some cobbles [FILL]
OTHER TEST DATA OTHER TEST DATA UNDRAINEDSHEAR STRENGTH psf (1) BLOWS PER FOOT MOISTURE CONTENT (°/0) DRY UNIT WEIGHT pcf (2) o meters é SYMBOL feet (3)
CLAYEYSILT (ML-CL)
Darkbrown, mediumstiff, moist, low plasticity
. with cobbles [ALLUV|UM]‘
Bottomof boring at 3.5 feet, refusal on cobble, dry at
time of drilling
NOTES: (1) METRIC EQUIVALENTSTRENGTH (kPa) = 0.0479 x STRENGTH(psf) (2) METRIC EQUIVALENTDRY UNITWEIGHTI-cNIm3=0.1571 x DRYUNITWEIGHT(pcf) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY A .__.~___.__ Lands of Hunter
—-———— Adams Street
——-—— A_7
AuLIFoRNIAcoRPoRATIoN,c2ooa,ALLRI<3HTsREsERv£D
I Samt HeIena, C3IIf0rnIa
FILE:0&5ou4.uwg www.millcrpac.com Project No. 09-5084 Date: 3/11/09 FIGURE Agenda Item #5.7.
BORING7
EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter ManualBucketAuger
D 2 7/21/09
ELEVATION: ~21 5.0-Feet‘
*REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Elevation
CLAYEY SILT (ML)
Lightbrown, mediumvstiff,dry, low plasticit
[FILL]
OTHER TEST DATA TEST DATA UNDRAlNEDSHEAR STRENGTH psf(1) BLOWS PER FOOT MOlSTURE CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT pcf (2) ‘.3metersDEPTH - 0 feet SAMPLEYBOL(3)-
CLAYEY SILT (ML-CL)
Dark brown, medium stiff, moist, low to moderate
plasticity, with cobbles [ALLUVIUM]
Bottom of boring at 3 feet. refusal on cobble, dry at
time of drilling
NOTES: (1) METRICEQUIVALENTSTRENGTH(kPa)
= 0.0479 x STRENGTH(psf) (2) METRIC EQUIVALENTDRY UNITWEIGHT kNlm3=0.1571 x DRY UNITWEIGHT(p61) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY Lands of Hunter 3j_____“""‘5’ 3324"“ Adams Street ACALIFORNIACORPORATION. o zoos.ALLRlGHTSRESERVED Z f1l Saint Helena, California FILE:D0-SO84.dwg www.mi1lcrpac.com Project No. 09-5084 Date: 8/11/09 Agenda Item #5.7.
0: E E -?g 5% BORINGB
0 D 3:;"3 E’ ,3. Q EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter Manual Bucket Auger '5 53 as or 2‘,
in m UJ
I LU LU E
p... 1.. E 5 CL D:E C ‘_ g 5 § 5 g EE
g 2: 7/21/09
5 E QE 9 g5 E3 ~214.0-Feet‘
O O :9 an U3 5 0 D 3
CLAYEYSILT (ML)
Lightbrown, medium stiff, dry, lowplasticity[FILL]
SILTYSAND(SM)
Brown, medium dense.moist, low plasticit
[ALLUVIUM]
SILTY CLAY (ML-CL)
Darkbrownto black, mediumstiff, moist, tow t
moderate plasticity [ALLUVIUM]
CLAYEY SILT (ML-CL)
Gray brown, stiff, moist, low to moderate
plasticity [ALLUVIUM]
CLAYEYSILT (ML)
Light gray brown.stiff, moist, low plasticlt
[ALLUVIUM]
Bottomof boring at 7 feet, dry at time of drilling
NOTES: (1) METRICEQUIVALENTSTRENGTH(I<Pa)= 0.0479 x STRENGTH(pat) (2) METRICEQUIVALENTDRY UNITWEIGHTkN/m3=0.1571 x DRYUNITWEIGHT(pct) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY BORINGLOG Lands of Hunter m——- Adams Street ar..:r.ri‘°L A—9 Saint Helena, California
Project No. 09-5034 Date: 3/11/09 FIGURE 504RedwoodBlvd. Suite 220 Novalo.CA94947 T1415I 3132-3444 I7:-1.15I 382-3450 A CALIFORNIACORPORATION,O 2006,ALLRIGHTSRESERVED FILE:OD-50B4.dwg www.m1l.lerpac.com Agenda Item #5.7.
‘ cc . I; g g 5 5 BORING9
0 0 %*5 E /‘x at EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter Manual BucketAuger |— I- 0-
\°
‘-" {"3 9‘) Q3-: g ‘dz’ 3 r- E
I- I— _ — c: 0: § 3 <0 E.’E g E DATE: 7/21/09 3:’ E D E 5 9 Z >- 9 ELEVATION‘ ~212 5—Feet* |- I- Z |— _| O 0 DC“J V ' O O 3 no on 2 o D 3 *REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Elevation
CLAYEYSILT (ML)
Light brown, mediumstiff,dry, Iow plasticit
[FILL]
CLAYEYSILT (ML—CL)
Dark brown, medium stiff, moist, low to moderate
plasticity [ALLUVIUM]
CLAYEYSILT (ML)
Lightgray brown to gray brown, stiff,moist, Io
SAMPLE NOTES: (1) METRICEQUIVALENTSTRENGTH(kPa) = 0.0479 x STRENGTH(psf) (2) METRICEQUIVALENTDRYUNITWEIGHTkNIm3=0.1571 x DRY UNITWEIGHT(pct) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY V BORING LOG Lands of Hunter
5;,-,,-- Adams Street
-I——- A-10
Saint Helena, California
Project No. o9~5oa4 Date: an1/o9 FIGURE
504RedwoodBlvd. Suitc220 Novalo, CA 94947 T:415 / 382-3444 F3125/ 382-3450 A CALIFORNIACORPORATION,O 2009.ALLRIGHTSRESERVED FILE:09-&0B4.dm www.m1'.Ilcrpac.c0m Agenda Item #5.7.
tr 5 5 55 5 BORING10
E E
(:5“Q
I E 3 Q EQUIPMENT: 4" Diameter ManualBucket Auger
(13 $ 8 E
I g ”" I9:I- E " I‘ 3 (D
0‘ E,‘Z 2 I-— LU % g asE g 5 I5 3 5 5: DATE: 7/21/09
E E EE 3 5 g EE E ELEVATION: ~213.0-Feet‘
O O :3 an an 2 0 D 3 en *REFERENCE: Topo Map used for Elevation
CLAYEYSILT (ML)
Light brown, medium stiff, dry, low piasticit
CLAYEY SILT (ML—CL)
Dark brown, medium stiff, moist, Iowto moderate
piasticity [ALLUVIUM]
SYMBOH3)
CLAYEYSILT(ML)
Lightgray brown, stiff, moist, low plasticit
[ALLUVIUM]
Bottom of boring at 5.5 feet. dry at time of drilling
NOTES: (1) METRIC EQUIVALENTSTRENGTH(kPa) = 0.0479 x STRENGTH(psf) (2) METRIC EQUIVALENTDRY UNITWEIGHTkNIm3=0.1571 it DRYUNITWEIGHT(pcf) (3) GRAPHICSYMBOLSAREILLUSTRATIVEONLY BORINGLOG 504Redwood Blvd. Suite 220 Novato, CA 94947 H B.I_E_wT._j.. T2415/ 332.3444 Adams Street j.__ A_ 11
A CALIFORNIAcons-onA1IoN.c 2005,ALLRIGHTSRESERVED F315 I 3826450 Saint Helena, California me; 09.50343“; www.millcrpac.cnm Project No. 09-5084 Date: 8/11/09 F Agenda Item #5.7.
20.0 3% E § 120 ,1’ E ' :35
9 18.0
E LLI 110 ; 3
I- ‘ E: 3
§ “*0
100 2
§ E Q
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)
NOTE: pcf x 0.157 = kN/ma(rounded to 3 signi?cant ?gures)
OPTIMUM MAXIMUMDRY
SYMBOL SAMPLE SOURCE CLASSIFICATION MOISTURE UNITWEIGHT CONT, (%) (kn/m3)VI
(pcf)
o on—sIIe CLAYEY SILT (ML-CL) 17.5 17.0 108
dark brown
REFERENCE: ASTMMethodD1557
504Redwood Blvd. COMPACTIONCURVE Lands of Hunter
3;m————~— Adams Street a.-.-.IT4§9-A-12
FIGURE Novato, CA 94947 T 415 I 382-3444 F / 3824450 Saint Helena, California Project No. 09-5084 Date: 8/11/09 A CALIFORNIACORPORATION,O 2008.ALLRIGHTSRESERVED FILE:095084cuwonwg www.millctpaI:.com E
I
§ Agenda Item #5.7.
Mllllllmllflli
\
[III II‘ « I lit lllllllilillllll
October 1, 2018
File: 1610.01b|tr.doc
Willowglen Homes
P. O. Box 2357
Healdsburg, Cal'fornia 95448
Attention: Mr.Ben vanZutphen
Re: Addendum to Geotechnical Engineering Report Dated February 22, 2011 Preliminary Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential and
Preliminary Recommendations for Mitigation of iquefaction Induced Settlement (if any) Proposed Hunter Residential Development
Lands of Hunter
Adams Street
St. Helena.California
Introductionand Sco e
This report is an addendum to a geotechn cal report by Mille Pacific Engineering Group dated February 22, 2011, which presented the results of a geotechnical investigation of the shallow soil conditions underlying the future Adams Street (Hunter Parcel) residential development, located on Adams Street in St. Helena, California (Site Location Map. Figure 1).
The proposed residential development is to consist of 51 single family residential lots and Lot 52, which is to be developed with 25 apartment units, as shown on the Site Plan.Figure 2. We understand that the proposed single family homes would typically consist of one or two story, wood frame structures with concrete slab-on-grade or raised wood floors. We anticipate that the apartment structures would also be one or two story wood frame structures. The proposed development would also include asphalt paved streets and concrete driveways, underground utilities, and associated improvements. No speci?c development plans are available at this time, however.
Regional geologic mapping indicates that the project site is underlain by an undetermined thickness of alluvialfan deposits consisting of poorly sorted sands and gravels, withinterbedded silts and clays. A regional geologic map of the site and vicinityis shown on Figure 3. measures to address the impacts of liquefaction induced ground settlement (if any) on the proposed development. Liquefaction refers to the sudden, temporary loss of soil shear strength during strong ground shaking. Liquefaction-related phenomena include |iquefaction—induced settlement, flow failure, and lateral spreading. These phenomena can occur where there are saturated, loose.granular deposits. Recent advances in liquefaction studies indicate that liquefactioncan occur in granular materials with a high, 35 to 50%. ?nes content (soil particles that pass the #200 sieve). provided the ?nes exhibit a plasticityindex of less than 7. The site is mapped regionally (ABAG, 2018) as having moderate susceptibility to liquefaction, as shown on Figure 4. 1333 No. McDowellBlvd.SuiteC Petaluma, California 94954 T (707) 765-6140 F (707) 765-6222 Agenda Item #5.7.
!l_|llE|I |_'lIIIllll
Willowglen Homes October 1, 2018
To evaluate soil liquefaction, the seismic energy from an earthquake is compared with the ability of the soil to resist pore pressure generation, known as the Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR). The earthquake energy ls termed the cyclic stress ratio (CSR) and is a function of the maximum considered earthquake peak ground acceleration (PGA) and depth. Soil resistance to liquefaction is based on its relative density, and the amount and plasticity of the fines (sills and clays). The relative density of cohesionless soil is correlated with the Cone Penetration Test (CPT) tip resistance and Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow count data measured in the ?eld and corrected for hammer ef?ciency, overburden and percent ?nes.
Based on the available regional liquefaction susceptibility mapping and regional geologic mapping, the project site has a moderate risk of experiencing liquefaction and liquefaction induced ground surface settlement during a future strong earthquake.
Mitigation of Llguefaction Induced Settlement
For lowrise commercial structures and lightweight residentialstructures, mitigationof the impacts of liquefaction induced settlement is typicallyaccomplished by the design of stiff,shallow mat slab or post—tensionedslab foundations or stiff, shallow grid foundations designed to resist distortion and wracking due to differential settlement. If predicted differential settlements are signi?cant, utility connections to structures can be designed to be ?exible to allow for some differential movement.
In many cases, liquefaction that occurs in relatively thin lenses or at greater depth beneath the ground surface may not result in settlement of the ground surface, and therefore would not have a negative impact on improvements at the ground surface.
Design Level Geotechnical lnvestigation
When more detailed plans are available for the proposed residential development, a much more detailed geotechnical study should be undertaken. This study would include much deeper borings and/or Cone Penetration testing, additional soil sampling, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses, including a more detailed evaluation of liquefaction potential and If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please call us at your convenience. Yours very truly, MILLERPACIFIC ENGINEERINGGROUP DanielS. Caldwell Geotechnical Engineer No. 2006 (B(pires 9/30/19) Enclosures: Figures 1 through 4 Agenda Item #5.7.
l.)..
1 '3» 921 _' . _
l. k
SCALE REFERENCE: DeLorme 3D Topoouads, 1999
Slu?nlwood Blvd. Suheu? TIIS NIWUACANN7 /an-aux F415 JI1-M50 iller acific ENGINEERING GROUP Lands of Hunter Adams Street Saint Helena.California FmioctNa. 1610.01 Dab: 7I3I201B Acu.n=omueanronA1Iou.2mI.u.LnoomnEsawEn nu; mom nun»; FIGURE -um Inilkrplc um:
Agenda Item #5.7.
_a=$.E_..m 93:3: .5: .8=e...z
use; .9 .a..Bo_ -_2i2&<
5\!u:«..x:nnnR..u
.3.-w§..u.l._5§.t<\ n5:.=U.=&<.5xN
H-5
«:3
.....n..&.2238 82$.
.....z......
W»
Q
I
I
II. 23..
El Hz...
| ililq E» 3.9
_I«I.J _|l_
.__._J my
Agenda Item #5.7.
M -rl’ -Ifi-
.'_ - h
.
*2 .
9" .1 ' ** ‘*3L 'l
c K .
.__ -r_‘-,. .' r.- I
REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP
(NOT TO SCALE)
NOT
LEGEND:
Qof. Alluvialfan deposits bordering uplands: heads of fans incised by channels partly ?lled by terraced deposits of younger alluvium; mainly deeply weathered poorlysorted coarse sand and gravel.
