HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 Arroyo Vista FONSI
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
CITY CLERK
File # D~[a][Q]-[k]~
If()() .. 2-0
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 15, 2008
PUBLIC HEARING: Arroyo Vista
Report prepared by Erica Fraser, Senior Planner
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Resolution authorizing the City Manager to act as the Certifying
Officer in order to certify the Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI), execute the Department of Housing and Urban
Development Request for Release of Funds and Certification and
sign any other related, associated and/or ancillary documents
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act for the Arroyo
Vista project and authorizing the Dublin Housing Authority to
submit a request to the San Francisco Field Office of the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for
approval of property disposition under Section 18 of the U.S.
Housing Act of 1937, as amended, to undertake a project known as
Arroyo Vista for the purpose of redeveloping an existing public
housing project and expanding the number of dwelling units, subject
to approval of the project by the City.
Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact
(including all revisions made since May 2008 and dated July, 2008).
June 3, 2008 City Council Agenda Statement (with attachments).
Comment Letter from Douglas Bright, dated June 9, 2008.
Comment Letter from The Public Law Interest Project, dated June
27,2008, commenting on the Environmental Assessment/Finding of
No Significant Impact.
Response to Comments on the Arroyo Vista Environmental
Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact, prepared by City of
Dublin, dated July 9, 2008.
Comment Letter from The Public Law Interest Project, dated June
27,2008, commenting on the Notice oflntent to Request Approval
of Property Disposition re Project Known as Arroyo Vista
Redevelopment.
Response to June 27, 2008 Letter from The Public Law Interest
Project regarding the Notice oflntent to Request Approval of
Property Disposition.
COpy TO:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G:\Arroyo Vista\FONSI\CCSR hearing - July 15th.doc
Page 1 of 4
ITEM NO.~
(if
9) Notice of Finding of No Significant Impact and Notice oflntent to
Request Approval of Property Disposition (dated May 28,2008).
RECOMMENDATION:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
~
Qf-
Receive Staff Presentation;
Open public hearing for general comments regarding Arroyo Vista;
Take testimony from the public;
Close Public Hearing and deliberate; and
Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) authorizing the City Manager to
act as the Certifying Officer in order to certify the Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI), execute the Department of Housing
and Urban Development Request for Release of Funds and
Certification and sign any other related, associated and/or ancillary
documents pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act for
the Arroyo Vista project and authorizing the Dublin Housing
Authority to submit a request to the San Francisco Field Office of
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (RUD)
for approval of property disposition under Section 18 of the U.S.
Housing Act of 1937, as amended, to undertake a project known as
Arroyo Vista for the purpose of redeveloping an existing public
housing project and expanding the number of dwelling units,
subject to approval ofthe project by the City.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None
DESCRIPTION:
Arroyo Vista is a 150 unit detached public housing project which is owned by the Dublin Housing
Authority (DHA) and managed by the Alameda County Housing Authority under contract. The housing
complex was constructed over 25 years ago. The complex has design problems which have created
ongoing building maintenance problems, as well as sewer and water main problems. The City has begun
the process of reviewing the redevelopment of the existing site for a new residential development
("Project") which could contain up to 378 dwelling units, community building, childcare facility and
related improvements.
Before the new development can be constructed, the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) must approve the disposition (sale) of the property to the private parties (Eden
Housing and Citation Homes), the development team that DHA has selected to develop the project.
The City Staff is required to analyze the environmental impacts of the disposition of the property and the
proposed Project under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A) and to submit its determination to
HUD before HUD can approve the disposition. The City is also required to authorize DHA to submit its
application to HUD to dispose of the property.
ANALYSIS:
The process of environmental review for the Arroyo Vista Project is a two step process. Since a part of the
project requires a Disposition Application to be submitted to RUD, a review under NEP A is required.
Additionally, review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is required to review the
proposed 378 unit project. The CEQA review for the proposed project will be completed at a later date.
At this point in the process, the City is what HUD calls the "Responsible Entity" for preparation of the
Page 2 of 4
environmental review under NEP A. The City Staff has prepared an Environmental Assessment
(Attachment 2) and intends to adopt a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
A "Notice of Finding of No Significant Impact and Notice of Intent to Request Approval of Property
Disposition," (Attachment 9) was published and mailed to all residents of Arroyo Vista (including
residents that have recently moved), property owners and occupants within 300 feet of Arroyo Vista and
all interested parties on May 28, 2008, and started a 30-day comment period required under NEP A on the
Environmental Review Record ("ERR"). All comments related to the EA and the proposed FONSI for the
proposed disposition of Arroyo Vista and the proposed Project received within that 30-day period, which
ended on June 27, 2008, must be considered by the City.
On June 3, 2008, the City Council held a public hearing (Attachment 3) and took verbal comments from
the public regarding the FONSI. Verbal comments regarding the FONSI were made by Craig Castellanet
of the California Affordable Housing Law Project during the City Council meeting.
Prior to the close of the 30-day comment period, the City received two comment letters regarding the EA
and proposed FONSI (Attachments 4 and 5). One comment letter was received from a Dublin resident
(Attachment 4) and one comment letter was received from Bay Area Legal Aid and The Public Interest
Law Project, on behalf of an association of Arroyo Vista residents and several individual residents
(Attachment 5). Although the City is not required to provide a formal response to comments received
pursuant to NEP A, the City has prepared responses to the verbal comments and the comment letters
received (Attachment 6). Minor changes to the Environmental Assessment, as discussed in Attachment 6,
were made based on comments received, while some comments did not require a change to the EA.
The Public Interest Law Project and Bay Area Legal Aid also submitted a June 27, 2008 comment letter
related to the disposition of the property on behalf of an association of Arroyo Vista residents and several
individual residents (Attachment 7). The "Notice of Finding of No Significant Impact and Notice of Intent
to Request Approval of Property Disposition" (Attachment 9) indicated the City would consider
comments prior to authorizing submission of a request for approval of property disposition. This letter
urges the City Council not to authorize DHA to submit an application for disposition of Arroyo Vista to
HUD. The Staffs comments on this letter are provided in Attachment 8. The letter also urges HUD to
disapprove DHA's application for disposition of Arroyo Vista. Accordingly, the City Staff forwarded this
comment letter to HUD and to DHA.
The City previously received public comments on June 3, 2008 on the proposed FONSI and will not
consider any further comments on the EA, the proposed FONSI or the NEP A process tonight. The public
hearing tonight is an opportunity for the public to provide any general comments on the proposed Arroyo
Vista project.
NEXT STEPS:
If the Council approves the attached resolution, the City Manager will sign the FONSI as the certifying
officer for the City and will also sign any documentation related to the Environmental Assessment/Finding
of No Significant Impact, including the Request for Release of Funds and Certification (HUD form
7015.15).
The City Manager will also notify the Dublin Housing Authority that it may submit a request to the San
Francisco Field Office of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for approval of
property disposition under Section 18 of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, as amended, to undertake a project
Page 3 of 4
known as Arroyo Vista Redevelopment for the purpose of redeveloping an existing public housing project
and expanding the number of dwelling units, subject to approval of the project by the City.
Environmental Review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) will also be
required prior to the City taking action on the Arroyo Vista project. Environmental review pursuant to
CEQA has already begun and the City has issued a Notice of Preparation and held a scoping meeting
pursuant to CEQA guidelines. The City is also in the process of reviewing the application, which includes
a proposed amendment to the general plan, a rezoning (Stage I/Stage 2 Rezone), Tentative Map and Site
Development Review for the Arroyo Vista project.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Receive Staff Presentation; 2) Open public hearing; 3) Take
testimony from the public regarding the City's role with respect to the Arroyo Vista project, generally, but
not related to the proposed FONSI; 4) Close the Public Hearing and deliberate; and 5) Adopt a Resolution
(Attachment 1) authorizing the City Manager to certify the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI),
execute the Request for Release of Funds Certification to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development and sign any other related, associated and/or ancillary documents pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act for the Arroyo Vista project and authorize the Dublin Housing Authority to
submit a request to the San Francisco Field Office of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) for approval of property disposition under Section 18 of the U.S. Housing Act of
1937, as amended, to undertake a project known as Arroyo Vista for the purpose of redeveloping an
existing public housing project and expanding the number of dwelling units, subject to approval of the
project by the City.
Page 4 of 4
I v~ If-Lfg
RESOLUTION NO. XX-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
************************************************
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACT AS THE CERTIFYING OFFICER IN ORDER
TO CERTIFY THE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI), EXECUTE THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT "REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF
FUNDS AND CERTIFICATION", AND SIGN ANY OTHER RELATED, ASSOCIATED AND/OR
ANCILLARY DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
ACT FOR THE ARROYO VISTA PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE DUBLIN HOUSING
AUTHORITY TO SUBMIT A REQUEST TO THE SAN FRANCISCO FIELD OFFICE OF THE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FOR APPROVAL
OF PROPERTY DISPOSITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE U.S. HOUSING ACT OF 1937,
AS AMENDED, TO UNDERTAKE A PROJECT KNOWN AS ARROYO VISTA
REDEVELOPMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDEVELOPING AN EXISTING PUBLIC
HOUSING PROJECT AND EXPANDING THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS, SUBJECT
TO APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT BY THE CITY.
WHEREAS, Eden Housing and Citation Homes ("Applicants") propose to redevelop the Arroyo
Vista development to include demolition of the existing 150 dwelling units, childcare facility and site
improvements and construction up to 378 new dwelling units, community building, childcare facility and
site improvements. These proposed actions are collectively referred to as the "proposed Project"; and
WHEREAS, prior to construction of the proposed Project, the Applicants the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") needs to approve the disposition of the Arroyo Vista property
to the Applicants and the Applicants need to obtain approval of a General Plan Amendment, Tentative
Map, Stagel/Stage2 Rezone and Site Development Review from the City. Environmental Review
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is also required prior to any City action on
the above mentioned applications; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared an Environmental Assessment and has made a Finding Of No
Significant Impact (hereafter "FONSI") pursuant to 40 C.F.R. 1508.13 and the National Environmental
Policy Act; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Assessment/FONSI will be used by the Department of Housing
and Urban Development ("HUD") as part of its review of the disposition application for the site submitted
to HUD by the Dublin Housing Authority; and
WHEREAS, notice of availability of the draft Environmental Assessment/FONSI ("Notice of
Finding of No Significant Impact and Notice of Intent to Request Approval of Property Disposition") was
published in the newspaper and mailed to all residents of Arroyo Vista, all property owners and tenants
within 300 feet of the Arroyo Vista site, to all appropriate tribal, local, state and federal agencies,
including EP A and HUD, and to all parties who have expressed an interest in receiving notice of actions
involving Arroyo Vista; and
WHEREAS, the draft Environmental Assessment/FONSI was available for public review from
May 4, 2008 to June 27, 2008 at City Hall during normal business hours; and =I-ie"".~ C). I lfli {or'
1 ATTACHMENTl
;J '1J 4li'l
WHEREAS, the City received comments on the draft Environmental Assessment/FONSI during
the public review period and those comments have been addressed and, where appropriate, incorporated
into the final Environmental Assessment/FONSI; and
WHEREAS, the City received comments on the proposed request for approval of property
disposition and proposal to authorize the Dublin Housing Authority to submit a request for approval of
disposition of the Arroyo Vista property; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated July 15, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference, described
and analyzed the Environmental Assessment/FONSI, including comments received on the Environmental
Assessment/FONSI and comments received on the proposed request for approval of property disposition
and proposal that the City authorize the Dublin Housing Authority to submit a request for approval of
disposition of the Arroyo Vista property; and
WHEREAS, prior to disposition of the site to private developers, the Dublin Housing Authority is
required to submit a request to HUD for approval of the property disposition under Section 18 of the U.S.
Housing Act of 1937, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact dated July 2008,
(which incorporates all revisions made since May 2008), reflects the City's independent judgment and
analysis of the potential for environmental impacts from the Project. The Environmental
Assessment/FONSI, and related project and environmental documents (the Environmental Review
Record), are available for review in the City Planning Division at the Dublin City Hall, file P A 07-028,
during normal business hours. The custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the
record of proceedings for the proposed Project is the City of Dublin Community Development
Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, Attn: Senior Planner, Erica Fraser.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and
made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council hereby authorizes the City
Manager to act as the Certifying Officer for the purpose of certifying the Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI), execute the Department of Housing and Urban Development Request for Release of
Funds and Certification and sign any other related, associated or ancillary documents pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act for the Arroyo Vista project and authorizes the Dublin Housing
Authority to submit a request to the San Francisco Field Office of the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) for approval of property disposition under Section 18 of the U.S. Housing
Act of 1937, as amended, to undertake a project known as Arroyo Vista Redevelopment for the purpose
of redeveloping an existing public housing project and expanding the number of dwelling units, subject to
approval of the project by the City, as described in the Notice of Finding of No Significant Impact and
Notice oflntent to Request Approval of Property Disposition.
2
J of t1'1i
1\
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th dayofJuly, 2008.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
G:\Arroyo Vista\FONSI\Reso FONSI and Sign. DOC
3
Attachment 2 - Environmental Assessment/Finding of No
Significant Impact
The Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact
is bound under separate cover.
Copies of the Environmental Assessment/Finding of No
Significant are available at the City of Dublin Community
Development Department for review.
1-/ ~<tqg'
~.~~1~E~t~ov
~"JI'lollt 1
'tllll,"~
V"i'IY'fN DE\J'i.\..d~~
u.s. Department of Housing and Urban
Development
San Francisco Regional Office - Region IX
600 Harrison Street
San Francisco, California 94107-1387
www.hud.gov
espanol.hud.gov
Environmental Assessment
for HUD-funded Proposals
Recommended format per 24 CFR 58.36, revised March 2005
[Previously recommended EA formats are obsolete].
Project Identification:
\
Preparer:
Arroyo Vista Residential Development
6700 Dougherty Road
Dublin, CA 94568
Jerry Haag, Urban Planner
(925) 833-6610
Responsible Entity:
Month/Year:
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568
(925) 833-6610
July 2008
5 ~, Y-ct<Z
Attachment 2
C1~
Environmental Assessment
Responsible Entity: City of Dublin
[24 CFR 58.2(a)(7)]
Certifying Officer: Richard Ambrose, City Manaqer. City of Dublin
[24 CFR 58.2(a)(2)]
Project Name: Disposition Application for: Arroyo Vista Redevelopment: Disposition
Application for Arroyo Vista, CA 142001, Dublin, California. submitted to HUD on Auqust
15,2007
Project Location: 6700 Douqherty Road, Dublin CA 94558
Estimated total project cost: ~56,995.000, for construction of the income restricted
rental portion of the Arroyo Vista proiect and $96.235.500 for the for-sale homes,
includinq improvements
Grant Recipient:
Dublin Housinq Authority (No qrants are requested)
[24 CFR 58.2(a)(5)]
Recipient ~ddress: 22941 Atherton Street. Havward, CA 94541
Project Representative: Christine Gouiq, Executive Director
Telephone Number: 510-727-8513
Conditions for Approval: (List all mitigation measures adopted by the responsible entity to eliminate or
minimize adverse environmental impacts. These conditions must be included in project contracts and other relevant
documents as requirements). [24 CFR 58.40(d), 40 CFR 1505.2(c)]
Mitiqation Measure CUL-1: Prior to grading of the site, the applicants shall prepare and implement a
program of mechanical subsurface testing for the presence or absence of significant cultural
resources. The program shall include use of a mechanical core sampler and shall be conducted by a
qualified archeologist as approved by the Dublin Community Development Director. If evidence of
significant cultural resources are identified, work on that portion of the project site shall cease until a
resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and applicable federal
regulations is prepared by a qualified archeologist and/or paleontologist and approved by the City of
Dublin Community Development Director or an authorized representative. Project work may be
resumed in compliance with such plan. If human remains are encountered, the County Coroner shall
be contacted immediately and the provisions of State law carried out.
Mitiqation Measure BI0-1: To minimize impacts to nesting birds, including loggerhead shrike, to Pallid
bats, and to sensitive fish species such as steelhead, prior to issuance of a grading permit the
applicants shall:
a) Limit clearing of vegetation and the initiation of construction to the non-breeding season for
loggerhead shrike and other nesting birds which is between September and January. If these
Page 2
7o;fttcti
activities cannot be done in the non-breeding season, a qualified biologist shall perform pre-
construction bird surveys within 30 days prior to construction or clearing of vegetation. If nesting
birds, such as loggerhead shrike, are discovered in the vicinity of planned development, buffer
areas shall be established around the nest until the nest is vacated. The size and duration of
the buffer will depend on the particular species of nesting bird present and shall be established
by a qualified biologist.
b) Prepare and implement an Erosion Control Plan to minimize pollutants into Alamo Creek
which will avoid impacting sensitive fish habitat. The Erosion Control Plan shall be reviewed
by a qualified aquatic biologist to ensure that the Plan will adequately reduce pollutants to
avoid impacts to sensitive fish species, such as steelhead.
c) Limit the initiation of construction, tree removal, and building demolition to the inactive
Pallid Bat season in September and October to avoid impacting bats. If all such work
cannot be confined to this time period, pre-construction bat surveys shall be performed by a
qualified biologist. If bats are discovered in the vicinity of planned development, buffer
areas shall be established around the bat roost until August 31 . The size and duration of
the buffer will depend on the type of roost structure and construction activity, and shall be
established by a qualified biologist.
Mitiqation Measure AIR-1: The City of Dublin shall:
a) Require construction contractors to water all active construction areas at least twice daily;
b) Require construction contractors to cover all haul trucks or maintain a minimum two foot
freeboard;
c) Require construction contractors to pave, app'ly water three times per day or apply non-
toxic soil stabilizers on unpaved access roads and staging areas;
d) Require that all paved access roads, parking and staging areas be swept daily, preferably
with water sweepers;
e) Require that adja~ent streets be swept on a daily basis, preferably with water sweepers, if
visible soil material is carried onto public streets;
f) Require hydroseeding or stabilization of inactive construction areas (10+ days) that have
been previously graded;
g) Enclose or cover exposed stockpiles of dirt, sand or similar material that can be eroded;
h) Require a 10 mph maximum speed limit on unpaved roads;
i) Require the installation of sandbags or similar measures to prevent silt runoff to public
streets or bodies of water;
j) Require replanting of vegetation in graded areas as quickly as possible.
Mitiqation Measure GEO-1: Foundation design and other construction techniques included in the
geotechnical report for the Project shall be included in final construction plans and specifications.
Mitiqation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to issuance of a demolition permit by the City of Dublin, the
applicants shall comply with the following:
a) An asbestos and lead based paint removal program shall be prepared in accord with local,
state and federal regulations. Necessary permits shall be obtained and the removal
program implemented by a qualified, licensed contractor. Disposal of contaminated
materials shall be in a location approved to accept such materials.
b) Following demolition and removal of residential dwellings and other improvements, surface
sampling for asbestos and lead based paint shall be completed using approved EPA
Page 3
a Q;, o/t't
methods. If residual lead or asbestos is found in the soil, this material shall be remediated
as specified in "a," above.
Mitiqation Measure NOISE-1: The following noise reduction measures shall be included in this
project:
a)
b)
c)
Maintain or replace the existing 7 -foot tall noise barrier wall adjacent to Dougherty Road to
ensure an exterior noise exposure level of 65 dBA Ldn or less in the easterly portion of the
project site.
Place public open space and common open areas away from Dougherty Road.
Provide disclosures to future residents of noise generated by helicopter and associated noise
from existing Parks RFT A.
Incorporate noise reducing techniques into building plans for the project, including but not
limited to sound rated windows and doors, sound rated wall construction techniques, use of
acoustical caulking, and other techniques to ensure interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA
Ldn.
Project applicants shall prepare and implement a Construction Noise Management Plan to
reduce short-term construction noise to a less-than-significant level. At a minimum, this plan
shall include limitations on hours of construction, a requirement to place compressors away
from adjacent residences, and require all on-site vehicles to have working mufflers and similar
items.
d)
e)
Mitiqation Measure TR-1: Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy, the Applicants of the
Preferred Alternative shall install a traffic signal at the South Mariposa Drive intersection with
Dougherty Road.
Mitiqation Measure TR-2: Prior to issuance of a grading plan, the Applicants for the Preferred
Alternative shall coordinate with LAVTA to develop a bus circulation plan to safely accommodate bus
circulation and to ensure pedestrian and bicycle safety. Bus improvements shall be reflected on final
improvement plans. Implement Mitigation Measure TR-1 to provide for pedestrian safety.
FINDING: [58.40(g)]
2 Finding of No Significant Impact
(The project will not result in a significant impact on the quality of the human
environment)
Finding of Significant Impact
(The project may significantly affect the quality of the human environment)
Date:
Preparer Signature:
NamelTitlel Agency:
RE Approving Official Signature:
Date:
NamelTitlel Agency:
Page 4
q of 40~
Statement of Purpose and Need for the Proposal: [40 CFR 1508.9(b)]
The City of Dublin is located in a generally high income region, the San Francisco Bay area, and has a
mandated need to provide housing opportunities for households representing all economic segments of
the community. The current Housing Element of the Dublin General Plan identifies a need to
accommodate 796 very low income households and 531 low income households in the community.
The Arroyo Vista project exists as a 150 unit public housing project that is owned by the Dublin Housing
Authority and managed by the Alameda County Housing Authority. Arroyo Vista is a 23.8 acre site
located at 6700 Dougherty Road. The complex was constructed in 1982 and the dwelling units have not
been updated since then. The site has design problems that have created ongoing building maintenance
problems, including but not limited to broken pavement and irrigation systems as well as leaking sewer
lines and water mains. The Housing Authority commissioned studies that found the cost to renovate the
existing housing far exceeded the amount of annual operating subsidy from the Annual Contributions
Contract and Capital Funds provided by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
as well as other funds that might be available through competitive processes. These studies are
incorporated herein by reference and are available for review at the City of Dublin Community
Development Department during normal business hours. The purpose of the redevelopment of Arroyo
Vista is to provide updated housing that meets the needs of its residents and to provide affordable
housing consistent with the policies of the General Plan.
Because Arroyo Vista is located within the City of Dublin and the City is the unit of general local
government that exercises land use responsibility over the Arroyo Vista property, the City of Dublin has
prepared this Environmental Assessment as the "Responsible Entity" as defined in 24 CFR section
58.1 (a)(7).
Description of the Proposal and Alternatives: Include all contemplated actions which
logically are either geographically or functionally a composite part of the project, regardless of the source
of funding. [24 CFR 58.32, 40 CFR 1508.25]
In order to provide a full analysis of proposed Project impacts and to assess potential impacts related to
approving and implementing the Project, the following three alternatives are analyzed in this
Environmental Assessment:
Alternative 1: No Action. Under this alternative, the existing Arroyo Vista complex would remain
as it currently exists, as a 150-unit public housing project owned by the Dublin Housing Authority
and managed by the Alameda County Housing Authority. No transfer or disposition of the
complex would occur. Existing parking and on-site private driveways, a childcare facility, a
managemenUmaintenance building and open spaces would also remain. There would be
expenditures for on-going maintenance of facilities to ensure the dwellings and other facilities
remain safe and habitable, but major rehabilitation or upgrading of the dwellings or grounds would
not occur. Existing older kitchen facilities would remain in individual dwellings as would existing
energy-inefficient appliances and space heating units. Older and substandard recreation facilities,
exterior paint, paving, irrigation, and landscaping would also remain as they now exist.
No relocation of existing residents would be required. No City approvals or permits would be
required under this Alternative.
Page 5
! n oJ Lt0~
1 J "
I' ;
;
Alternative 2: Intensified Private Development (the Preferred Alternative). Under this alternative,
the existing Arroyo Vista complex would be demolished, including all 150 residential units and
private driveways, the management/maintenance building, and the child care facility, and an
intensified mixed-income project built on the site. The intensified project would be constructed by
a partnership consisting of a non-profit organization, Eden Housing, and a market-rate residential
builder, Citation Homes Central. The project would contain approximately 378 units comprised of
198 for-sale homes, (with 141 attached and 57 detached dwellings) 14 of which would be
affordable, 130 income-restricted family rental dwellings (with a mix of 1, 2, 3 and 4 bedroom
units in a combination of stacked flats and townhouses) and 50 senior income-restricted
apartments (with 49 1-bedroom apartments and 1 2-bedroom manager unit). This would
represent an increase in the number of income restricted and market-rate dwellings on the site.
Proposed dwellings would include a mix of two and three-story residential wood-frame buildings.
At the core of the development, the Village Center would include a Community Building with
central recreation space and a new Child Care Center. Additional satellite recreational areas,
both passive and active, would be scattered throughout the proposed development.
This Alternative also represents an opportunity for the City to leverage both public and private
sector investments to construct more modern and energy efficient dwellings than currently exist
on the site. Existing dwellings contain minimal wall and ceiling insulation, older windows, older
style toilets and shower heads that are not water efficient and older high energy consuming
appliances, including but not limited to heating systems, clothes washers/dryers and refrigerators.
Existing landscape planting and irrigation systems are inefficient in that the 25-year old plant
materials are not considered drought tolerant. Irrigation systems are not state-of-the art in terms
of minimizing water use. The irrigation system is also older and frequently breaks causing loss of
significant water.
Implementation of this alternative would require relocation of all current residents of the complex,
which would be accomplished consistent with federal and state relocation statutes and guidelines
and the Relocation Plan adopted by the Dublin Housing Authority. The Plan provides that
residents would receive advisory and counseling services, comparable replacement housing in
the form of a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher or replacement housing payment, moving
expenses, help with packing and moving for the elderly and disabled if requested, security
deposits and a 150-day notice to move (this notice is given only if HUD approves the disposition
application).
This action would assist in satisfying the City of Dublin's quantified needs for housing for low and
very low income housing dwellings, in accordance with the Housing Element of the Dublin
General Plan, including low income senior residents.
The Dublin Housing Authority submitted a Disposition Application to HUD on August 15, 2007,
pursuant to the provisions of 24 CFR 970 et seq. proposing disposition of the site to the Eden
Housing and Citation Homes Central developer team. With HUD approval of the Disposition
Application, the project would be removed from the public housing program and will no longer be
subject to the Annual Contribution Contract. The estimated total cost of implementing the
Affordable Family Apartment portion of this alternative would be $56,995,000 The total includes
approximately $41,030,000 for the Affordable Apartments and approximately $15,965,000 for the
Affordable Senior Apartments.
Page 6
II ~ Lfctt
The sources of funding for the Affordable Family Apartments would most likely include the City of
Dublin, the Dublin Housing Authority from Citation Homes Central's site purchase, Low-Income
Housing Tax Credit Investor, Affordable Housing Program (AHP) funding from the Federal Home
Loan Bank and a permanent bank loan. The sources of funding for the Affordable Senior
Apartments would most likely include the same sources except that HUD Section 202 Supportive
Housing for the Elderly Program would be included and there would be no permanent bank loan.
The total projected cost for the Arroyo Vista For-Sale component is approximately $96,235,500.
This figure includes land acquisition, city fees, building construction, subdivision improvements
(streets, utilities, grading, demolition, etc.), landscaping, insurance, and "soft" costs for the 198
units within Citation's portion of the project.
Alternative 3: Rehabilitation of Existing Complex. The third alternative would include cosmetic and
structural upgrades to the existing 150 dwellings on the site as well as the child care facility,
managemenUmaintenance building, parking, landscaping, irrigation and driveways. Dwellings and
other facilities on the site would be upgraded and/or replaced to bring the complex into conformity
with current energy standards. Upgrades would include but would not be limited to new kitchens
(cabinets, countertops, appliances, floor coverings, paint), installation of new energy efficient
heating systems, new paint and floor coverings in other rooms and similar upgrades. The
estimated costs for these upgrades would be $20.3 million. Limited short-term relocation of some
residents may be required on a unit-by-unit basis to accomplish major interior remodeling, but no
project-wide relocation would be required since existing units would remain. No transfer or
disposition of the site would be needed. The City of Dublin would need to issue building permits
to accomplish many of these improvements.