Qyfo: Fluvialdeposits at the outer edge of alluvialfans; fonns levees between basin deposits; characterized by ?ne, but variable, grain size; composed mainly of ?ne sand, silt.and silty clay.
Reference: KF. Fox.Jr.. J.D. Sims, JA Bartowand EJ. Heliey, "PreliminaryGeologic Map ofEas1em Sonoma County and Western Napa County. California, Sheet 3 of 4. 1973. 1333 N.McbowolBN1 ille aci e
W REGIONALGEOLOGICMAP
PcInInI.CA§4B54 ENGINEERING GROUP m,m,,m,‘u Liggzgfaggéfr 3 ,.c,......,........,.,...,..,...,...,......¢.....E,E...,E., 1’J'£_ Saint Helena.California n,5_mu. gym... wvmrriilorpucnrn Project No. 1610.01 Date: 7r:lIZti1l FIGURE S
I
Agenda Item #5.7.
‘ Q_
._ . .
‘n 0‘? .9 ~'. ”'t'nd
£1‘ \.
\
. .
\ , I "3-' ~‘_
I g- '\
5 '-
I <2 ‘. .
0“
e>°
(7 5: hi
:5‘
-9 A90, 3
5‘: '30‘
Q
:9’) I79,’
\
' r
I ea Vc '71. W
co (5 L A1; 9
St Helena 9 '0, 3 s '31 0,, 0. 3' 4 S .
a,,C’
'7 _z:-
I O
: 3' C‘;
3 -5" Q‘ "kg, 11,9:
' 5‘ Q 57? rag, 06/, ‘L5 40
..: ° 3' ‘I 4' "'6 J’
"at A6 ‘t 9‘, O
‘F’ “‘\ me, D, O 5, ,_. 0* O0
,,
S _ (cc
5 -. 4 .5. 0 Lo’ 4’ V‘ :7 95 V
O ’ 8, Q, S
to
I If 4°
4 S ‘V
a 5 0°
/7 04 ° "0
,7’ "ago 1-, ‘.4’ G4?‘ ,9 I7 4
c A
III0 ye, O0 ’ a ° C‘ v‘ 2;, 5 <2,
,’)G’_ in $3. 1.0 °v:,¢. ‘‘4,, s {,0 ‘ "' ,;\v ,4. 9 ~ 9 “W - - 50.8 I suscepuumyLevel‘ No Scale /‘\Very High D Moderate Very Law LocalRoad I: High [: Low Major Rand ‘ ' Map Ratamnos AEAG Geographic Information13:: System. N.Mclhnl am. .
Sm: LIQUEFACTIONSUSCEPTIBILITYMAP er
Fauna. ca
94954 L d f H t ¥ an S 0 Un El’
T ENGINEERING GROUP m,,,mm Adams Street
°"-' Mm 4
ACu.FDIMAcnl?alAl'|0N.2OIl.AI.LllGM'fSlES£|lVElI Fm’ 7556222 Saint Helena.California ma mun nun mmxrinvoacum PmkclNa 1610.01 Date 7I3f2t‘I1l FIGURE J S
I
Agenda Item #5.7.
825 Sonoma Avenue, Suite C Santa Rosa, CA 95404 (707) 544-0784 FAX (707) 544-0866 Prepared for
Mr. Ben Van Zutphen
P.O. Box 2357
Healdsburg, California 95448
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APN 009-030-057
SAINT HELENA, CALIFORNIA
MARCH 6, 2018
EBA Project No. 18-2550
Agenda Item #5.7.
Printed on Recycled Paper
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Purpose ..................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Scope of Work ........................................................................................... 2
1.3 Significant Assumptions ............................................................................. 2
1.4 Limitations, Exceptions, and Deviations..................................................... 2
1.5 Special Terms and Conditions ................................................................... 3
1.6 User Reliance ............................................................................................ 3
1.7 Reason for Performing Phase I ESA ......................................................... 3
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................ 3
2.1 Location and Legal Description .................................................................. 3
2.2 Site Characteristics .................................................................................... 4
2.3 Current Use of the Property ....................................................................... 4
2.4 Physical Setting ......................................................................................... 4
2.4.1 TOPOGRAPHY .................................................................................... 4
2.4.2 GEOLOGIC SETTING ........................................................................... 4
2.4.3 SURFACE WATER BODIES/FLOODPLAINS ............................................. 5
2.4.4 HYDROGEOLOGY ............................................................................... 5
2.5 Description of Structures, Roads and Improvements ................................. 5
2.6 Current Adjoining Properties ...................................................................... 5
3.0 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION ...................................................................... 5
3.1 Title Records .............................................................................................. 5
3.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations (AULs) ..................... 5
3.3 Owner, Property Manager, and Occupant Information............................... 6
3.4 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues .......................................... 6
3.5 Previous Environmental Reports ............................................................... 6
4.0 RECORDS REVIEW ............................................................................................ 6
4.1 Environmental Records Sources ............................................................... 6
4.2 Project Site ................................................................................................ 9
4.2.1 PROPERTIES WITHIN THE APPROXIMATE MINIMUM SEARCH DISTANCE ... 9
4.2.2 ORPHAN SITES ................................................................................ 10
4.2.3 VAPOR ENCROACHMENT SCREENING .................................................. 10
4.3 Additional Environmental Records Sources - Interviews & Regulatory Agency Reviews ...................................................................................... 11
4.4 Physical Setting Sources ......................................................................... 12
4.5 Historical Use Information for the Project site .......................................... 12
4.5.1 HISTORICAL SUMMARY ..................................................................... 12
4.5.2 HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS .................................................. 13
4.5.3 SANBORN FIRE INSURANCE MAPS ..................................................... 14
4.6 Historical Use Information for Adjoining Properties .................................. 14 Agenda Item #5.7.
5.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE................................................................................. 14
5.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions ...................................................... 14
5.2 Current Use of the Property ..................................................................... 15
5.3 Exterior Observations .............................................................................. 15
5.4 Interior Observations................................................................................ 15
5.5 Hazardous Substances and Petroleum Products .................................... 15
5.6 Odors ....................................................................................................... 15
5.7 Pools of Liquid ......................................................................................... 15
5.8 Drums ...................................................................................................... 15
5.9 Unidentified Substance Containers .......................................................... 15
5.10 Interior Stains or Corrosion ...................................................................... 15
5.11 Drains and Sumps ................................................................................... 15
5.12 Pits, Ponds or Lagoons ............................................................................ 15
5.13 Stained Soil or Pavement ........................................................................ 15
5.14 Solid Waste .............................................................................................. 15
5.15 Stressed Vegetation ................................................................................ 16
5.16 Wells ........................................................................................................ 16
5.17 Septic Systems ........................................................................................ 16
5.18 Electrical Transformers ............................................................................ 16
5.19 Underground Storage Tanks .................................................................... 16
5.20 Above Ground Storage Tanks ................................................................. 16
5.21 Utilities ..................................................................................................... 16
5.22 Fill Materials ............................................................................................. 16
5.23 Asbestos .................................................................................................. 16
5.24 Lead Paint ................................................................................................ 16
5.25 Radon ...................................................................................................... 16
6.0 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 17
7.0 CONCLUSIONS/RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS ................. 17
8.0 NON-SCOPE CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................... 18
8.1 Non-Scope Considerations ...................................................................... 18
8.2 Additional Services .................................................................................. 18
9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 18
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Figures
Appendix B: Preliminary Title Report
Appendix C: Phase I Questionnaire
Appendix D: EDR Radius Map Report
Appendix E: Pesticide Use Reports
Appendix F: Historic Aerial Photographs
Appendix G: Professional Qualifications
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following report presents the findings of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) performed by EBA Engineering for the property herein identified as Napa County Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 009-030-057. The property is further identified hereinafter as the project site. This ESA was completed for Ben Van Zutphen and the City of St.
Helena in conformance with ASTM Standard Practice E1527-13.
1.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this environmental site investigation is to assess the possible contamination of the project site with hazardous or toxic substances or wastes. A site may contain these substances or wastes as a result of current or past site activities, unauthorized dumping or disposal, or migration of contaminants from adjacent or nearby properties.
The Client should be aware that strict interpretation of California and federal legislation and case law may hold the landowner responsible for any toxic liability including future cleanup costs and, potentially, historical assessments and remediation work on the project site.
Such statement is not motivated by any condition of the project site but is a general observation of the advisability that property owners and purchasers exercise all appropriate diligence and alertness to hazardous material risks.
This report is not intended to provide the necessary level of detail to be utilized for structural demolition/remodeling or soil or groundwater remediation. For such activities, appropriate regulations should be followed to ensure adequate coverage of material handling, worker and employee safety, airborne contamination during construction, and the precise extent of any contamination for contractor directions. This report conforms to American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards E 1527-13 for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments.
In defining a standard of good commercial and customary practice for conducting an environmental site assessment, the goal of the processes established by this practice is to identify recognized environmental conditions, historical recognized environmental conditions and controlled recognized environmental conditions. The term recognized environmental conditions (RECs) refers to the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property. The term historic REC refers to a past release of a hazardous substance or petroleum hydrocarbons that has occurred in connection to the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory agencies without restricting use of the property or requiring controls. The term controlled REC refers to a past release of a hazardous substance or petroleum hydrocarbons that has occurred in connection to the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory agencies and allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls. The term includes hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with laws. The term is not Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 2
intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public 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.
By performing a Phase I ESA of a parcel of real estate with respect to the range of contaminants within the scope of the CERCLA (42 U.S.C. §9601) and petroleum products, a user satisfies one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability.
1.2 SCOPE OF WORK
This Phase I ESA was performed in general accordance with the requirements of the ASTM International Designation: E 1527-13, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessment. To determine the condition of the project site with respect to environmental liability, EBA performed the following tasks:
1) Reviewed past and current land use for indications of the manufacture, generation, use, storage, and/or disposal of hazardous substances;
2) Evaluated the potential for on-site soil and/or groundwater contamination resulting from past and present project site land use activities and, to the extent possible, adjacent off-site operations;
3) Rendered findings and professional opinions regarding the potential for environmental contamination at the project site; and
4) Recommend and perform further investigations (i.e., Phase II ESA), if deemed appropriate to evaluate whether contamination and/or environmental hazards exist at the locations identified.
1.3 SIGNIFICANT ASSUMPTIONS
No significant assumptions were made during the performance of this Phase I ESA.
1.4 LIMITATIONS, EXCEPTIONS, AND DEVIATIONS
Local, State, and Federal environmental regulations and property conditions can vary significantly over time. Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations presented as a result of this environmental site assessment apply strictly to the environmental regulations and property conditions existing at the time EBA performed this study. EBA assumes that the data obtained and the inferences made during this investigation are reasonable and representative of the property.
EBA makes no warranty, expressed or implied, except that our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted existing environmental engineering, health and safety principles, and applicable regulations at the time and location of the study. EBA has analyzed the available information using currently applicable engineering techniques.
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 3
Please be advised that the recommendations presented herein are based solely on information made available to EBA by others, and includes professional interpretations based on limited research and data. Based on these circumstances, the decision to conduct additional investigative work to substantiate the findings and conclusions presented herein is the sole responsibility of the Client.
No Exceptions or Deviations occurred from the ASTM Standard.
1.5 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
This Phase I ESA was conducted in accordance with our executed contract. No special terms or conditions apply.
1.6 USER RELIANCE
This report has been prepared solely for the Client and any such unauthorized reliance on or use of this report, including any of its information or conclusions, will be at the third party's risk. For the same reasons, no warranties or representations, expressed or implied in this report, are made to any such third party.
Please note pursuant to Section 4.6 of the ASTM Standard E 1527-13 for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments, this report is valid for 180 days from the date noted herein.
1.7 REASON FOR PERFORMING PHASE I ESA
It is our understanding that this Phase I ESA was performed as part of a larger Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed development of the project site.
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 LOCATION AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The project site property consists of a 16.9 acre agricultural parcel of land located on the north side of the city of St. Helena, California. The project site does not have a physical site address and is identified as Napa County APN 009-030-057. The property is partially occupied by a vineyard, while the remaining portion remains undeveloped. Figure 1, Appendix A shows the location of the project site. Figures 2, Appendix A shows the project site boundaries, as shown on the current tax assessor’s map. Figure 3, Appendix A shows various pictures of the project side and associated features. Photo plates are also included in Appendix A that show relevant site features.
Legal descriptions of the project site are included in the Preliminary Title Report and are enclosed in Appendix B.
The following presents project site specific information:
Site Location: No Address; Napa County APN 009-030-057
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 4
Owner: Dennis R. Hunter
Site Occupants: Currently Unoccupied
Zoning: Medium Density Residential
Lot Size: 16.9 acres
County: Napa
USGS Quadrangle: St. Helena, California
Latitude and Longitude: N 38° 30’ 42.12’’Latitude & W 122° 27’ 52.40’’Longitude ** Approximate center of project site
2.2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The project site is located within the city limits of St. Helena, California in the centralnorthwestern portion of the Napa Valley. The project site consists of vineyards in the southwest portion of the property and undeveloped grasslands in the northeast portion of the property.
2.3 CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY
The project site is currently unoccupied and is currently partially utilized for vineyard cultivation.
2.4 PHYSICAL SETTING
2.4.1 TOPOGRAPHY
The project site is located in the central portion of the Napa Valley within the City of St.
Helena and is generally flat and level with limited topography. The site is at an elevation of approximately 220 feet above mean sea level.
2.4.2 GEOLOGIC SETTING
The project site is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province of northern California. The Coast Range Geomorphic Province is generally characterized as a series of northwest trending elongated ridges and valleys that are a result of folding and faulting. The province includes many separate ranges, coalescing mountain masses, and several major structural valleys. The regional structure of the Coast Range is considered to be a number of independent fault blocks with different stratigraphic and structural histories.
The project site is mapped as being composed of Younger alluvial soils consisting of poorly sorted silt, sand, and gravel may overlay portions of the bedrock materials that are the result or weathering and erosion. The alluvial deposits can vary in thickness and are underlain by the Sonoma Volcanics geologic formation. The Sonoma Volcanics are Pliocene in Age and consist of a variety of volcanic rocks including basalt, rhyolite, andesite, tuff and other volcanic rocks. In some areas the volcanics are interlayered with tuff and volcanic sedimentary deposits.