This Environmental Assessment, prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, is intended
to be used by HUD in considering whether to approve the Disposition Application that would be required
for Alternative 2.
If Alternative 2 is pursued, Eden Housing and Citation Homes Central must obtain approval from the City
of Dublin to demolish existing Arroyo Vista improvements and construct the proposed improvements. This
requires approval by the City of various land use entitlements. The City of Dublin would prepare an
Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines to
consider the environmental impacts of the proposed land use entitlements needed for the new
development.
Existing Conditions and Trends: Describe the existing conditions of the project area and its
surroundings, and trends likely to continue in the absence of the project. [24 CFR 58.40(a)]
As stated above, the existing Arroyo Vista development contains 150 detached public housing units that
are owned by the Dublin Housing Authority. The complex was constructed over 25 years ago in an
inefficient lower density, dispersed site design. The complex has experienced ongoing building
maintenance problems, as well as sewer and water main problems, and does not meet current energy
efficiency standards.
In the absence of the Preferred Alternative, the existing Arroyo Vista project would continue to exist and
would require increasingly larger outlays for building maintenance and repair as well as higher energy
costs. Based on the pattern of the last five years of HUD funding, sufficient funds are not likely to be
available to meet these costs.
Page 7
[;I 8~ LJk1i
Surrounding land uses include Parks RFT A east of the project site and a mix of apartments and
townhouses to the north, south and west. A combination auto service station/convenience store has been
built north of the Arroyo Vista site.
The City of Dublin is experiencing significant growth in the Eastern Dublin area, located approximately
0.75 miles east of the Project. Recent growth includes a mix of residential development at various
densities and product types, including restricted income dwellings, and commercial and office
development.
Ongoing redevelopment is occurring in the central portion of Dublin, although not to the extent of Eastern
Dublin. South of the Arroyo Vista site, approximately 0.3 miles, a major mixed use residential, office and
retail redevelopment project is being completed. The City of Dublin has had discussions with
representatives of the Department of the Army regarding possible disposition of a portion of Parks RFTA
and development of non-military housing, commercial and office uses approximately 0.3 miles southeast
of the Arroyo Vista site.
Overall, the City of Dublin has experienced significant growth over the past ten years. Due to absorption
of most developable properties, growth of residential, commercial and office uses is anticipated to
continue in the next five to ten year period, but at a slower pace.
Page 8
I 3 tJ~c 4-0{ i
Statutory Checklist
[24CFR 358.51
Record the determinations made regarding each listed statute, executive order or regulation. Provide appropriate
source documentation. [Note reviews or consultations completed as well as any applicable permits or approvals
obtained or required. Note dates of contact or page references]. Provide compliance or consistency documentation.
Attach additional material as appropriate. Note conditions, attenuation or mitigation measures are required.
Factors
Historic Preservation
[36 CFR 800]
Determination and Compliance Documentation
A site specific cultural investigation was completed for the site
(Cultural Resource Investigation, Holman & Associates, 2007,
Attachment 2). One formal archeological survey was
completed in 1979 on the site. The survey in 1979 did not
discover any archeological resources on or around the project
site. A visual inspection of the project site was conducted in
July of 2007. No resources were observed during that
inspection. It is likely that any resources on the site have been
buried due to the existing development or other activities on
the site.
Alternative 1: There would be no impacts to historic resources,
since no construction or major ground disturbing activities
would occur with minimal facility maintenance.
Alternative 2: Existing structures and improvements would be
demolished and removed from the site. Structures on the site
date from circa 1982 and are less than forty years old. They
therefore do not qualify as historic resources (Cultural
Resource Investigation, Holman & Associates, 2007,
Attachment 2). However, this proposed project was referred to
the California State Office of Historic Preservation for
comment (see Attachment 3) on April 4, 2008 and the City
requested a response by May 5, 2008. No response was
received from the State Office of Historic Preservation
regarding this project.
An archeological literature search and field survey conducted
by a qualified archeologist found that the project site has no
recorded cultural resources sites, but, due to its location
adjacent to Alamo Creek, has the potential for containing
buried and unrecorded historic and prehistoric artifacts that
could be disturbed by proposed project construction. Mitigation
Measure CUL-1 will reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant level.
MitiQation Measure CUL-1: Prior to grading of the site, the
project applicants shall prepare and implement a program
of mechanical subsurface testing for the presence or
absence of siQnificant cultural resources. The proQram
Page 9
! Ii ai, 40i
shall include use of a mechanical core sampler and shall
be conducted by a qualified archeologist as approved by
the Dublin Community Development Director. If evidence
of significant cultural resources are identified, work on that
portion of the project site shall cease until a resource
protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5 and applicable federal regulations is prepared by
a qualified archeologist and/or paleontologist and
approved by the City of Dublin Community Development
Director or an authorized representative. Project work may
be resumed in compliance with such plan. If human
remains are encountered, the County Coroner shall be
contacted immediately and the provisions of State law
carried out.
Alternative 3: Replacement and reconstruction of driveways,
utility lines and landscaping could uncover unsurveyed historic
artifacts on the site. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would apply to
Alternative 3.
Floodplain Management Alternatives 1.2 and 3: The project site is not located within a
[24 CFR 55, Executive Order 119881 1 OO-year floodplain (FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
Community Panel Number 0607050001 B)
Wetlands Protection A biological reconnaissance of the site indicated the potential
[Executive Order 11990] presence of approximately 500 square feet of wetland on the
site (Biological Assessment of Site, WRA, 2/08. Attachment 4).
A follow-up investigation of the site (Biological Evaluation,
WRA, 6/08, Attachment 10) found that there are no wetlands
on the site.
Alternatives 1.2 and 3: There would be no impacts to wetland
areas since there are no wetlands on the site.
(Bioloqical Assessment of Site, WRA, 2/08. Attachment 4)
Coastal Zone The project site is located inland from San Francisco Bay and
Management Act is not within any coastal zone (Dublin General Plan, Section
[Sections 307(c),(d)] 1.4, Primary and Extended Planning Areas).
Alternative 1: There would be no impact to coastal zones,
since the Project site is located approximately twenty miles
inland from the nearest coast.
Alternative 2: There would be no impact to coastal zones,
since the Project site is located approximately twenty miles
inland from the nearest coast.
Alternative 3: There would be no impact to coastal zones,
since the Project site is located approximately twenty miles
inland from the nearest coast.
Sole Source Aquifers No aquifers exist in this portion of the City of Dublin (Chapter
[40 CFR 1491 7, Environmental Resource Manaqement/Conservation
Page 10
/5:f LfOt i
Element, Dublin General Plan)
Alternative 1: There would be no impact to aquifers, since
none exist under the City of Dublin.
Alternative 2: There would be no impact to aquifers, since
none exist under the City of Dublin.
Alternative 3: There would be no impact to aquifers, since
none exist under the City of Dublin.
Endangered Species Act Potentially occurring federal threatened or candidate species
[50 CFR 402] wildlife, amphibian or plant species on or adjacent to the
Project site include: San Joaquin kit fox, Golden eagle,
American peregrine falcon, western snowy plover,
loggerhead shrike, burrowing owl, saltmarsh common
yellowtail, Alameda song sparrow, California tiger
salamander, California red-legged frog, Alameda whipsnake,
Central California Coastal steel head, conservancy fairy
shrimp, longhorn fairy shrimp, vernal pool fairy shrimp,
vernal pool tadpole shrimp, valley elderberry longhorn
beetle, Bay checkerspotted butterfly, large-flowered
fiddleneck, and Santa Cruz tarplant.
A site-specific biological assessment was completed for the
site and no endangered or threatened species were
observed on the site. Of the species listed above, the
biological assessment notes a moderate potential for the
presence of Central California Coastal steelhead on or
immediately adjacent to the Project site.
Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no impacts to
endangered plant or wildlife species or their respective
habitats under these Alternatives, since there would be no
loss of trees or other major construction near Alamo Creek.
Alternative 2: Polluted stormwater runoff from the site could
impact steel head fish species, a Federally Threatened
species. Steel head has no potential to occur within the Project
Area since there are no creeks within the property. However,
Alamo Creek is located immediately west of the Project Area.
This creek is a tributary to Arroyo de la Laguna Creek, which
has been repeatedly surveyed with virtually no suggestion that
this creek constitutes habitat for steelhead. Arroyo de la
Laguna is a tributary to Alameda Creek, which is thought of as
habitat for this species although migration barriers prevent
regular spawning. Nonetheless, steel head should be
considered in conjunction with land management on properties
adjacent to watersheds that could contain this species. Water
quality can be impacted by runoff from these properties, and
this decreases habitat value for fish. The quality of runoff that
enters creeks from adjacent properties such as the Project
Area should be carefullv controlled through the use of erosion
Page 11
I fo ~ ,-+q~
control plans, best management practices (BMPs), and
wastewater containment.
Adherence to Mitigation Measure BI0-1, subparagraph b,
will minimize these impacts such that the proposed Project
would not likely adversely affect the Central California Coast
steel head or critical habitat:
Mitiqation Measure BI0-1: To minimize impacts to nesting
birds, including loggerhead shrike, to Pallid bats, and to
sensitive fish species such as steelhead, prior to issuance
of a grading permit the applicants shall:
a) Limit clearing of vegetation and the initiation of
construction to the non-breeding season for
loggerhead shrike and other nesting birds which
is between September and January. If these
activities cannot be done in the non-breeding
season, a qualified biologist shall perform pre-
construction bird surveys within 30 days prior to
construction or clearing of vegetation. If nesting
birds, such as loggerhead shrike, are
discovered in the vicinity of planned
development, buffer areas shall be established
around the nest until the nest is vacated. The
size and duration of the buffer will depend on
the particular species of nesting bird present
and shall be established by a qualified biologist.
b) Prepare and implement an Erosion Control Plan
to minimize pollutants into Alamo Creek which
will avoid impacting sensitive fish habitat. The
Erosion Control Plan shall be reviewed by a
qualified aquatic biologist to ensure that the
Plan will adequately reduce pollutants to avoid
impacts to sensitive fish species, such as
steelhead.
c) Limit the initiation of construction, tree removal,
and building demolition to the inactive Pallid Bat
season in September and October to avoid
impacting bats. If all such work cannot be
confined to this time period, pre-construction bat
surveys shall be performed by a qualified
biologist. If bats are discovered in the vicinity of
planned development, buffer areas shall be
established around the bat roost until August 31.
The size and duration of the buffer will depend
on the type of roost structure and construction
activity, and shall be established by a qualified
biologist.
Page 12
Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act
[Sections 7 (b), (c)l
Air Quality
[Clean Air Act, Sections 176 (c)
and (d), and 40 CFR 6, 51, 93]
/7 o:f L{C1i
(WRA Biological Assessment, 2/08, Attachment 4)
As part of the environmental review process, the City has
notified NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
that the Preferred Project will not adversely impact listed
species. NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service were also notified of the availability of the
Environmental Assessment.
Thus, this impact will be less-than-siqnificant.
No Wild and Scenic Rivers exist in the City of Dublin (Dublin
General Plan, Section 1.4, Primary and Extended Planning
Areas).
Alternative 1: There would be no impact to wild and scenic
rivers, since none exist in the City of Dublin.
Alternative 2: There would be no impact to wild and scenic
rivers, since none exist in the City of Dublin.
Alternative 3: There would be no impact to wild and scenic
rivers, since none exist in the City of Dublin.
Alternative 1: There would be no increase in the quantity of air
pollutants on a short-term basis since no construction
emissions would occur and there would be no long-term air
emissions since there would be no increases in vehicle trips to
and from the site.
Alternative 2: An air quality conformity analysis with emission
standards as set forth in the Clean Air Act, as amended, found
that although this Alternative would increase air emissions
during both construction and operational phases of the project,
emissions would not exceed the recommended thresholds of
significance adopted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District, the local air agency. Approval of the proposed project
would not interfere with attainment of National Ambient Air
Quality standards. (Air Impact Conformity Analysis, Don
Ballanti, 2/11/08 Attachment 5).
Consistent with Bay Area Air Quality Management District
recommendations, the following measures shall be
incorporated into project grading plans and specifications to
reduce short-term construction dust emissions to a less-than-
significant level.
Mitiqation Measure AIR-1: The City of Dublin shall:
a) Require construction contractors to water all
active construction areas at least twice daily;
b) Require construction contractors to cover all haul
trucks or maintain a minimum two foot freeboard;
c) Require construction contractors to pave, apply
water three times per day or aoplv non-toxic soil
Page 13
1 g 0'1 LfOfZ
stabilizers on unpaved access roads and staging
areas;
d) Require that all paved access roads, parking and
staging areas be swept daily, preferably with
water sweepers;
e) Require that adjacent streets be swept on a daily
basis, preferably with water sweepers, if visible
soil material is carried onto public streets;
f) Require hydroseeding or stabilization of inactive
construction areas (10+ days) that have been
previously graded;
g) Enclose or cover exposed stockpiles of dirt, sand
or similar material that can be eroded;
h) Require a 10 mph maximum speed limit on
unpaved roads;
i) Require the installation of sandbags or similar
measures to prevent silt runoff to public streets or
bod ies of water;
j) Require replanting of vegetation in graded areas
as quickly as possible.
Alternative 3: Implementation of this Alternative could involve
removal and replacement of existing driveways, parking
areas and landscaped areas. These activities could result in
short term emission of dust and Mitigation Measure AIR-1 will
apply to this Alternative to reduce this impact to a less-than-
sianificant level.
Farmland Protection The Important Farmland Map for Alameda County designates
Policy the Project site as Urban and Built Up Land (California
Act [7 CFR 658] Department of Conservation, Important Farmland Map of
Alameda County, 2000).
Alternative 1: There would be no impact to farmland or
agricultural production under this Alternative, since the site
and surrounding area have been developed for urban uses.
Alternative 2: There would be no impact to farmland or
agricultural production under this Alternative, since the site
and surrounding area have been developed for urban uses.
Alternative 3: There would be no impact to farmland or
agricultural production under this Alternative, since the site
and surroundinq area have been developed for urban uses.
Environmental Justice Under Executive Order 12898, HUD is tasked with achieving
[Executive Order 12898] environmental justice by "...identifying and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health
or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities
on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States." (See, Executive Order 12898, subd. 1-101.)
Alternative 1: Under this Alternative, existing public housing
Page 14
/9 ~ 40t
units occupied by low income residents would continue to
deteriorate as maintenance needs exceed limited federal
subsidies for public housing. This Alternative would not
provide the benefits to low-income populations that would
occur under Alternatives 2 and 3, such as upgraded facilities
including but not limited to energy saving and more convenient
appliances and heating and cooling systems. It would maintain
the status-quo and the existing number of units. Thus, this
Alternative would not have a disproportionately high or
adverse impact on human health or environmental impacts on
low-income populations, minority populations or Native
American tribes.
Alternative 2: The environmental impacts associated with this
Alternative would not fall disproportionately on minority and/or
low-income members of the community. The Project site is
located in an area of diverse, mixed income housing, with
adjacent residential development similar to the type and
character of the proposed Project. The Project itself will
include a mix of incomes, providing affordable as well as
market rate housing. All Project residents will receive priority to
return to the new Project upon its completion so the
environmental impact associated with this Alternative is
expected to be negligible. Additionally, the number of
restricted income units to be built under this Alternative will
increase by at least 28, and perhaps as many as 42. Thus,
this Alternative will increase the affordable housing resources
for low-income members of the community. To the extent
persons of color are disproportionately low-income, this
Alternative will increase affordable housing opportunities for
those persons. Because the project includes a significant
number of market rate homes, the Project will integrate low-
income persons into their surrounding community, thus
decreasing the isolation and segregation of the existing
project. There is no intensive heavy industry in the Project
area, nor any other intensive development of a kind that might
cause substantial health hazards. The potential environmental
impacts of this Alternative are typical of residential
development and would affect future residents without respect
to minority or income status.
Alternative 3: This Alternative would involve remodeling and
upgrading the existing public housing units, occupied by low-
income households, to meet current energy standards.
Aesthetic qualities of the overall complex would also be
upgraded. Thus, this Alternative would not have a
disproportionately high or adverse impact on human health or
environmental impacts on low-income populations, minority
populations or Native American tribes.
Page 15
do VA Lji1 i
HUD Environmental Standards Determination and Compliance Documentation
Noise Abatement and The site is subject to noise generated by vehicles using
Control [24 CFR 51 B) Dougherty Road, the eastern boundary of the site. Anticipated
future noise levels, based on traffic projections, estimate an
exterior noise exposure level of 63 dBA Ldn at the
easternmost row of dwellings adjacent to Dougherty Road.
Lower exterior noise levels are anticipated for areas further
west, towards the interior of the project site.
Alternatives 1 and 3: Maintaining the existing 7-foot tall noise
barrier along Dougherty Road would continue to provide
adequate exterior vehicular noise protection to existing
dwellings based on a maximum HUD exterior noise exposure
of 65 dBA Ldn. Existing residents will be subject to helicopter
flights and other noise sources generated at Parks RFT A.
Alternative 3 would be required to adhere to Mitigation
Measure NOISE-1 (e) to reduce construction noise to on and
off-site residents to a less-than-significant level.
Alternative 2: The Intensified Development Alternative could
result in potentially significant noise levels from construction of
the proposed Project, vehicle noise from Dougherty Road as
well as possible helicopter overflights and other noise sources
from Parks RFT A. The following measure is recommended to
mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level:
Mitiqation Measure NOISE-1: The following noise
reduction measures shall be included in this project
a) Maintain or replace the existing 7-foot tall
noise barrier wall adjacent to Dougherty Road
to ensure an exterior noise exposure level of
65 dBA Ldn or less in the easterly portion of
the Project site.
b) Place public open space and common open
areas away from Dougherty Road.
c) Provide disclosures to future residents of
noise generated by helicopter and
associated noise from existing Parks RFT A.
d) Incorporate noise reducing techniques into
final building plans for the Project, including
but not limited to sound rated windows and
doors, sound rated wall construction
techniques, use of acoustical caulking and
other techniques to ensure interior noise
levels do not exceed 45 dBA Ldn.
e) Project applicants shall prepare and
implement a Construction Noise Management
Plan to reduce short-term construction noise
to a less-than-sionificant level. At a minimum,
Page 16
&/10/1$
this plan shall include limitations on hours of
construction, a requirement to place
compressors away from adjacent residences,
and require all on-site vehicles to have
working mufflers and similar items.
(Illingworth & Rodkin, Environmental Noise Assessment,
1/28/08 see Attachment 6).
T oxic/Hazardous/Radio- The site is not contaminated with levels of organochloride
active Materials, pesticides, arsenic, or mercury of lead contamination above
Contamination, Environmental Screening Levels. (Limited Phase II
Environmental Site Assessment, Terrasearch 2/6/08, see
Chemicals or Gases Attachment 7). Existing structures have been found to contain
[24 CFR 58.5(i)(2)] levels of asbestos building materials and lead based paints.
(Limited Asbestos Survey and Evaluation, Protech Consulting,
9/07, see Attachment 7).
Alternative 1: There would be no release of or remediation of
existing levels of asbestos and lead based paint in buildings,
since existing structures would remain.
Alternatives 2 and 3: Demolition andlor upgrading of existing
dwellings could release asbestos and lead based paint into the
atmosphere. The following measure will ensure that the level
of contaminants are reduced to a less-than-significant level:
Mitiqation Measure HAZ-1:
a) An asbestos and lead based paint removal
program shall be prepared in accord with local,
state and federal regulations. Necessary permits
shall be obtained and the removal program
implemented by a qualified, licensed contractor.
Disposal of contaminated materials shall be in a
location approved to accept such materials.
b) Following demolition and removal of residential
dwellings and other improvements, surface
sampling for asbestos and lead based paint
shall be completed using approved EPA
methods. If residual lead or asbestos is found in
the soil, this material shall be remediated as
specified in "a," above.
Siting of HUD-Assisted One potential hazardous site wa.s identified in the Limited
Projects near Hazardous Phase I Environmental Site Assessment on Parks RFT A
Operations [24 CFR 51 C] approximately 0.12 miles east of the Project Site. The nature
or extent of any contamination on this site is not known
(Limited Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Terrasearch
7/23/07, Attachment 7). The Project site is separated from
Parks RFT A by a major arterial roadway with an approximate
width of 100 feet, a 7 -foot solid masonry wall along the
easterly boundary of the Project site, plus an approximate 6 to
8 foot tall earthen berm on the westerly boundary of Parks
RFTA to buffer the Project site from any explosions or other
major hazards on the Parks RFTA site (field observation
1/7108).
Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no change to the number
Page 17
C).;2 Q~ L-(?t{
of residents, visitors or employees on the site that would be
subject to any explosion or risk of upset from Parks RFT A
since no new dwellings would be built.
Alternative 2: A greater number of dwellings and residents
would be present on the Arroyo Vista site than under
Alternatives 1 and 3; however the presence of a large setback
from Parks RFT A, the masonry wall and berm would provide
sufficient protection to future Project residents from risks of
upset.
Airport Clear Zones and The Project site is not located within an airport referral area
Accident Potential from any public or private airport or airstrips (Alameda County
Zones Airport Land Use Policy Plan, 1986). Helicopter operations
[24 CFR 51 OJ occur at Parks RFT A immediately east of the Project site;
however, actual flights occur on the base and to the east of the
base (Environmental Noise Management Plan, Parks Reserve
Forces Training Area, Dublin California, 2000).
Alternatives 1 ,2 and 3: No impact to the Project site is
anticipated under any of the Alternatives.
Page 18
;?31'Mi
Environmental Assessment Checklist
[Environmental Review Guide HUO CPO 782, 24 CFR 58.40; Ref. 40 CFR 1508.8 &1508.27]
Evaluate the significance of the effects of the proposal on the character, features and resources of the Project area.
Enter relevant base data and verifiable source documentation to support the finding. Then enter the appropriate
impact code from the following list to make a determination of impact. Impact Codes: (1) - No impact anticipated;
(2) - Potentially beneficial; (3) - Potentially adverse; (4) - Requires mitigation;
(5) - Requires project modification. Note names, dates of contact, telephone numbers and page references. Attach
additional material as appropriate. Note conditions or mitigation measures required.
land Development
Code
Source or Documentation
Conformance with The existing City General Plan (local Comprehensive Plan)
Comprehensive Plans and Zoning Ordinance designate the site for multi-family
and Zoning development, consistent with the existing Arroyo Vista
project.
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: No General Plan Amendment or
rezoning would be required for these Alternatives, since no
additional dwellings would be built.
1 Alternative 2: A General Plan Amendment and rezoning is
required (and has been requested) to increase residential
density on the site. Surrounding properties to the north,
west and south have been developed at similar densities to
the proposed Project. No impacts are anticipated with
regard to these actions (Contact: Erica Fraser, Dublin
Community Development Deoartment.)
Compatibility and Land uses surrounding the Arroyo Vista Project site to the
Urban Impact north, west and south include multi family housing
complexes at a similar density, scale and general design as
the proposed Project. Although existing older dwellings
would be removed to accommodate the proposed Project, a
relocation plan has been prepared consistent with federal
and state relocation guidelines (Contact: Erica Fraser,
Dublin Community Development Department, 1/7/08)
1 Alternatives 1. 2 and 3: All three Alternatives would be
compatible with surrounding land uses and density of
development and no impact would result.
Slope The Project site has a gradual slope to the west, less than 2
percent, and is not subject to landslides and/or mudflows
(Site Topography Map, CBG Engineering, August 2007).
1 Alternatives 1. 2 and 3: None of the Alternatives would
significantly impact existing slope and topography of the
site.
Erosion 1 Alternative 1: Erosion potential would be low since no major
construction would occur under this Alternative.
4 Alternatives 2 and 3: Although not subject to landslides and
Page 19
;2 L-I <r140<l
associated erosion, dirt could erode into the adjacent
Alamo Creek and adjacent streets during the grading and
construction phases of Alternative 2 and major
reconstruction of the complex under Alternative 3.
Mitigation Measure 810-1 requires the preparation of an
Erosion Control Plan to avoid erosion impacts into Alamo
Creek and would be aoolicable to both Alternatives.
Soil Suitability Site soils consist of medium stiff clay, silty sand and gravel
materials. (Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed
Arroyo Vista Residential Development, Terrasearch Inc,
August 6, 2007 Attachment 8).
1 Alternative 1: There would be no impact with regard to soil
suitability under this Alternative, since no construction is
proposed.
4 Alternatives 2 and 3: A site-specific soils analysis notes that
site soils, local seismic conditions and other soil
considerations can support an increase in the number of
dwellings on the site, or major rehabilitation of existing
dwellings; however, site-specific design recommendations
shall be followed to ensure that proposed construction will
be suitable for local soil conditions:
Mitiqation Measure GEO-1: Foundation design and
other construction techniques included in the
geotechnical report for the Project shall be included in
final construction plans and specifications.
Hazards and Nuisances The site is not contaminated with levels of organochloride
including Site Safety pesticides, arsenic, mercury or lead contamination above
Environmental Screening Levels. (Limited Phase II
Environmental Site Assessment, Terrasearch 2/6/08).
Existing structures have been found to contain levels of
asbestos building materials and lead based paints. (Limited
Asbestos Survey and Evaluation, Protech Consulting, 9/07,
see Attachment 7).
1 Alternative 1: There would be no release of or remediation
of existing levels of asbestos and lead based paint in
buildings, since existing structures would remain.
4 Alternatives 2 and 3: Demolition and/or upgrading of
existing dwellings could release asbestos and lead based
paint into the atmosphere. The following measure will
ensure that the level of contaminants are reduced to a less-
than-significant level:
Mitiqation Measure HAZ-1:
a) An asbestos and lead based paint removal
Page 20
&'51 Y0i
program shall be prepared in accord with
local, state and federal regulations.
Necessary permits shall be obtained and the
removal program implemented by a
qualified, licensed contractor. Disposal of
contaminated materials shall be in a location
approved to accept such materials.
b) Following demolition and removal of
residential dwellings and other
improvements, surface sampling for
asbestos and lead based paint shall be
completed using approved EPA methods. If
residual lead or asbestos is found in the soil,
this material shall be remediated as
soecified in "a," above.
Energy Consumption 1 Alternative 1: Existing levels of energy consumption would
remain, since older non-energy efficient dwellings would
remain on the site.
2 Alternatives 2 and 3: Construction of new dwellings or
major rehabilitation of existing dwellings will be required to
conform to residential energy standards as set forth in the
most recent California Building Code to minimize any
increases in total energy use. (Source: Gregory Shreeve,
Dublin Building Office, 2/6/08) The Project site is also
located near retail, service and employment centers in
Dublin and is located approximately 0.75 miles from the
nearest elementary school (Field observation, 12/30/07).
Noise - Contribution to 1 Alternatives 1 and 3: The number of dwellings would not
Community Noise Levels increase under these two Alternatives and there would be
no increases in short or long-term community noise levels.
1 Alternative 2: The Intensified Project would increase the
number of vehicles to and from the site due to an increase
in the number of dwellings. However, based on the findings
included in the Project specific acoustic report, this increase
will not result in a significant long term increase to
community noise levels.
(Illingworth & Rodkin, Environmental Noise Assessment,
1/28/08 see Attachment 6).
Air Quality 1 Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no long or short-term
Effects of Ambient Air Quality on pollutant increases under these Alternatives, since no
Project and Contribution to
Community Pollution Levels increases in the number of dwellings or associated vehicles
would occur.
4 Alternative 3: Although air emissions would increase during
both construction and operational phases of this
Page 21
/)0 oj 4Crct
Alternative, emissions would not exceed the recommended
thresholds of significance adopted by the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District, the local air agency. Approval
of this Alternative would not interfere with attainment of
National Ambient Air Quality standards. (Air Impact
Conformity Analysis, Don Ballanti, 2/11/08). Adherence to
Mitigation Measure AIR-1 will ensure that construction air
quality impacts would be less-than-significant.
Environmental Design 1 Alternative 1: No impact to environmental design or local
Visual Quality - Coherence, visual quality is anticipated, since no additional dwellings
Diversity, Compatible Use and
Scale would be built on the site and no major exterior upgrades
would occur.