Based on the surface topography and near site investigations, groundwater in the area of the project site is anticipated to flow northeast towards the Napa River. Groundwater in the area of the project site has been recorded to vary from approximately one to 17 feet below Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 5
ground surface. Depths of groundwater are expected to be influenced by topography and may vary seasonally.
2.4.3 SURFACE WATER BODIES/FLOODPLAINS
The Napa River is located northeast of the project site. A review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map [Map No. 06055C0264E] indicates the project site is located within an area of reduced flood hazard due to the presence of a flood control levee.
2.4.4 HYDROGEOLOGY
Based on the surface topography and subsurface investigations conducted in the surrounding area, groundwater in the area of the project site is anticipated to flow to the north to northeast towards the Napa River.
2.5 DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURES, ROADS AND IMPROVEMENTS
The project site consists of a 16.9 acre agricultural property, and contains no permanent structures or significant property improvements. An unpaved pedestrian path begins at the end of Adams Street and runs along the entire length of the northwest side of the project site. The pathway is located on top of a constructed levee that was constructed by the City of St. Helena for the control of flooding from the Napa River.
The project site contains approximately seven acres of developed vineyards that are located on the southern side of the project site. The remainder of the project site includes approximately 9.9 acres of undeveloped grasslands.
There is a water supply well located on the northern side of the project site. The well appears to be inoperable.
2.6 CURRENT ADJOINING PROPERTIES
The project site is bound on the north and west by agricultural properties that include developed vineyards and on south and east by developed residential properties.
3.0 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION
3.1 TITLE RECORDS
A Preliminary Title Report dated March 27, 2014 was reviewed for the project site. Title records dating from March 27, 2014 to the present were reviewed on the Napa County Recorder’s Office web site. A copy of the report is enclosed in Appendix B.
3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS (AULS) A review of Title information was performed using available public documents from the Napa County Recorder’s Office and the Preliminary Title Report dated March 27, 2014. No environmental liens or Use Limitations were noted in record information reviewed for this assessment.
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 6
3.3 OWNER, PROPERTY MANAGER, AND OCCUPANT INFORMATION
The project site property is owned by Dennis R. Hunter.
The project site is currently unoccupied.
3.4 VALUATION REDUCTION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
The ASTM Standard requires an evaluation of environmental issues that would result in a devaluation of the property. There were no issues of environmental concern observed at the project site identified as part of this assessment that would be expected to affect the full and fair use and value of the project site property.
3.5 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS
No environmental reports were available for the project site.
3.6 PHASE I QUESTIONNAIRE
A Phase I Questionnaire was completed by the prospective buyer, Ben VanZutphen.
This questionnaire has been included in Appendix C.
4.0 RECORDS REVIEW
4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS SOURCES
EBA contacted Environmental Data Resources (EDR) of Southport, Connecticut, to conduct a comprehensive Federal, state and local environmental records search for the project site and properties within a one-mile radius of the project site. The purpose of the database search was to identify potential exposure to the subject property from various environmental concerns and/or hazardous materials releases. The following databases and environmental programs are included in the database search:
National Priority List
Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL Federal Superfund Liens
National Priority List Deletions
CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, & Liability Information System
Federal Facility Site Information listing
CERC-NFRAP CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 7
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
RESPONSE State Response Sites
ENVIROSTOR EnviroStor Database
SWF/LF Solid Waste Information System
SLIC Statewide SLIC Cases
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land UST Active UST Facilities
AST Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
VCP Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
ODI Open Dump Inventory
DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations WMUDS/SWAT Waste Management Unit Database
SWRCY Recycler Database
HAULERS Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands US Clandestine Drug Labs
HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database
SCH School Property Evaluation Program
Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites
CDL Clandestine Drug Labs
US HIST CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
CA Facility Inventory Database
SWEEPS UST Listing
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
LIENS Environmental Liens Listing
DEED Deed Restriction Listing
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System CHMIRS California Hazardous Material Incident Report System LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing
MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing
SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators
DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
DOD Department of Defense Sites
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD Records Of Decision
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
US MINES Mines Master Index File
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 8
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
PCB Activity Database System
Material Licensing Tracking System
Radiation Information Database
Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
RMP Risk Management Plans
CA Bond Expenditure Plan
NPDES Permits Listing
Cortese Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List
CUPA Listings CUPA Resources List
Proposition 65 Records
DRYCLEANERS Cleaner Facilities
Well Investigation Program Case List
Enforcement Action Listing
San Mateo County Business Inventory
EMI Emissions Inventory Data
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing
Financial Assurance Information
PCB Transformer Registration Database
Financial Assurance Information Listing
PROC Certified Processors Database
EPA WATCH LIST
2020 Corrective Action Program List
Lead Smelter Sites
Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem WDS Waste Discharge System
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
Medical Waste Management Program Listing
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database
EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
EDR US Hist Auto Stat EDR Exclusive Historic Gas Stations EDR US Hist Cleaners EDR Exclusive Historic Dry Cleaners RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 9
RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank The Environmental Record Search (ERS) consists of a map showing the location of the identified sites relative to the project site, a summary listing the identified sites by street names, and a final report describing the sources investigated and the resulting findings. It should be noted that the findings are those noted on the regulatory database(s) and that accuracy and completeness of record information varies among information sources, including government sources. The ERS findings are supplemented by interviews with owners/occupants/employees, and local government officials. Agency records review and historical data review are also used to ascertain the potential environmental significance of sites reported in the ERS. Results of the record search are presented in Appendix D.
The project site is not identified in environmental databases or regulatory agency files as having issues of environmental concern. Several properties in the surrounding area were identified within a one-mile radius of the project site boundary as having environmental concerns. Relevant near site properties are further discussed below.
4.2 PROJECT SITE
The project site property was not identified in regulatory agency files or databases as having environmental concerns and there is no indication of the historic use, generation or disposal of hazardous materials and/or waste at the project site. Further there is no indication of the current or historic use of either underground or aboveground fuel storage tanks at the project site.
It should be noted that there are records of the use of agricultural pesticides at the project site that have been applied to the vineyard. Records obtained from the Napa County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office include the use of herbicides, fungicides and miticides.
The use of agricultural pesticides is regulated and overseen by the Napa County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office in accordance with Title 3 of the California Code of Regulations. It does not appear that any agricultural chemicals are stored or mixed at the project site. Copies of the available Pesticide Use Reports are included in Appendix E.
It should be further noted that historic records, including historic aerial photographs, indicate that a portion of the project site was used as an orchard dating from the 1940’s.
Agricultural operations conducted during this time period often used agricultural pesticides, such as organochlorines and arsenic, which are long lived and persistent in the environment. The use of these materials would have been at a time period that no regulatory oversite or reporting were required. No records of such use was encountered in regulatory records reviewed for this assessment and further no testing for these compounds was conducted as part of this assessment.
4.2.1 PROPERTIES WITHIN THE APPROXIMATE MINIMUM SEARCH DISTANCE Several near site properties were identified in EDR Radius Map Report as having environmental concerns within the minimum search distance from the project site property as required by ASTM Standard 1527-13. A review of available information regarding the Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 10
identified properties indicates that all of the identified properties are located at a distance of greater than 1,000 feet from the project site. In addition, regulatory agency records indicate that all of the identified site have completed environmental investigation and remediation with regulatory oversight and direction from applicable regulatory agencies. Given the proximity, case status and hydraulically co-gradient nature of sites identified within the approximate minimum search distance it is unlikely that these sites will present an environmental threat to the project site.
Additional Sites
Several additional sites within a one-mile radius of the project site were identified in regulatory agency files and databases as having issues of environmental concern. A review of the available information indicates that many of these properties are identified as generators of hazardous materials and/or wastes and are regulated for such use, storage and disposal. Several of the other identified sites consist of closed contaminant sites that have been characterized and closed with regulatory oversight. These sites are seen as posing no environmental threat to the project site.
4.2.2 ORPHAN SITES
EDR orphan site designation indicated insufficient address information for an identified site to be plotted. EBA reviewed the Orphan Sites identified in the Radius Map Report. Neither the project site nor any near site properties were identified in the Orphan Summary.
4.2.3 VAPOR ENCROACHMENT SCREENING
Preliminary vapor encroachment screening pursuant to ASTM Standard 2600-10 was conducted for the project site property in conjunction with this assessment. Tier 1 vapor screening was performed to determine if vapor intrusion was a threat to the present or future use of the project site due to the presence of the documented releases of petroleum hydrocarbons at near site properties. The Tier 1 screening is based on the following factors:
Types and concentrations of contaminants present
Soil characteristics
Depth to groundwater
Location of the project site property in relation to the known or suspected contaminants
Vapor conduits
Cleanup status of the contaminated property
ASTM-2600 sets a minimum distance of 1/10 mile (528 feet) for petroleum hydrocarbons and 1/3 mile (1,742 feet) for volatile organic compounds as an initial criteria distance for screening vapor threats. A review of the available information indicates that there are several properties within these minimum search distances that have documented releases of contaminants to soil and groundwater. However, no properties identified as having releases of petroleum hydrocarbons were identified within 528 feet of the project site boundaries. A review of available information regarding the remaining sites with historic volatile organic compound impacts within 1,742 feet of the project site boundaries, indicates Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 11
that all of the sites have been investigated and remediated to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory agencies and granted case closure status by the regulating agencies. There is no indication that the releases at these properties have impacted the project site and all are seen as posing a minimal threat to the project site.
Based on this information the threat of vapor intrusion to the project is seen as unlikely.
4.3 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS SOURCES -INTERVIEWS ®ULATORY AGENCY
REVIEWS
Supplemental interviews and research were performed based on findings from the environmental records search. The interview and research process targeted both project site and regulatory personnel and regulatory agencies in an attempt to ascertain the nature and status of known environmental issues. Regulatory agencies and individuals contacted during the information review process included:
Mr. Ben VanZutphen – Prospective Developer of Project Site Noah Housh – City of St. Helena Planning Department
St. Helena Planning and Building Department
Napa County Recorder’s Office
Napa County Planning, Building and Environmental Services Website Napa County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board California Department of Toxic Substances Control
California State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker Web Site California Department of Toxic Substances Control Envirostor Website Regulatory agency files were reviewed at the agencies listed above. The findings from the file reviews are as follows:
ST. HELENA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Development and building records were available and reviewed at the St. Helena Planning and Building Department that dated from the mid 1980’s to the present. The majority of the available records are related to a flood mitigation project that occurred in the early 2000’s on the parcel adjacent to the northeast of the project site.
NAPA COUNTY ASSESSOR’S OFFICE
Development and tax records were reviewed at the Napa County Assessor’s Office. No significant data gaps were noted within the available information.
NAPA COUNTY RECORDER’S OFFICE
Recorded deeds and other relevant site documentation were reviewed at the Napa County Recorder’s Office. No environmental liens or deed restrictions were noted in the available information.
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 12
NAPA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER’S OFFICE
Pesticide Use Reports for the use and applicable of agricultural pesticides were obtained from the Napa County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office.
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Files available at the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board are duplicated and uploaded to GeoTracker. Therefore, available information for near site properties were reviewed on the GeoTracker web site.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL
No files were available for the project site property at this agency.
CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD GEOTRACKER WEB SITE DATABASE The Geotracker web site was consulted to determine if either the project site or surrounding properties were identified in this environmental database as having environmental concerns. The project site was not identified. Several near site properties were identified.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ENVIROSTOR WEB SITE DATABASE The Envirostor web site was consulted to determine if either the project site or surrounding properties were identified in this environmental database as having environmental concerns. The project site was not identified in this environmental database. One nearby site was identified.
4.4 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCES
Several sources of information were reviewed to establish the physical setting of the project site property including the following:
Google Earth
USGS Topographic Maps
Published Geologic references
4.5 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION FOR THE PROJECT SITE
The history of the project site was researched to ascertain the past use from the present back to the property’s first developed use. Reasonably ascertainable historical information sources were reviewed to determine the history of the project site property. The following historical sources were reviewed as part of this assessment:
Historical aerial photographs
Historical Maps and research
Interviews with persons knowledgeable about the project site.
4.5.1 HISTORICAL SUMMARY
The first developed use of the project site appears to start sometime prior to 1947. Historic aerial photographs indicate that the project site was largely utilized for cultivation purposes, notably vineyards and orchards. From the available information it appears that the project Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 13
site has remained generally undeveloped with limited property use, with the exception of vineyards that are currently present on the southwestern portion of the project site.
As discussed herein the project site was also associated with the construction of a flood control project that included a constructed levee that is located along the western and northern sides of the project site. The flood control project also includes a stormwater catch basin that is reported to collect stormwater runoff from the developed portions of St. Helena located to the south and east of the project site. The flood control basin then pumps the collected water to the Napa River located to the north and east of the project site.
The history and use of the project site is known and documented through several means including available public records and historic aerial photographs. It should be recognized that there are data gaps in the history and use of the project site that are due to the passage of time, a lack of available property owners and a lack of historical documentation regarding the historic use of the project site. These data gaps are seen as insignificant.
4.5.2 HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
Historical aerial photographs were obtained from Environmental Data Resources for the years 1947, 1953, 1958, 1968, 1973, 1982, 1993, 2006, 2010, and 2014. Aerial photographs can indicate changes in land use of a site over time. The following presents our findings from a review of the available photographs. 1947 PHOTOGRAPH
The 1947 photograph indicates the presence of an orchard in the northeast portion of the project site. The remainder of the project site is visible as undeveloped grasslands. It should be noted that a series of holding ponds are visible along the southeastern border of the project site. The surrounding area appears to consist of low density residential developments towards the southeast and agricultural development towards the north and west.
1953 PHOTOGRAPH
The 1953 photograph indicates no significant changes to the project site from the 1947 photograph. The adjacent and surrounding area appears generally unchanged. 1958 PHOTOGRAPH
The 1958 photograph indicates no significant changes to the project site from the 1953 photograph. The adjacent and surrounding area appears generally unchanged. 1968 PHOTOGRAPH
The 1968 photograph indicates that the orchard previously located in the northeast portion of the project site has been removed. The remaining portion of the project site and the surrounding area remains generally unchanged.
1973 PHOTOGRAPH
The 1973 photograph indicates the project site with developed vineyards in the central and southwest portions of the property. The remaining portion of the project site remains unchanged. It should be noted that the holding ponds southeast of the project site have Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 14
been removed in the 1973 photograph. The adjacent and surrounding area appears to be in the initial stages of suburban development.
1982 PHOTOGRAPH
The 1982 photograph indicates the appearance of a holding pond in the northeast portion of the project site. The greater surrounding area appears to have undergone significant residential development since the 1973 photograph.
1993 PHOTOGRAPH
The 1993 photograph indicates no significant changes to the project site from the 1982 photograph. The greater surrounding area appears generally unchanged. 2006 PHOTOGRAPH
The 2006 photograph indicates no significant changes to the project site from the 1993 photograph. The adjacent and surrounding area appears to have undergone significant residential development.
2010 PHOTOGRAPH
The 2010 photograph indicates that a portion of the vineyard in the northeast portion of the project site have been removed and the area appears to have been regraded. The adjacent and surrounding area appears generally unchanged.
2014 PHOTOGRAPH
The 2014 photograph indicates no significant changes to the project site from the 2010 photograph. The adjacent and surrounding area appears generally unchanged.
Copies of the aerial photographs are included in Appendix F.
4.5.3 SANBORN FIRE INSURANCE MAPS
No Sanborn Fire Insurance Map coverage is available for the project site property.
4.6 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION FOR ADJOINING PROPERTIES Historic research was ascertained for adjoining properties by reviewing the historical documents referenced above.
5.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE
5.1 METHODOLOGY AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
EBA personnel conducted site inspections on February 12, 2018. The site reconnaissance entailed viewing the project site and the surrounding areas. The site was inspected to observe the property and to identify discernible or potential environmental concerns. In addition, a reconnaissance of adjacent properties was performed to confirm surrounding land use and conditions. Information was obtained by interviews with knowledgeable individuals regarding the past and current uses of the project site. No limitations were encountered that limited the extent of the property inspection. Findings from the site reconnaissance activities are summarized in the following sections.
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 15
5.2 CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY
The project site is currently utilized as a vineyard.
5.3 EXTERIOR OBSERVATIONS
As discussed the project site consists of a developed vineyard with some grasslands. There are no structures present at the project site. At the time of the property inspection the project site was observed to be clean and well maintained with no issues of environmental concern.
5.4 INTERIOR OBSERVATIONS
No structures are present at the project site, therefore no interior inspections or observations were made as part of this assessment.
5.5 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
There were no hazardous substances or petroleum products observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.6 ODORS
No odors were observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.7 POOLS OF LIQUID
No pools of free liquid were observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.8 DRUMS
No drums were observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.9 UNIDENTIFIED SUBSTANCE CONTAINERS
No unidentified drums or containers were observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.10 INTERIOR STAINS OR CORROSION
No stained soil or corrosion were observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.11 DRAINS AND SUMPS
No drains or sumps were observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.12 PITS, PONDS OR LAGOONS
No pits, ponds or lagoons were observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.13 STAINED SOIL OR PAVEMENT
There was no stained soil or pavement observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.14 SOLID WASTE
No solid waste was observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 16
5.15 STRESSED VEGETATION
No areas of stressed vegetation were observed at the project site during the site reconnaissance.
5.16 WELLS
A water supply well is located on the northern portion of the project site. At the time of the property inspection, the well was not in use.
5.17 SEPTIC SYSTEMS
There is no records of septic systems at the project site.
5.18 ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMERS
A pole mounted electrical transformer is present at the northern portion of the project site that appears to be associated with the power infrastructure for the water supply well. At the time of the property inspection the transformer appeared to be intact with no indication of leakage or failure.
5.19 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
There is no record of the current or historic use of underground fuel tanks at the project site.
5.20 ABOVE GROUND STORAGE TANKS
No above ground fuel tanks were observed at the project site during the site visit.
5.21 UTILITIES
The only utility observed at the project site is the power pole and transformer that services the water supply well.
5.22 FILL MATERIALS
It appears that the construction of the flood control levee and associated work included regrading and filling portions of the project site. It is assumed that the fill materials were from the flood control project and did not include imported fill materials.
5.23 ASBESTOS
No structures are currently present at the project site, therefore there is no likelihood of asbestos containing materials being present.
5.24 LEAD PAINT
No structures are currently present at the project site, therefore there is no likelihood of lead paint being present.
5.25 RADON
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Radon Zone Classification for Napa County is 2, which is defined as having a moderate potential to have radon concentration between 2 to 4 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). The U.S. EPA action level for radon is 4.0 pCi/L. Based on Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 17
the radon concentration information, it is unlikely but possible that radon abatement activities would be required at the project site; however it should be noted that no testing for radon has been performed.
6.0 DISCUSSION
Development at the project site likely began prior to the 1947 aerial photograph. Sequential aerial photographs starting from 1947 indicate the presence of an orchard and vineyards at the project site. No structures currently exist on the project site, and there is no evidence that indicates the presence of historical structures at the property. Currently, a portion of the project site appears unutilized, while the remaining portion appears to be used in the cultivation of grapes.
The project site is not identified in regulatory agency databases or files as having issues of environmental concern and there is no indication of the use, generation or disposal of hazardous materials or wastes at the project site. Further, there is no indication of the current or historic use of underground fuel storage tanks at the project site.
Several sites are identified in the surrounding areas as having issues of environmental concern. These sites are located more than 1,000 feet from the boundaries of the project site, and are listed in regulatory databases as closed investigations. From a review of the available information all the identified sites in the surrounding area are seen as posing a minimal threat to the project site.
It should be noted that there are records of the use of agricultural pesticides at the project site that have been applied to the vineyard. Records obtained from the Napa County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office include the use of herbicides, fungicides and miticides.
The use of agricultural pesticides is regulated and overseen by the Napa County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office in accordance with Title 3 of the California Code of Regulations. It does not appear that any agricultural chemicals are stored or mixed at the project site. Additionally, historical photographs indicate the presence of an orchard on the project site in the Late 1940’s. Though the usage of organochlorine pesticides may have historically occurred, it is unlikely that any significant concentrations would be present onsite.
7.0 CONCLUSIONS/RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
EBA Engineering has performed this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527-13 for the property identified as APN 009-030-057. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described herein. Based on conclusions from the environmental records search, historical data review, and the site reconnaissance we find no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the project site property.
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 18
8.0 NON-SCOPE CONSIDERATIONS
8.1 NON-SCOPE CONSIDERATIONS
The following environmental issues are outside the scope (non-scope considerations) of the standard practice defined by ASTM Standard Practice E 1527-13:
Regulatory Compliance;
Cultural and Historic Resources;
Industrial Hygiene;
Health and Safety;
Ecological Resources;
Endangered Species;
Indoor Air Quality;
High Voltage Power Lines;
Biological Agents; and
Mold
EBA identified no ASTM non-scope considerations/RECs in connection with the project site that represent potential business environmental risk but are outside the standard scope of services prescribed by ASTM Standard Practice E 1527-13.
8.2 ADDITIONAL SERVICES
No additional services beyond the standard scope of services prescribed by ASTM Standard Practice E 1527-13 were requested by the Client.
9.0 REFERENCES
Aerial Photographs:
1947 Environmental Data Resources
1953 Environmental Data Resources
1958 Environmental Data Resources
1968 Environmental Data Resources
1973 Environmental Data Resources
1982 Environmental Data Resources
1993 Environmental Data Resources
2006 Environmental Data Resources
2010 Environmental Data Resources
2014 Environmental Data Resources
Agenda Item #5.7.
L:\env\esa\2550 Adams Street\Report\text DN.doc 19
Geology of Northern California, California Division of Mines and Geology – Bulletin 190 Geologic Map and Map Database of Eastern Sonoma and Western Napa Counties, California. Complied by R.W. Graymer, E.E. Brabb, D.L. Jones, J. Barnes, R.S. Nicholson and R.E. Stamski. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, 2007.
U.S. Geological Survey, 7.5 Minute - Topographic Quadrangle, Saint Helena, California.
Agenda Item #5.7.
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
Agenda Item #5.7.
LOCATION MAP
1 PROJECT
SITE
Q:\2550\Location Maps.dwg, Location Map, 2/16/2018 11:54:39 AM Agenda Item #5.7.
ASSESSORS PARCEL MAP
2 PROJECT SITE Q:\2550\Location Maps.dwg, APN Map, 2/16/2018 11:56:20 AM
Agenda Item #5.7.
AERIAL VIEW
3 ADAMS ST
PROJECT
SITE
Q:\2550\Location Maps.dwg, Aerial View, 2/16/2018 12:02:23 PM Agenda Item #5.7.
View of the project site looking northeast.
View of the project site looking southwest.
PHOTO PLATE
HUNTER PROPERTY
APN 009-030-057
ST. HELENA, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
4 February 2018
18-2550
Agenda Item #5.7.
APPENDIX B
PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT
Agenda Item #5.7.
File Number: 463973 Page 1 of 8
2850 Cordelia Road, Ste 100
Fairfield, CA 94534
(707) 439-7500 Phone
PRELIMINARY REPORT
Order Number : 463973
Title Unit Number : 7931
Buyer/Borrower Name: :
Seller Name: : Dennis R. Hunter
Property Address: APN# 009-030-057, Napa, California
In response to the above referenced application for a Policy of Title Insurance, Stewart Title of California, Inc. hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a Policy or Policies of Title Insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referenced to as an Exception on Schedule B or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions, and Stipulations of said Policy forms.
The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage and Limitations on covered Risks of said policy or policies are set forth in Exhibit A attached. The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of Insurance is less than that set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. Limitations on Covered Risks applicable to the CLTA and ALTA Homeowner’s Policies of Title Insurance which establish a Deductible Amount and a Maximum Dollar Limits of Liability for certain coverages are also set forth in Exhibit A. Copies of the policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report.
Please read the exceptions shown or referred to below and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Exhibit A of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters, which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered.
It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects, and encumbrances affecting title to the land.
This report, (and any supplements or amendments thereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance a binder or commitment should be requested.
Dated as of: March 27, 2014 at 7:30 a.m.
Update No. 1
Bill Curry, Title Officer
When replying, please contact Sandy Veveiros, Escrow Officer Stewart Title of California, Inc.
1101 College Avenue, Suite 100
Santa Rosa, Calif. 95404,
(707) 526-2000
Agenda Item #5.7.
File Number: 463973 Page 2 of 8
PRELIMINARY REPORT
The form of Policy of Title Insurance contemplated by this report is:
California Land Title Association Standard Coverage Policy American Land Title Association Owners Policy
American Land Title Association Residential Title Insurance Policy American Land Title Association Loan Policy
CLTA/ALTA Homeowners Policy
ALTA Short Form Residential Loan Policy (06/16/07)
2006 ALTA Loan Policy
SCHEDULE A
The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this report is:
Fee
Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in:
Dennis R. Hunter, dealing with his separate property, who acquired title as an unmarried man Agenda Item #5.7.
File Number: 463973 Page 3 of 8
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The land referred to herein is situated in the State of California, County of Napa, City of Napa, and described as follows:
Portions of that certain real property situate in the City of St Helena, County of Napa, State of California being a portion of Parcel One described in the Grant Deed to the City of St Helena recorded March 15, 2005 at Document No. 2005-0009620 Official Records Napa County and a portion of the lands described in the Grant Deed to Dennis R. Hunter recorded December 7, 2001, at Document No. 2001-0043130 Official Records Napa County, said portions being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the southwestern corner of the above reference lands to Dennis R. Hunter; thence along the southwestern line of said lands S60°50’08”E, 50.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence leaving last said line N29°14’27”E, 851.74 feet; thence N47°03’45”E, 107.96 feet; thence 560°46’20”E, 22.90 feet; thence N32°22’33”E, 450.36 feet; thence N60°54’21”W, 10.02 feet; thence N32°22’33”E, 177.79 feet; thence N50°49’49”E, 264.81 feet to the general southwestern line of the above referenced Parcel One to the City of St Helena; thence along said general southwestern line S71°07’20”E, 2.96 feet; thence leaving last said line N41°18’58”E, 254.98 feet; thence N49°42’50”E, 48.52 feet; thence N60°38’24”E, 44.19 feet; thence S 7729°32’38”E, 64.19 feet; thence S84°21’35”’E, 142.68 feet; thence S78°16’37”E, 64.79 feet; thence S70°20’25”E, 86.57 feet; thence S47°50’36”E, 68.79 feet; thence S62°05’04”E, 77.73 feet to the southeastern line of said Parcel One to the City of St. Helena; thence along last said line S28°56’09”W, 279.88 feet to the northeastern corner of said lands to Dennis R. Hunter; thence along the general southeastern and southwestern lines of said lands to Dennis R. Hunter N60°46’20”W, 234.63 feet; thence S29°13’40”W, 1258.77 feet; thence N60°51‘11”W, 449.33 feet; thence S29°36’59”W, 665.66 feet; thence N60°50’08”W, 64.96 feet to the True Point of Beginning.
Assessor’s Parcel Number 009-030-057-000
(End of Legal Description)
Agenda Item #5.7.
File Number: 463973 Page 4 of 8
SCHEDULE B
At the date hereof, exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed exceptions and exclusions contained in said policy or policies would be as follows:
Taxes:
A. Property taxes, which are a lien not yet due and payable, including any assessments collected with taxes, to be levied for the fiscal year 2014 – 2015.
B. General and Special City and/or County taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes, for the fiscal year 2013 - 2014:
1 st
Installment: $11,242.63 Paid
2 nd
Installment: $11,242.63 Open
Parcel No.: 009-030-057
Code Area: 003-000
C. Assessments, if any, for Community Facility Districts affecting said land which may exist by virtue of assessment maps or notices filed by said districts. Said assessments are collected with the County Taxes.
D. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 75) of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California.
Exceptions:
1. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records
2. An easement for public utilities and rights incidental thereto in favor of Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company as set forth in a document recorded March 28, 1930 in Book 49 at Page 169 of Official Records, affects as described therein.
3. An easement for underground water pipeline and rights incidental thereto in favor of the City of St.
Helena as set forth in a document recorded December 5, 1972, in Book 895 at Page 383 of Official Records, affects as described therein.
4. The matters contained in an instrument entitled “Hunt Avenue Storm Drain Reimbursement Agreement” dated November 14, 1995, by and between the City of St. Helena and St. Helena Office Park, a California general partnership and B & E Properties, a California general partnership upon the terms therein provided recorded November 29, 1995, as Instrument 1995-026769 of Official Records.