1 Alternative 2: Under this Alternative, an older income-
restricted public housing project would be demolished and
a new housing development would be constructed on the
same site. Proposed construction would be consistent with
surrounding multi-family development patterns. A General
Plan Amendment has been requested to increase density
on the site, but the Project proposed as this Alternative is
consistent with all other General Plan policies, including the
Housing Element (Contact: Erica Fraser, Dublin Community
Development Department, 1/7/08)
2 Alternative 3: The exterior appearance of the Project would
be improved with upgrades to paint and new landscaping.
(Contact: Erica Fraser, Dublin Community Development
Department, 1/7/08)
Socioeconomic
Code
Source or Documentation
Demographic Character Changes The Project site is developed with the existing Arroyo Vista
income restricted public housing project that has 150
dwellings and a community building.
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: No demographic changes would occur
with regard to local demographic characteristics since no
additional dwellings would be built.
1 Alternative 2: All existing improvements on the site would
be removed under this Alternative to allow construction of a
mixed-income community on the same site with more
dwellings. Existing residents will be given priority to return
to the project upon completion of construction of the new
affordable units. The same general overall demographic
character of this portion of Dublin would not change
(Contact: Erica Fraser, Dublin Community Development
Department, 1/8/08)
Page 22
d'7 ':'f LWl
Displacement 1 Alternative 1: No displacement of existing residents would
occur under this alternative, since existing dwellings would
remain.
Alternative 2: The child care center,
1 management/maintenance building and all 150 residential
units on the site would be demolished under this
Alternative. This means that the approximate 400 residents
living in the 150.units would be displaced. However,
demolition will not occur until all current residents and the
child care center are relocated pursuant to the Relocation
Plan approved by the Dublin Housing Authority consistent
with applicable statutes and guidelines.
1 The Relocation Plan indicates that residents will be
provided with relocation benefits that include advisory and
counseling services (including help with packing as may be
required by elderly and/or disabled residents), comparable
replacement housing through a Section 8 Housing Choice
Voucher or replacement housing payment if a household is
ineligible for a Voucher, and moving costs at either the fixed
rate established by the Department of Transportation or
actual moving costs for up to 50 miles. In addition, DHA
will pay for credit check fees and security deposits, up to a
maximum amount, even though neither federal nor state
laws or guidelines require such payments. These benefits
have been provided to the households that have voluntarily
moved to date and will be provided to those who still remain
at Arroyo Vista.
If HUD approves DHA's disposition application, residents
will also receive a 150-day notice to move. HUD
regulations require that this notice be for 90 days.
Most residents that have voluntarily moved to date have
relocated in the Tri-Valley area (Dublin, Pleasanton and
Livermore). The DDA indicates that displaced Arroyo Vista
residents will have a preference over other persons to
reapply for the newly developed affordable units.
Alternative 3: Limited and short-term displacement of some
residents would occur to allow replacement of kitchens and
other improvements; however, this would not be a
significant impact.
(Contact: John Lucero, Housinq Specialist, 1/8/08)
Employment and Income Patterns 1 Alternatives 1 and 3: Existing employment and income
patterns would remain under these Alternatives, since no
additional dwellings would be constructed.
Alternative 2: Construction of this Alternative would
1 increase residential opportunities in Dublin and the Tri-
Page 23
d&~f~
Valley area, an area with a current surplus of jobs and a
relative scarcity of housing for moderate, low and very-low
income households (Contact: John Lucero, Housing
Specialist, 1/8/08)
Community Facilities
and Services
Code
Source or Documentation
Educational Facilities The Dublin Unified School District provides K-12 public
educational facilities to the Project site. Closest facilities
include Fredricksen Elementary, approximately 0.6 miles to
the west, Wells Middle School, approximately 0.5 miles to
the east, and Dublin High School located approximately 0.8
miles to the west (www.dublinK12.ca.us), 1/7/08)
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: The same number of school-aged
children would continue to be generated from the Arroyo
Vista project.
Alternative 2: A number of additional students would live in
1 the larger complex, although 50 of the new units would be
restricted to seniors and these would not create additional
students. Project developers will be required to pay school
impact fees to off-set increased enrollments.
Commercial Facilities The Project is located along Dougherty Road which
contains commercial facilities and is approximately 0.75
miles north of Dublin Boulevard. Dougherty Road also
houses retail and service uses. Typical uses on these roads
include restaurants, auto service, food service and other
retail uses (Field observation, 12/30/07)
Alternatives 1.2 and 3: There would be no difference with
1 respect to availability of local commercial facilities.
Health Care The closest major hospital is Valley Care Medical Center at
5555 W. Las Positas Boulevard in Pleasanton. This facility
is approximately 2.5 miles southeast of the project site
(www.vallevcare.com, 1/7/08)
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no increase in the use
of local health care facilities under Alternatives 1 and 3,
since no additional dwelling units would be added to the
site.
1 Alternative 2: Limited and less-than-significant increases in
demand for health care would result under Alternative 2.
Although more dwellings would be built on the site,
including 50 senior apartments, this would represent an
increase of approximately 600 new residents out of the Tri-
Valley regional population of 109,700 residents in 2005.
This increase could be handled by existing and proposed
Page 24
~0 9j l1t:tc(
hospitals and clinics in Dublin, Pleasanton and Livermore
(Proiections 2007, Association of bay Area Governments).
Social Services Social services are provided by Alameda County, with the
nearest office to the Project site located at the Livermore
Outstation, 3311 Pacific Avenue, Livermore.
(www.alamedasocialservices.ora, 1/7/08)
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no increase in the use
of local social services, since no additional dwellings would
be built.
1 Alternative 2: The Project could generate a slight but not
significant increase in the need for County social services
based on an increase of dwellings on the Project site under
this Alternative.
Solid Waste Solid waste pick-up and hauling service to the existing
Arroyo Vista project is provided by Amador Valley
Industries, the local solid waste hauler and recycler.
1 Alternatives 1: There would be no increase in the
generation of solid waste, since no additional dwellings
would be built.
1 Alternative 2: An increase would occur in the amount of
solid waste generated on the site based on an increase of
dwellings on the Project site under this Alternative. Amador
Valley Industries would continue to provide service to the
redeveloped site. Adequate dumpster and bin space have
been provided on the proposed site plan for this Alternative.
Additional waste would also be generated during demolition
and constructed activities. Pursuant to Chapter 7.30, Waste
Management Plan, of the Dublin Municipal Code, the
project will be required to submit a waste management plan
which shows that 50% of all construction and demolition
debris will be reused or recycled.(Contact: K. Brighi,
Amador Valley Industries, 9/18/07)
Alternative 3: Additional waste would be generated during
constructed activities. Pursuant to Chapter 7.30, Waste
Management Plan, of the Dublin Municipal Code, the
project will be required to submit a waste management plan
which shows that 50% of all construction and demolition
debris will be reused or recvcled.
Waste Water Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal service to
the existing Arroyo Vista project is provided by Dublin San
Ramon Services District (DSRSD). Wastewater generated
from the site is transported via public underground sewer
lines to DSRSD's regional wastewater treatment plant,
located approximately 1.9 miles southwest of the Project
Page 25
'" )p u.t:- <l
'::;l o~. .. -' "
I
site. (Contact: RhQdora Biagton, DSRSD engineer, 1/9/08)
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no increase in
wastewater generation on the site, since no additional
dwellings would be built.
1 Alternative 2: The amount of wastewater generated on the
site would increase, based on an increase of dwellings on
the Project site. Based on discussions with DSRSD staff
adequate capacity exists in the overall wastewater system
to accommodate the proposed increased number of
dwellings under this Alternative (Contact: Rhodora Biagton,
DSRSD enQineer, 1/9/08).
Storm Water The current complex includes a series of underground drain
pipes and open swales to transport stormwater runoff to
both the City of Dublin's stormwater system and directly to
Alamo Creek.
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no increase in
stormwater runoff from the site under these Alternatives,
since no additional dwellings would be built.
1 Alternative 2: Under local, regional, state and federal
surface water pollution requirements, additional quantities
of storm water from the site would largely be retained on
the site in oversize underground pipes and vaults to
minimize increases in stormwater runoff from the site.
Contact: Mark Lander, Dublin Public Works Department,
1/9/08)
Water Supply Water to the existing Arroyo Vista project is provided by
Zone 7.
Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no changes to water
1 supply under these two alternatives.
Alternative 2: Under this Alternative, domestic water service
1 would become the responsibility of DSRSD. DSRSD relies
substantially on surface water supplies, so there would be
no impact with regard to local groundwater recharge issues
or on the local aquifer. Adequate surface water supplies
exist to serve the increased number of dwellings under this
Alternative (Contact: Rhodora Biagtan, DSRSD engineer
8/23/07).
Public Safety Police service to the Arroyo Vista site is provided by the
- Police City of Dublin Police Services Department, headquartered
at Dublin Civic Center, approximately 1.0 mile southwest of
the project site (www.cLdublin.ca.us).
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no changes to police
Page 26
2/q;JJ /,,,-4
~ -t' -"'((..'t'6
services provided to the Project site under these two
alternatives since no additional dwellings would be
constructed. Police services would continue to be provided
by the City of Dublin.
1 Alternative 2: Police service would continue to be provided
by the City of Dublin, although a somewhat greater number
of dwellings constructed under this Alternative could result
in greater calls for police and emergency service. This
anticipated increase would be less-than-significant and
could be accommodated by existing Police staffing and
capital facilities (Val Guzman, Dublin Police Services
4/30/08)
- Fire Fire service to the Project is provided by Alameda County
Fire Department, under contract to the City of Dublin for all
three Alternatives. The nearest fire station to the site is
Station No. 17, located at 6200 Madigan, approximately 1.5
miles due east of the Arroyo Vista site.
(www,acqov,fire,fire/station.qov)
Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no changes to fire
1 services provided to the project site under these two
alternatives since no additional dwellings would be
constructed. Fire services would continue to be provided by
the Alameda County Fire Department under contract to the
City of Dublin.
Alternative 2: Fire service would continue to be provided by
1 the Alameda County Fire Department, under contract to the
City of Dublin. Although a greater number of dwellings
would be constructed under this Alternative, a less-than-
significant impact would result since new dwellings would
comply with current fire codes. The fire service provider has
indicated that fire service to the site under this Alternative
could be accommodated with existing staffing and capital
facilities (Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department,
4/29/08).
- Emergency Medical Emergency medical service to the Project site is provided
by Alameda County Fire Department, under contract to the
City of Dublin. The nearest fire station to the site is Station
No. 17, located at 6200 Madigan, approximately 1.5 miles
east of the project site (www.acqovJireJire/station.qov)
Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no changes to
1 emergency services provided to the Project site under
these two alternatives since no additional dwellings would
be constructed. Emergency medical services would
continue to be provided by the Alameda County Fire
Department under contract to the City of Dublin.
Page 27
~ 6J ycrZ
1 Alternative 2: Emergency medical service would continue to
be provided by the Alameda County Fire Department under
. contract to the City of Dublin. A greater number of dwellings
cOnstructed under this Alternative could result in a greater
number of calls for emergency service since more dwellings
would exist on the site, including 50 senior apartment units.
This impact is anticipated to be less-than-significant and
could be accommodated by the local fire and emergency
service provider (Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire
Department, 4/29/08).
Open Space and Recreation The existing Arroyo Vista complex includes approximately 3
Open Space acres of undeveloped on-site open space fields plus
basketball courts and other recreation facilities for resident
use.
Alternatives 1 and 3: Existing open space and recreation
1 facilities on the site would remain available under these
Alternatives.
Alternative 2: A central open space feature would be
1 provided on the site under this Alternative, although the two
currently vacant fields on the site would be converted to
housinQ and parkinQ.
Recreation In terms of off-site recreation features, the City of Dublin
maintains Alamo Creek Park approximately 0.3 miles north
of the Project site. This is a 5.3-acre park with playfields,
picnic areas, barbeques and restrooms. Dougherty Hills
Park, a large open space area owned by the City, is located
approximately 0.4 miles west of the site
(www.cLdublin.ca.us)
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: Onsite recreation and play areas
would continue to exist on the site, and existing residents
could continue to use nearby City park facilities.
1 Alternative 2: Although there would be a larger on-site
resident population under this Alternative than the other
Alternatives, existing City parks could accommodate such
an increase with a less-than-significant impact. Although
there is an approximately 1-acre park deficit in this portion
of Dublin, payment of park in-lieu fees to the City, as
required by ordinance, will assist in financing future
parkland (Diane Lowart, Dublin Parks and Community
Services Director, 4/30/08)
Cultural Facilities The Arroyo Vista site is located approximately 1.0 mile
northeast of the Dublin library, which is located in the
Dublin Civic Center (www.cLdublin.ca.us).
Page 28
33 ~r L{t11
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: No impacts to cultural facilities would
occur under these Alternatives since the resident
population of the Arroyo Vista project would not change.
Alternative 2: Less-than-significant impacts to cultural
1 facilities would occur under this Alternative since the library
has been sized to accommodate the full build out of the City.
The addition of approximately 228 dwellings that could be
constructed under this Alternative would fall within this
buildout population.
Transportation The Project site fronts onto Dougherty Road, a major north-
south arterial roadway in the City of Dublin. (Circulation
Element of Dublin General Plan). Dougherty Road is
located approximately 0.5 miles north of Interstate 580 and
has an interchange with this freeway. Dougherty Road also
provides access to San Ramon and communities north of
Dublin (field observation). The Project site is also located
adjacent to regional bus line 3, operated by the Livermore
Amador Valley Transit Authority. Route 3 is a fixed route
bus line that connects to the Dublin/Pleasanton BART
station approximately 0.7 miles southeast of the project
site, Stoneridge regional shopping mall in Pleasanton, the
Dublin Senior Center, Wells Middle School, Dublin High
School and Shannon Community Center
(www.wheelsbus.com). Nearby bicycle routes include a
Class I bike path along Dougherty Road and within the Iron
Horse Trail, a multi-function recreation trail just south of the
Project site (field observation).
Alternative 1: No additional dwellings would be constructed
1 under this Alternative and no additional vehicle traffic would
be added to local and regional roads. Existing patterns of
public transit, bicycle and pedestrian traffic would remain.
Alternative 2: Construction of this Alternative would add an
4 estimated 83 additional vehicle trips in the a.m. peak and
110 vehicle trips in the p.m. peak to the local and regional
network. This would result in an unacceptable level of delay
for vehicles on South Mariposa Drive turning left onto
Dougherty Road under existing plus project conditions, as
well as short and long term cumulative plus project
conditions, which would be a significant impact. This would
be reduced to a less-than-significant level by adherence to
the following mitigation measure:
Mitiqation Measure TR-1: Prior to issuance of
certificates of occupancy, the Applicants of the
Preferred Alternative shall install a traffic signal at the
South Mariposa Drive intersection with Dougherty
Page 29
;P) j r Cbf.' '')1
~'-1 1" :"/'1_; Ie
Road.
This Alternative would contribute additional peak hour
traffic to the Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard
intersection north of the Project site under short-term
cumulative conditions (Year 2015). However, traffic from
the Project site is anticipated to be negligible at this
intersection, since most of the traffic at this intersection is
anticipated to come from the north.
Under long-term cumulative conditions (2025), this
Alternative would contribute to peak hour traffic at the
Amador Valley Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection.
Traffic from the Project site is anticipated to be negligible at
this intersection, since most of the traffic at this intersection
is anticipated to come from the Camp Parks project and
from the north.
This Alternative would add a negligible amount of increased
traffic under peak hour long-term cumulative conditions at
the major intersection south of the site, the Dublin
Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection. Therefore, no
significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures
are required.
Additional traffic from this Alternative to nearby freeways
and Metropolitan Transportation System arterial roadways
under cumulative conditions is not expected to be
significant.
Reconfigured Project driveways under this Alternative could
result in potentially significant impacts to local bus
circulation routes. The following mitigation measure is
recommended to reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant level.
Mitigation Measure TR-2: Prior to issuance of a
grading plan, the Applicants for the Preferred
Alternative shall coordinate with LAVTA to develop a
bus circulation plan to safely accommodate bus
circulation, and to ensure pedestrian and bicycle
safety. Bus improvements shall be reflected on final
improvement plans. Implement Mitigation Measure
TR-1 to provide for pedestrian safety.
(City of Dublin, Traffic Report for Arroyo Vista Project,
4/30/08 see Attachment 9).
Alternative 3: Similar to Alternative 1, there would be no
Page 30
"J r- W' ..,',' (". /1,.
~ r--f' ~1" ( 1"
additional vehicle trips or change to existing traffic patterns
from the Project onto local and regional roads and existing
1 public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian circulation
patterns would remain.
Natural Features
Source or Documentation
Water Resources 1 Alternatives 1 and 3: There would be no significant change
to water resources under these two Alternatives, since no
new dwellings would be constructed. If plumbing systems
were upgraded under Alternative 3, there could be some
savings of water if water efficient fixtures were retrofitted.
1 Alternative 2: There would be no substantial depletion of
groundwater resources under this Alternative, since the
Project would receive water from Dublin San Ramon
Services District, which uses imported surface water as its
major water source. The Project site is already substantially
currently developed with a residential project, and is not a
groundwater recharge area identified in the Dublin General
Plan. (DSRSD Urban Water Management Plan, June,
2005). Approximately 2.5-acres of the present undeveloped
portions of the site, located on the north and west sides of
the site, would be converted to housing under this
Alternative. This is equivalent to approximately 10% of the
total site (review of site development plan dated 2/19/08).
Surface Water 1 Alternatives 1 and 3: No changes to surface water
resources would occur under these Alternatives since no
additional dwellings would be constructed. No impacts
would result to any surface bodies of water near the site
under either of these Alternatives.
4 Alternative 2: Although development on the Project site
under Alternative 2 would be closer to Alamo Creek, the
nearest surface body of water to the site, a minimum 35-
foot wide setback and buffer area between development
under this Alternative and Alamo Creek would be
maintained (review of site development plan dated
2/19/08). An Erosion Control Plan is also required as
Mitigation Measure 810-1 to protect surface water in Alamo
Creek and other surface bodies of water.
Unique Natural Features and The Project site is substantially developed and contains no
Agricultural Lands natural features or agricultural lands, although Alamo
Creek, a major creek, is located just west of the site (Field
Observation)
1 Alternatives 1 and 3: Portions of the existing development
on the Arroyo Vista site are setback approximately 20 to 30
Page 31
3G~4Or~
feet from dwellings and top of bank of Alamo Creek. Other
portions of the site have a greater setback, 100 feet or
more, between site improvement and top of bank. No
changes would occur to these setbacks since no new
construction would occur under these Alternatives.
1 Alternative 2. Under this Alternative, existing 20 to 30 foot
wide setbacks would remain between buildings and Alamo
Creek for currently developed portions of the site. For
currently undeveloped portions of the site, a 35-foot wide
setback would be provided and maintained between
proposed structures and the top of bank of Alamo Creek.
No construction or improvements would be allowed in this
setback area. (Project plans dated 2/19/08).
Under all Alternatives, no impacts would result to unique
natural features or aqriculturallands.
Vegetation and Wildlife 1 Alternatives 1 and 3: No changes would occur to wildlife or
vegetation on the site, since no construction would occur
under these Alternatives.
4 Alternative 2: Development under this Alternative could
have impacts to nesting birds including Loggerhead Shrike
(a USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern), due to the
removal of trees on the Project site which have the potential
for nests; Pallid bats, due to the removal of buildings and
other structures on the site which provide marginal habitat
for this species; and fish species which have the potential
to occur in the Alameda Creek (the adjacent Alamo Creek
is a tributary to the Alameda Creek) due to runoff from the
Project site. Potential impacts related to the Central
California Coastal steelhead are discussed under the
Endangered Species Act above.
Adherence to Mitigation Measures 810-1, discussed under
the Endangered Species Section, will reduce these impacts
to a less-than-significant level (WRA Biological
Assessment, 2/08, see Attachment 4). A number of existing
trees on the site are proposed to be removed to
accommodate the proposed Project; however, replacement
trees will be planted on the site.
Other Factors
Source or Documentation
Flood Disaster Protection Act 1 Flood Insurance is not required for this Project under the
[Flood Insurance] National Flood Insurance Program since it is not located
[958.6(a)] within a 1 OO-year flood olain.
Coastal Barrier Resources Act! 1 The Project site is located approximately 10 miles inland
Coastal Barrier Improvement Act from San Francisco Bay and is not near a coastal area
Page 32
3191
eft
[958.6(c)] (Field Observation)
Airport Runway Clear Zone or 1 The Arroyo Vista site is not located within any airport
Clear Zone Disclosure runway clear zone or any other airport safety zones
[~58.6(d)] (Alameda County Airport Land Use Policy Plan)
Other Factors N/A
Page 33
0b ~ t..Fct:
Summary of Findings and Conclusions
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
Alternatives and Project Modifications Considered [24 CFR 58.40(e), Ref. 40 CFR 1508.91 (Identify other
reasonable courses of action that were considered and not selected, such as other sites, design modifications, or
other uses of the subject site. Describe the benefits and adverse impacts to the human environment of each
alternative and the reasons for rejecting it.) -
The following additional alternatives were considered as part of this environmental review process. These
are summarized below with the reasons that they have been rejected.
Developer Proposals for the Arroyo Vista Site. The Dublin Housing Authority issued a Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) to developers interested in redeveloping the project site. Eight proposals were
received, from which the Preferred Alternative was ultimately selected. All eight were rated on five
criteria: overall development experience, experience specific to the type of project requested,
financial and development capacity, development concept and the financing plan and business terms.
A short list of three was then developed and their representatives were interviewed to determine
which team had the best proposal.
The seven proposals not selected had various combinations of affordable and market rate units, both
rentals and for-sale homes. They were not selected because they did not score as highly as the
proposal submitted by Eden Housing and Citation Homes (the Preferred Alternative). In some cases,
the design and development concept of those not selected was not as attractive as that of the
Preferred Alternative. For others, their financing plans were incomplete or deemed unrealistic. A
couple proposers had very little experience with developing and/or managing rental housing for very
low income residents. One proposer dropped out before the review process was completed due to
market conditions.
The Preferred Alternative was the most responsive to the Housing Authority's RFQ, presented the
most attractive design concept and site layout, proposed more affordable units than are presently on
the site, contained reasonable business terms and a realistic financing plan, and was composed of a
highly experienced developer team that understood the local market conditions.
Off-Site Mixed Income Alternative in Dublin: One alternative would include constructing a mixed
income project (market rate and income restricted) consisting of approximately 378 dwellings
elsewhere in the City of Dublin. This would require establishment of a developer consortium for the
two development components, acquisition of approximately 24 acres of land, obtaining financing and
land use entitlements.
This alternative was rejected since the existing Arroyo Vista site is the only site owned by the Dublin
Housing Authority in the City of Dublin that could accommodate the Preferred Alternative. No other 20
to 25 acre vacant sites in Dublin are available. The cost to acquire a developed site of approximately
the same size is also not known, but is likely infeasible due to acquisition cost.
Off-Site Income-Restricted Proiect in Dublin: This alternative would involve building an approximately
378-unit all income-restricted Project on another site in Dublin.
In addition to the infeasibility of finding an appropriate site, developing an all income-restricted Project
would be financially infeasible, since the market-rate portion of the Preferred Alternative is needed to
offset the infrastructure costs of overall Project development. Lack of a market-rate component would
make developing this alternative infeasible.
Page 34
/Q 0-1 'i<~d
~ / l::7~ i.f-; II
Off-Site Mixed Income Alternative in Tri-Valley Reqion: This alternative would include developing a
378-mixed income Project within another community in the Tri-Valley area, such as Pleasanton,
Livermore or the unincorporated portion of Alameda County.
This alternative was rejected as infeasible since no sites in any other Tri-Valley community are owned
by the Dublin Housing Authority. Market rate land prices would make an off-site alternative infeasible.
It is also unknown if another City would approve land use entitlements necessary to allow this
alternative to move forward.
Hiqher Density Alternative: Another alternative would include constructing more dwellings on the
existing 23.8 acre site. This would allow for a greater number of market-rate and income-restricted
dwellings to be built, further assisting the City of Dublin in meeting quantified objectives for low-
income households.
This alternative was rejected since the proposed density would be greater than surrounding
developments and would be inconsistent with local comprehensive plans and zoning as well as not
being compatible with environmental design and scale of surrounding developments.
Lower Density Alternative: Development of the existing 23.8-acre site at a lower density was
considered, as an income-restricted single family detached dwellings project at a residential density
of approximately 6 dwellings per acre, which would yield 144 dwellings.
The Lower Density alternative was rejected since this alternative would require displacement of all
existing residences to construct fewer dwellings than currently exists on the site. The low density
configuration would be financially infeasible due to the estimated high development cost per dwelling.
Partial Reconstruction and Partial Redevelopment: One alternative would include leaving
approximately one-half of the current Arroyo Vista units (75 dwellings) as they currently exist on half
the site and redeveloping the other half with higher density income-restricted housing.
This alternative was rejected due to land use incompatibilities between the density and appearance of
the two portions of the site.
Mixed-Use Alternative: An approximately 5-acre portion of the existing 23.8-acre site would be
developed for local serving commercial uses under this alternative. The remaining 18.8 acres of the
site would be developed with approximately 298 income-restricted dwellings, which is the same
density as the Preferred Alternative.
This alternative was rejected since the Project site is not well suited to a small commercial center. It is
located mid block on a high speed arterial roadway. Left turn movements from vehicles traveling north
into the site could be limited. The market feasibility of developing commercial uses on a portion of the
site is limited due to the large number of commercial uses north and south of the site. Construction of
298 income-restricted dwellings on the non-commercial portion of the site may not be feasible due to
the high per-unit cost of providing infrastructure.
Page 35
LfO 9;f 4li~
No Action Alternative [24 CFR 58.40(e)]
(Discuss the benefits and adverse impacts to the human environment of not implementing the preferred alternative).
As identified in the above section, retaining the existing Arroyo Vista complex at the current
number of dwelling units as now exists (Alternative 1) would not result in identified significant
impacts on the environment. However, it would also not provide 30 additional affordable rental
units, 14 affordable units (pursuant to the City's Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance) or modern,
energy efficient dwellings on the site with opportunities for long-term costs savings on building
maintenance and utilities. The existing project would continue to deteriorate due to insufficient
HUD funding for improvements.
Mitigation Measures Recommended [24 CFR 58.40(d), 40 CFR 1508.20]
(Recommend feasible ways in which the proposal or its external factors should be modified in order to minimize
adverse environmental impacts and restore or enhance environmental quality.)
Mitiqation Measure CUL-1: Prior to grading of the site, the applicants shall prepare and implement a
program of mechanical subsurface testing for the presence or absence of significant cultural
resources. The program shall include use of a mechanical core sampler and shall be conducted by a
qualified archeologist as approved by the Dublin Community Development Director. If evidence of
significant cultural resources are identified, work on that portion of the project site shall cease until a
resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and applicable federal
regulations is prepared by a qualified archeologist and/or paleontologist and approved by the City of
Dublin Community Development Director or an authorized representative. Project work may be
resumed in compliance with such plan. If human remains are encountered, the County Coroner shall
be contacted immediately and the provisions of State law carried out.