5. The matters contained in an instrument entitled “Temporary Construction Easement” dated December 9, 2008, by and between Dennis R. Hunter, Grantor and the City of St. Helena, Grantee upon the terms therein provided recorded April 17, 2009, as Instrument 2009-0009317 of Official Records.
Affects as shown on map attached thereto
Agenda Item #5.7.
File Number: 463973 Page 5 of 8
6. The matters contained in an instrument entitled “Utility Easement Agreement” dated December 9, 2009, by and between Dennis R. Hunter, Grantor and the City of St. Helena, Grantee upon the terms therein provided recorded April 17, 2009, as Instrument 2009-0009318 of Official Records.
Affects as shown on map attached thereto.
7. Deed of Trust to secure an indebtedness in the amount shown below, and any other obligations secured thereby:
Amount: $10,000,000.00
Dated: May 12, 2009
Trustor: Dennis R. Hunter, dealing with his separate property Trustee: Stewart Title of California, Inc.
Beneficiary: First Community Bank
Recorded: May 19, 2009 as Instrument No. 2009-0012656 of Official Records Loan No.: 0001 801006 06
The above deed of trust is reflected as an equity line loan or a revolving line of credit. Prior to final payoff we will require a written statement from the beneficiary that the account has been closed, the enclosed indemnity (for refinance purposes only) signed by the owner/trustor, and or a full reconveyance must be submitted for recording concurrent with payoff.
8. The matters contained in an instrument entitled “Temporary Construction Easement” dated December 9, 2008, by and between City of St. Helena and Dennis R. Hunter upon the terms therein provided recorded April 17, 2009 as Instrument No. 2009-0009317, of Official Records.
9. The matters contained in an instrument entitled “Utility Easement Agreement” dated December 9, 2008, by and between City of St. Helena and Dennis R. Hunter upon the terms therein provided recorded April 17, 2009 as Instrument No. 2009-0009318, of Official Records.
10. Matters which may be disclosed by an inspection or by a survey of said land satisfactory to this Company, or by inquiry of the parties in possession thereof.
11. Rights of parties in possession.
(End of Exceptions)
Agenda Item #5.7.
File Number: 463973 Page 6 of 8
NOTES AND REQUIREMENTS
A. If an Owners Policy will be requested, please be aware that unless instructed otherwise, we will issue a CLTA Standard Coverage Owners Policy. If a different form of policy is contemplated for this transaction, please advise and contact your title officer for additional requirements.
B. There are no conveyances affecting said land, recorded with the County Recorder within 24 months of the date of this report.
C. This report can be used as an expedited search/starter in a subsequent sale.
D. This report is preparatory to the issuance of an ALTA loan Policy. We have no knowledge of any fact which would preclude the issuance of the policy with CLTA Endorsement Forms 100 and 116 and if applicable, 115 and 116.2 attached.
E. The charge for a policy of title insurance, when issued through this title order, will be based on the Basic Rate.
F. The map attached, if any, may or may not be a survey of the land depicted hereon. Stewart Title expressly disclaims any liability for loss or damage which may result from reliance on this map except to the extent coverage for such loss or damage is expressly provided by the terms and provisions of the title insurance policy, if any, to which this map is attached.
G. A Preliminary Change of Ownership Report must be completed by the transferee (buyer) prior to the transfer of property in accordance with the provisions of Section 480.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
The Preliminary Change of Ownership Report should be submitted to the recorder concurrent with the recordation of any document effecting a change of ownership. If a document evidencing a change of ownership (i.e. Deed, Affidavit-Death Joint Tenant) is presented to the recorder for recording without a preliminary change of ownership report, the recorder may charge an additional $20.00 H. If your property is in San Francisco, it is the requirement of the City and County of San Francisco that a Transfer Tax affidavit to be completed and signed by the Grantor for each deed submitted for recording.
This is an addition to a Preliminary Change of Ownership Report.
In addition to County Transfer Tax, any conveyance of the herein described property may be subject to a City Transfer and/or Conveyance Tax, as follows.
Alameda $12.00 per thousand
Albany $11.50 per thousand
Berkeley $15.00 per thousand
Cloverdale $1.10 per thousand
Cotati $1.90 per thousand
Culver City $4.50 per thousand
Hayward $4.50 per thousand
Los Angeles $4.50 per thousand
Mountain View $3.30 per thousand
Oakland $15.00 per thousand
Palo Alto $3.30 per thousand
Petaluma $2.00 per thousand
Piedmont $13.00 per thousand
Agenda Item #5.7.
File Number: 463973 Page 7 of 8
Pomona $2.20 per thousand
Redondo Beach $2.20 per thousand
Richmond $7.00 per thousand
Riverside $1.10 per thousand
Sacramento $2.75 per thousand
San Leandro $6.00 per thousand
City and County of San
Francisco
Up to $250,000 = $5.00 per thousand
$250,000 to $1,000,000 = $6.80 per thousand
$1,000,000 to $5,000,000 = $7.50 per thousand
$5,000,000 to $10,000,000 = $20.00 per thousand
Above $10,000,000 = $25.00 per thousand
(Do not add the additional $1.10 for County Tax, it is
included.)
San Jose $3.30 per thousand
San Mateo $5.00 per thousand
San Rafael $2.00 per thousand
Santa Monica $3.00 per thousand
Santa Rosa $2.00 per thousand
Sebastopol $2.00 per thousand
Vallejo $3.30 per thousand
Waterford $0.55 per thousand
Winters $1.10 per thousand
Woodland $1.10 per thousand
Additional Requirements for “Short Sale” Transactions in which a lender will accept less than the outstanding balance of its loan as full satisfaction of the obligation:
The Company will require, prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, evidence that the first-position trust deed holder has received and acknowledged all payments to be made to subordinate-position lien holders, regardless of whether such payments are to be made from proceeds or from contributions by real estate brokers and/or buyers in the subject transaction, or from other third-party sources. Evidence shall include but not be limited to: (a) a written demand from the first-position trust deed holder acknowledging and approving payments to subordinate-position lien holders from proceeds and otherwise; or (b) a supplemental letter or amended demand from the first-position lien holder acknowledging payments to be made to subordinate lien holders from sources other than proceeds (including broker commissions and additional buyer deposits).
Agenda Item #5.7.
File Number: 463973 Page 8 of 8
CALIFORNIA “GOOD FUNDS” LAW
California Insurance Code Section 12413.1 regulates the disbursement of escrow and sub-escrow funds by title companies. The law requires that funds be deposited in the title company escrow account and available for withdrawal prior to disbursement. Funds received by Stewart Title of California, Inc. via wire transfer may be disbursed upon receipt. Funds received via cashier’s checks or teller checks drawn on a California Bank may be disbursed on the next business day after the day of deposit. If funds are received by any other means, recording and/or disbursement may be delayed, and you should contact your title or escrow officer.
All escrow and sub-escrow funds received will be deposited with other escrow funds in one or more noninterest bearing escrow accounts in a financial institution selected by Stewart Title of California, Inc..
Stewart Title of California, Inc. may receive certain direct or indirect benefits from the financial institution by reason of the deposit of such funds or the maintenance of such accounts with the financial institution, and Stewart Title of California, Inc. shall have no obligation to account to the depositing party in any manner for the value of, or to pay to such party, any benefit received by Stewart Title of California, Inc.. Such benefits shall be deemed additional compensation to Stewart Title of California, Inc. for its services in connection with the escrow or sub-escrow.
If any check submitted is dishonored upon presentation for payment, you are authorized to notify all principals and/or their respective agents of such nonpayment.
Wire Instructions
Please find below Wiring Instructions for Escrow # 463973 Effective March 31, 2014
All funds wired should be directed to:
Bank Comerica Bank
San Jose Main
Address 333 West Santa Clara Street
City/State San Jose, CA 95113
ABA 121137522
Credit To Stewart Title of California, Inc.
Account No. 1894094869
Reference Escrow Officer - Sandy Veveiros
Escrow Number - 463973
Escrow Unit No. - 7903
We do not accept ACH Transfers, these funds will be returned and may cause a delay in closing. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Agenda Item #5.7.
File No.: 463973
4 4STG Privacy Notice 1 (Rev 01/26/09) Stewart Title Companies WHAT DO THE STEWART TITLE COMPANIES DO WITH YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION? Federal and applicable state law and regulations give consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing. Federal and applicable state law regulations also require us to tell you how we collect, share, and protect your personal information. Please read this notice carefully to understand how we use your personal information. This privacy notice is distributed on behalf of the Stewart Title Guaranty Company and its affiliates (the Stewart Title Companies), pursuant to Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA).
The types of personal information we collect and share depend on the product or service that you have sought through us. This information can include social security numbers and driver's license number.
All financial companies, such as the Stewart Title Companies, need to share customers'personal information to run their everyday business—to process transactions and maintain customer accounts. In the section below, we list the reasons that we can share customers'personal information; the reasons that we choose to share; and whether you can limit this sharing.
Reasons we can share your personal information Do we share? Can you limit this sharing? For our everyday business purposes— to process your transactions and maintain your account. This may include running the business and managing customer accounts, such as processing transactions, mailing, and auditing services, and responding to court orders and legal investigations.
Yes No
For our marketing purposes— to offer our products and services to you. Yes No For joint marketing with other financial companies No We don't share For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your transactions and experiences. Affiliates are companies related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and nonfinancial companies. Our affiliates may include companies with a Stewart name; financial companies, such as Stewart Title Company
Yes No
For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your creditworthiness.
No We don't share
For our affiliates to market to you Yes No
For nonaffiliates to market to you. Nonaffiliates are companies not related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and nonfinancial companies.
No We don't share
We may disclose your personal information to our affiliates or to nonaffiliates as permitted by law. If you request a transaction with a nonaffiliate, such as a third party insurance company, we will disclose your personal information to that nonaffiliate. [We do not control their subsequent use of information, and suggest you refer to their privacy notices.] Sharing practices
How often do the Stewart Title Companies
notify me about their practices?
We must notify you about our sharing practices when you request a transaction.
How do the Stewart Title Companies
protect my personal information?
To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we use security measures that comply with federal and state law. These measures include computer, file, and building safeguards.
How do the Stewart Title Companies
collect my personal information?
We collect your personal information, for example, when you • request insurance-related services
• provide such information to us
We also collect your personal information from others, such as the real estate agent or lender involved in your transaction, credit reporting agencies, affiliates or other companies.
What sharing can I limit? Although federal and state law give you the right to limit sharing (e.g., opt out) in certain instances, we do not share your personal information in those instances.
Contact Us
If you have any questions about this privacy notice, please contact us at: Stewart Title Guaranty Company, 1980 Post Oak Blvd., Privacy Officer, Houston, Texas 77056 Agenda Item #5.7.
Order Number: 463973
Available Discounts Disclosure Statement
Order No. 463973
AVAILABLE DISCOUNTS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
This is to give you notice that Stewart Title of California, Inc. (“ Stewart Title”) is pleased to inform you that upon proper qualification, there are premium discounts available upon the purchase of title insurance covering improved property with a one to four family residential dwelling.
Such discounts apply to and include:
Property located within an area proclaimed a state or federal disaster area; Property purchased from a foreclosing beneficiary or successful bidder at a foreclosure sale; Property being refinanced.
Please talk with your escrow or title officer to determine your qualification for any of these discounts.
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXHIBIT “A”
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Order No.: 463973
Escrow No: 463973
The land referred to herein is situated in the State of California County of Napa, City of Napa, and described as follows:
Portions of that certain real property situate in the City of St Helena, County of Napa, State of California being a portion of Parcel One described in the Grant Deed to the City of St Helena recorded March 15, 2005 at Document No. 2005-0009620 Official Records Napa County and a portion of the lands described in the Grant Deed to Dennis R. Hunter recorded December 7, 2001, at Document No. 2001-0043130 Official Records Napa County, said portions being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the southwestern corner of the above reference lands to Dennis R. Hunter; thence along the southwestern line of said lands S60°50’ 08”E, 50.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence leaving last said line N29°14’ 27”E, 851.74 feet; thence N47°03’ 45”E, 107.96 feet; thence 560°46’ 20”E,
22.90 feet; thence N32°22’ 33”E, 450.36 feet; thence N60°54’ 21”W, 10.02 feet; thence N32°22’ 33”E, 177.79 feet; thence N50°49’ 49”E, 264.81 feet to the general southwestern line of the above referenced Parcel One to the City of St Helena; thence along said general southwestern line S71°07’ 20”E, 2.96 feet; thence leaving last said line N41°18’ 58”E, 254.98 feet; thence N49°42’ 50”E, 48.52 feet; thence N60°38’ 24”E, 44.19 feet; thence S 7729°32’ 38”E, 64.19 feet; thence S84°21’ 35”’ E, 142.68 feet; thence S78°16’ 37”E, 64.79 feet; thence S70°20’ 25”E, 86.57 feet; thence S47°50’ 36”E, 68.79 feet; thence S62°05’ 04”E, 77.73 feet to the southeastern line of said Parcel One to the City of St. Helena; thence along last said line S28°56’ 09”W, 279.88 feet to the northeastern corner of said lands to Dennis R.
Hunter; thence along the general southeastern and southwestern lines of said lands to Dennis R. Hunter N60°46’ 20”W, 234.63 feet; thence S29°13’ 40”W, 1258.77 feet; thence N60°51‘11”W, 449.33 feet; thence S29°36’ 59”W, 665.66 feet; thence N60°50’ 08”W, 64.96 feet to the True Point of Beginning.
Assessor’s Parcel Number 009-030-057-000
(End of Legal Description))
Agenda Item #5.7.
CLTA Preliminary Report Form
Rev. 06-03-11
Exhibit A (Revised 06-03-11)
CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION
STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY – 1990
EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE
The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys'fees or expenses which arise by reason of:
1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building or zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien, or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy.
(b) Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy.
2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge.
3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters:
(a) whether or not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant;
(b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy;
(c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the insured mortgage or for the estate or interest insured by this policy.
4. Unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness, to comply with the applicable doing business laws of the state in which the land is situated.
5. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law.
6. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the insured the estate of interest insured by this policy or the transaction creating the interest of the insured lender, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency or similar creditors'rights laws.
Agenda Item #5.7.
CLTA Preliminary Report Form
Rev. 06-03-11
EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE - SCHEDULE B, PART I
This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys'fees or expenses) which arise by reason of:
1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records.
Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records.
2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof.
3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the public records.
4. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records.
5. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b) or (c) are shown by the public records.
6. Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the public records.
CLTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (02-03-10)
ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE
EXCLUSIONS
In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, You are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys'fees, and expenses resulting from:
1. Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of those portions of any law or government regulation concerning:
a. building;
b. zoning;
c. land use;
d. improvements on the Land;
e. land division; and
f. environmental protection.
This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 8.a., 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23 or 27.
2. The failure of Your existing structures, or any part of them, to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 14 or 15.
3. The right to take the Land by condemning it. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 17.
Agenda Item #5.7.
CLTA Preliminary Report Form
Rev. 06-03-11
4. Risks:
a. that are created, allowed, or agreed to by You, whether or not they are recorded in the Public Records; b. that are Known to You at the Policy Date, but not to Us, unless they are recorded in the Public Records at the Policy Date;
c. that result in no loss to You; or
d. that first occur after the Policy Date - this does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 7, 8.e., 25, 26, 27 or 28.
5. Failure to pay value for Your Title.
6. Lack of a right:
a. to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in paragraph 3 of Schedule A; and b. in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch the Land.
This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 11 or 21.
7. The transfer of the Title to You is invalid as a preferential transfer or as a fraudulent transfer or conveyance under federal bankruptcy.
LIMITATIONS ON COVERED RISKS
Your insurance for the following Covered Risks is limited on the Owner’s Coverage Statement as follows:
• For Covered Risk 16, 18, 19, and 21 Your Deductible Amount and Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability shown in Schedule A.
The deductible amounts and maximum dollar limits shown on Schedule A are as follows:
Your Deductible Amount
Our Maximum Dollar
Limit of Liability
Covered Risk 16:
1 % of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A or
$2,500.00 $10,000.00
(whichever is less)
Covered Risk 18:
1 % of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A or
$5,000,00 $25,000.00
(whichever is less)
Covered Risk 19:
1 % of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A or
$5,000.00 $25,000.00
(whichever is less)
Covered Risk 21:
1 % of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A or
$2,500.00 $5,000.00
(whichever is less)
Agenda Item #5.7.
CLTA Preliminary Report Form
Rev. 06-03-11
2006 ALTA LOAN POLICY (06-17-06)
EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE
The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys'fees, or expenses that arise by reason of:
1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to
(i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land;
(ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; or
(iv) environmental protection;
or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6.
2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8.
3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13 or 14); or
(e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage.
4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business laws of the state where the Land is situated.
5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law.
6. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors’ rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or
(b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b) of this policy.
7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records.
This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11(b).
The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage:
Agenda Item #5.7.
CLTA Preliminary Report Form
Rev. 06-03-11
EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE
This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys’ fees or expenses) that arise by reason of:
1. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records.
2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land.
3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.
4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records.
5. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records.
6. Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the public records. 2006 ALTA OWNER’S POLICY (06-17-06)
EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE
The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys'fees, or expenses that arise by reason of:
1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to
(i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land;
(ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; or
(iv) environmental protection;
or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6.
2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8.
Agenda Item #5.7.
CLTA Preliminary Report Form
Rev. 06-03-11
3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 and 10); or
(e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title.
4. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors’ rights laws, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or
(b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 9 of this policy.
5. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A.
The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage:
EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE
This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys’ fees or expenses) that arise by reason of:
1. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records.
2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown in the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land.
3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.
4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and that are not shown by the Public Records.
5. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records.
6. Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the public records.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Order Number: 7931-463973 - ABA Disclosure Title Page 1 of 1
AFFILIATED BUSINESS ARRANGEMENT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Date: March 31, 2014
To :
Property:
APN# 009-030-057
Napa, California 94558
From: Stewart Title of California, Inc.
This is to give you notice that Stewart Title of California, Inc. (“ Stewart Title”) has a business relationship with Stewart Solutions, LLC, DBA – Stewart Specialty Insurance Services, LLC (“ Stewart Insurance”). Stewart Information Services Corporation owns 100% of Stewart Insurance and Stewart Title of California. Because of this relationship, this referral may provide Stewart Title a financial or other benefit.
Set forth below is the estimated charge or range of charges for the settlement services listed. You are NOT required to use the listed provider(s) as a condition for purchase, sale, or refinance of the subject Property. THERE ARE FREQUENTLY OTHER SETTLEMENT SERVICE PROVIDERS AVAILABLE WITH SIMILAR SERVICES. YOU ARE FREE TO SHOP AROUND TO DETERMINE
THAT YOU ARE RECEIVING THE BEST SERVICES AND THE BEST RATE FOR THESE SERVICES.
Stewart Insurance Settlement Service Charge or range of charges Hazard Insurance $400.00 to $6,500.00
Home Warranty $255.00 to $ 780.00
Natural Hazard Disclosure Report $ 42.50 to 149.50
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I/we have read this disclosure form, and understand that Stewart Title is referring me/us to purchase the above-described settlement service(s) and may receive a financial or other benefit as the result of this referral.
Signature
Signature
Agenda Item #5.7.
APPENDIX C
PHASE I QUESTIONNAIRE
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
Agenda Item #5.7.
APPENDIX D
EDR RADIUS MAP REPORT
Agenda Item #5.7.
FORM-LBD-CHM
The EDR Radius Map™ Report
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Hunter Property
Adams Street
Saint Helena, CA 94574
Inquiry Number: 5167765.2s
January 25, 2018
Agenda Item #5.7.
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 8
Orphan Summary 96
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
GeoCheck - Not Requested
TC5167765.2s Page 1
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2018 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
ADAMS STREET
SAINT HELENA, CA 94574
COORDINATES
Latitude (North): 38.5113800 - 38˚ 30’ 40.96’’
Longitude (West): 122.4645960 - 122˚ 27’ 52.54’’
Universal Tranverse Mercator: Zone 10
UTM X (Meters): 546680.1
UTM Y (Meters): 4262485.0
Elevation: 219 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 5602436 SAINT HELENA, CA
Version Date: 2012
South Map: 5602434 RUTHERFORD, CA
Version Date: 2012
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
Portions of Photo from: 20140604, 20140608
Source: USDA
Agenda Item #5.7.
5167765.2s Page 2
36 ST HELENA PETROLEUM 905 MAIN ST ENVIROSTOR, LUST, HIST CORTESE Higher 2746, 0.520, South K35 PG AND E ST HELENA MITCHELL DR AND OAK EDR MGP Higher 2341, 0.443, SSW 34 KAREN RECTOR 1410 ADAMS ST LUST Higher 2337, 0.443, SW K33 PG&E ST. HELENA 1301-1302 MITCHELL D ENVIROSTOR, VCP, DEED Higher 2323, 0.440, SSW K32 ST. HELENA PG & E 1301-1302 MITCHELL D SLIC Higher 2276, 0.431, SSW J31 JOE MCGRATH 632 MCCORKLE ST LUST Higher 2183, 0.413, SE J30 632 MCCORKLE REDEVEL 632 MCCORKLE AVENUE SLIC Higher 2183, 0.413, SE I29 VINTAGE BANK 1065 MAIN ST LUST Higher 2118, 0.401, South I28 SIDEWALK-POPE AND MA 1080 MAIN ST LUST Higher 1984, 0.376, South G27 BEN FRANKLIN VARIETY 1111 MAIN ST LUST Higher 1929, 0.365, SSW G26 ST. HELENA/BEN FRANK 1111 MAIN ST LUST, HAZNET Higher 1929, 0.365, SSW H25 PACIFIC BELL 1240 OAK AVENUE LUST, EMI Higher 1907, 0.361, SSW H24 PACIFIC BELL 1240 OAK STREET RCRA-SQG, LUST, FINDS, ECHO, HIST CORTESE Higher 1907, 0.361, SSW F23 CITY OF ST. HELENA S 1108 MAIN LUST Higher 1843, 0.349, SSW F22 VALLEY CONVENIENCE S 1108 MAIN ST LUST, HIST CORTESE Higher 1843, 0.349, SSW G21 NAPA VALLEY PETROLEU 1153 MAIN ST LUST, HIST CORTESE Higher 1825, 0.346, SSW F20 NOBLE PROPERTIES 1132 MAIN STREET SLIC Higher 1782, 0.338, SSW 19 OGLETREE’S MACHINE S 1017 POPE ST LUST Higher 1769, 0.335, South F18 SAINT HELENA PLAZA 1136 MAIN ST LUST Higher 1724, 0.327, SSW F17 HEUBLEIN FINE WINE G 8215 ST HELENA HWY LUST, SWEEPS UST, HIST CORTESE Higher 1686, 0.319, SSW D16 CHEVRON 1400 MAIN ST LUST Higher 1536, 0.291, SW
15 ST. HELENA, CITY OF, 1480 MAIN STREET LUST, ENF, HIST CORTESE, NPDES Higher 1444, 0.273, SW E14 PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE LUST Higher 1443, 0.273, WSW E13 HELEN PASCHICH ESTAT 1078 FULTON LANE LUST, UST, HIST UST, HIST CORTESE Higher 1438, 0.272, WSW D12 CHEVRON 1400 MAIN ST LUST, HIST CORTESE Higher 1359, 0.257, SW C11 UNION 76 1380 MAIN ST LUST, HIST CORTESE Higher 1335, 0.253, SW B10 ABRUZZINI PROPERTY 1030 FULTON LN LUST, SLIC, HIST CORTESE Higher 1243, 0.235, WSW B9 RON ABRUZZINI 1030 FULTON LN SWEEPS UST, CA FID UST Higher 1243, 0.235, WSW B8 ABRUZZINI PROPERTY 1030 FULTON LANE UST, HIST UST Higher 1243, 0.235, WSW 7 FACILITY 49-000-0059 1 SKAGGS ISLAND RD UST Higher 1226, 0.232, SSE 6 SAFEWAY STORE #0762 1026 HUNT AVE LUST Higher 1105, 0.209, SSW C5 TRIPOLI MARKET 607 29 LUST, HIST CORTESE Higher 1101, 0.209, SW C4 CALTRANS UNKNOWN MITCHELL & P LUST Higher 1101, 0.209, SW B3 JIM WHEELER PAINTING 1030 FULTON AVE RCRA-SQG Higher 1085, 0.205, WSW A2 PM MORISOLI 940 HUNT AVE HIST UST Higher 812, 0.154, SSW A1 P.M. MORISOLI 940 HUNT AVE SWEEPS UST Higher 812, 0.154, SSW
MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
ADAMS STREET
SAINT HELENA, CA 94574
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION SITE NAME ADDRESS Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
RESPONSE State Response Sites
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF Solid Waste Information System
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
AST Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS Considered Brownfieds Sites Listing
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
WMUDS/SWAT Waste Management Unit Database
SWRCY Recycler Database
HAULERS Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations ODI Open Dump Inventory
IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database
SCH School Property Evaluation Program
CDL Clandestine Drug Labs
Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
Local Land Records
LIENS Environmental Liens Listing
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
CHMIRS California Hazardous Material Incident Report System LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing
MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing
SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information
EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
ROD Records Of Decision
RMP Risk Management Plans
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS PCB Activity Database System
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites
US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem US MINES Mines Master Index File
ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites
ECHO Enforcement & Compliance History Information
DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
CA BOND EXP. PLAN Bond Expenditure Plan
Cortese "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List CUPA Listings CUPA Resources List
DRYCLEANERS Cleaner Facilities
EMI Emissions Inventory Data
ENF Enforcement Action Listing
Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing HAZNET Facility and Manifest Data
ICE ICE
HWP EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing
HWT Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database
MINES Mines Site Location Listing
MWMP Medical Waste Management Program Listing
NPDES NPDES Permits Listing
PEST LIC Pesticide Regulation Licenses Listing
PROC Certified Processors Database
Notify 65 Proposition 65 Records
UIC UIC Listing
WASTEWATER PITS Oil Wastewater Pits Listing
WDS Waste Discharge System
WIP Well Investigation Program Case List
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR Hist Auto EDR Exclusive Historical Auto Stations
EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases.
Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property.
Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-SQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month.
A review of the RCRA-SQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 09/13/2017 has revealed that there is 1 RCRA-SQG site within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ JIM WHEELER PAINTING 1030 FULTON AVE WSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.205 mi.) B3 9 State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
ENVIROSTOR: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites.
A review of the ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/30/2017 has revealed that there are 2 ENVIROSTOR sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ PG&E ST. HELENA 1301-1302 MITCHELL D SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.440 mi.) K33 72 Facility Id: 28490002
Status: Certified / Operation & Maintenance
ST HELENA PETROLEUM 905 MAIN ST S 1/2 - 1 (0.520 mi.) 36 92 Facility Id: 28290001
Status: Refer: Other Agency
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Sites included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.