Mitiqation Measure BI0-1: Mitiqation Measure BI0-1: To minimize impacts to nesting birds, including
loggerhead shrike, to Pallid bats, and to sensitive fish species such as steelhead, prior to issuance of
a grading permit the applicants shall:
a) Limit clearing of vegetation and the initiation of construction to the non-breeding season for
loggerhead shrike and other nesting birds which is between September and January. If these
activities cannot be done in the non-breeding season, a qualified biologist shall perform pre-
construction bird surveys within 30 days prior to construction or clearing of vegetation. If nesting
birds, such as loggerhead shrike, are discovered in the vicinity of planned development, buffer
areas shall be established around the nest until the nest is vacated. The size and duration of
the buffer will depend on the particular species of nesting bird present and shall be established
by a qualified biologist.
b) Prepare and implement an Erosion Control Plan to minimize pollutants into Alamo Creek
which will avoid impacting sensitive fish habitat. The Erosion Control Plan shall be reviewed
by a qualified aquatic biologist to ensure that the Plan will adequately reduce pollutants to
avoid impacts to sensitive fish species, such as steelhead.
c) Limit the initiation of construction, tree removal, and building demolition to the inactive
Pallid Bat season in September and October to avoid impacting bats. If all such work
cannot be confined to this time period, pre-construction bat surveys shall be performed by a
qualified biologist. If bats are discovered in the vicinity of planned development, buffer
areas shall be established around the bat roost until August 31. The size and duration of
the buffer will depend on the type of roost structure and construction activity, and shall be
established by a qualified biologist.
Page 36
4/1 ct
Mitiqation Measure AIR-1: The City of Dublin shall:
a) Require construction contractors to water all active construction areas at least twice daily;
b) Require construction contractors to cover all haul trucks or maintain a minimum two foot
freeboard;
c) Require contactors to pave, apply water three times per day or apply non-toxic soil
stabilizers on unpaved access roads and staging areas;
d) Require that all paved access roads, parking and staging areas be swept daily, preferably
with water sweepers;
e) Require that adjacent streets be swept on a daily basis, preferably with water sweepers, if
visible soil material is carried onto public streets;
f) Require hydroseeding or stabilization of inactive construction areas (10+ days) that have
been previously graded;
g) Enclose or cover exposed stockpiles of dirt, sand or similar material that can be eroded;
h) Require a 10 mph maximum speed limit on unpaved roads;
i) Require the installation of sandbags or similar measures to prevent silt runoff to public
streets or bodies of water;
j) Require replanting of vegetation in graded areas as quickly as possible.
Mitiqation Measure GEO-1: Foundation design and other construction techniques included in the
geotechnical report for the Project shall be included in final construction plans and specifications.
Mitiqation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to issuance of a demolition permit by the City of Dublin, the
applicants shall comply with the following:
a) An asbestos and lead based paint removal program shall be prepared in accord with local,
state and federal regulations. Necessary permits shall be obtained and the removal
program implemented by a qualified, licensed contractor. Disposal of contaminated
materials shall be in a location approved to accept such materials.
b) Following demolition and removal of residential dwellings and other improvements, surface
sampling for asbestos and lead based paint shall be completed using approved EPA
methods. If residual lead or asbestos is found in the soil, this material shall be remediated
as specified in "a," above.
Mitiqation Measure NOISE-1: The following noise reduction measures shall be included in this
project:
a)
b)
c)
Maintain or replace the existing 7 -foot tall noise barrier wall adjacent to Dougherty Road to
ensure an exterior noise exposure level of 65 dBA Ldn or less in the easterly portion of the
project site.
Place public open space and common open areas away from Dougherty Road.
Provide disclosures to future residents of noise generated by helicopter and associated noise
from existing Parks RFT A.
Incorporate noise reducing techniques into building plans for the project, including but not
limited to sound rated windows and doors, sound rated wall construction techniques, use of
acoustical caulking and other techniques to ensure interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA
Ldn.
Project applicants shall prepare and implement a Construction Noise Management Plan to
reduce short-term construction noise to a less-than-significant level. At a minimum, this plan
shall include limitations on hours of construction, a requirement to place compressors away
d)
e)
Page 37
Lf~eJ
from adjacent residences, and require all on-site vehicles to have working mufflers and similar
items.
Mitiqation Measure TR-1: Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy, the Applicants of the
Preferred Alternative shall install a traffic signal at the South Mariposa Drive intersection with
Dougherty Road.
Mitiqation Measure TR-2: Prior to issuance of a grading plan, the Applicants of the Preferred
Alternative shall coordinate with LAVTA to develop a bus circulation plan to safely accommodate bus
circulation and to ensure pedestrian and bicycle safety. Bus improvements shall be reflected on final
improvement plans. Implement Mitigation Measure TR-1 to provide for pedestrian safety.
Page 38
43 '14q~
Additional Studies Performed
(Attach studies or summaries)
Arroyo Vista Landscape and Irriqation Repair Estimates, MCE Corporation, June 2006
Arroyo Vista Residential Proiect. Dublin CA-Environmental Noise Assessment Illingworth & Rodkin,
January 28, 2008
Bioloqical Resources Assessment. Arroyo Vista Housinq Proiect, Dublin CA, WRA Environmental
Consultants, February 2008
Cultural Resources Study for the Arroyo Vista Housinq Proiect. Dublin, Alameda County California,
Holman & Associates, October 10, 2007
General Plan, City of Dublin, updated through September 2006
Geotechnicallnvestiqation on Proposed Residential Development, Arroyo Vista, Terrasearch,lnc.
August6,2007
Limited Phase I Environmental Site Assessment on Proposed Residential Development. Arroyo Vista,
Terrasearch, Inc., July 23, .2007
Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment on Proposed Residential Development, Arroyo
Vista, Terrasearch, Inc., February 6, 2008
Pavement Repair Estimate. Arroyo Vista Complex, PERMCO Engineering, June 2006
Proiections '07, Association of Bay Area Governments, 2007
Residential and Community Buildinq Repair Estimate, CM Pros, November 2005
Traffic Report for the Arroyo Vista Proiect, City of Dublin, April, 2008
List of Sources, Agencies and Persons Consulted [40 CFR 1508.9(b)]
Demoqraphic Study and Facilities Plan, Dublin Unified School District, October 2004
General Plan, City of Dublin updated through September 14, 2006
Environmental Noise Manaqement Plan, Parks Reserve Forces Traininq Area, California,
Environmental Noise Program, Directorate of Environmental Health Engineering, U.S. Army Center
for Health Promotion and Preventative Medicine, December 2000
Parks and Recreation Master Plan, City of Dublin, updated February 2004
Urban Water Manaqement Plan, Dublin San Ramon Services District, May 2005
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Update, Dublin San Ramon Services District, June 2005
Page 39
Lj Lf ;f
./
I
Attachment 1
Project Exhibits
-Regional Location
-Site Context
-Site Plan
-
~
"""
..
..
..
..
..
k~"ilci
~
..
..
...
1'1
..
..
..
..
45 o;f
Livermore
17
(
Exhibit 1
REGIONAL LOCATION
CITY OF DUBLIN
ARROYO VISTA
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
J
10 miles
I
o
I
2
,
4
,
6
.
8
,
our:!1J----
co~1!'s:urJ1"
cotlllJb.-:-o'" CO
___-...tAM'<-
[CITY OF SAN RAMONI
------
."..,.....-:-
."..,..."..,.. ,
."..,.. .,
.----- \ .
."..,..."..,. ,
."..,.. .
\
.
,
.
.
---------
.
PARKS RESERVE FORCES
TRAINING AREA
...u~.._!"'..._."-".i
i FEDERAL i
: CORRECnONAL :
! INSTITlJ710N i
. : ,-,~
SANTA RITA
REHA81UTATION
CENTER
.
-.-.--)
.
I
.
I
I
.
I
.
.J
I
.
I
[CITY OF PLEASANTON]
Exhibit 2
{:"
<S"'
K2>
PROJECT LOCATION
. City Limit
-t:
~S>
CITY OF DUBLIN
ARROYO VISTA
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
N
!
~~:....
o
I
114 112
, ,
314
,
1 mile
1
J
I
, ,
I
,
,
t
,
1
i. i i i Ii i i , I i
,'. ,j,,;~r:~~{,~;, - K .' . !i)L ;'. ';; ii ilJ;';~t:{;<':"'J > .',)
:%,1;~:'2~{: : ::'~":~:J . J:t;~ ~~~" .... - ':'ift!' .,~.: .... ,,,('if' '~;s;;:i'it':~:' .
/<t/;~:"<;;:J";}:",:<:." '~:.A~~"'t ,.:,' '. ,. ~,,';',~):, ~~~~' ::::-~ ~_ :ii" ti J. r''''''' ' ""iI:,,:,t:;F:> 7'
':IX ;;(~"f>;,;}:~:ti} 'J:, ' J h .~., ':, !" y: >~:~ I'W ,&:~,.},:~ 7' ~
", ,;:;1-- /: ' ;'{' '~~'. .., ".'r ,~ '--' ",'" 4-. LU /I ^ :~ ',~.", "':". .',
, ';~, -- '?::>-t::_! \/.....~-'\-tfn~j~:.l~in.;1._~j~)Jf~-t~!;i~.'_1-t1. . -o.;=~ ;:-r- --....ue-_..-."',\.._._.:~
. '//' /:~:'>~: ':;i:'L:'::;"'~;:':~=:?"~~I~U ~ -,,_ - _ ~~. ~ _<-:,~::t~ '
<;<(/.,....;.-jk:':y . f- l- . II I- n II1I n IIII ----..y ~ D " " ! ~,- {~.c r:~,\">,'l ;!'lfl~;
I,.. -/j:'.:~c "/ t- - J-- I- ( r--, ~ ~ . co ~ " L,. ;: f)J )':.
F't::'",<f:'8':',>;;;: ',Ld~', ~ - - ~ -.- II~~J ~ :oj -, __ ' r= A)c _ ::. I.. :'_
!;i:?":;,:";::'~ _ , ,-- -~ JUr ~ ~. -C: ~ ,/ iI'iC
.~ - l- ~ ~~ ~ '-E == :1 .'5'HfJ
=., - r- :.." "1;=' ;: DAiffJ ~, - ~ "'D K =n ~ -c:= {= ~ ji~q <K '
IF~;" =t w r~ .~.'; '.: .,~c-;~la"'Eb~~I;gB'I~ : ri\""m:i~:'tl'; ~ r~__;:: ,,' . .~--~ ;~ ~ ~ r ,;":,,,'
1,/\~9 fA =3: ~- ...~. ~ := ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - c 4'J,,'''i y A ~. ~ --C" ~ r-- ~~, : ;= '=- ;= ..,=:1 ':"
,~to-" , '- -1 " L- ~ '- '- , lwuJllOllllOlllL D .. = ~ r=:= r= ,"~ [..it ."".:,,'
,".('''''j li .....,. ". ...,,,,...... .." ~., L- - '-- L-..'-
.;;~u~-:-;j,::", (:~;, " m,:_:,,'" -; ': ~~_~...:: "" ,:~:::. ' ':7 .,;",::;'~, .....
,~!'i{':;;' :"]~\}"., i()-'.c\' ,/ . ,t;k:Gf ~,;J.j,;j "cU.'" '~';~-'.';~' ,<':!::,D~;~f.,~~ ""..";2, [., ('.,o:O.~ <);;',) . ;') ~.C) ',i.: '.., ,'" ,', .::~<;. /" \-f"' '~--L;;:;:,:\iL,;if.1!"~::
-
PARKINO MIX AND COUNr
MAIlKETRA'rnUSIDI!NTlAL
""'" ., ..-------",-
~ -ToTAl .:--
AfFORDABLB FAMILY RESlDEHTlAL
UNIT MIX AND COUNr
MAUEr RATE RESlDPNI1AL
w-::.:s :1M:1Ii
~~.~ _'. 0 ~7
"'''N
I"~
.. 5~ ..
TOtAL 191
LEGEND
L lAt/lClR"f
ex:: ClUMITYC[H1Ul
t
....YJJh
'V ~~ ~~I
-:::-V
.---/
CO'lOlf.D UP
CltlJl~ 1)11
AFPOIWABU! FAMILY RESIDEN1tA[.
~""1"'7NI'; ,,:I""::'I,::I"":"'I"~I"'~"
. . 12 . 12.. . " 11/"
C . 0 . .1 I) 0 0 24
o 2 0 I) 0 . 0 0 II
toTAL DO
TOTAL 2liI .-
SENIOR.AfFOIUlABUI RI!SlD!lN11AL
~~~
...... .
torAL '11..'--
DAYCARE, OJMMUNnY R.ooM .tADMIN.
TOTAl. U
SENIOR.AfFORDABLE RESIDENllAL
lH'TT1P[ WANlTY
~
V1CINlIY MAP
~
IUBLIC mm
SmaT.. .\II
muTI >>
TOT... "
1't7rAL,AIlEINCIUIUHT ...
lllOl1lCOl ..
21lEDROlalllJrHACDllNl I
"'-
"-'.-
TOTAl. ..
TOTAL UilI1DfIN'nAL UNJ1'<XJUIlT :m
~
, fit I'" 2<<l'
u"'.....""."'..-t.-!
".At!: 1.'~6II' n41J::AlnL~'u.:rm
SOURCE: Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc,. 8-6-2007,
CITY OF DUBLIN
ARROYO VISTA
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Exhibit 3
-s;;::-
~
~
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
""".
4f1o ~'-lq~
Attachment 2
Cultural Resource Study
uq 1
boLmamASSOCIATES
Au.cbaeological Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
~
361S FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94110 41SjSSO-7.2B6
1~
Jerry Haag
2029 University Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94704
October 10, 2007
,..
Dear Mr. Haag:
-
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY FOR THE ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT,
DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
,:~
-
At your request Holman & Associates has completed a cultural resources study and
Native American consultation for the above referenced 23.8 acre parcel located in Dublin,
Alameda County, California. There is no recorded evidence of cultural resources inside the
project area, but there is a possibility that the property may contain buried cultural resources.
This report summarizes the findings of an archaeological literature review and field inspection.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
14M
The proposed project area is an existing 23.8 acre parcel of rental housing located in
eastern Dublin. Located on the Dublin U.S.G.S. map, the borders of the existing project area are
Dougherty Road on the east, Alamo Creek along the northern and western borders and existing
housing along the southern border. The property is divided into a larger northern parcel and a
small parcel by Amador Valley Boulevard. Apartment buildings, parking and open space is
situated along two streets (Cottonwood Circle and Parkwood Circle) which connect at either end
with Wildwood Road which parallels the eastern bank of Alamo Creek.
""
ARCHAEOLOGICAL LITERATURE REVIEW
..
~
An archaeological literature review was conducted by this author on July 12,2007 at the
Northwest Information Center (NWIC, file no. 07-48) to obtain information about recorded
archaeological sites in and around the project area and to obtain formal archaeological studies of
the project area and its surroundings. There are no recorded prehistoric or historic sites inside the
current project area; a number of historic structures and some problematic archaeological sites
have been recorded to the east in the Camp Parks locality over the years. Most of the prehistoric
resource areas have been re-examined over the years and invalidated as archaeological sites.
..
..
..
.....
~
50 c:t *'(
I
...
...
The current project area has been the subject of at least one formal archaeological survey:
in 1979 this author and Mr. Matthew Clark of Holman & Associates completed a visual
inspection of the proposed 600 acre KREMCO development area. This development included all
of the current proj ect property, along with acreage to the west and north of it. In addition to
conducting an intensive visual reconnaissance of the riparian corridor along Alamo Creek, a
limited number of geotechnical trenches were inspected near the creek to search for evidence of
buried archaeological deposits. The actual location of these trenches was not noted in the 1979
report.
-
The report did conclude that despite negative surface findings and a similar lack of
cultural materials found the limited trenches which were cut near the creek, there still was a
possibility that future construction activities could uncover archaeological materials buried under
silt. By 1979 this author and others working in the Amador Valley had uncovered a series of
buried archaeological sites dating back at least 2500 years: situated on seasonal high ground near
the prehistoric borders of Willow Marsh (now the location of the Hacienda Business Park) and
along the drainages which run into and out of the Livermore-Amador Valley, prehistoric villages
have been discovered during construction projects under as much as 10 feet of silts deposited by
the creeks and/or by waters backing up in Willow Marsh during extending pluvial periods. Since
1979 additional examples of deeply buried prehistoric deposits have been found along the creeks
and arroyos in the general vicinity.
~
...
....
-
There is no record that any additional archaeological work was done for the existing
development; archaeological monitoring was not recommended in 1979, and apparently wasn't
done as a precaution whenever the existing buildings were constructed.
...,'
NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
-
A check of the Sacred Lands Files of the Native American Heritage Commission was
undertaken by this author on July 181\ 2007. In a written response dated July 31 (see appendix),
Ms. Debbie Treadway reported that there were no recorded Native American cultural resources
in their files. A list of Native American contacts who may have information about cultural
resources was provided.
-
...
Letters were written to the names on the list and sent on August 3, 2007 by this author.
As of the writing ofthis report, there has been no response from any ofthe informants listed.
~
DESCRIPTION OF FIELD INSPECTION
A visual inspection of the project area was attempted by this author during the last week
of July, 2007. The existing housing development was walked through in an attempt to locate
open ground not modified by the housing and/or landscaping which surrounds it. In addition a
visual inspection of the creek bank found north and west of the existing roadway was inspected
to search for buried strata which may have contained buried cultural resources.
2
1P?!'",
tiM
~
mM
"'"
0W
-u
iliiiWi'
,..
..
'iM
..
-
5{~
It quickly became apparent that the recent development activities (done at some time after
1979) have altered and/or covered all of the original ground surface inside the development
borders with buildings, pavement, concrete and/or landscaping. Vegetation and other imported
materials also prevented an inspection of the creek banks which border the property.
FINDINGS/RECOMMENDA TIONS
It is the opinion of this author that the proposed project area, currently covered by
buildings, roads and landscaping, still has a potential for containing buried prehistoric cultural
resources which could have survived damage caused by the existing development, in particular if
they were covered by alluvial materials in prehistoric times.
Future development of the site will require the removal of existing buildings and at a
minimum grading and trenching for new services to the buildings. It is the recommendation of
this report that a program of mechanical subsurface presence/absence testing for cultural
resources be completed utilizing a mechanical core sampler in the open space areas of the
existing development to search for potentially buried archaeological deposits. Given the existing
conditions on site, an inventory of prehistoric cultural resources can only be completed through
mechanical subsurface presence/absence testing. In the event that any such deposits are
discovered, additional core samples should be taken if needed to map the aerial extent and depth
below the surface of potentially significant cultural materials.
If it is determined that new construction activities will impact resource deposits, a plan
for the evaluation of the deposit(s) should be submitted to the City of Dublin and other
appropriate agencies for approval. Evaluation, done through a limited program of hand
excavation, will search for materials and/or information which demonstrate that the resources are
eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) and/or the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
Sincerely,
~
Miley Paul Holman
Holman & Associates
REFERENCES
Holman, Miley
1979
Letter report to Dale Hornberger regarding the cultural resources study of
the 600 acre KREMCO project area, Dublin. On file, NWIC S-2021.
3
- r
~ 2 ~~ ~-
APPENDIX: NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
bolrnamA550CIA~;5~
AuchaeologicaL Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
UitiII
361S FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94110 41~/~~O-7.2Bt5
,.u
Debbie Treadway
Native American Heritage Commission
915 Capitol Mall Room 288
Sacramento, CA 95814
July 18,2007
Dear Ms. Treadway:
'l'i''-*
...
RE: SACRED LANDS SEARCH REQUEST FOR ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT,
DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
llIiII
Please find enclosed two maps of the location of the proposed Arroyo Vista Housing
project located in Dublin, Alameda County, for which I am requesting a Sacred Lands Check. I
wish to thank you in advance for any assistance you can be regarding this project.
..
.
Sincerely,
,-~
Miley Paul Holman
,'l!i
,.....
Hd
.
-<Will
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Arnold
Schwarzeneaaer /~e~o~~ ::p!{t ~
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 653-4082
Fax (916) 657-5390
Web Site www.nahc.ca.gov
-
July 31,2007 .
Miley Paul Holman
Holman & Associates
3615 Folsom St.
San Francisco, CA 94110
Sent by Fax~ fY\-p..lC~
Number of Pages: 2 ....."....J
RE: Proposed Arroyo Vista Housing project, Alameda
Dear Mr. Holman:
A record search of the sacred land file has failed to indicate the presence of Native American cultural
resources in the immediate project area. The absence of specific site information in the sacred lands file
does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural
resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.
~
Enclosed is a list of Native Americans individuals/organizations who may have knowledge of cultural
resources in the project area. The Commission makes no recommendation or preference of a single
individual, or group over another. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential
adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated, if they
cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By contacting all those
listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult with the appropriate
tribe or group. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the Commission
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 me at (916) 653-
4038.
",
Sinperely,
I
~-
~~
.
-
.....
..
Jakki Kehl
720 North 2nd Street
Patterson , CA 95363
jakki@bigvalley.net
(209) 892-2436
(209) 892-2435 - Fax
..
"""
Katherine Erolinda Perez
PO Box 717
linden , CA 95236
(209) 474-2602
,~
55~'
'I
Native American Contacts
Alameda County
July 30, 2007
Ohlone/Costanoan
Ohlone/Costanoan
Northern Valley Yokuts
Bay Miwok
Amah/Mutsun Tribal Band
Michelle Zimmer, Cultural Resource Coordinator
POBox 3892 Ohlone/Costanoan
Clear Lake ,CA 95422
408-375-4281
.,,~
Amah/MutsunTribal Band
Irene Zwierlein, Chairperson
789 Canada Road
Woodside , CA 94062
amah_mutsun@yahoo.com
(650) 851-7747 - Home
(650) 851-7489 - Fax
....
'.
'.
Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan
Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson
P.O. Box 28 Ohlone/Costanoan
Hollister , CA 95024
831-637-4238
Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area
Rosemary Cambra, Chairperson
PO Box 360791 Ohlone / Costanoan
Milpitas , CA 95036
muwekma@muwekma.org
408-434-1668
408-434-1673
The Ohlone Indian Tribe
Andrew Galvan
PO Box 3152
Mission San Jose , CA 94539
chochenyo@ AOL.com
(510) 656-0787 - Voice
(510) 882-0527 - Cell
(510) 687-9393 - Fax
Ohlone/Costanoan
Bay Miwok
Plains Miwok
Patwin
Trina Marine Ruano Family
Ramona Garibay, Representative
Ohlone/Costanoan 16010 Halmar Lane Ohlone/Costanoan
Lathrop I CA 95330 Bay Miwok
510-300-5971 - cell Plains Miwok
Patwin
.
This list Is current only as of the date of this document.
...
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 and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
..
This list Is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed
Arroyo Vista Housing project, Alameda
-
I/,/n
~ r;t :~t" 1
boLrnamASSOCIATES
Ar.lcbaeological Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
361S FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO
CALIFORNIA 94110 41S/~SO-7.2BC'5
Irene Zwierlein
789 Canada Road
Woodside, CA 94062
,.'"
August 3, 2007
Dear Ms.Zwierlein:
l1li.,
RE: ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT, DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
IIII'
Please find enclosed two maps showing the location of the above referenced
redevelopment project in Dublin. I obtained your name from the Native American Heritage
Commission during my Sacred Lands check for this project as someone who may have
information concerning cultural resources at this location.
n,
""
If you have any information to share with me regarding cultural resources at this location,
I would appreciate hearing from you in writing; you can always fax me at the office. That number
is 415-282-6239.
-
-
Thank you for your attention.
."
.,
Miley Paul Holman
-
-
-
51 ~ \ftt~
bolmamASSOC'ATES
Au..chaeological Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
361S FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO
CALIFORNIA 94110 41S/SS0-7.296
Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan
Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson
P.O. Box 28
Hollister, CA 95024
August 3, 2007
Dear Ms Sayers:
RE: ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT, DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Please find enclosed two maps showing the location of the above referenced
redevelopment project in Dublin. I obtained your name from the Native American Heritage
Commission during my Sacred Lands check for this project as someone who may have
information concerning cultural resources at this location.
If you have any information to share with me regarding cultural resources at this location,
I would appreciate hearing from you in writing; you can always fax me at the office. That number
is 415-282-6239.
Thank you for your attention.
Miley Paul Holman
'<!i!l
..
..
1111
i.
..
5g r:I 4t1c(
boLmOIDASSOC'ATES
Aucbaeological Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
..
,...
.-'
361S FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94110 41S/SS0-7.296
""""~
Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe
Rosemary Cambra
P.O. Box 360791
Milpitas, CA 95036
August 3, 2007
-~
Dear Ms Cambra:
RE: ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT, DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
-
Please find enclosed two maps showing the location of the above referenced
redevelopment project in Dublin. I obtained your name from the Native American Heritage
Commission during my Sacred Lands check for this project as someone who may have
information concerning cultural resources at this location.
-
-
If you have any information to share with me regarding cultural resources at this location,
I would appreciate hearing from you in writing; you can always fax me at the office. That number
is 415-282-6239.
-
Thank you for your attention.
..
~,
-
Miley Paul Holman
-
,.,...
'''''''p
..
~
5<1 ~/ ~t1,t
boLmamASSOCIATES
AucbaeoLogicaL Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
361S FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94110 41S/SS0-7~96
The Ohlone Indian Tribe
Andrew Galvan
P.o. Box 3152
Mission San Jose, CA 94539
~-
August 3, 2007
Dear Mr. Galvan:
~
RE: ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT, DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Please find enclosed two maps showing the location of the above referenced
redevelopment project in Dublin. I obtained your name from the Native American Heritage
Commission during my Sacred Lands check for this project as someone who may have
information concerning cultural resources at this location.
If you have any information to share with me regarding cultural resources at this location,
I would appreciate hearing from you in writing; you can always fax me at the office. That number
is 415-282-6239.
Thank you for your attention.
Miley Paul Holman
j(~
a
...
..
*'
..
I.J 0 0/) t.fcvt .-
boLma~ASSOCIATES
AQcbaeological Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
il<&'
-
361S FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94110 41S/SSQ-7.296
Ramona Garibay
16010 Halmar Lane
Lathrop, CA 95330
,....,
August 3, 2007
Dear Ms. Garibay:
...
RE: ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT, DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
"""
Please find enclosed two maps showing the location of the above referenced
redevelopment project in Dublin. I obtained your name from the Native American Heritage
Commission during my Sacred Lands check for this project as someone who may have
information concerning cultural resources at this location.
~
If you have any information to share with me regarding cultural resources at this location,
I would appreciate hearing from you in writing; you can always fax me at the office. That number
is 415-282-6239.
-,
-
Thank you for your attention.
...
"""
Miley Paul Holman
...
..
--
M'tt-
~
-
...
-
~
ii1i
..
,.
'.
.
....
...
Jakki Kehl
720 North 2nd Street
Patterson, CA 95363
August 3, 2007
Dear Ms. Kehl:
LP '11 i..V:1 (,6
DoLrnamA550CIATE5
Aucnaeological Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
3615" FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO
CALIFORNIA 94110 415"/~5"O-7.29t5
RE: ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT, DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Please find enclosed two maps showing the location of the above referenced
redevelopment project in Dublin. I obtained your name from the Native American Heritage
Commission during my Sacred Lands check for this project as someone who may have
information concerning cultural resources at this location.
If you have any information to share with me regarding cultural resources at this location,
I would appreciate hearing from you in writing; you can always fax me at the office. That number
is 415-282-6239.
Thank you for your attention.
Miley Paul Holman
Michelle Zimmer
Amah/Mutsun Band
P.O. Box 3892
Clear Lake, CA 95422
August 3, 2007
Dear Ms. Zimmer:
02 '1J ~t1((
boLmamA550CIATE5
AucbaeoLogical Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
-
-'
""""
361~ FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94110 41~/5"~O-7.2B6
-,
....
RE: ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT, DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
-
Please find enclosed two maps showing the location of the above referenced
redevelopment project in Dublin. I obtained your name from the Native American Heritage
Commission during my Sacred Lands check for this project as someone who may have
information concerning cultural resources at this location.
-
If you have any information to share with me regarding cultural resources at this location,
I would appreciate hearing from you in writing; you can always fax me at the office. That number
is 415-282-6239.
~;
Thank you for your attention.
-
..'
Miley Paul Holman
M~
-
-
i:.m
-
1_
)/Wf,j,j
,""
-j.
,.AI\ij
..
,~
..
...
dI
..
..
Katherine Perez
P.O. Box 717
Linden, CA 95236
August 3,2007
Dear Ms. Perez:
0:j fjlJ 4':1'(
bolrnamAssOCIATES
Au.cnaeologicaL Consultants
"SINCE THE BEGINNING"
361S FOLSOM ST. SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94110 41SjSSO-7.296
RE: ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT, DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Please find enclosed two maps showing the location of the above referenced
redevelopment project in Dublin. I obtained your name from the Native American Heritage
Commission during my Sacred Lands check for this project as someone who may have
information concerning cultural resources at this location.
If you have any information to share with me regarding cultural resources at this location,
I would appreciate hearing from you in writing; you can always fax me at the office. That number
is 415-282-6239.
Thank you for your attention.
Miley Paul Holman
f.o '-I rfb ~"f"~;'~l (
ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT
DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
THOMAS GUIDE STREET MAP
~
..-~-"
. /"..
--""-, ,
.......-.."...
,
,
,
'-
..........
.>iMl
,~
,
,
,
,
,
,
.,
,
,
,
r--..;---.----
,.
:
..
..
...
,..
,.
'*"
dlii
.\fIII
I.; 8 "/} Y crt
"'"
ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT
DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
..
DUBLIN U.S.G.S. MAP
!IIl:ll'!i'"
~-
(0 to Vb If?t g
Attachment 3
SHPO Referral Letter
let? PO LfCf tt
CITY OF DUBLIN
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California 94568
Website: http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us
April 4, 2008
Ms. Susan Stratton
Project Review Unit
Office of Historic Preservation
California Department of Parks and Recreation
1416 9th Street, Room 1442-7
Sacramento CA 94296-0001
Re: City of Dublin Arroyo Vista Project (6700 Dougherty Road)
Dear Ms. Stratton,
This is to advise your office that the City of Dublin, in conjunction with the Dublin Housing
Authority (DHA), is undertaking a project that includes removal of existing buildings and related
improvements on the existing Arroyo Vista public housing site, located at 6700 Dougherty
Road in Dublin, Alameda County. The site consists of 150 dwelling units which were
constructed in the early 1970's, a day care facility, ancillary buildings, roadways and parking
areas.
A portion of the project would involve disposition of the 23.8-acre project site by the DHA to
two private development interests for the purpose of rebuilding a mixed income housing project
on the same site.
Pursuant to 36 CFR 800, the City of Dublin hereby requests any comments the Office of
Historic Preservation may have regarding historic resources on this site.
To provide background to you and your staff, enclosed is a copy of the CEQA Initial Study that
includes a site location map, proposed site development plan for the proposed project and a
text description of the project. Also enclosed is a cultural resources report for the proposed
project prepared by Holman & Associates.
;~
dill
In order to allow this important project to move forward in a timely manner, any comments from
your office should be received by the City of Dublin no later than May 5, 2008.
..
Should you .have any questions about the project, please contact either Jerry Haag, the City's
environmental consultant at (510) 644 2106, or Erica Fraser, AICP, the City's project manager,
at (925) 833 6610.
..
Area Code (925) . City Manager 833-6650 . City Council 833-6650 . Personnel 833-6605 . Economic Development 833-6650
Finance 833-6640. Public Works/Enginccring 833-6630' Parks & Community Services 833-6645' Police-833-6670
Planning/Code Enforcement 833-6610' Building Inspection 833-6620' Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6606
.
.
f19J1b 4C1i
1
L
I
~
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
./_S~inCe~;!Y/ .' .
.. .'~"-"
"---Ser ::m, AICP
Community Development Director
Attachments: CEQA Initial Study
Cultural Resource Report
L
L
I
L
L
I
I
I
."
~
I
_.
I
-
L
L.
/.tl1JJb yC{<<
Attachment 4
Biological Resource Reconnaissance
'1fJ D;() y.C1. t
Biological Resources Assessment
ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT
DUBLlf\!, ALAMEDA
CALlFORt\JIA
Prepared For:
.
Jerr-y Haag
2029 University Avenue
Bel-keley, CA 94704
..
Contact:
Tom Fl'aser
fraser@wl'a-ca.colll
..
Date:
February 2008
dOlI
,.
,...,
"....
E N V I R 0 r, 11'1 E I, T p, l CON S U l 1 J, IH S
..
2169-G East FrancIsco Blvd, Son I~atael, CA 9~ 90 1 (~15) ~ 5~-8868 tel \ ~15) ~ 54-0129 lox Into@wra-cacom www.wla-co.com
..
"1 , rIb y.q~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.1 Federal Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.2 State Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3 Local Ordinances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.0 METHODS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1 Biological Communities ........................................... 5
3.1.1 Non-sensitive Biological Communities .......................... 6
3.1.2 Sensitive Biological Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2 Special Status Species ........................................... 6
3.2.1 Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2.2 Site Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.0 RESULTS......................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1 Biological Communities ...........................................8
4.1.2 Sensitive Biological Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2 Special Status Species .......................................... 12
4.2.1 Plants.................................................. 12
4.2.2 Wildlife................................................. 12
5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS.... .......... ........... ..... . . . ..17
5.1 Biological Communities .......................................... 17
5.2 Special Status Plant Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.3 Special Status Wildlife Species .................................... 17
~
6.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
6.1 Special Status Species .......................................... 19
6.1.1 Impacts to Special Status Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.1.2 Suggested Mitigation ...................................... 20
6.2 Riparian Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.2.1 Impacts ................................................ 20
6.2.2 Suggested Mitigation ...................................... 20
6.3 Section 404 Wetlands ...........................................21
6.3.1 Impacts ................................................ 21
6.3.2 Suggested Mitigation ...................................... 21
6.4 Wildlife Corridors and Habitat ..................................... 21
6.4.1 Impacts ................................................ 21
6.4.2 Suggested Mitigation ...................................... 22
6.5 Local Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.5.1 Impacts ................................................ 22
6.5.2. Suggested Mitigation ...................................... 22
6.6 Conservation Plans ............................................. 23
6.6.1 Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.6.2 Suggested Mitigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
i<l#
....
..
7.0 REFERENCES.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
.
i~
..
1t.pt) 40ft
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Area Location Map ............................................ 2
Figure 2. Project Area ....................................................... 9
Figure 3. Areas with Wetland Plants ........................................... 11
Figure 4. Special Status Plant Species Occurrences within Five Miles of Project Area ..... 13
Figure 5. Special Status Wildlife Species Occurrences within Five Miles of Project Area. . . . 14
.'"
.......
LIST OF APPENDICES
l!IIlIf!'
Appendix A- List of Observed Plant and Animal Species
Appendix B- Potential for Special Status Plant and Wildlife Species to Occur in the Project
Area
Appendix C- Representative Project Area Photographs
lllrf""
-
..
-
...'
fill"
ttfi.
-
-j
-
~
~"
.*
ii
""'
I ~Ob l.fC1~
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On September 20,2007, WRA, Inc. performed an assessment of biological resources at the 25-
acre existing Arroyo Vista housing site (Project Area) in Dublin, Alameda County, California, which
is located along Dougherty Road just north of Highway 580 (Figure 1). The purpose of the
assessment was to gather information necessary to complete a review of biological resources,
including an assessment of any sensitive habitats or special status species under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This information will be used in the development of an Initial
Study and an Environmental Assessment document to support CEQA and National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) review and analysis of this project.
This report describes the results of the site visit, which assessed the Project Area for (1) the
presence of special status species; (2) the potential to support special status species; and (3) the
presence of other sensitive biological resources protected by local, state, and federal laws and
regulations. This report also contains an evaluation of potential impacts to special status species
and sensitive biological resources that may occur as a result of the proposed project, and potential
mitigation measures to compensate for those impacts.
A biological resources assessment provides general information on the potential presence of
sensitive species and habitats, but is not an official protocol-level survey for listed species that may
be required for project approval by local, state, or federal agencies. Specific findings on the
occurrence of any species or the presence of sensitive habitats may require that protocol-level
surveys be conducted. This assessment is based on information available at the time of the study
and on site conditions that were observed on the date of the site visit.
2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
The following sections explain the regulatory context of the biological resources assessment,
including applicable laws and regulations that were applied to the field investigation and analysis
of potential project impacts.
2.1 Federal Regulations
Special Status Species
fl.",
Federal special status species include those plants and wildlife species that have been formally
listed, are proposed as endangered or threatened, or are candidates for such listing under the
Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The ESA affords protection to both listed and proposed
species. In addition, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Birds of Conservation Concern, and
sensitive species included in USFWS Recovery Plans are all considered special status species.
'.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
...
In addition to regulations for special status species, most birds in the United States, including non-
status species, are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. Under this legislation,
destroying active nests, eggs, and young is illegal.
l1li
..
,.
..
zl
~I ',>,.".,,:\
el ?" l ..' ~ ---
~( ;.:' ': j- - -r:;: t{:~~'.-<'~'~"""" ..:" .... ..,:'
i' . - .) :i ..-.',., .1' i'.-. ~. ,,~~;'._
:J.- -----. "~-, ' JI '''~~''':':::';.... ;'.~- ;...... =
--- ,< ,t--._...~.-,~.",-")' """,-,
__ c',. ?9:~- -=-";. , '<~'''' ','.. II~
-07 ; R :\ A I' M 0 'N' ';
....~ ' '~:
:~- . 11
~t III .J .. . '.\ i'/'
k" I.--!.'~' "\ I.
os, ...1
[..:;,-..,.Jj C A.~, '1 P "".'''~''.I'/:/''.
',11 I - ;~;
/1i-1q '-..1 i',
""I'~(=",;.__L. ~'--'.IL: ,I,,:. .. . , '.'j
"\' t - '. ' ~-I' \ ,'.;~;;)
-:i:d=_-=Y. . 7''''',)2::> A. R, .: K~, '. _-=-~ . '. ) l' .l,-
CY IrFj--:---......' "\ . I' ..~.~~~._ _"./
~,LL~J .<:}~. .~ _.~ ~ "~ -f
n r.'.'. (U.:lr:~~',...:~~~t~~.." mrniJ' .,
If: IIIIIJ~!LI:,_!-J, (~:,-~1 I' II~ ~,
. f~.J'"II~~:1i -!I I~{'....!!I !.i
~ ,1r-1,~i..,I~lr~~~. 1[j~~I~;T.-lil~' ~r. ~ '~Ir=
, . " I !{ I' Jl!1 !~,j~~r~! ... il!!~!'~i!J~II!. '. II
. \, .,(.. ' I " 1< ' I II I PI 1111 It- = ,. = - : = "r-
; '\ ~~~! 1 I; j1~Jll, --t~'~=r=--,c-~. _....Ji I1111 if_II i~ 'i
; \~' r ,"!"r~lijjJl' fltlll I~'" -IIII)-~i"riif /' II
", . ,-III-I-J 1111' P I"l JI . , I l
I ',,;; I,~ 'I:"~"" .:-~'-. --i'c~.!.-.L. J I , _L~ I ....Jl ,_,;--'_':'6 ~,
: ""{ I " II. C ~ r-I.": - IIUiiiII'-llIrr'l- ,r II I,
. "~. I ~ ...I:t- ii'. I,~~ Ii ), 1111 I" "L=__= 'k=
-', I r'~, ;:~_'~-' '.,,~. =- ----'_'-...: _',. I"
, - _... __v . '-- -- -:---- ---1- -- - _-;-,1 -;-- ~~' ,~~ !P;;:-.;. .--.-L _ _ _ -IIII.,Uifll1uJll1 " ,
I" <'" +' r'" .. _ )". . ' l: -,~-- -- -,,-
\, ., ....."' I .-., ::-;, ~ '. " ,\..1."'\'1, 'I, --- _...J[
" '\ I ' r t. l.fIc1't.-.;;~ . I~ 11
~ r.' 'I'. , ~~~.;;;( ~'. i -:r'''~~ =':--" "~-. I! "I !'>'" ~ ,- c ~, -
. .I:" '%k ..;~ 'If .~ "ii"CC-~-~'l~t ,;
.. . f ~ >'~,(~;~;;:;J:'~~:r~~i~ -
. ,,"~ I;':"""'~':~:~~t
.....1. GRANT-' <..':,~:.HO Fr 'e ., ~ 10.,
. - '." . ! :~~JWUNDARY ,II "':;;
..~.. r-- ;'1 ~ "~ ~~~~~~~~- . ~It( - ~= '.- ~. .~.. ~_;o:/'" .~
{.-....j-....___.-....',i.'\ '. I '\ 8M ''''-..:,
;, J 'il" ,. 325 "
\\ ,~ \\" .........,
',' \, I..... "I!~ - --'-. - --.:. ~""_"'_
,;>': \ i r .:' "
'" . \. ..... ! II -:... ~.
. ,,) i__...=I ,'1'1 . \.....'x,
fh,~:~ -,~ ,\ ~.
/./., I " ';0, v Fi , .
\ ; ,~, \0.
'I..M.....i....'<;,'j~'.:-m.:-~r:.~... HJ~.3
'.~.-./ ".
Svl.Y"o:.
';".... {~
r.~:
'\)',_.., ,'...~ l .
- . .~;:'~:.~~-=-A:.~/~i~',::
;'-'."(:-,;--. .,
('"
r-
III
. .... '.{~:r'\ .:'-' ,,,,.
-;:b'lF""':1~i''+' '-...~.. '
" c, :i~~~\','""j' :"0'-'"
'_.~
i
U-1 ADO: R )
j
~j'I'1 ,",1~T;..'
.r("/..,. .~
/....-.::~.r- ' ~.... :;.~'~,
S
al'
-<,
51
....1
::::l
I
I
f
...
'r
S;nt::. (1.3";;
~~
('"
"
~"
~7;
.f '
JJ/-
r'
'),' .;::
,..~
\.
.......l
",t
--;: '-
t
\.
~.
o
5001,000
Figure 1. Project Area Location Map
Dublin Arroyo Vista Biological Assessment
Alameda Count California
,-.
t, '
i:
l"\~. \
j:,\,\\
\\
.~~:,~ \
1~~ i1t1cb
c.
J/ _'_
I ::' ~.i ..---o--,~
-' _ ir.-----: "
..----=' 'f \'.
~.,. - /{
. "
t'
'\
"
"II!
I'
...'
n
fIIInI"
~,
IIIIII"!
.'
lIiJl"
-
o)wra
ENVIRONfY1EI~iAL CONSULTANTS
-
Date: September 2007
Basemap: USGS Topo Quad
Map By: Derek Chan
Filepath: L:\Acad 2000 Files\16000\16142\gis\
ArcMap\Figl LocMap PS 20070925,mxd
-
-"", ~ Ub '1-0 'b
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is a term defined and used in the ESA as a specific geographic area that contains
features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require
special management and protection. The ESA requires federal agencies to consult with the
USFWS to conserve listed species on their lands and to ensure that any activities or projects they
fund, authorize, or carry out will not jeopardize the survival of a threatened or endangered species.
In consultation for those species with critical habitat, federal agencies must also ensure that their
activities or projects do not adversely modify critical habitat to the point that it will no longer aid in
the species' recovery. In many cases, this level of protection is similar to that already provided to
species by the ESA "jeopardy standard." However, areas that are currently unoccupied by the
species but which are needed for the species' recovery, are protected by the prohibition against
adverse modification of critical habitat.
Sensitive Biological Communities
Federal sensitive biological communities include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special
values, such as wetlands, streams, and riparian habitat. These habitats are regulated under
federal regulations including the Clean Water Act.
Waters of the United States
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulates "Waters of the United States" under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act. "Waters of the U.S." are defined broadly as waters susceptible to use
in commerce, including interstate waters and wetlands, all other waters (intrastate waterbodies,
including wetlands), and their tributaries (33 CFR 328.3). Potential wetland areas, according to the
three criteria used to delineate wetlands stated in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual (1987), are identified by the presence of (1) hydrophytic vegetation, (2) hydric soils, and
(3) wetland hydrology. Areas that are inundated for sufficient duration and depth to exclude growth
of hydrophytic vegetation are subject to Section 404 jurisdiction as "other waters" and are often
characterized by an ordinary high water line (OHW). Other waters, for example, generally include
lakes, rivers, and streams. The placement of fill material into "Waters of the U.S." (including
wetlands) generally requires an individual or nationwide permit from the Corps under Section 404
of the Clean Water Act.
2.2 State Law
Special Status Species
~
State special status species include those plants and wildlife species that have been formally listed,
are proposed as endangered or threatened, or are candidates for such listing under the California
Endangered Species Act (CESA). The CESA affords protection to both listed and proposed
species. In addition, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Species of Special Concern,
which are species that face extirpation in California if current population and habitat trends
continue, and CDFG special status invertebrates are all considered special status species.
Although CDFG Species of Special Concern generally have no special legal status, they are given
special consideration under CEQA.
\Mil
..
3
.tlIi
't!i$lI
llJPf'; ~t1i
."1
In addition, plant species on California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Lists 1 and 2 are also
considered special status plant species. Impacts to these species are considered significant
according to CEQA. CNPS List 3 plants have little or no protection under CEQA, but are included
in this analysis for completeness.
fI'!l'ff
Sensitive Biological Communities
State sensitive biological communities include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special
values, such as wetlands, streams, and riparian habitat. These habitats are protected in California
under state regulations such as the Porter-Cologne Act, the CDFG Streambed Alteration Program,
and CEQA.
....
I!IlIIt'1'
Waters of the State
The term "Waters of the State" is defined by the Porter-Cologne Act as "any surface water or
groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state." The Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) protects all waters in its regulatory scope, but has special
responsibility for wetlands, riparian areas, and headwaters. These waterbodies have high resource
value, are vulnerable to filling, and are not systematically protected by other programs. RWQCS
jurisdiction includes "isolated" wetlands and waters that may not be regulated by the Corps under
Section 404. "Waters of the State" are regulated by the RWQCB under the State Water Quality
Certification Program which regulates discharges of fill and dredged material under Section 401
of the Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Projects that require
a Corps permit, or fall under other federal jurisdiction, and have the potential to impact "Waters of
the State," are required to comply with the terms of the Water Quality Certification determination.
If a proposed project does not require a federal permit, but does involve dredge or fill activities that
may result in a discharge to "Waters of the State," the RWQCS has the option to regulate the
dredge and fill activities under its state authority in the form of Waste Discharge Requirements.
\III!<
..
.'
-
Wilt.
-'
Streams. Lakes. and Riparian Habitat
Streams and lakes, as habitat for fish and wildlife species, are subject to jurisdiction by CDFG
under Sections 1600-1616 of the State Fish and Game Code. Alterations to or work within or
adjacent to streambeds or lakes generally require a 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement. The term stream, which includes creeks and rivers, is defined in the California Code
of Regulations (CCR) as follows: "a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently
through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes
watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian
vegetation" (14 CCR 1.72). In addition, the term stream can include ephemeral streams, dry
washes, watercourses with subsurface flows, canals, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other
means of water conveyance if they support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream-dependent
terrestrial wildlife (CDFG ESD 1994). Riparian is defined as, "on, or pertaining to, the banks of a
stream;" therefore, riparian vegetation is defined as, "vegetation which occurs in and/or adjacent
to a stream and is dependent on, and occurs because of, the stream itself" (CDFG ESD 1994).
Removal of riparian vegetation also requires a Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement from CDFG.
11ft'
..
!il<,'
-
4
17tJf; '-10(6
Other Sensitive Bioloqical Communities
Other sensitive biological communities not discussed above include habitats that fulfill special
functions or have special values. Natural communities considered sensitive can be identified by
CDFG. CDFG ranks sensitive communities as "threatened" or "very threatened" and keeps records
of their occurrences in its Natural Diversity Database. Sensitive plant communities are also
identified by CDFG on their List of California Natural Communities Recognized by the CNDDB.
Impacts to sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations
or by the CDFG or USFWS must be considered and evaluated under CEOA (California Code of
Regulations: Title 14, Div. 6, Chap. 3, Appendix G).
2.3 Local Ordinances
Sensitive Bioloqical Communities
Local sensitive biological communities include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special
values, such as wetlands, streams, and riparian habitat. These habitats are protected by local
ordinances or policies (City or County Tree Ordinances, Special Habitat Management Areas, and
General Plan Elements). Ordinance No. 52-87 of the City of Dublin establishes requirements for
the protection of watercourses, including a 20-foot setback area adjacent to open channel
watercourses, such as Alamo Creek. Chapter 5.60 of the City of Dublin's Municipal Ordinances
also specifies that Heritage Trees are protected. These include any oak, bay, cypress, maple,
redwood, buckeye, or sycamore tree having a diameter of 24 inches or more at breast height.
3.0 METHODS
On September 20,2007, the Project Area was traversed on foot to determine (1) plant communities
present within the Project Area, (2) if existing conditions provided suitable habitat for any special
status plant or wildlife species, and (3) if sensitive habitats are present. All plant and wildlife
species encountered were recorded, and are summarized in a species list in Appendix A.
3.1 Biological Communities
Prior to the site visit, the Soil Survey of Alameda County, California (U.S. Department of Agriculture
1966) was examined to determine if any unique soil types that could support sensitive plant
communities and/or aquatic features were present in the Project Area. Aerial photographs and
previous biological reports for the neighboring area were also reviewed.
Biological communities present in the Project Area were classified based on existing plant
community descriptions described in the Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural
Communities of California (Holland 1986). However, in some cases it is necessary to identify
variants of community types or to describe non-vegetated areas that are not described in the
literature. Biological communities were classified as sensitive or non-sensitive as defined by CEOA
and other applicable laws and regulations.
AiIIl
..
5
..
"""
1~Vb LtC1 i
3. 1. 1 Non-sensitive Biological Communities
Non-sensitive biological communities are those communities that are not afforded special
protection under CEQA, and other state, federal, and local laws, regulations and ordinances.
These communities may, however, provide suitable habitat for some special status plant or wildlife
species and are identified or described in Section 4.1.1 below.
3. 1.2 Sensitive Biological Communities
Sensitive biological communities are defined as those communities that are given special protection
under CEQA and other applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations and ordinances.
Applicable laws and ordinances are discussed above in Section 2.0. Special methods used to
identify sensitive biological communities are discussed below.
...'
Wetlands and Waters
...
The Project Area was surveyed to determine if any wetlands and waters potentially subject to
jurisdiction by the Corps, RWQCB, or CDFG were present. The assessment was based primarily
on the presence of wetland plant indicators, but may also include any observed indicators of
wetland hydrology or wetland soils. Any potential wetland areas were identified as areas
dominated by plant species with a wetland indicator status1 of OBL, FACW, or FAC as given on the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands (Reed 1988). Evidence
of wetland hydrology can include direct evidence (primary indicators), such as visible inundation
or saturation, surface sediment deposits, algal mats and drift lines, or indirect indicators (secondary
indicators), such as oxidized root channels. Some indicators of wetland soils include dark colored
soils, soils with a sulfidic odor, and soils that contain redoximorphic features as defined by the
Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United
States (NRCS, 2002).
"'"
..
;;iI.
-
-
Other Sensitive Bioloqical Communities
The Project Area was evaluated for the presence of other sensitive biological communities,
including riparian areas and sensitive plant communities recognized by CDFG. If present in the
Project Area, these sensitive biological communities were mapped and are described in Section
4.1.2 below.
,,",'
..
~
3.2 Special Status Species
.,
3.2. 1 Literature Review
Potential occurrence of special status species in the Project Area was evaluated by first
determining which special status species occur in the vicinity of the Project Area through a literature
and database search. Database searches for known occurrences of special status species
focused on the Dublin 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle and the eight surrounding USGS quadrangles.
-
1 OBL = Obligate, always found in wetlands (> 99% frequency of occurrence); FACW =
Facultative wetland, usually found in wetlands (67-99% frequency of occurrence); FAC = Facultative,
equal occurrence in wetland or non-wetlands (34-66% frequency of occurrence).
6
-
-
1t1 d7) dC1 rt
The following sources were reviewed to determine which special status plant and wildlife species
have been documented to occur in the vicinity of the Project Area:
· California Natural Diversity Database records (CNDDB) (CDFG 2007)
· USFWS quadrangle species lists (USFWS 2007)
· CNPS Electronic Inventory records (CNPS 2007)
· CDFG publication "California's Wildlife, Volumes I-III" (Zeiner et al. 1990)
· CDFG publication "Amphibians and Reptile Species of Special Concern in
California" (Jennings 1994)
· A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins, R.C. 2003)
3.2.2 Site Assessment
A site visit was made to the Project Area to search for suitable habitats for species identified in the
literature review as occurring in the vicinity. The potential for each special status species to occur
in the Project Area was then evaluated according to the following criteria:
1) No Potential. Habitat on and adjacent to the site is clearly unsuitable for the species
requirements (foraging, breeding, cover, substrate, elevation, hydrology, plant community,
site history, disturbance regime).
2) Unlikelv. Few of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are
present, and/or the majority of habitat on and adjacent to the site is unsuitable or of very
poor quality. The species is not likely to be found on the site.
3) Moderate Potential. Some of the habitat components meeting the species requirements
are present, and/or only some of the habitat on or adjacent to the site is unsuitable. The
species has a moderate probability of being found on the site.
4) Hiah Potential. All of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are
present and/or most of the habitat on or adjacent to the site is highly suitable. The species
has a high probability of being found on the site.
5) Present. Species is observed on the site or has been recorded (Le. CNDDB, other
reports) on the site recently.
The site assessment is intended to identify the presence or absence of suitable habitat for each
special status species known to occur in the vicinity in order to determine its potential to occur in
the Project Area. The site visit does not constitute a protocol-level survey and is not intended to
determine the actual presence or absence of a species; however, if a special status species is
observed during the site visit, its presence will be recorded and discussed. Appendix B presents
the evaluation of potential for occurrence of each special status plant and wildlife species known
to occur in the vicinity of the Project Area with their habitat requirements, potential for occurrence,
and rationale for the classification based on criteria listed above. Recommendations for further
surveys are made in Section 5.0 below for species with a moderate or high potential to occur in the
Project Area.
'>!If
7
....
'.
..
~o~t1C\i
~~
..
4.0 RESULTS
~
The entire Project Area has previously been disturbed and does not represent a high-value habitat.
It is a highly modified site within the city of Dublin, surrounded by other housing developments and
ruderal fields. On the east side it is bounded by Dougherty Road; Amador Valley Boulevard is
northwest of the Project Area. Alamo Creek flows past the western edge of the Project Area and
is fenced off from the site. The elevation of the Project Area ranges from 350 to 372 feet.
More than eighty percent of the site is a housing development. Community center buildings, an
outdoor basketball court, and a ring of tall redwoods mark the center of the housing development
(Figure 2). This development has two main access roads (Monterey Drive and North Mariposa).
Houses are clustered on either side of Monterey Drive, both north and south of the loop-shaped
North Mariposa road. Houses face inwards towards a shared courtyard consisting of a lawn,
parking lot, and pathways. Vegetation throughout the housing subdivision consists primarily of
landscaped ornamentals. Domestic or feral cats appear to frequent the Project Area, reducing
habitat value for wildlife.
~-
fI"'~
-
The rest of the site is occupied by two undeveloped ruderal fields, one at the northern end of the
site (North Field) and one on the western edge of the site (West Field). In North Field brush piles,
wood chips, and litter cover much of the ground, and a mix of mostly non-native weedy plants
comprises most of the vegetation. A few eucalyptus trees (Eucalytpus sp.) and coast live oak trees
(Quercus agrifolia) are growing at the far eastern end of North Field, near Dougherty Road. West
Field is more manicured in appearance and is surrounded on all sides by a paved fooVbikepath.
A basketball court borders the eastern edge of this field. The central section of this field has been
mowed and a layer of sawdust placed around sections of the perimeter of the mowed area. The
topography slopes downward from the north and east edges of West Field towards a low point in
the northwestern corner, where a drain is located. Shrubs and trees, including willow (Salix sp.),
coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), cotoneaster (Cotoneaster sp.), firethorn (Pyracantha sp.), and
non-native ornamentals are growing along the fence line that borders the western edge of this field.
..
-
-
-
Soils have been disturbed in both of these fields. North Field was disced, and both fields
(especially West Field) appear to have been graded and modified with earth-moving equipment.
A wide swath of gravel has been laid on top of the soil in the southwestern section of the North
Field, serving as what appears to be a temporary roadway/turnaround area. The following sections
present the results and discussion of the biological assessment within the Project Area.