A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 24 LUST sites within Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8
approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CALTRANS UNKNOWN MITCHELL & P SW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.209 mi.) C4 10 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0249
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500216
date9: 2/11/2004
TRIPOLI MARKET 607 29 SW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.209 mi.) C5 12
Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0172
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500156
date9: 7/25/2000
SAFEWAY STORE #0762 1026 HUNT AVE SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.209 mi.) 6 13 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Open
Permit ID: 248471
ABRUZZINI PROPERTY 1030 FULTON LN WSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.235 mi.) B10 16 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0002
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500001
date9: 5/15/1992
UNION 76 1380 MAIN ST SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.253 mi.) C11 18
Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0175
Facility Id: 28-0295
Facility Status: Post remedial action monitoring
Facility Status: Leak being confirmed
Global Id: T0605500159
Global Id: T0605500251
CHEVRON 1400 MAIN ST SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.257 mi.) D12 22
Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500190
HELEN PASCHICH ESTAT 1078 FULTON LANE WSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.272 mi.) E13 25 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Facility Id: 28-0134
Facility Status: Case Closed
date9: 12/10/1992
PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE WSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.273 mi.) E14 26 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9
Global Id: T0605500123
ST. HELENA, CITY OF, 1480 MAIN STREET SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.273 mi.) 15 27 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0210
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500189
date9: 11/4/2003
CHEVRON 1400 MAIN ST SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.291 mi.) D16 35
Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Facility Id: 28-0211
Facility Status: Preliminary site assessment underway
HEUBLEIN FINE WINE G 8215 ST HELENA HWY SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.319 mi.) F17 35 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0068
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500064
date9: 10/3/1995
SAINT HELENA PLAZA 1136 MAIN ST SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.327 mi.) F18 37 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T10000000393
OGLETREE’S MACHINE S 1017 POPE ST S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.335 mi.) 19 39 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Open
Permit ID: 248458
NAPA VALLEY PETROLEU 1153 MAIN ST SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.346 mi.) G21 40 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0064
Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
Global Id: T0605500061
VALLEY CONVENIENCE S 1108 MAIN ST SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.349 mi.) F22 45 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0186
Facility Status: Remedial action (cleanup) Underway
Global Id: T0605500168
CITY OF ST. HELENA S 1108 MAIN SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.349 mi.) F23 62 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Closed
Permit ID: 248384
PACIFIC BELL 1240 OAK STREET SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.361 mi.) H24 62 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0128
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10
Facility Status: Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500117
date9: 8/8/1996
PACIFIC BELL 1240 OAK AVENUE SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.361 mi.) H25 65 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Closed
Permit ID: 248171
ST. HELENA/BEN FRANK 1111 MAIN ST SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.365 mi.) G26 69 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Closed
Permit ID: 9965
BEN FRANKLIN VARIETY 1111 MAIN ST SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.365 mi.) G27 70 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Closed
Permit ID: 248506
SIDEWALK-POPE AND MA 1080 MAIN ST S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.376 mi.) I28 70 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Open
Permit ID: 248382
VINTAGE BANK 1065 MAIN ST S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.401 mi.) I29 70 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Open
Permit ID: 248369
JOE MCGRATH 632 MCCORKLE ST SE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.413 mi.) J31 71 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Open
Permit ID: 318765
KAREN RECTOR 1410 ADAMS ST SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.443 mi.) 34 92 Database: NAPA CO. LUST, Date of Government Version: 01/09/2017 Status: Closed
Permit ID: 248151
SLIC: Cleanup Program Sites (CPS; also known as Site Cleanups [SC] and formerly known as Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups [SLIC] sites) included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.
A review of the SLIC list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 4 SLIC sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ ABRUZZINI PROPERTY 1030 FULTON LN WSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.235 mi.) B10 16 Database: SLIC, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Facility Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T10000002584
NOBLE PROPERTIES 1132 MAIN STREET SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.338 mi.) F20 40 Database: SLIC, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Facility Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T10000000217
Global Id: SL0605588535
632 MCCORKLE REDEVEL 632 MCCORKLE AVENUE SE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.413 mi.) J30 70 Database: SLIC, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11
Facility Status: Open - Verification Monitoring
Global Id: T10000010047
ST. HELENA PG & E 1301-1302 MITCHELL D SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.431 mi.) K32 71 Database: SLIC, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Facility Status: Open - Remediation
Global Id: SL0605518541
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database.
A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 2 UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ FACILITY 49-000-0059 1 SKAGGS ISLAND RD SSE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.232 mi.) 7 14 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 12/11/2017
Facility Id: 49-000-005917
ABRUZZINI PROPERTY 1030 FULTON LANE WSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.235 mi.) B8 14 Database: NAPA CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 11/22/2017 Facility Id: NAPA0018
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
VCP: Contains low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases and the project proponents have request that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs.
A review of the VCP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/30/2017 has revealed that there is 1 VCP site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ PG&E ST. HELENA 1301-1302 MITCHELL D SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.440 mi.) K33 72 Status: Certified / Operation & Maintenance
Facility Id: 28490002
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
SWEEPS UST: Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the SWRCB in the early 1990’s. The listing is no Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 12
longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list.
A review of the SWEEPS UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/01/1994 has revealed that there are 2 SWEEPS UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ P.M. MORISOLI 940 HUNT AVE SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.154 mi.) A1 8 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 42320
RON ABRUZZINI 1030 FULTON LN WSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.235 mi.) B9 15 Comp Number: 54371
HIST UST: Historical UST Registered Database.
A review of the HIST UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/15/1990 has revealed that there are 2 HIST UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ PM MORISOLI 940 HUNT AVE SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.154 mi.) A2 8 Facility Id: 00000042320
ABRUZZINI PROPERTY 1030 FULTON LANE WSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.235 mi.) B8 14 Facility Id: 00000054371
CA FID UST: The Facility Inventory Database contains active and inactive underground storage tank locations. The source is the State Water Resource Control Board.
A review of the CA FID UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/31/1994 has revealed that there is 1 CA FID UST site within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ RON ABRUZZINI 1030 FULTON LN WSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.235 mi.) B9 15 Facility Id: 28000007
Status: I
Local Land Records
DEED: The use of recorded land use restrictions is one of the methods the DTSC uses to protect the public from unsafe exposures to hazardous substances and wastes .
A review of the DEED list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/04/2017 has revealed that there is 1 DEED site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ PG&E ST. HELENA 1301-1302 MITCHELL D SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.440 mi.) K33 72 Status: CERTIFIED / OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 13
Envirostor ID: 28490002
Other Ascertainable Records
HIST CORTESE: The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. This listing is no longer updated by the state agency.
A review of the HIST CORTESE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/2001 has revealed that there are 10 HIST CORTESE sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ TRIPOLI MARKET 607 29 SW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.209 mi.) C5 12
Reg Id: 28-0172
ABRUZZINI PROPERTY 1030 FULTON LN WSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.235 mi.) B10 16 Reg Id: 28-0002
UNION 76 1380 MAIN ST SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.253 mi.) C11 18
Reg Id: 28-0175
Reg Id: 28-0295
CHEVRON 1400 MAIN ST SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.257 mi.) D12 22
Reg Id: 28-0211
HELEN PASCHICH ESTAT 1078 FULTON LANE WSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.272 mi.) E13 25 Reg Id: 28-0134
ST. HELENA, CITY OF, 1480 MAIN STREET SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.273 mi.) 15 27 Reg Id: 28-0210
HEUBLEIN FINE WINE G 8215 ST HELENA HWY SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.319 mi.) F17 35 Reg Id: 28-0068
NAPA VALLEY PETROLEU 1153 MAIN ST SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.346 mi.) G21 40 Reg Id: 28-0064
VALLEY CONVENIENCE S 1108 MAIN ST SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.349 mi.) F22 45 Reg Id: 28-0186
PACIFIC BELL 1240 OAK STREET SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.361 mi.) H24 62 Reg Id: 28-0128
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP: The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants) compiled by EDR’s researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800’s to 1950’s to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste.
Many of the byproducts of the gas production, such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds are potentially hazardous to human health and the Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 14
environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil and groundwater contamination.
A review of the EDR MGP list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there is 1 EDR MGP site within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ PG AND E ST HELENA MITCHELL DR AND OAK SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.443 mi.) K35 92 Agenda Item #5.7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5167765.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 15
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped. Count: 3 records.
Site Name Database(s)
____________ ____________
PG&E GAS PLANT ST HELENA SEMS-ARCHIVE
PGE FORMER MFRD GAS PLANT LUST
CORNER OF MITCHELL AND POPE ST LUST
Agenda Item #5.7.
EDR Inc.
110 kV
60 kV
2 4
0 4 0
7 6 0
4 4 0 0
960
3 6
8 8 0
8 4 0 8 0 0
8 0 0
7 6 0 760
7 6 0
760
7 20
8 8 0
8 8 0
8 4 0
8 4 0
8 0 0
800
7 6 0
7 6 0
7 2 0
7 7
2 0
2 0
7 2 0 7 2 0
7 2 0
680
6 8 0 6 8 0
6 8 0
6 8 0
5 6 0
520
5 2 0
640 6 4 0
6 4
6 4 0
600
6 0 0
6 0 0
6 0 0
5 6 0
4 0
0 0
5 6 0
5 6 0
5 6 0
5 2 0
6 0
5 2 0
4 8 0
4 8 0
4 4 0
4 4 0
4 0 0
4 0 0
3 6 0
3 6 0
3 6 0
8 0
8 0
4 8 0
4 4 0
4 4 0
4 0 0 4 0 0
3 6 0
360
6 0
3 2 0
3 2 0
2 8 0
2 80
2 0 0
2 0 0 2 0 0
2 4 0
2 4 0
2 4 0
2 4 0
2 4 0
2 4 0
2 4 0
240
2 4 0
2 8 0
280
2 8 0
2 8 0
280
320
320
320
3 2 0
3 2 0
3 2 0
320
3 2 0
360
3 6 0
360
3 6 0 3 6 0
4 4 0 0
400
4 0 0
4 0 0
440
4 4 0
4 4 0
4 8 0
4 8 0
4 8 0
5 2 0
5 2 0
5 2 0
5 2 0
4 8 0
4 4 0
2 0 0
2 8 0
3 2 0
3 2 0
3 6 0
4 0 0
0 Agenda Item #5.7.
EDR Inc.
240
240
Agenda Item #5.7.
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Proposed NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NPL LIENS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
SEMS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
RCRA-SQG 0.250 0 1 NR NR NR 1
RCRA-CESQG 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
Federal institutional controls /
engineering controls registries
LUCIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
US ENG CONTROLS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
US INST CONTROL 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Federal ERNS list
ERNS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
RESPONSE 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
ENVIROSTOR 1.000 0 0 1 1 NR 2
State and tribal landfill and/or
solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LUST 0.500 0 4 20 NR NR 24
TC5167765.2s Page 4
Agenda Item #5.7.
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted INDIAN LUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
SLIC 0.500 0 1 3 NR NR 4
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
UST 0.250 0 2 NR NR NR 2
AST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
INDIAN UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
VCP 0.500 0 0 1 NR NR 1
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
WMUDS/SWAT 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
SWRCY 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
HAULERS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
INDIAN ODI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DEBRIS REGION 9 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
ODI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
IHS OPEN DUMPS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Local Lists of Hazardous waste /
Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HIST Cal-Sites 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
SCH 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
CDL 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Toxic Pits 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
US CDL 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
SWEEPS UST 0.250 0 2 NR NR NR 2
HIST UST 0.250 0 2 NR NR NR 2
CA FID UST 0.250 0 1 NR NR NR 1
Local Land Records
LIENS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
LIENS 2 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
DEED 0.500 0 0 1 NR NR 1
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
TC5167765.2s Page 5
Agenda Item #5.7.
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted CHMIRS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
LDS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
MCS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
SPILLS 90 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
FUDS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
DOD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
SCRD DRYCLEANERS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
US FIN ASSUR 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
EPA WATCH LIST 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
2020 COR ACTION 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
TSCA 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
TRIS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
SSTS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RMP 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
RAATS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PRP 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PADS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
ICIS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
FTTS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
MLTS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
COAL ASH DOE 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
COAL ASH EPA 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
PCB TRANSFORMER 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
RADINFO 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HIST FTTS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
DOT OPS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
INDIAN RESERV 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
FUSRAP 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
UMTRA 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
LEAD SMELTERS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
US AIRS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
US MINES 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
ABANDONED MINES 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
FINDS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
UXO 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
ECHO 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
DOCKET HWC 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
FUELS PROGRAM 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
CA BOND EXP. PLAN 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Cortese 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CUPA Listings 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
DRYCLEANERS 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
EMI 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
ENF 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Financial Assurance 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HAZNET 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
TC5167765.2s Page 6
Agenda Item #5.7.
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted ICE 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HIST CORTESE 0.500 0 2 8 NR NR 10
HWP 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
HWT 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
MINES 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
MWMP 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
NPDES 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PEST LIC 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PROC 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Notify 65 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
UIC 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
WASTEWATER PITS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
WDS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
WIP 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP 1.000 0 0 1 0 NR 1
EDR Hist Auto 0.125 0 NR NR NR NR 0
EDR Hist Cleaner 0.125 0 NR NR NR NR 0
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA LF 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
RGA LUST 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
- Totals -- 0 0 15 35 1 0 51
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC5167765.2s Page 7
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Number Of Tanks: 1
Content: LEADED
STG: P
Tank Use: M.V. FUEL
Active Date: 07-01-85
Capacity: 300
Tank Status: A
SWRCB Tank Id: 28-000-042320-000001
Owner Tank Id: 1
Created Date: 06-30-89
Action Date: Not reported
Referral Date: 07-01-85
Board Of Equalization: Not reported
Number: 9
Comp Number: 42320
Status: Active
SWEEPS UST:
812 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster A
0.154 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
240 ft.
1/8-1/4 SAINT HELENA, CA 94574
SSW 940 HUNT AVE N/A
A1 P.M. MORISOLI SWEEPS UST S106930253
Click here for Geo Tracker PDF:
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Container Construction Thickness: Not reported
Type of Fuel: REGULAR
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Tank Capacity: 00000300
Year Installed: 1965
Container Num: 1
Tank Num: 001
Total Tanks: 0001
Owner City,St,Zip: RUTHERFORD, CA 94574
Owner Address: 1351 NIEBAUM LN.
Owner Name: P.M. MORISOLI
Telephone: 7079632430
Contact Name: Not reported
Other Type: FARM
Facility Type: Other
Facility ID: 00000042320
Region: STATE
URL: http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ustpdfs/pdf/0002B089.pdf File Number: 0002B089
HIST UST:
812 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster A
0.154 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
240 ft.
1/8-1/4 ST HELENA, CA 94574
SSW 940 HUNT AVE N/A
A2 PM MORISOLI HIST UST U001598325
TC5167765.2s Page 8
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Transporter of hazardous waste: No
Recycler of hazardous waste: No
Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No
U.S. importer of hazardous waste: No
Handler Activities Summary:
Owner/Op end date: Not reported
Owner/Op start date: 04/12/2006
Owner/Operator Type: Owner
Legal status: Private
Owner/operator extension: Not reported
Owner/operator fax: Not reported
Owner/operator email: Not reported
Owner/operator telephone: Not reported
Owner/operator country: US
ST HELENA, CA 94571
Owner/operator address: 1030 FULTON
Owner/operator name: TRIGEMINUS LLC
Owner/Op end date: Not reported
Owner/Op start date: 05/01/1989
Owner/Operator Type: Operator
Legal status: Private
Owner/operator extension: Not reported
Owner/operator fax: Not reported
Owner/operator email: Not reported
Owner/operator telephone: Not reported
Owner/operator country: US
Not reported
Owner/operator address: Not reported
Owner/operator name: JIM WHEELER
Owner/Operator Summary:
hazardous waste at any time
waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Description: Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Classification: Small Small Quantity Generator
EPA Region: 09
Contact email: Not reported
Contact telephone: 707-963-9377
Contact country: US
ST HELENA, CA 94574
Contact address: 1030 FULTON AVE
Contact: JIM WHEELER
EPA ID: CAR000175349
ST HELENA, CA 94574
Facility address: 1030 FULTON AVE
Facility name: JIM WHEELER PAINTING
Date form received by agency: 07/07/2006
RCRA-SQG:
1085 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster B
0.205 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
248 ft.