-
..
4.1
Biological Communities
~tJ1,
-
The predominant biological community present in the Project Area is ruderal herbaceous grassland,
which is a non-sensitive community. No sensitive biological communities are found in the Project
Area, although a small area of wetland plants was found and is discussed below.
-
-
4. 1. 1 Non-sensitive Biological Communities
Ruderal herbaceous qrassland
.'
Although not described in the literature, ruderal herbaceous grassland includes areas that have
been partially developed or have been used in the past for agriculture. Wildlife within this
8
~-
-
'fill
i~
e'Oll
.-ie'e I,
. I ,~
..
elf
" ,
<t.. ,,-'
~.
.:.
".,,-
~
N
}~
I' ('
J.
Feet
400
o)wra
Figure 2. Project Area
""
.,.
Dublin Arroyo Vista Biological Assessment
Alameda Count California
ENVIRONMEN"~eL CCNSUL1AIJlS
Date: October 2007
Base Photo: TerraServer, 2004
Map By: Derek Chan
Filepath: L:\Acad 2000Files\16000\16142\gis\
ArcMap\Fig3_Aerial 20070925.mxd
.'
~ ~ I() i.fC1~' -
illffli
community may often include such small rodents as mice and voles, as well as snakes, lizards, and
foraging songbirds. Ruderal herbaceous grassland can also be used by special status or larger
animals depending on proximity to open space and other factors.
~
The two fields within the Project Area can best be described as ruderal herbaceous grassland,
particularly North Field, which is not mowed like West Field. Plant species observed in both these
fields include non-native plant species such as wild oat (Avena fatua), ripgut brome (Bromus
diandrus), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis),
Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), dallis grass (Paspalum
dilatatum), Harding grass (Phalaris aquatica), bristly ox tongue (Picris echioides), curly dock
(Rumex crispus), and strawberry clover (Trifolium fragiferum). Additional non-natives occurring just
in North Field are cutleaf geranium (Geranium dissectum), Mediterranean barley (Hordeum
marinum), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), Italian ryegrass (Lotium multiflorum), wild radish
(Raphanus sativus), tumbleweed (Salsola tragus), and milk thistle (Silybum marianum). Plants
growing along the fence line bordering the north portion of North Field include English ivy (Hedera
helix), periwinkle (Vinca major), and grape vine (Vitis sp.). The native slender willowherb
(Epilobium ciliatum) is also present in North Field. Wildlife use of these areas appears to be
limited. Raccoon scat was observed along with several small rodent burrows, likely vole (Microtus
sp.) or gopher (Thomomys bottae). Birds in these areas included Wild Turkey (Megeagris
gallopavo), American Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), and European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris).
..
-
....
lIIl'
ii!W
..
..
This community, making up the areas within the Project Area that are not already paved and
developed, consists mostly of non-native plants and likely common wildlife species. It is a non-
sensitive community.
..,
Iilil
..
4. 1.2 Sensitive Biological Communities
~
Wetlands
..
According to the Soil Survey of Alameda County, California (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1966),
two different soil types occur in the Project Area: Diablo clay (DbC) and Clear Lake clay (CdA). The
majority of the site has Diablo clay soils, which are classified as well-drained and occurring on
slopes of 7-15%. There is a small inclusion of Clear Lake clay soils in the Project Area
encompassing the western half of North Field and just the northwestern tip of West Field. These
soils are classified as moderately well-drained, occurring on 0-3% slopes.
....
..
-
-
Two small (roughly 250 square feet) areas dominated by wetland plants were mapped on either
side of the foot/bikepath bordering the northwestern edge of West Field within the area mapped
as having Clear Lake clay soils. These plants occur along a drain line in the vicinity of the drain,
as shown on Figure 3 and in the photographs in Appendix C. Plants observed were tall flat-sedge
(Cyperus eragrostis), dallis grass (Paspalum dilatatum), narrowleaf plantain (Plantago lanceolata),
California bulrush (Scirpus californicus), and rough cockle-bur (Xanthium strumarium). No other
sensitive biological communities are present within the Project Area.
..
-
-
1I!IIl'W-
10
..
-
""
o
..
..
_110
r..<ii
~
;;fli8
Figure 3. Areas with Wetland Plants
Legend
r_-_l Project Boundary
Wetland Plants
- Drain Line
o Drain Opening
o)wra
""M
ENVIRONMENjAL ccr,SULTAN1S
-
Dublin Arroyo Vista Biological Assessment
Alameda Count California
Date: September 2007
Base Photo: TerraServer, 2004
Map By: Derek Chan
Filepath: L:\Acad 2000Files\16000\16142\gis\
ArcMap\Fig3 Aerial 2007092S.mxd
-
~t1~ yQ1
-
4.2 Special Status Species
.
-
4.2. 1 Plants
\$i~;<
Based on a review of the resources and databases given in Section 3.2.1, thirty-five special status
plant species have been recorded in the vicinity of the Project Area (Appendix B). Six of these
special status species have been documented to occur within five miles of the Project Area, as
shown on Figure 4. These are Congdon's tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonil), Mt. Diablo
buckwheat (Eriogonum truncatum), San Joaquin spearscale (Atriplex joaquiniana), Diablo
helianthella (Helianthella castanea), saline clover (Trifolium depauperatumvar. hydrophilum), and
hairless popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys glaber). No plant species requiring protection were
observed during the site assessment.
-
-
MI'!'
The site assessment occurred during the blooming period of Congdon's tarplant (which blooms
between May and October), Mt. Diablo buckwheat (which blooms between April and September),
and San Joaquin spearscale (which blooms between April and October); however, these species
were not observed during the survey. While the survey did not occur during the blooming period
of Diablo helianthella and saline clover, suitable habitat does not exist on-site for either of these
species. Diablo helianthella was historically found in the hills to the northwest of the Project Area
(see Figure 4), and saline clover requires marshes, swamps, vernal pools, or valley and foothill
grassland with mesic/alkaline soils. Hairless popcorn flower was historically documented in the
Project Area, but this native annual herb is now presumed extinct in California.
"""
""",,",,'.
-
One naturalized Northern California black walnut (Juglans californica var. hindsil) seedling was
observed during the September 20th survey. This seedling was observed along the fence line on
the western edge of West Field. This is a CNPS List 1 B species and is usually found in riparian
forest and riparian woodland, at elevations between 0 - 440 meters. It blooms between April and
May. Since this species is widely naturalized in cismontane California, and since only native stands
of this species have protected status, this individual plant does not require any special protection
in the Project Area. The remaining species documented to occur in the vicinity of the Project Area
have no potential to occur there, either due to lack of suitable habitat or because the Project Area
is outside of the species' elevation range.
-
-
~it
4.2.2 Wildlife
-
All of the wildlife observed in the Project Area are commonly found species, and many are adapted
to occupying disturbed or urban areas. No special status wildlife species were observed during the
site assessment.
III"
-
Thirty-six special status species of wildlife have been recorded in the vicinity of the Project Area.
Appendix B summarizes the potential for each of these species to occur in the Project Area. A map
showing 2007 CNDDB occurrences of special status wildlife species is provided in Figure 5. No
special status species are known to occur or have a high potential to occur within the Project Area.
Two special status wildlife species have a moderate potential to occur in the Project Area: the pallid
bat and Loggerhead Shrike. Special status wildlife species of particular interest are discussed
below.
....
-
\I!Im'!I!
12
~ S-l() L{Ci <t
~
.l
.'
-
f
-. -...----------...-... /
""".".""."".... - (' -- ............
,,,,,.~ ,........~
" ,/......
" ...... ' ,.
0'-'" ......
", .,......~ '.-
"- " ...
. , ,
I".. (. ......
/ · l ...
, "
/ ." ,
, ,. ,
, , '.
/ ~
l \
/ .. \
, \
,. \
,(, \
, ,
" " ",'.: f "
c
I~-...---'.-r.'ll .'-," . r. \
I Project Arear" II
I ' 'n - I
,,1 "l I
\ \J I~!-r :
I [ .~> ' ,
.~ \ :..~:- .- - I
, ~ ,
\ ~ I
\ ,
, ,
\ ,
\ I
\ ,
\ I
\ I
, /
, /
.., .. :. ,
, /
, ,
... /'
" "
...... "
, /
...... "
'~~.... ,,~
'.... . ! .. --,--
... 5mile Buffer.fr.9J:!1~J:roject Area ~~__
j '--.
, \r;.
.", .
;-
.
San Joaquin Spearscale
-~
,,:.1
I;'
, .
N
A
.iWlti
..
I.' Hairless Popcorn-flower
IE Saline Clover
o
2
4
Miles
J/
-;.
..
Figure 4. Special Status Plant Species
Occurrences within Five Miles of Project Area
.tIiI
ENVIROtHAEN'AL CCNSUL1MHS
..
Dublin Arroyo Vista Biological Assessment
Alameda Count California
Date: October 2007
Basemap: USGS Topo Quad
Map By: Derek Chan
Filepath: L:\Acad 2000Files\16000\16142\gis\
ArcMap\Fig4 CNDDB plants 20071002.mxd
..'
~woo Y 01
..~' ~,~'~':~:~'.~:~-
~<> :':~ .-'~'~:;
!
-
",
~:'--'-""
"
':
-
.,1' 1__.
".
~
'. \0;,
-~
.~:.= ._-.......
IIl!8f
><.
.
-.
-
.
( C
( '. '~.' .-
gO"
. . , ,~i...... If'
. ~ .' 'I,
Project Area ' · . ", . III! fI'
. "~". - \'
'. 'I" -
. . J :~...." -=
__~,,_ 7:~~~ ~:;
'1f .. --- tit
.
..
r c..
t1iii!..
c
..
....,,=-
j~'.
.~c,
~, . (-
.,
(
c
.....
.c...
.( (
c
-
(
.,
~--.
(
'-...,
IIII'!IW!
~;
(
I. .~
-
. ..... ~
c
;';'
;';'
,,/
,,'
,,'
,"
"
........
..
. 1'"7"'
-
_.
Tricolored Blackbird
.. Western Pond Turtle
~ White-tailed Kite
, :
..:....
N
A
..,
....,-.;-.
~;r American Badger San Joaquin Kit Fox
_ California Horned Lark E~':= Yuma Myotis
... California Linderielia _ Burrowing Owl
California Red-legged Frog ~ Golden Eagle
l'1li California Tiger Salamander rm Northern Harrier
Pallid Bat
o
2
4
Miles
-
Figure 5. Special Status Wildlife Species
Occurrences within Five Miles of Project Area
o)wra
EI~VIRONMEN-AL CCNSULTAN1S
~
Dublin Arroyo Vista Biological Assessment
Alameda Count California
Date: October 2007
Basemap: USGS Topa Quad
Map By: Derek Chao
Filepath: L:\Acad 2000Files\16000\16142\gis\
ArcMap\FigS CNDDB animals_20071 002 .mxd
Co1l5fJ tft1 eg.
Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia), CDFG Species of Special Concern; USFWS Bird of
Conservation Concern. Burrowing Owl typically favors flat, open grassland or gentle slopes and
sparse-shrub land ecosystems. This species prefers annual or perennial grasslands, typically
with sparse or nonexistent tree or shrub canopies; however, they also colonize debris piles and old
pipes. In California, Burrowing Owl is found in close association with California ground squirrels.
Burrowing Owl exhibits high site fidelity and usually uses the abandoned burrows of ground
squirrels for shelter and nesting.
'~
Burrowing Owl is unlikely to occur within the Project Area because most of the property has been
developed, paved, and/or landscaped with lawn grass and ornamental plants. However, numerous
occurrences of this species have been documented in grassy vacant lots and open areas just east
of the site (Figure 5). The Project Area is mostly surrounded by urban development and is not
contiguous with large expanses of grassland that might encourage owls to disperse to the site.
Only two open areas are present within the Project Area: North Field and West Field. North Field
is disced, a management practice that discourages use by wildlife, particularly burrowing owls.
West Field is maintained for recreation, and appears to have a high amount of human activity that
would deter wildlife use. No ground squirrels or suitable owl burrows were seen anywhere within
the Project Area.
California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), Federal Threatened, CDFG Species
of Concern. California tiger salamander (CTS) is restricted to grasslands and low-elevation foothill
regions in California (generally under 1500 feet) where it uses seasonal aquatic habitats for
breeding. The salamanders breed in natural ephemeral pools, or ponds that mimic ephemeral
pools (stock ponds that go dry), and occupy substantial areas surrounding the breeding pool as
adults. CTS spends most of its time in the grasslands surrounding breeding pools. It survives hot,
dry summers by estivating (going through a dormant period) in refugia (such as burrows created
by ground squirrels and other mammals and deep cracks or holes in the ground) where the soil
atmosphere remains near the water saturation point. During wet periods, salamanders may
emerge from refugia and feed in the surrounding grasslands.
CTS is unlikely to occur within the Project Area. CTS have been documented east of the Project
Area, as close as two miles away (CNDDB, 2007). However, similar to Burrowing Owl, this species
requires relatively undisturbed grassland for foraging and plentiful rodent burrows for shelter. Sites
that have been disturbed by development and earth-moving activities are not likely to contain CTS
unless CTS can re-colonize the area through a corridor that connects to an adjacent population.
In addition, CTS requires nearby pools that hold standing water for at least a few months in order
to breed. None of these components are present within or adjacent to the Project Area, which has
been thoroughly disturbed by earth-moving activities and is nearly surrounded by urban
development.
..
California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonil), Federal Threatened, CDFG Species of
Concern. California red-legged frog (CRLF) is dependent on suitable aquatic, estivation, and
upland habitat. During periods of wet weather, starting with the first rainfall in late fall, red-legged
frogs disperse away from their estivation sites to seek suitable breeding habitat. Aquatic and
breeding habitat is characterized by dense, shrubby, riparian vegetation and deep, still or slow-
moving water. Breeding occurs between late November and late April. California red-legged frog
estivates during the dry months in small mammal burrows, moist leaf litter, incised stream
channels, and large cracks in the bottom of dried ponds.
..
15
-
..101
'6~OO ~ct i
"""
..
CRLF is unlikely to occur within the Project Area. Alamo Creek, which passes along the western
edge of the Project Area, is the only feature that might attract or support this species. However,
CRLF has not been documented in Alamo Creek within five miles of the Project Area. The Project
Area itself is heavily developed and disturbed, has high human traffic, does not contain aquatic
habitat, and does not contain suitable upland estivation habitat or dispersal corridors. The Project
Area is nearly surrounded by urban development and is not likely to ever constitute habitat for this
species.
-
""
Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus). CDFG Species of Special Concern, WBWG High Priority.
Pallid bat is found in a variety of low elevation habitats throughout California. It selects a variety
of day roosts including rock outcrops, mines, caves, hollow trees, buildings, and bridges. Night
roosts are usually found under bridges, but also in caves, mines, and buildings. Pallid bat is
sensitive to roost disturbance. Unlike most bats, pallid bat primarily feeds on large ground-dwelling
arthropods, and many prey are taken on the ground (Zeiner, et al. 1990).
11m
..
..
Pallid bat has a moderate potential for occurrence within the Project Area. Buildings and other
structures within the Project Area may provide marginal habitat for this species. However, most
buildings observed during the September 2007 site visit were in good repair and had few openings
or crevices for bats to utilize. Levels of human activity within the housing development are high,
and this would likely discourage bats from roosting in this area. Marginal foraging habitat is present
along the creek corridor to the west and over grassy areas to the east. A recent occurrence of
pallid bat has been documented two miles southwest of the Project Area (CNDDB, 2007). Cautions
taken for pallid bat would also be beneficial for other sensitive bats such as Yuma myotis (Myotis
yumanensis).
..
-
..
Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). CDFG Species of Special Concern, USFWS Bird
of Conservation Concern. Loggerhead Shrike is a common resident and winter visitor in lowlands
and foothills throughout California. It prefers open habitats with scattered trees, shrubs, posts,
fences, utility lines or other perches. Nests are usually built on a stable branch in a densely-
foliaged shrub or small tree and are usually well-concealed. The highest densities occur in open-
canopied valley foothill hardwood, valley foothill hardwood-conifer, valley foothill riparian pinyon-
juniper, juniper, and desert riparian habitats. While this species eats mostly Arthropods, they also
take amphibians, small to medium-sized reptiles, small mammals and birds. They are also known
to scavenge on carrion.
I!IlI!Ir
-
..
Loggerhead Shrike has a moderate potential for occurrence within the Project Area. Marginal
foraging habitat exists in open areas within and adjacent to the property, and a number of trees and
bushes would be suitable for nesting.
-
Steel head-Central California Coast (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus). Federal Threatened.
Central California Coast ESU includes all naturally spawned populations of steelhead (and their
progeny) in California streams from the Russian River to Aptos Creek, and the drainages of San
Francisco and San Pablo Bays eastward to the Napa River (inclusive), excluding the Sacramento-
San Joaquin River Basin. Steelhead typically migrate to marine waters after spending two years
in freshwater, though they may stay up to seven. They then reside in marine waters for two or three
years prior to returning to their natal stream to spawn as four- or five-year-olds. Steelhead adults
typically spawn between December and June. In California, females typically spawn two times
before they die. Preferred spawning habitat for steel head is in perennial streams with cool to cold
"""'~
~.."
16
,.
""""
~Or tJ() l-t q t
water temperatures, high dissolved oxygen levels and fast flowing water. Abundant riffle areas
(shallow areas with gravel or cobble substrate) for spawning and deeper pools with sufficient
riparian cover for rearing are necessary for successful breeding.
~
Steelhead has no potential to occur within the Project Area since there are no creeks within the
property. However, Alamo Creek is immediately west of the Project Area. This creek is a tributary
to Arroyo de la Laguna Creek, which has been repeatedly surveyed with virtually no suggestion that
this creek constitutes habitat for steel head (Leidy et al., 2003). Arroyo de la Laguna is a tributary
to Alameda Creek, which is thought of as habitat for this species although migration barriers
prevent regular spawning (Gunther et al., 2000). Nonetheless, steelhead should be considered in
conjunction with land management on properties adjacent to watersheds that could contain this
species. Water quality can be impacted by runoff from these properties, and this decreases habitat
value for fish. The quality of runoff that enters creeks from adjacent properties such as the Project
Area should be carefully controlled through the use of erosion control plans, best management
practices (BMPs), and wastewater containment.
5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
No special status plant species of concern and no special status wildlife species were observed
during the site assessment. One potentially sensitive plant community was identified within the
Project Area. Two special status wildlife species have a moderate potential to occur within the
Project Area. The following sections present recommendations for future studies and/or measures
to avoid or reduce impacts to these species and sensitive habitats.
5.1 Biological Communities
..
-
Most of the Project Area is either paved and developed, or comprised of ruderal herbaceous
grassland, which is not a sensitive biological community. However, two small 250 square foot
areas in the vicinity of the drain in West Field support wetland plants. This area should be further
studied to determine whether or not it falls within the jurisdiction of the Corps under Section 404
of the Clean Water Act and RWQCB under the Porter Cologne Act and Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act.
:i4illl
5.2 Special Status Plant Species
"loll
i__
No further special status plant surveys are recommended for the Project Area. Of the 35 special
status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the Project Area, two species were determined
to have some potential to occur in the Project Area. Only one of the two species, California black
walnut, was observed in the Project Area, but was a naturalized individual, which does not require
protection. Most of the species found in the review of background literature occur in high quality
cismontane woodland, chaparral, or valley and foothill grassland habitat, none of which are present
in the Project Area.
"..
..
..
5.3
Special Status Wildlife Species
..
A small number of wildlife concerns for development within the Project Area can be addressed
through the use of mitigation measures. No special status species are known to be present or
..
17
..
"""
..
",.
t>r 00[) 4 tf i
..
have a high potential to occur within the Project Area. Loggerhead Shrike and pallid bat were
determined to have a moderate potential for occurrence. Wildlife concerns can be summarized as
follows:
\\t.t
.
Nesting birds, including special-status birds such as Loggerhead Shrike, may be impacted
by tree and brush removal or development within the breeding season from February to
August.
Bats such as pallid bat may be impacted by building demolition or tree removal from
November through August.
Steel head and other fish could be impacted by a decrease in creek water quality as a result
of surface runoff.
...
.
"~
.
""""
Nesting birds may be impacted by construction during the bird breeding season from February to
August. As mentioned in Section 2.1, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act protects almost all species of
nesting birds, including common species. Special status birds receive additional protection.
Ideally, the clearing of vegetation and the initiation of construction can take place in the non-
breeding season between September and January. If these activities cannot be done in the non-
breeding season, a qualified biologist shall perform pre-construction bird surveys within 30 days
of the onset of construction or clearing of vegetation. If nesting birds are discovered in the vicinity
of planned development, it will likely be necessary to establish buffer areas around the nest until
the nest is vacated. The size of the buffer would be dependent on the particular species of nesting
bird.
...
1If'
"""
..
Disturbance of trees, buildings, and other structures in the Project Area may impact bat roosts. As
with birds, bat roost sites can change from year to year, so pre-construction surveys are usually
necessary to determine the presence or absence of bat roost sites in a given area. Pre-
construction bat surveys do not need to be performed if building demolition work is conducted
between September 1 and October 31, after young have matured and prior to the bat hibernation
period. However, if it is necessary to disturb potential bat roost sites between November 1 and
August 31, pre-construction surveys will be necessary. Pre-construction bat surveys normally
involve surveying trees, rock outcrops, bridges, and buildings subject to removal or demolition for
evidence of bat use (guano accumulation, or acoustic or visual detections). If evidence of bat use
is found, then biologists should conduct a minimum of three acoustic surveys between April and
September under appropriate conditions using an acoustic detector to determine whether a site is
occupied. If bats are found, they should be excluded from occupied roosts in the presence of a
qualified biologist during the fall prior to construction.
....
..
-
lIiIi
..
....
-
Runoff from urban development in the Project Area may contribute to degradation of a watershed
that may comprise habitat for steelhead and other sensitive fish. In order to avoid sedimentation
in the Alameda Creek watershed, thorough erosion control measures should be designed and
implemented during construction activities. Such measures are typically required as part of a
SWPPP that is submitted while obtaining a grading permit.
~
Protective measures to avoid wildlife impacts can be summarized as follows:
· Initiation of construction and tree and brush removal should be done during the non-
breeding season for birds between September and January. If vegetation removal occurs
outside this time period, pre-construction nesting bird surveys shall be performed by a
qualified biologist.
18
-
ut Itrbt4q't
· Initiation of construction, tree removal, and building demolition should be performed in
September or October to avoid impacting bats. If all construction activities can not be
confined to this period, preconstruction surveys shall be performed by a qualified biologist.
· Design and implement a thorough erosion control plan to avoid indirectly impacting
steel head habitat.
6.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
The proposed project involves the conversion of 25 acres of low-income housing units and ruderal
plant communities to a higher density low-income housing development. The proposed conversion
project would retain the redwoods circling North Mariposa. The Project Area is completely fenced
and surrounded by rural development and roadways, meaning that no significant impacts to wildlife
migratory corridors are likely to occur. The potential presence of most special status wildlife
species is considered unlikely due to degraded habitat conditions in the Project Area, absence of
suitable breeding habitat, and human disturbance in the vicinity of the site due to surrounding
residential development. It is likely that no wetlands or potentially jurisdictional waters are present
in the Project Area, although the small cluster of wetland plants in West Field (Figure 3) merits
further investigation. No significant impacts to special status amphibians, reptiles or invertebrates
are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
The project has the potential to impact one special status bat species and one special status bird
species. The project also has the potential to impact nesting birds protected under the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act and to degrade the quality of a nearby creek that may be upstream from steel head
habitat. The project's potential to impact Dublin heritage trees was addressed in a separate report
(Babby 2007). A single heritage redwood tree was identified in the impacted portion of the Project
Area.
Potential impacts and mitigation measures outlined in a format following the CEQA checklist are
discussed below. With the following suggested mitigation measures, impacts to these biological
resources would be reduced to less-than-significant.
6.1 Special Status Species
Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
indirectly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
6.1.1 Impacts to Special Status Species
Wildlife
,,/lII
;>Ill
Potential impacts to wildlife as a result of development within the Project Area are summarized
below. A more detailed description of these impacts appears in Section 5.3.
· Nesting birds, including special-status birds such as Loggerhead Shrike, may be impacted
f.
19
...
;8
....
t1~bQ 4?ft
...
.
by tree and brush removal or development within the breeding season from February to
August.
Bats such as pallid bat may be impacted by building demolition or tree removal from
November through August.
Steelhead and other fish could be impacted by a decrease in creek water quality as a result
of surface runoff.
...
.
~
Plants
....
No special-status plants are determined to be present in the Project Area. Project construction
could commence with no further mitigation with respect to special status plants.
-
6. 1.2 Suggested Mitigation
Protective measures to avoid wildlife impacts are summarized below. A more detailed description
of mitigation measures can be found in Section 5.3.
..
.
Initiation of construction and tree and brush removal should be done during the non-
breeding season for birds between September and January. If vegetation removal outside
this time period cannot be avoided, pre-construction nesting bird surveys shall be
performed by a qualified biologist.
Initiation of construction, tree removal, and building demolition should be performed in
September or October to avoid impacting bats. If all such work cannot be confined to this
time period, pre-construction bat surveys shall be performed by a qualified biologist.
Design and implement a thorough erosion control plan to avoid indirectly impacting
steel head habitat.
-
..'
.
-
.
-"
6.2
Riparian Habitat
....
Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
..
im!
6.2.1 Impacts
-
l,.~j;, )
Most of the Project Area is comprised of ruderal habitat which is not considered sensitive habitat
under CEQA. The only riparian habitat observed was adjacent to the Project Area on its western
flank, where Alamo Creek bends around the site. This riparian area is already fenced off from the
Project Area, providing a buffer zone that satisfies the City of Dublin's Ordinance No. 52-87 setback
requirements for open channel watercourses.
..
6.2.2 Suggested Mitigation
No significant impacts to riparian habitat are anticipated as a result of the proposed project, thus
no mitigation is required.
20
1JI!llIP:lt
-
Ci ~ 6fJ ift1 '6
6.3 Section 404 Wetlands
Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
6.3.1 Impacts
With the possible exception of the small area of wetland plants in West Field, there are no other
expected impacts to federally protected wetlands or waters.
6.3.2 Suggested Mitigation
Prepare jurisdictional wetland delineation to determine presence or absence of Section 404
wetlands on-site. If it is confirmed that there are no jurisdictional wetlands, then no mitigation will
be required.
Erosion control measures shall be implemented to reduce or prevent sediment and pesticide run-off
from entering Alamo Creek. An Erosion Control Plan and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
shall be prepared for this project.
6.4 Wildlife Corridors and Habitat
Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
6.4.1 Impacts
,OIl
Development within the Project Area will not substantially impact wildlife habitat or movement
corridors. The majority of the Project Area is urban, having been disturbed, graded, developed,
landscaped, paved, and otherwise modified and occupied by humans, and therefore does not
comprise valuable habitat for wildlife species. The Project Area is also fenced on nearly all sides,
so it is unlikely that any wildlife corridors go through the site.
...
A vacant lot in the north of the Project Area (North Field), provides open space between grassy
vacant lots to the east and a narrow wooded creek corridor to the west, beyond which is open
grassland in the north Dublin hills. This is one of only a few places where wildlife could potentially
move between open space east of Dougherty Road and open space west of a belt of urban
development along Dougherty Road. However, this does not appear to be a high-value or regularly
used wildlife corridor due to fences on both sides of the bike path that runs along the western edge
of the Project Area. High levels of human activity in this area and traffic on Dougherty Road are
likely to discourage wildlife from using this route, along with the fact that the corridor is already
blocked by fences.
,l8
...
..
..
..
Alamo Creek to the west of the Project Area could be considered a tributary to a native wildlife
,'OlI
21
w
WI
?1 Lf 00 y.tq t
nursery, as juvenile steelhead may be present further downstream. Polluted surface runoff
entering this creek could impact habitat quality for steelhead downstream.
As mentioned in Section 6.1.1 , the Project Area may also provide rearing habitat for juvenile birds
and bats in trees and man-made structures.
6.4.2 Suggested Mitigation
Since the open space at the north end of the Project Area does not appear to be a practical or
substantial wildlife corridor, no mitigation measures are suggested.
Mitigation measures for birds, bats, and steel head are provided in Section 6.1.2 and 6.3.2.
6.5 Local Policies
Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
6.5.1 Impacts
Some mature native trees are present in the Project Area that are protected under the City of
Dublin Heritage Tree Ordinance. This ordinance prohibits tree removal without a permit from any
property within the City of Dublin, of any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye, and
sycamore tree having a trunk or main stem of twenty-four (24) inches or greater. The majority of
the native trees in the project vicinity occur in the riparian corridor along Alamo Creek that is not
part of the Project Area and is fenced off from it. The circle of redwoods lining the west end of
North Mariposa will be retained, and there are several heritage-sized trees within this grouping.
The project arborist determined that only one heritage tree, a 26-inch dbh redwood, will be
impacted by the project.
6.5.2. Suggested Mitigation
The project applicant shall submit the arborist's findings and obtain a tree removal permit from the
City for any impacted heritage trees (currently projected to be just a single tree). The applicant
shall install replacement trees for the removal of any heritage tree in the Project Area at a ratio to
be determined by the City and monitor the survival of the replacement trees for a period of three
years. Any trees that die during the monitoring period will be replaced and monitored for three
years.
Heritage trees preserved in the Project Area shall be surrounded by protective fencing during
project construction. This fencing will be installed at least ten feet outside the dripline of the
protected trees and no construction material or chemicals will be stored within the protective
fencing.
The City may require additional mitigation for impacts to other native trees including oaks. These
mitigation measures may include but are not limited to compensatory tree replacement for impacts
to native oaks and monitoring the success of replacement tree plantings. If such mitigation is
required by the City the applicant will comply with such measures. This will reduce impacts to
22
~
Cf'c>~ lfC(r{;
existing native trees to a less than significant level.
6.6 Conservation Plans
Would the project conflict with the provIsions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
6.6.1 Impacts
No impact. The project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan
(HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan.
6.6.2 Suggested Mitigation
No mitigation is required as no HCPs, NCCPs, or other conservation plans apply to the Project
Area.
"'.
7.0 REFERENCES
,.,.
Babby, D. L., 2007. An Arborist Report for the Arroyo Vista Housing Project in Dublin, California.
California Department of Fish and Game. 2007. Natural Diversity Database, Wildlife and Habitat
Data Analysis Branch. Sacramento.
California Native Plant Society. 2007. Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular
Plants of California. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.
City of Dublin, California. 2007. City of Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 5.60: Heritage Trees.
http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/dublin.htm I
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Department
of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180-0631.
Gunther, A. J., J. Hagar, and P. Salop. 2000. An assessment of the potential for restoring a viable
steelhead trout population in the Alameda Creek watershed. Alameda Creek Fisheries
Restoration Workgroup. Prepared by Applied Marine Sciences LLC and Hagar
Environmental Science.
rt*lt
Hickman, J.C. (ed.) 1993. The Jepson manual: higher plants of California. University of California
Press.
,..
Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California.
Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California
Jennings, Mark R. 2004. An Annotated Check List of Amphibians and Reptile Species of
....
23
'...
)+$
q~~4?('6
California and Adjacent Waters. Third, revised edition. California Department of Fish and
Game.
!!!Me.-
Leidy, A.A., G.S. Becker, and B.N. Harvey. 2003. Historical Distribution and Current Status of
Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Coho Salmon (0. kisutch), and Chinook Salmon (0.
tshawytscha) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. US EPA and Center for
Ecosystem Management and Restoration.
~
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2002. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the
United States, version 5.0. G.W. Hurt, P.M. Whited, eds. USDA, NRCS in cooperation with
the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, Fort Worth, TX.
Reed, Jr., Porter B. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: National
Summary. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. BioI. Rep. 88 (24). 244 pp.
Stebbins, A.C. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, 3rd Edition. 2003. The
Peterson Field Guide Series, Houghton Mifflin Company, New York.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.1966. Soil Survey of Alameda County.
California. In cooperation with the University of California Agricultural Experiment Station.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. Quadrangle Species Lists, Sacramento
Fish and Wildlife Service.
Zeiner, D. C., W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr., K. E. Mayer, and M. White. 1990. California's Wildlife,
Volume I-III: Amphibians and Reptiles, Birds, Mammals. California Statewide Wildlife
Habitat Relationships System, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento.
IlI!!l'!fl
..
-
ii',;i
..
...
-
-
II"P'
111'+
24
-
-
1J1) tfC-( <6
APPENDIX A
LIST OF OBSERVED PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES
~
i:fjli
'"-
~~(' ~ 03 i.f C(l,
Appendix A. List of Observed Plant and Animal Species in the Project Area from the site assessment
conducted on September 20, 2007.
'~
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME
PLANTS
Aesculus californica California buckeye
Arctotheca calendula capeweed
Argyranthemum sp. daisy, marguerite
Avena fatua wild oat
Avena barbata slender wild oat
Baccharis pilularis coyote brush
Brassica nigra black mustard
Bromus diandrus ripgut brome
Bromus catharticus rescue grass
Carpobrotus edulis ice plant
Centaurea solstitialis yellow star thistle
Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed
Conyza sp. horseweed
Cotoneaster sp. cotoneaster
Cynodon dactylon Bermuda grass
Cyperus eragrostis tall flat-sedge
Oittrichia graveolens stinkwort
Epilobium ciliatum slender willowherb
Eucalyptus sp. gum
Foeniculum vulgare sweet fennel
Fuchsia sp. fuchsia
Geranium dissectum dissected geranium
Hedera helix English ivy
Hordeum marinum Mediterranean barley
Juglans californica California black walnut
Lactuca serriola prickly lettuce
~
~-
i,'U!lI
-
-
-
"'"
..
...
dIi
,,'"
0\ C1"O Lt0 ct
Lavandula sp. lavender
Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum
Lolium multiflorum Italian rye grass
Lotus corniculatus bird's foot trefoil
Malva nicaeensis bull mallow
Medicago polymorpha bur clover
Mentha pulegium pennyroyal
Mentha sp. mint
Paspalum dilatatum dallis grass
Phalaris aquatica Harding grass
Picris echioides bristly ox tongue
Pinus radiata Monterey pine
Pinus sp. pine
Plantago lanceolata narrowleaf plantain
Polygonum arenastrum oval leaf knotweed
Pyracantha sp. firethorn
Quercus agrifolia coast live oak
Quercus lobata valley oak
Raphanus sativus wild radish
Rosa sp. rose
Rumex crisp us curly dock
Salix sp. willow
Salsola tragus tumbleweed
Scirpus californicus California bulrush
Sequoia sempervirens redwood
Silybum marianum milk thistle
Taraxacum officinale common dandelion
Tribulus terrestris puncture vine
Trifolium fragiferum strawberry clover
Tropaeolum majus garden nasturtium
..
!!'fI\\V'
l*'~
\ 00 ~b Ltc( t
...
Vicia sativa common vetch
Vinca major periwinkle
Vilis sp. grape
Xanthium strumarium rough cockle-bur
Zantedeschia aethiopica calla lily
WILDLIFE
Anas platyrhynchos Mallard
Aphelocoma californica Western Scrub Jay
Buteo lineatus Red-shouldered Hawk
Calypte anna Anna's Hummingbird
Canis lupus familiaris domestic dog
Carpodacus mexicanus House Finch
Corvus brachyrhynchos American Crow
Falco sparverius American Kestrel
Felis silvestris catus domestic cat
Megeagris gallopavo Wild Turkey
Microtus sp. vole (burrows)
Picoides nuttallii Nuttall's Woodpecker
Pipilo crissalis California Towhee
Procyon lotor raccoon (scat)
Sturn us vulgaris European Starling
Thomomys bottae Botta's pocket gopher (burrows)
Zenaida macroura Mourning Dove
\.idj
'...
-
,,,"
a
'.
"""
II1II
..
1 ,\ (.";
\01 Ifb I.{vt 6
APPENDIX B
POTENTIAL FOR SPECIAL STATUS PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES TO OCCUR IN THE
PROJECT AREA
'.....
w
..
".
d
+j<~
~
H
"'"
..
..
-"'"
,.
'.
..
...
102. lYb 1.1 ttet
Appendix B. Potential for Special Status Plant and Wildlife Species to Occur in the Project Area. List
compiled from a September 2007 search of the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity
Database (CNDDB), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Species Lists, and California Native Plant Society
(CNPS) Electronic Inventory search of the Dublin, Diablo, Tassajara, Livermore, La Costa Valley, Niles, Newark,
Hayward, and Las Trampas Ridge USGS 7.5' quadrangles. A review of other CDFG lists and publications
(Jennings and Hayes 1994, Zeiner et al. 1990) was also conducted.
SPECIES
STATUS.
HABITAT
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
Mammals
salt-marsh wandering shrew CSC Salt marshes of the south arm of No Potential. Salt marsh
Sorex vagrans halicoetes San Francisco Bay. Medium high habitat not present within
marsh 6 to 8 feet above sea level the Project Area.
where abundant driftwood is
scattered among Salicornia.
pallid bat CSC, WBWG Occupies a variety of habitats at Moderate Potential. This
Antrozous pallidus low elevation including species may be somewhat
grasslands, shrublands, tolerant of human
woodlands, and forests. Most presence and may find
common in open, dry habitats roosting habitat in isolated
with rocky areas for roosting. trees, buildings, or other
structures.
Townsend's big-eared bat CSC, WBWG Primarily found in rural settings in Unlikely. High levels of
Corynorhinus townsendii a wide variety of habitats human activity in and
including oak woodlands and around the buildings and
mixed coniferous-deciduous general Project Area are
forest. Day roosts highly likely to deter this
associated with caves and mines. species..
Very sensitive to human
disturbance.
San Joaquin kit fox FE,ST,RP Annual grasslands or grassy Unlikely. The Project
Vulpes macrotis mutica open stages with scattered Area is surrounded by
shrubby vegetation. Need urbanization and does not
loose-textured sandy soils for contain suitable foraging
burrowing, and suitable prey or burrowing habitat for
base. this species.
American badger CSC Most abundant in drier open Unlikely. The few
Taxidea taxus stages of most shrub, forest, and portions of open ground
herbaceous habitats, with friable within the Project Area
soils. Requires friable soils and that might support this
open, uncultivated ground. Preys species have been disced
on burrowing rodents. or heavily modified.
Birds
Cooper's Hawk CSC Associated with open or Unlikely. This species
Accipiter cooperii interrupted woodland and riparian may utilize the riparian
habitats in the Coast ranges and corridor to the west but is
foothills surrounding the Central unlikely to nest or forage
Valley. Nest sites mainly in within the Project Area.
riparian groWths of deciduous
trees, as in canyon bottoms on
river flood-plains; also nests in
live oaks.
..
SPECIES
STATUS.
HABIT AT
I GO:; at> yt1g
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
""
Sharp-shinned Hawk CSC This species is a fairly common Unlikely. This species
Accipiter striatus migrant and winter visitor may utilize the riparian
throughout California and is found corridor to the west but is
in a variety of habitats, especially unlikely to nest or forage
woodlands. It usually nests in within the Project Area.
dense small-tree stands of
conifers near water. Preferred
roost sites are within intermediate
to high-canopy forest areas.
Golden Eagle BCC, CSC, (Nesting and wintering) rolling No Potential. Open,
Aquila chrysaetos CFP, CDF foothills mountain areas, isolated habitat for nesting
sensitive, sage-juniper flats, desert. or foraging is not present
BLM sensitive Cliff-walled canyons provide within the Project Area.
nesting habitat in most parts of
range; also, large trees in open
areas.
Ferruginous Hawk BCC, CSC, (Wintering) Frequents open Unlikely. Typical open
Buteo regalis BLM sensitive grasslands, sagebrush flats, foraging habitat for this
desert scrub, low foothills species is not present
surrounding valleys and fringes of within the Project Area.
pinyon-juniper habitats. Preys on
lagomorphs, ground squirrels and
mice. Population trends may
follow lagomorph population
cycles.
Northern Harrier CSC (Nesting) Nests and forages in Unlikely. Typical
Circus cyaneus grassland habitats, usually in grassland/marsh nesting
association with coastal salt and and foraging habitat for
freshwater marshes. Nests on this species is not present
ground in shrubby vegetation, within the Project Area.
usually at marsh edge; nest built
of a large mound of sticks in wet
areas. May also occur in alkali
desert sinks.
White-tailed Kite CFP Year-long resident of coastal and Unlikely. This species
Elanus leucurus valley lowlands; rarely found away may utilize the riparian
from agricultural areas. Preys on corridor to the west but is
small diurnal mammals and unlikely to nest or forage
occasional birds, insects, reptiles, within the Project Area.
and amphibians.
Prairie Falcon BCC,CSC (Nesting) inhabits dry, open Unlikely. Typical
Falco mexicanus terrain, either level or hilly. breeding and foraging
Breeding sites located on cliffs. habitat for this species is
Forages far afield, even to not present within the
marshlands and ocean shores. Project Area.
American Peregrine Falcon FD, SE, CFP, Winters throughout Central Unlikely. Typical
Falco peregrinus anatum BCC Valley. Requires protected cliffs breeding and foraging
and ledges for cover. Feeds on a habitat for this species is
variety of birds, and some not present within the
mammals, insects, and fish. Project Area.
..
!Ill'\II!'"
SPECIES
STATUS*
HABITAT
10'-1 tJh yt1t(
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
"..'"
Western Snowy Plover FT, CSC, (Nesting) Federal listing applies No Potential. This
Charadrius alexandrinus BCC,RP only to the Pacific coastal species is generally
nivosus population. Found on sandy restricted to coastal areas.
beaches, salt pond levees and
shores of large alkali lakes.
Requires sandy, gravelly or friable
soils for nesting.
Burrowing Owl CSC, BCC Frequents open grasslands and No Potential. Burrow
Athene cunicularia shrublands with perches and habitat not present within
burrows. Preys upon insects, the Project Area.
small mammals, reptiles, birds, Frequent human, dog, and
and carrion. Nests and roosts in cat disturbance is likely to
old burrows of small mammals. deter this species. Project
Area is fragmented
isolated from appropriate
habitat.
Loggerhead Shrike BCC,CSC Inhabits broken woodlands, Moderate Potential.
Lanius ludovicianus savannah, pinyon-juniper, Joshua Marginal foraging and
tree, and riparian woodlands, nesting habitat for this
desert oases, scrub and washes. species may be present
Prefers open country for hunting, within the Project Area.
with perches for scanning, and
fairly dense shrubs and brush for
nesting.
California Horned Lark CSC Coastal regions, chiefly from Unlikely. Grassland
Eremophila alpestris actia Sonoma County to San Diego habitat within the Project
County. Also main part of San Area is likely too minimal,
Joaquin Valley and east to disturbed, and isolated to
foothills. Short-grass prairie, be utilized by this species.
"bald" hills, mountain meadows,
open coastal plains, fallow grain
fields, alkali flats.
Bank Swallow ST Migrant in riparian and other No Potential. Suitable
Riparia riparia lowland habitats in western bank habitat not present
California. Nests in riparian areas within the Project Area.
with vertical cliffs and bands with
fine-textured or sandy soils in
which to nest.
Yellow Warbler CSC Yellow warblers prefer dense Unlikely. This species
Oendroica petechia brewsteri riparian vegetation for breeding. may utilize the riparian
Yellow warbler populations have corridor to the west but is
declined due to brood parasitism unlikely to nest or forage
by brown-headed cowbirds within the Project Area.
(Molothrus ater) and habitat
destruction. Diet is primarily
insects supplemented with
berries.
,'.
-
~
10S ~ ~~.~
SPECIES
STATUS"
HABITAT
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
JI!I!lI'"
Saltmarsh Common CSC,BCC Frequents low, dense vegetation Unlikely. This species
Yellowthroat near water including fresh to may utilize the riparian
Geothlypis trichas sinuosa saline emergent wetlands. corridor to the west but is
Brushy habitats used in migration. unlikely to nest or forage
Forages among wetland herbs within the Project Area.
and shrubs for insects primarily.
Alameda Song Sparrow BCC,CSC Resident of salt marshes No Potential. The Project
Melospiza melodia pusi/lula bordering south arm of San Area is far from the salt
Francisco Bay. Inhabits Salicornia marsh habitat of the South
marshes; nests low in Grindelia Bay.
bushes (high enough to escape
high tides) and in Sa/icornia.
Tricolored Blackbird CSC,BCC Usually nests over or near Unlikely. This species
Agelaius tricolor freshwater in dense cattails, tules, may utilize the riparian
or thickets of willow, blackberry, corridor to the west but is
wild rose or other tall herbs. unlikely to nest or forage
within the Project Area
due to lack of suitable
habitat.
Reptiles and Amphibians
California tiger salamander FT, CSC Inhabits annual grass habitat and Unlikely. Project Area
Ambystoma ca/iforniense mammal burrows. Seasonal and surroundings have
ponds and vernal pools crucial to been fragmented, graded,
breeding. and heavily altered.
Suitable burrow and
breeding habitat not
present.
California red-legged frog FT, CSC, RP Lowlands and foothills in or near Unlikely. Breeding
Rana aurora draytonii permanent sources of deep water habitat not present within
with dense, shrubby or emergent Project Area. Upland
riparian vegetation. Requires 11 estivation and dispersal
to 20 weeks of permanent water habitat not observed. This
for larval development. Must species has some
have access to estivation habitat. potential to occur within
the creek corridor to the
west; however, it is
unlikely to ever occur
within the Project Area.
foothill yellow-legged frog CSC Found in or near rocky streams in No Potential. Aquatic
Rana boylii a variety of habitats. Feed on habitat not present within
both aquatic and terrestrial the Project Area.
invertebrates.
western pond turtle CSC A thoroughly aquatic turtle of No Potential. Aquatic
Actinemys marmorata ponds, marshes, rivers, streams habitat not present within
and irrigation ditches with aquatic the Project Area.
vegetation. Need basking sites
and suitable (sandy banks or
grassy open fields) upland habitat
for egg-laying.
~
JI!Il!l"
....
~.
!II!!I'J"
-
.."
....
fIIJ"f
-
"",,'
..
,.,
"..
..
,&,i
..
IlIIIllJ'
SPECIES
STATUS*
HABITAT
lOW fir) L1 q{
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
.~
Alameda whipsnake FT,ST Inhabits chaparral and foothill- No Potential. Grassland
Masticophis lateralis hardwood habitats in the eastern habitat with rock outcrops
euryxanthus Bay Area. Prefers south-facing not present within Project
slopes and ravines with rock Area. Site is isolated and
outcroppings where shrubs form disturbed.
a vegetative mosaic with oak
trees and grasses and small
mammal burrows provide basking
and refuge.
Fishes
Central California Coastal FT,CSC Adults migrate upstream to No Potential. Aquatic
steelhead spawn in cool, clear, well- habitat not present within
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus oxygenated streams. Juveniles the Project Area.
remain in fresh water for 1 or However, the Project Area
more years before migrating is within the Alameda
downstream to the ocean Creek watershed, which
could be considered
steel head habitat far
downstream.
Invertebrates
Conservancy fairy shrimp FE, SSI, RP Endemic to the grasslands of the No Potential. Seasonal
Branchinecta conservatio northern two-thirds of the Central wetland depressions and
Valley; found in large, turbid vernal pools required for
pools. Inhabit astatic pools this species are not
located in swales formed by old, present within the Project
braided alluvium; filled by Area.
winter/spring rains, last until June.
longhorn fairy shrimp FE, SSI, RP Endemic to the eastern margin of No Potential. Seasonal
Branchinecta longiantenna the central coast mountains in wetland depressions and
seasonally astatic grassland vernal pools required for
vernal pools. Inhabit small, this species are not
clear-water depressions in present within the Project
sandstone and clear-to-turbid Area
clay/grass-bottomed pools in
shallow swales.
vernal pool fairy shrimp FT, SSI, RP Endemic to the grasslands of the No Potential. Seasonal
Branchinecta Iynchi Central Valley, central coast wetland depressions and
mountains, and south coast vernal pools required for
mountains, in astatic rain-filled this species are not
pools. Inhabit small, clear-water present within the Project
sandstone-depression pools and Area
grassed swale, earth slump, or
basalt-flow depression pools.
vernal pool tadpole shrimp FE, SSI, RP Inhabits vernal pools and swales No Potential. Seasonal
Lepidurus packardi in the Sacramento Valley wetland depressions and
containing clear to highly turbid vernal pools required for
water. Pools commonly found in this species are not
grass bottomed swales of present within the Project
unplowed grasslands. Some Area
pools are mud-bottomed and
highly turbid.
~q
'f~
,"W
..
..
...
-
SPECIES
ST ATUS.
HABITAT
101 c:o yt1'i
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
California linderiella SSI Seasonal pools in unplowed No Potential. Seasonal
Linderiella occidentalis grasslands with old alluvial soils wetland depressions and
underlain by hardpan or in vernal pools required for
sandstone depressions. Water in this species are not
the pools has very low alkalinity, present within the Project
conductivity, and TDS. Area
valley elderberry longhorn FT, SSI, RP Occurs only in the central valley No Potential. Elderberry
beetle of California, in association with host plant not observed
Desmocerus californicus blue elderberry (Sambucus within the Project Area.
dimorphus mexicana). Prefers to lay eggs in
elderberrry 2 to 8 inches in
diameter; some preference
shown for "stressed" elderberry.
Bay checkerspot butterfly FT, SSI, RP Restricted to native grasslands on No Potential. Project
Euphydryas editha bayensis outcrops of serpentine soil in the Area is fragmented and
vicinity of San Francisco Bay. near areas of high human
Plantago erecta is the primary traffic. Host plant not
host plant; Orthocarpus observed during
densif/orus and 0. purpurscens September 2007 site visit.
are the secondary host plants.
monarch butterfly SSI Winter roost sites extend along Unlikely. Project Area is
Danaus plexippus the coast from northern fragmented and near
Mendocino to Baja California, areas of high human
Mexico. Roosts located in traffic.
wind-protected tree groves
(eucalyptus, Monterey pine,
Monterey cypress), with nectar
and water sources nearby.
Plants
large-flowered fiddleneck FE, SE, List Cis montane woodland and valley No Potential. The Project
Amsinckia grandif/ora 1B and foothill grassland. 275-550 m. Area does not contain
Blooms April-May. suitable habitat for this
species.
bent-flowered fiddleneck List 1 B Coastal bluff scrub, cismontane No Potential. The Project
Amsinckia lunaris woodland, and valley and foothill Area is a developed site; it
grassland. 3-500 m. Blooms does not contain suitable
March-June. habitat for this species.
slender silver-moss List 2 Broadleafed upland forest, lower No Potential. The Project
Anomobryum julaceum montane coniferous forest, and Area does not contain
North Coast coniferous forest. suitable habitat for this
Found in damp rock and soil on species.
outcrops- usually roadcuts. 100-
1000 m.
Mt. Diablo manzanita List 1 B Chaparral on sandstone. 135- No Potential. The Project
Arctostaphylos auriculata 650 m. Blooms January-March. Area does not contain
suitable habitat for this
species.
~
~.
-~
.'
-
..
Vi>
-
~"'\
~<
...
-
SPECIES
STATUS*
HABITAT
(0 'b iT{) 4CfCI
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
,,;d
Contra Costa manzanita List 1 B Chaparral on rocky soils. 500- No Potential. The Project
Arctostaphylos manzanita 1100 m. Blooms January- Area does not contain
ssp. laevigata February. suitable habitat for this
species, and is not in the
species' elevation range.
alkali milk-vetch List 1 B Playas, valley and foothill No Potential. The Project
Astragalus tener var. tener grassland (on adobe clay), and Area does not contain
vernal pools; often on alkaline suitable habitat for this
soils. 1- 60m. Blooms March- species.
June.
heartscale List 1 B Chenopod scrub, meadows and No Potential. The Project
Atriplex cordulata seeps, and valley and foothill Area is a developed site; it
grasslands; often on saline or does not contain suitable
alkaline soils. 1- 375 m. Blooms habitat for this species.
April-October.
brittlescale List 1 B Chenopod scrub, meadows and No Potential. The Project
Atriplex depressa seeps, playas, valley and foothill Area is a developed site; it
grasslands, and vernal pools; does not contain suitable
often on alkaline, clay soils. 1- habitat for this species.
320 m. Blooms May-October.
San Joaquin spearscale List 1 B Chenopod scrub, meadows and No Potential. The Project
A triplex joaquiniana seeps, playas, and valley and Area is a developed site; it
foothill grasslands; often on does not contain suitable
alkaline soils. 1- 835 m. Blooms habitat for this species.
April-October.
big scale balsam root List 1 B Valley and foothill grasslands and No Potential. The Project
Balsamorhiza macrolepis var. cismontane woodland; often on Area is a developed site; it
macrolepis serpentinite soils. 90- 1400 m. does not contain suitable
Blooms March-June. habitat for this species.
round-leaved filaree List 1 B Cis montane woodland and valley No Potential. The Project
California macrophylla and foothill grasslands; often on Area is a developed site; it
clay soils. 15- 1200 m. Blooms does not contain suitable
March-May. habitat for this species.
Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern List 1 B Chaparral, cismontane woodland, No Potential. The Project
Calochot1us pulchellus riparian woodland, and valley and Area is a developed site; it
foothill grasslands. 30- 840 m. does not contain suitable
Blooms April-June. habitat for this species.
chaparral harebell List 1 B Chaparral; often on rocky and No Potential. The Project
Campanula exigua serpentinite soils. 275- 1250 m. Area does not contain
Blooms May-June. suitable habitat for this
species.
Congdon's tarplant List 1 B Valley and foothill grasslands; Unlikely. The Project Area
Centromadia parryi ssp. often on alkaline soils. 1- 230 m. is a developed site; this
congdonii Blooms May-October; species can be found in
uncommonly in November. disturbed areas.
1111
.
..
tliM.
SPECIES
STATUS.
HABITAT
I Dqab yq't
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
palmate-bracted bird's-beak FE, SE, List Chenopod scrub and valley and No Potential. The Project
Cordylanthus palmatus 1B foothill grasslands; often on Area is a developed site; it
alkaline soils. 5- 155 m. Blooms does not contain suitable
May-October. habitat for this species.
western leatherwood List 1 B Broadleafed upland forest, No Potential. The Project
Dirca occidenta/is closed-cone coniferous forest, Area does not contain
chaparral, cismontane woodland, suitable habitat for this
North Coast coniferous forest, species.
riparian forest, and riparian
woodland; often on mesic soils.
50- 395 m. Blooms January-
March; uncommonly in April.
Ben Lomond buckwheat List 1 B Occurs on sandy soils in No Potential. The Project
Eriogonum nudum var. chaparral and cismontane Area does not contain
decurrens woodland, and in maritime suitable habitat for this
ponderosa pine sandhills soils in species.
lower montane coniferous forest.
50- 800 m. Blooms June-October.
Mt. Diablo buckwheat List 1 B Chaparral, coastal scrub, and No Potential. The Project
Eriogonum truncatum valley and foothill grasslands; Area is a developed site; it
usually on sandy soils. 3- 350 m. does not contain suitable
Blooms April-September; habitat for this species.
uncommonly in November and
December.
fragrant fritillary List 1 B Cis montane woodland, coastal No Potential. The Project
Friti/laria liliacea prairie, coastal scrub, valley and Area is a developed site; it
foothill grassland; often does not contain suitable
serpentinite. 3-410 m. Blooms habitat for this species.
February-April.
Diablo helianthella List 1 B Broadleafed upland forest, No Potential. The Project
HeliantheJla castanea chaparral, cismontane woodland, Area is a developed site; it
coastal scrub, riparian woodland, does not contain suitable
and valley and foothill grassland. habitat for this species.