1/8-1/4 ST HELENA, CA 94574
WSW 1030 FULTON AVE CAR000175349
B3 JIM WHEELER PAINTING RCRA-SQG 1010313582
TC5167765.2s Page 9
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Violation Status: No violations found
. Waste name: IGNITABLE WASTE
. Waste code: D001
Used oil transporter: No
Used oil transfer facility: No
Used oil Specification marketer: No
Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No
User oil refiner: No
Used oil processor: No
Used oil fuel burner: No
Furnace exemption: No
On-site burner exemption: No
Underground injection activity: No
Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No
JIM WHEELER PAINTING (Continued) 1010313582
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500216
Action: Closure/No Further Action Letter - #2/11/2004
Date: 02/11/2004
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500216
LUST:
Phone Number: 7072534269
Email: Not reported
City: NAPA
Address: 1195 THIRD ST., ROOM 101
Organization Name: NAPA COUNTY
Contact Name: UST CASE WORKER
Contact Type: Local Agency Caseworker
Global Id: T0605500216
LUST:
Site History: Not reported
Potential Contaminants of Concern: Gasoline
Potential Media Affect: Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) Local Case Number: 0615
File Location: Local Agency
Local Agency: NAPA COUNTY
RB Case Number: 28-0249
Case Worker: ZZZ
Status Date: 02/11/2004
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Longitude: -122.469597
Latitude: 38.505939
Global Id: T0605500216
Geo Track: http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report.asp?global_id=T0605500216 Case Type: LUST Cleanup Site
Lead Agency: NAPA COUNTY
LUST:
1101 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster C
0.209 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
251 ft.
1/8-1/4 ST HELENA, CA 94574
SW UNKNOWN MITCHELL & POPE ST N/A
C4 CALTRANS LUST S106610904
TC5167765.2s Page 10
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Facility Status: Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0249
Region: 2
LUST REG 2:
Status Date: 02/11/2004
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500216
Status Date: 08/20/1996
Status: Open - Site Assessment
Global Id: T0605500216
Status Date: 11/13/1991
Status: Open - Case Begin Date
Global Id: T0605500216
LUST:
Action: Technical Correspondence / Assistance / Other
Date: 07/30/2003
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500216
Action: Meeting
Date: 10/08/2003
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500216
Action: Leak Reported
Date: 11/13/1991
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500216
Action: Leak Stopped
Date: 11/13/1996
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500216
Action: * No Action
Date: 12/23/2003
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500216
Action: Site Visit / Inspection / Sampling
Date: 06/26/2003
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500216
Action: Site Visit / Inspection / Sampling - #1/8/2004
Date: 01/08/2004
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500216
Action: Leak Discovery
Date: 11/13/1996
CALTRANS (Continued) S106610904
TC5167765.2s Page 11
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Date Post Remedial Action Monitoring Began: Not reported Date Remediation Action Underway: Not reported
Pollution Remediation Plan Submitted: Not reported
Pollution Characterization Began: Not reported
Preliminary Site Assesment Began: Not reported
Prelim. Site Assesment Wokplan Submitted: Not reported
Oversight Program: LUST
Date Leak Confirmed: 8/20/1996
Leak Source: UNK
Leak Cause: UNK
How Discovered: Tank Closure
Case Number: 0615
CALTRANS (Continued) S106610904
Action: Leak Stopped
Date: 10/11/1990
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500156
Action: Leak Discovery
Date: 10/11/1990
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500156
LUST:
Phone Number: Not reported
Email: [email protected]
City: NAPA
Address: 1195 THIRD STREET, SUITE 101
Organization Name: NAPA COUNTY
Contact Name: James Newman, P.G., C.E.G.
Contact Type: Local Agency Caseworker
Global Id: T0605500156
LUST:
Site History: Not reported
Potential Contaminants of Concern: Gasoline
Potential Media Affect: Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) Local Case Number: 0216
File Location: Local Agency
Local Agency: NAPA COUNTY
RB Case Number: 28-0172
Case Worker: JTN
Status Date: 07/25/2000
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Longitude: -122.469597
Latitude: 38.505939
Global Id: T0605500156
Geo Track: http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report.asp?global_id=T0605500156 Case Type: LUST Cleanup Site
Lead Agency: NAPA COUNTY
LUST:
1101 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster C
0.209 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
251 ft.
1/8-1/4 ST HELENA, CA 94574
SW 607 29 HIST CORTESE N/A
C5 TRIPOLI MARKET LUST S105026749
TC5167765.2s Page 12
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Reg Id: 28-0172
Reg By: LTNKA
Facility County Code: 28
Region: CORTESE
HIST CORTESE:
Date Post Remedial Action Monitoring Began: Not reported Date Remediation Action Underway: Not reported
Pollution Remediation Plan Submitted: Not reported
Pollution Characterization Began: Not reported
Preliminary Site Assesment Began: 6/25/1991
Prelim. Site Assesment Wokplan Submitted: Not reported
Oversight Program: LUST
Date Leak Confirmed: Not reported
Leak Source: Tank
Leak Cause: Structure Failure
How Discovered: Tank Closure
Case Number: 0216
Facility Status: Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0172
Region: 2
LUST REG 2:
Status Date: 07/25/2000
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500156
Status Date: 06/25/1991
Status: Open - Site Assessment
Global Id: T0605500156
Status Date: 10/11/1990
Status: Open - Case Begin Date
Global Id: T0605500156
LUST:
Action: Leak Reported
Date: 10/17/1990
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500156
TRIPOLI MARKET (Continued) S105026749
District: 0
Permit Type: Non-LOP
Status: Open
Permit ID: 248471
NAPA CO. LUST:
1105 ft.
0.209 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
244 ft.
1/8-1/4 ST. HELENA, CA
SSW 1026 HUNT AVE N/A
6 SAFEWAY STORE #0762 LUST S119102617
TC5167765.2s Page 13
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Longitude: -122.46228
Latitude: 38.507
Permitting Agency: SONOMA COUNTY
Facility ID: 49-000-005917
UST:
1226 ft.
0.232 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
224 ft.
1/8-1/4 SKAGGS ISLAND, CA 94574
SSE 1 SKAGGS ISLAND RD N/A
7 FACILITY 49-000-005917 UST U004050402
Leak Detection: None
Container Construction Thickness: Not reported
Type of Fuel: UNLEADED
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Tank Capacity: 00001000
Year Installed: 1972
Container Num: 2
Tank Num: 002
Leak Detection: None
Container Construction Thickness: Not reported
Type of Fuel: DIESEL
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Tank Capacity: 00001000
Year Installed: 1972
Container Num: 1
Tank Num: 001
Total Tanks: 0002
Owner City,St,Zip: NAPA, CA 94559
Owner Address: 1222 RIVER PARK BLVD.
Owner Name: RON ABRUZZINI
Telephone: 7072262674
Contact Name: Not reported
Other Type: WAREHOUSE
Facility Type: Other
Facility ID: 00000054371
Region: STATE
URL: http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ustpdfs/pdf/00028F9C.pdf File Number: 00028F9C
HIST UST:
Num of Tanks: 0
District: Not reported
Permit Type: Not reported
Facility Status: Not reported
Permit ID: Not reported
Facility ID: NAPA0018
NAPA CO. UST:
1243 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster B
0.235 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
252 ft.
1/8-1/4 ST HELENA, CA
WSW 1030 FULTON LANE HIST UST N/A
B8 ABRUZZINI PROPERTY UST U001598334
TC5167765.2s Page 14
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Click here for Geo Tracker PDF:
ABRUZZINI PROPERTY (Continued) U001598334
DUNs Number: Not reported
Contact Phone: Not reported
Contact: Not reported
Mailing City,St,Zip: ST HELENA 94574
Mailing Address 2: Not reported
Mailing Address: 1222 RIVER PARK BLVD
Mail To: Not reported
Facility Phone: 7072262674
SIC Code: Not reported
Cortese Code: Not reported
Regulated ID: 00054371
Regulated By: UTNKI
Facility ID: 28000007
CA FID UST:
Number Of Tanks: Not reported
Content: REG UNLEADED
STG: PRODUCT
Tank Use: M.V. FUEL
Active Date: Not reported
Capacity: 1000
Tank Status: Not reported
SWRCB Tank Id: 28-000-054371-000002
Owner Tank Id: Not reported
Created Date: Not reported
Action Date: Not reported
Referral Date: Not reported
Board Of Equalization: 44-015453
Number: Not reported
Comp Number: 54371
Status: Not reported
Number Of Tanks: 2
Content: DIESEL
STG: PRODUCT
Tank Use: M.V. FUEL
Active Date: Not reported
Capacity: 1000
Tank Status: Not reported
SWRCB Tank Id: 28-000-054371-000001
Owner Tank Id: Not reported
Created Date: Not reported
Action Date: Not reported
Referral Date: Not reported
Board Of Equalization: 44-015453
Number: Not reported
Comp Number: 54371
Status: Not reported
SWEEPS UST:
1243 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster B
0.235 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
252 ft.
1/8-1/4 ST HELENA, CA 94574
WSW 1030 FULTON LN CA FID UST N/A
B9 RON ABRUZZINI SWEEPS UST S101624086
TC5167765.2s Page 15
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Status: Inactive
Comments: Not reported
EPA ID: Not reported
NPDES Number: Not reported
RON ABRUZZINI (Continued) S101624086
Global Id: T0605500001
LUST:
Action: Leak Discovery
Date: 04/02/1987
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500001
Action: Leak Reported
Date: 04/02/1987
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500001
Action: Leak Stopped
Date: 04/02/1987
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500001
LUST:
Phone Number: 7072534269
Email: Not reported
City: NAPA
Address: 1195 THIRD ST., ROOM 101
Organization Name: NAPA COUNTY
Contact Name: UST CASE WORKER
Contact Type: Local Agency Caseworker
Global Id: T0605500001
LUST:
Site History: Not reported
Potential Contaminants of Concern: Gasoline
Potential Media Affect: Soil
Local Case Number: 0018
File Location: Local Agency
Local Agency: NAPA COUNTY
RB Case Number: 28-0002
Case Worker: ZZZ
Status Date: 05/15/1992
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Longitude: -122.472079
Latitude: 38.509196
Global Id: T0605500001
Geo Track: http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report.asp?global_id=T0605500001 Case Type: LUST Cleanup Site
Lead Agency: NAPA COUNTY
LUST:
1243 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster B
0.235 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
252 ft.
1/8-1/4 ST HELENA, CA 94574 HIST CORTESE
WSW 1030 FULTON LN SLIC N/A
B10 ABRUZZINI PROPERTY LUST S104162284
TC5167765.2s Page 16
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Region: CORTESE
HIST CORTESE:
Click here to access the California GeoTracker records for this facility:
Site History: Not reported
Potential Contaminants of Concern: Lead, Crude Oil, Diesel, Gasoline, Heating Oil / Fuel Oil Structure, Soil
Potential Media Affected: Aquifer used for drinking water supply, Contaminated Surface / File Location: Not reported
RB Case Number: Not reported
Local Agency: NAPA COUNTY
Case Worker: JTN
Case Type: Cleanup Program Site
Longitude: -122.472078
Latitude: 38.509236
Lead Agency Case Number: E 5870
Lead Agency: NAPA COUNTY
Global Id: T10000002584
Status Date: 05/23/2012
Facility Status: Completed - Case Closed
Region: STATE
SLIC:
Date Post Remedial Action Monitoring Began: Not reported Date Remediation Action Underway: Not reported
Pollution Remediation Plan Submitted: Not reported
Pollution Characterization Began: Not reported
Preliminary Site Assesment Began: 8/8/1990
Prelim. Site Assesment Wokplan Submitted: 6/19/1990
Oversight Program: LUST
Date Leak Confirmed: Not reported
Leak Source: Tank
Leak Cause: Structure Failure
How Discovered: Tank Closure
Case Number: 0018
Facility Status: Case Closed
Facility Id: 28-0002
Region: 2
LUST REG 2:
Status Date: 05/15/1992
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T0605500001
Status Date: 08/08/1990
Status: Open - Site Assessment
Global Id: T0605500001
Status Date: 06/19/1990
Status: Open - Site Assessment
Global Id: T0605500001
Status Date: 04/02/1987
Status: Open - Case Begin Date
ABRUZZINI PROPERTY (Continued) S104162284
TC5167765.2s Page 17
Agenda Item #5.7.
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Reg Id: 28-0002
Reg By: LTNKA
Facility County Code: 28
ABRUZZINI PROPERTY (Continued) S104162284
Action: Staff Letter
Date: 11/10/2009
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500159
Action: Leak Discovery
Date: 03/22/1989
Action Type: Other
Global Id: T0605500159
Action: LOP Case Closure Summary to RB
Date: 01/25/2011
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500159
Action: Closure/No Further Action Letter
Date: 01/25/2011
Action Type: ENFORCEMENT
Global Id: T0605500159
LUST:
Phone Number: Not reported
Email: [email protected]
City: NAPA
Address: 1195 THIRD STREET, SUITE 101
Organization Name: NAPA COUNTY
Contact Name: James Newman, P.G., C.E.G.
Contact Type: Local Agency Caseworker
Global Id: T0605500159
LUST:
Site History: Not reported
Potential Contaminants of Concern: Gasoline, Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Potential Media Affect: Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) Local Case Number: 0199
File Location: Local Agency
Local Agency: NAPA COUNTY
RB Case Number: 28-0175
Case Worker: JTN
Status Date: 01/25/2011
Status: Completed - Case Closed
Longitude: -122.469990849495
Latitude: 38.5052963506949
Global Id: T0605500159
Geo Track: http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report.asp?global_id=T0605500159 Case Type: LUST Cleanup Site
Lead Agency: NAPA COUNTY
LUST:
1335 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster C
0.253 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
251 ft.
1/4-1/2 ST HELENA, CA 94574
SW 1380 MAIN ST HIST CORTESE N/A
C11 UNION 76 LUST S102439588
TC5167765.2s Page 18
Agenda Item #5.7.