60- 1300 m. Blooms March-June.
Brewer's western flax List 1 B Chaparral, cis montane woodland, No Potential. The Project
Hesperolinon breweri and valley and foothill grassland; Area is a developed site; it
often on serpentinite soils. 30- does not contain suitable
900 m. Blooms May-July. habitat for this species.
Santa Cruz tarplant FT, SE, List Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, No Potential. The Project
Holocarpha macradenia 1B and valley and foothill grassland; Area is a developed site; it
often on clay, sandy soils. 10- 220 does not contain suitable
m. Blooms June-October. habitat for this species.
Northern California black List 1 B Riparian forest and riparian Unlikely. The Project Area
walnut woodland. 0- 440 m. Blooms does not contain suitable
Juglans hindsii April-May. habitat for native stands of
this species; however,
naturalized individuals
may be present.
iI!f8ll!~
.."
,.".,
.
..
.'
....
""""
eo
~t-l}
-
"""
..
SPECIES
STATUS.
HABITAT
110 on !.of?; '6
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
..
Contra Costa goldfields FE, List 1 B Cismontane woodland, alkaline No Potential. The Project
Lasthenia conjugens playas, valley and foothill Area is a developed site; it
grassland, and vernal pools; often does not contain suitable
on mesic soils. 0- 470 m. Blooms habitat for this species.
March-June.
Hall's bush mallow List 1 B Chaparral and coastal scrub. 10- No Potential. The Project
Malacothamnus hallii 760 m. Blooms May-September; Area does not contain
uncommonly in October. suitable habitat for this
species.
San Antonio Hills monardella List 3 Chaparral and cis montane No Potential. The Project
Monardella antonina ssp. woodland. 500 -1000 m. Blooms Area does not contain
antonina June-August. suitable habitat for this
species.
robust monardella List 1 B Broadleafed upland forest, No Potential. The Project
Monardella vil/osa ssp. chaparral (openings), cis montane Area is a developed site; it
globosa woodland, coastal scrub, valley does not contain suitable
and foothill grassland. 100-915 habitat for this species.
m. Blooms June-July;
uncommonly in August.
Mt. Diablo phacelia List 1 B Chaparral and cismontane No Potential. The Project
Phacelia phacelioides woodland; often on rocky soils. Area does not contain
500- 1370 m. Blooms April-May. suitable habitat for this
species, and is not in the
species' elevation range.
hairless popcorn-flower List 1 A Alkaline meadows and seeps and No Potential. The Project
Plagiobothrys glaber coastal salt marshes and Area does not contain
swamps. 15- 180 m. Blooms suitable habitat for this
March-May. species and this species is
presumed extinct in
California.
rock sanicle List 1 B Broadleafed upland forest, No Potential. The Project
Sanicula saxatilis chaparral, and valley and foothill Area does not contain
grassland; often on rocky soils. suitable habitat for this
620- 1175 m. Blooms April-May. species, and is not in the
species' elevation range.
most beautiful jewel-flower List 1 B Chaparral, cismontane woodland, No Potential. The Project
Streptanthus albidus ssp. and valley and foothill grassland; Area is a developed site; it
peramoenus often on serpentinite soils. 94- does not contain suitable
1000 m. Blooms April-September; habitat for this species.
uncommonly in March and
October.
Mt. Diablo jewel-flower List 1 B Chaparral and valley and foothill No Potential. The Project
Streptanthus hispidus grassland; often on rocky soils. Area does not contain
365- 1200 m. Blooms March- suitable habitat for this
June. species.
saline clover List 1 B Marshes and swamps, valley and No Potential. The Project
Trifolium depauperatum var. foothill grassland with mesic/ Area is a developed site; it
hydrophilum alkaline soils, and vernal pools. does not contain suitable
0-300 m. Blooms April - June. habitat for this species.
,.
-
-
,,~.
SPECIES
....
STATUS*
( II D{) ~ct
POTENTIAL FOR
OCCURRENCE
...
HABITAT
caper-fruited tropidocarpum
Tropidocarpum capparideum
List 1 B
Valley and foothill grassland
(alkaline hills). 1- 455 m. Blooms
March-April.
No Potential. The Project
Area is a developed site; it
does not contain suitable
habitat for this species.
No Potential. The Project
Area does not contain
suitable habitat for this
species.
-
~
oval-leaved viburnum
Viburnum el/ipticum
List 2
Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
lower montane coniferous forest.
215-1400 m. Blooms May-June.
* Key to status codes:
FE
FT
FD
BCC
SE
ST
CSC
CFP
CDF
WBWG
BLM
RP
SSI
List 1 A
List 1 B
List 2
List 3
Federal Endangered
Federal Threatened
Federal Delisted
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
State Endangered
State Threatened
CDFG Species of Special Concern
CDFG Fully Protected Animal
CDF Sensitive: warrant special protection during timber operations
Western Bat Working Group High Priority species
Bureau of Land Management sensitive species
Recovery Plan (species is listed in a local recovery plan)
Special Status Invertebrate
CN PS List 1 A: Plants presumed extinct in California
CNPS List 1 B: Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere
CNPS List 2: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere
CNPS List 3: Plants about which CNPS needs more information (a review list)
..
-
11M
ll!lJI'l.'
BIt
-
#i~:i
-
-
-
IF
....
I / 2..!Y6 t+1 it,
""",4
~
:;M
APPENDIX C
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECT AREA PHOTOGRAPHS
..
<AIIIi
~-
..
~.
.~
r..-..ll
j;..
'.
..
fill
..
,~
..
-
'11M!
'.
'M
Above: View of North Field (facing east)
Below: View of West Field (facing northwest)
o)wra
Photographs taken September 20, 2007.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTAf>JTS
fW
~
/L '3 D() t..1 Cj 1
Wetland Plants in West Field
Above: View facing northwest showing both clumps of
plants
Below: View facing north showing drain line and drain
o)wra
ENVIRONMEf-.JTAL CONSULTANTS
Photographs taken September 20, 2007.
.t'
tl4 on ~C1i
...
...
-
~
...
-
..
-
~
-
!Il!'P'
fIJP
-
-
"."'Jii
,ft4li
..
,i~
,'*'
~-
#M.
...
Above: Homes landscaped with ornamentals
Below: Typical lawn found in courtyard of each housing
cluster.
o)wra
..
Photographs taken September 20, 2007.
f: N V I ROhl fVlE I";T I\L COI\!SU L T f\t\!T S
~
..
...
..
.
..
...
#.
115 L1t1c(
( I ~ 8Q tJ,.&,1
Attachment 5
Air Quality Conformity Analysis
I nDb l.ft1~
Conformity Discussion
'-
General conformity requirements were adopted by Congress as part of the Clean Air
Act (CM) Amendments in 1990, and were implemented by U.S. EPA regulations in
1993. (See Sec. 176 of the CM (42 U.S.C. S 7506) and 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B.)
General conformity requires that all federal actions must "conform" with the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) as approved or promulgated by EPA. The purpose of the
general conformity program is to ensure that actions taken by the federal government
do not undermine state or local efforts to achieve and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards. Before a federal action is taken, it must be evaluated for conformity
with the SIP. All "reasonably foreseeable" emissions predicted to result from the action
are taken into consideration. These include direct and indirect emissions, and must be
identified as to location and quantity. If it is found that the action would create emissions
above de minimis threshold levels specified in EPA regulations (40 CFR S 93.153(b)), or
if the activity is considered "regionally significant" because its emissions exceed 10% of
an area's total emissions, the action cannot proceed unless mitigation measures are
specified that would bring the project into conformance.
,'4W
"'"
,JIll
;.w
In June 2004, the Bay Area was designated as a marginal nonattainment area of the
national 8-hour ozone standard, and the General Conformity rules establish the
following de minimis thresholds:
100 tons per year for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
100 tons per year for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
The San Francisco Bay Air District currently attains national air quality standards for
particulate matter (PM). However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA
lowered the 24-hour PM2.5 standard from 65 IJg/m3to 35 IJg/m3 in 2006. EPA is required
to designate the attainment status of the Bay Area for the new standard by December of
2009, which could establish a PM2.5 de minimis threshold for general conformity at that
time if the region is classified nonattainment.
4.
The General Conformity rules require conformity determinations for projects if they
generate more emissions than minimum thresholds and are not specifically exempted
by the regulation.
-
...
The project would generate new emissions both during construction and operation.
Direct and indirect emissions for construction and operation have been estimated using
the URBEMIS-2007 program. Construction emissions from construction equipment,
fugitive dust, evaporation of paints and solvents, construction worker vehicles and other
sources were calculated based on a 1-year construction period. The emission factors
J"
..
..
...
II<tVbU't
..'
.
~>
-
utilized and default equipment/vehicle population were generated by the construction
module of the URBEMIS-2007 emissions program.
-
The URBEMIS-2007 program was also used to estimate operational emissions. Both
indirect (vehicular) emissions and indirect (area source) emissions were quantified
using the URBEMIS-2007 program. The URBEMIS program identifies 5 categories of
area source emissions:
Natural Gas Combustion
Hearth Emissions
Landscaping Emissions
Architectural Coating
Consumer Products
Construction and operational emissions are shown in Table 1. Also shown are the
general conformity de minimis emission levels, and the recommended thresholds of
significance of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the local air agency.
Emissions during both construction and operation are substantially below the "de
minimis" thresholds for ozone precursors established for the region by the Federal
Clean Air Act conformity rules. The project would not interfere with attainment of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards and would not require a conformity
determination.
.'
Table 1: Construction and Operational Emissions in Tons Per Year
"'''~..
VOC NOx
Project Construction 6.22 4.44
Project Operation 10.95 10.20
General Conformity De 100 100
Minimis Threshold
BAAQMD Threshold of 15 15
Significance
II 0 Ob LfC1. <l
Attachment 6
Acoustic Analysis
.....
ILUNGWORTH&RoDKIN,INC.
'III. Acoustics. Air Quality '""
505 Petaluma Boulevard South
Petaluma, California 94952
;-
Tel.- 707-766-7700
www.ilfingworthrodkin.com
Fax. 707-766-7790
illro@illingworthrodkin.com
\!lJ!fi
January 28, 2008
-
Stephen Christensen
Citation Homes
404 Saratoga A venue, Suite 100
Santa Clara, CA 95050
....
VIA E-Mail: s(~hristensen!a)sesdevelo[)ment.c()m
SlJBJECT: Arroyo Vista Residential Project, Dublin, California-
Environmental Noise Assessment
...
Dear Stephen:
0M
This letter presents the results of our environmental noise assessment of the Arroyo Vista
Residential Project proposed west of Dougherty Road in Dublin, California. The project would
redevelop the site with high-density residential uses. Included in the report are the fundamentals
of environmental acoustics, applicable noise regulations and guidelines, and a description of
existing noise levels at the project site. The report summarizes the results of calculations of
future noise levels at proposed noise sensitive receptors and presents the noise and land use
compatibility assessment of the proposed project. Preliminary recommendations are made to
ensure a compatible residential development.
Fundamentals of Acoustics
Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is disturbing
or annoying. The objectionable nature of sound could be caused by its pitch or its loudness.
Pitch is the height or depth of a tone or sound, depending on the relative rapidity (frequency) of
the vibrations by which it is produced. Higher pitched signals sound louder to humans than
sounds with a lower pitch. Loudness is intensity of sound waves combined with the reception
characteristics of the ear. Intensity may be compared with the height of an ocean wave in that it
is a measure of the amplitude of the sound wave.
.""
"
In addition to the concepts of pitch and loudness, there are several noise measurement scales
which are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement
which indicates the relative amplitude ofa sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the
lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels
are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents a ten-fold increase in
..
.
h'!\lll!
-
..
,-
/"2.0 UQ l
Stephen Christensen
January 28, 2008
Page 2 of 15
acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is 100 times more intense, 30 decibels is 1,000 times more
intense, etc. There is a relationship between the subjective noisiness or loudness of a sound and
its intensity. Each 10-decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling
of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities. Technical terms are defined in Table I.
There are several methods of characterizing sound. The most common in California is the A-
weighted sound level or dBA. This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to
which the human ear is most sensitive. Representative outdoor and indoor noise levels in units
of dBA are shown in Table 2. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of
time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior
of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms
of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying
events. This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is called Leq. The most common
averaging period is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of noise events of arbitrary duration.
The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can
accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus I dBA. Various
computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways
and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends upon the distance the receptor is
from the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about plus or
minus I to 2 dBA.
Since the sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night -- because excessive noise
interferes with the ability to sleep -- 24-hour descriptors have been developed that incorporate
artificial noise penalties added to quiet-time noise events. The Community Noise Equivalent
Level, CNEL, is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a community, with a 5 dB penalty
added to evening (7:00 pm - 10:00 pm) and a 10 dB addition to nocturnal (10:00 pm -7:00 am)
noise levels" The Day/Night Average Sound Level, DNL, is essentially the same as CNEL, with
the exception that the evening time period is dropped and all occurrences during this three-hour
period are grouped into the daytime period.
~
121UU
~'1i
I\Ilf'i
lII!!IIll"
"'"'"
.,..'
-
-
-
~
~
Y'.MM
MIl
Stephen Christensen
January 28, 2008
Page 3 of 1 5
..
TABLE I
D Ii 'f
fA
f IT
U d' h' R
..
e In. IOns 0 cous Ica erms se Int IS eDort
Term Definitions
Decibel, dB A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10
of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The
reference pressure for air is 20.
Sound Pressure Level Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micro Pascals (or
20 micro Newtons per square meter), where I Pascal is the pressure resulting from a
force of I Newton exerted over an area of I square meter. The sound pressure level is
expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the
pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e.g., 20 micro Pascals).
Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter.
Frequency, Hz The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric
pressure. Nonnal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Infrasonic sound
are below 20 Hz and Ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz.
A-Weighted Sound The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-
Level, dBA weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very
high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response
of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to nOise.
Equivalent Noise Level, The average A-weighted noise level during the measurement period. The hourly Leq
Leq used for this report is denoted as dBA L"llhJ.
Community Noise The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of
Equivalent Level, 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and after addition of 10 decibels
CNEL to sound levels in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.
Day/Night Noise Level, The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of
DNL or La. 10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.
Ln Values The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%,50%, and 90% of the time
LeI" L)(I, L~iU' ~u during the measurement period.
Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The nonnal or existing level of
environmental noise at a given location.
Intrusive That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location.
The relative intrusiveness ofa sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency,
and time of occurrence and tonal or infonnational content as well as the prevailing
ambient noise level.
..
*-
-
;,i.
M
..
'"
.;11
'MIl
..
""
..
,..
1Il
..
..
/''12'' ilz... qC1 't
t,.. _leU
-
'!i!#
[? ~DU y.&t(
.,
...
....
Stephen Christensen
January 28, 2008
Page 4 of 15
TABLE 2 TVllical Noise Levels in the Environment
Common Outdoor Noise Source I Noise Level I
Common Indoor Noise Source
120 dBA
...
Jet fly-over at 300 meters
Rock concert
110 dBA
..
Pile driver at 20 meters 100 dBA
-
Night club with live music ~t
90 dBA
-
Large truck pass by at 15 meters
11M
80 dBA Noisy restaurant
,.
Garbage disposal at I meter
Gas lawn mower at 30 meters 70 dBA Vacuum cleaner at 3 meters ""'"
Commercial/Urban area daytime Normal speech at I meter ..
Suburban expressway at 90 meters 60 dBA
Suburban daytime Active office environment
50 dBA
Urban area nighttime Quiet office environment
40 dBA
Suburban nighttime
Quiet rural areas 30 dBA Library
Ouiet hedroom at night
Wilderness area 20 dBA Quiet recording studio
Most quiet remote areas 10 dBA
o dBA Threshold of human hearing
t",",
.#!J
.~
Stephen Christensen
January 28, 2008
Page 5 of 15
.0IfI
Regulatory Background
...
HUD environmental noise regulations are set forth in 24CFR Part 5]B (Code of Federal
Regulations). The following exterior noise standards for new housing construction would be
applicable to this project.
65 dBA Ldn or less - acceptable.
....
· exceeding 65 dBA Ldn but not exceeding 75 dBA Ldn - normally unacceptable (appropriate
sound attenuation measures must provide an additional 5 decibels of attenuation over that
typically provided by standard construction in the 65 dBA Ldn to 70 dBA Ldn zone; 10
decibels additional attenuation in the 70 dBA Ldn to 75 dBA Ldn zone)
Mil
· exceeding 75 dBA Ldn - unacceptable
-
These noise standards apply, "... at a location 2 meters from the building housing noise sensitive
activities in the direction of the predominant noise source..." and "".at other locations where it
is determined that quiet outdoor space is required in an area ancillary to the principal use on the
site."
A goal of 45 dBA Ldn is set forth for interior noise levels and attenuation requirements are
geared toward achieving that goal. It is assumed that with standard construction any building
will provide sufficient attenuation to achieve an interior level of 45 dBA Ldn or less if the
exterior level is 65 dBA Ldn or less.
,t,4iij
The City of Dublin I has adopted noise and land use compatibility guidelines for new residential
projects. Residential development is considered compatible without mitigation up to a day/night
average noise level (Ldn)2 of 60 dB. This standard is more restrictive than the HUD exterior
noise standard and is applied in primary outdoor use areas associated with a single-family
development (backyards) and common outdoor use areas associated with multi-family projects.
....
Multi-family housing in the State of California is subject to the environmental noise limits set
forth in the 2007 California Building Code (Chapter ]2, Appendix Section ]207.] ] .2). The
noise limit is a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA Ldn. Where exterior noise levels exceed
60 dBA Ldn. a report must be submitted with the building plans describing the noise control
measures that have been incorporated into the design of the project to meet the noise limit. This
interior noise limit is consistent with the HUD guidelines.
...
J City of Dublin General Plan, City of Dublin Community Development Department, Adopted February J J, 1985,
Updated September 14,2006.
2 Day/Night Noise Level, Ldo' The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of
10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.
..
...
~*1ii
"..
'Ollll
/24 O'bYct (;
Stephen Christensen
January 28, 2008
Page 6 of J 5
Existing Noise Environment
The project site is located west of Dougherty Road, south of Amador Valley Road. Parks
Reserve Forces Training Area is located east of Dougherty Road. The site is currently developed
with residential land uses that will be replaced with the project. A 7-foot noise barrier is located
at the property line of the project site to reduce noise levels generated by traffic along Dougherty
Road. Ambient noise levels, resulting primarily from traffic, were measured at the project site
from midday July 17, 2007 to the afternoon of July 19, 2007. The noise monitoring survey
consisted of one long-term noise measurement (L T - J) and two short-term, attended noise
measurements (ST-1 and ST-2). Noise measurement locations are shown on Figure 1.
The long-term noise measurement was made approximately 50 feet from the centerline of
Dougherty Road at an elevation approximately 12 feet above the ground. This measurement
location was not shielded by the existing noise barrier and quantified the daily trend in noise
levels during the approximate two-day measurement period. Daytime hourly average noise
levels ranged from 70 to 75 dBA Leq, and nighttime hourly average noise levels ranged from 58
to 74 dBA Leq. The day-night average noise level, calculated based on the measured noise data
at this location, was 75 dBA Ldn. Figures 2, 3, and 4 depict the daily trend in noise levels at the
long-term noise measurement site.
Two short-term noise measurements were made at positions five-feet above the ground to
quantify noise levels at residential receivers that are shielded by the existing seven-foot noise
barrier. Average noise levels generated by vehicular traffic were 56 to 58 dBA Leq. The
estimated Ldn at these locations is 59 to 61 dBA. Table 3 summarizes the short-term noise data.
TABLE 3 - SHORT-TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT SUMMARY
Location Leg L(IO) L(SO) L(90) Ldn
ST -I - 65 ft. from the center of Dougherty 61
Road, microphone 5 ft. above the ground, 58 61 57 52
shielded by existing 7 ft. noise barrier.
ST-2 - 95 ft. from the center of Dougherty 59
Road, microphone 5 ft. above the ground, 56 59 55 51
shielded by existing 7 ft. noise barrier.
Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks) is also a source of noise that affects project
site. The site is located within 1,000 feet of the westernmost boundary of Camp Parks and is
subject to audible noise from helicopters. Helicopters are required to enter and exit Camp Parks
from the north and east, and although audible, noise levels resulting from distant helicopters are
generally at or below ambient traffic noise levels along Dougherty Road. Training activities at
the small arms ranges, located approximately one-mile to the northeast, may also be audible and
1""'/,
t 2--5"0 yt1( ..,
-
JJM\l
Stephen Christensen
January 28, 2008
Page 7 of 15
annoying at times. The Environmental Noise Management Plan for Parks Reserve Forces
Training Areal indicates that the project site is within the Suggested Noise Disclosure Area but
the site is not subject to incompatible noise levels.
Noise and Land lJse Compatibility Assessment
Exterior Noise Assessment
I"~.
The compatibility of proposed exterior use areas is assessed against HUD's environmental noise
regulations (65 dBA Ldn or less) and the Land Use Compatibility Standards established in the
City of Dublin General Plan (60 dBA Ldn or less). FHWA's Traffic Noise Model (TNM v. 2.5)
was used in the noise analysis for this project. Roadway, barrier, terrain features, and receiver
locations were digitized and input into the traffic noise model in a three-dimensional reference
coordinate system. Geometrical inputs were based on the project's Conceptual Land Plan4 and
field observations. Traffic volumes, including the vehicle mix ratio, and traffic speeds were also
input into the model for calibration based on field counts. TNM predicts noise levels assuming
calm wind conditions with moderate temperatures and humidity.
Future traffic projectionsS were used to calculate the relative increase in traffic noise levels
expected along Dougherty Road, adjacent to the project site, by 2025. Future traffic noise levels
are anticipated to be about 2 dBA Ldn higher than existing conditions. Exterior noise levels
would be as high as 77 dBA Ldn at the easternmost property line of the project site.
Future noise levels in private/common exterior use areas were calculated assuming the
attenuation provided by a noise barrier at the easternmost property line of the project site and the
shielding provided by the proposed residential units, assumed to be two-stories high.
Calculations were made for receivers located between proposed buildings and for receivers
proposed near access roads that would receive less shielding (Figure 5). Traffic noise modeling
results are summarized in Table 4.
3 Environmental Noise Management Plan, Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, California, US. Army Center for
Health Promotion and Preventative Medicine, December 2000.
4 Arroyo Vista Conceptual Land Plan, Carlson, Barbee, & Gibson, Inc., June 20, 2007.
5 City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development, Figures 3 and 9, TJKM, December 19,
2007.
""'"
-
I ~U "7J ~?: 'l
Stephen Christensen
January 28. 2008
Page 8 of 15
TABLE 4 - TRAFFIC NOISE MODELING RESULTS (dBA, Ldn)
Receiver 7.foot 8.foot 9.foot
1st Row - Between Buildinqs 63 61 60
2nd Row- Between Buildinqs 61 61 60
3rd Row - Between Buildinas 59 58 58
4th Row - Between Buildinas 57 56 56
5th Row - Between Buildinas 56 55 54
1 st Row - Near Access Road 71 71 71
3rd Row - Near Access Road 67 67 66
5th Row - Near Access Road 62 62 62
As shown in Table 4, the existing 7-foot noise barrier (relative to the elevation of Dougherty
Road) would reduce exterior noise levels to 63 dBA Ldn at first-row exterior use areas proposed
between the residential units themselves. Exterior noise levels would be 61 dBA Ldn at second-
row exterior use areas and less than 60 dBA Ldn at third-row through fifth-row exterior use areas
located between the residential units. The existing noise barrier would provide sufficient
attenuation such that exterior noise levels between building rows would be less than 65 dBA Ldn
meeting HUD's exterior noise standards for new housing.
Larger noise barriers would be necessary to meet the City of Dublin's exterior noise level
guidelines. An 8-foot noise barrier would reduce exterior noise levels at first- and second-row
exterior use areas (between building rows) to 61 dBA Ldn and to less than 60 dBA Ldn at third-
row through fifth-row exterior use areas. A 9-foot barrier would be required to reduce exterior
noise levels to 60 dBA Ldn or less at all residential use areas located between building rows
(first-row through fifth-row exterior use areas).
Exterior noise levels at receivers adjacent to the access roadways would receive minimal
shielding from noise barriers. Exterior noise levels would range from 62 dBA Ldn to 71 dBA Ldn
at first- through fifth-row receivers adjacent to an access roadway from Dougherty Road with the
existing 7-foot noise barrier.
Recommendation: As the site plan develops, continue to locate private or common exterior use
areas away from Dougherty Road in areas shielded by proposed residential buildings. The
project applicant and the City should agree on an acceptable exterior noise level and design noise
barriers accordingly to meet the agreed upon level. The existing 7-foot noise barrier would
reduce exterior noise levels to less than 65 dBA Ldn, consistent with HUD guidelines and within
the conditionally acceptable noise level range identified by the City of Dublin. A 9-foot barrier
would be required to reduce exterior noise levels to 60 dBA Ldn or less (normally acceptable
range identified by the City of Dublin). Final detailed design of proposed noise barriers should
be completed when the project site plan and grading plan are available.
Noise generated by Camp Parks should also be disclosed to prospective homeowners/occupants
in the property deed or lease agreement.
...
It.1''b ~~( II!'
..
,.'
"...
"....
',-;'
..
\-&i\.
.'
...
1m
Ill'"
..
I!ill-;
-
iIIII
.,
...,
I.'
I.
I~I'
-
-
m
Stephen Christensen
January 28, 2008
Page 9 of ] 5
Interior Noise Assessment
~
The easternmost facades of proposed first-row units would be exposed to future exterior noise
levels of about 76-77 dBA Ldn assuming a multi-story residential building with and uninterrupted
view of Dougherty Road. Exterior noise levels at residential facades of second-row through
fifth-row units would be lower assuming increased distance from the roadway and the shielding
provided by adjoining buildings. Exterior noise levels would range from 62 to 73 dBA Ldn at
second-row through fifth-row units. Interior noise levels with the windows partially open for
ventilation are approximately 15 decibels lower than exterior noise levels assuming typical
California construction methods. With the incorporation of mechanical ventilation systems that
allow occupants the option of maintaining the windows shut to control noise, interior noise
levels are normally 20 to 25 decibels lower than exterior noise levels. Interior noise levels
would be approximately 52 to 57 dBA Ldn inside residential units assuming the windows are
closed.
Interior noise levels would vary depending on the specific design of the buildings (relative
window area to wall area) and construction materials and methods. Since project-level
recommendations cannot be made without building elevation and floor plans, an acoustical
analysis should be prepared during detailed design of the project. Attaining the necessary noise
reduction from exterior to interior spaces is readily achievable in noise environments less than 75
dBA Ldn with proper wall construction techniques, the selections of proper windows and doors,
and the incorporation of forced-air mechanical ventilation systems. In noise environments
exceeding 75 dBA Ldn, the construction materials and techniques necessary to reduce interior
noise levels to acceptable levels become more expensive and difficult to implement. Noise
insulation features such as stucco-sided staggered-stud walls and high STC-rated windows and
doors would be required for first-row receivers adjacent to Dougherty Road. First-row
residences would also need to be equipped with a full heating and air-conditioning system
because it is unlikely residents would open their windows for ventilation. A minimum of 32
decibels of attenuation would be required to meet the 45 dBA Ldn interior noise level guideline at
units nearest Dougherty Road.
Mdll
hM
....
...
'.
-.
Recommendation: Noise insulation features to be included in the project's design will need to
be developed once detailed floor plans and building elevations are available. The noise control
treatments should be designed to reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA Ldn or less to meet the
interior noise limits established by HUD and the State Building Code. Special building
construction techniques (e.g., sound-rated windows and building facade treatments) will be
required for new residential uses adjacent to Dougherty Road. These treatments would include,
but are not limited to, sound rated windows and doors, sound rated wall constructions, acoustical
caulking, etc. The specific determination of what treatments are necessary will be conducted on
a unit-by-unit basis. Results of the analysis, including the description of the necessary noise
control treatments, will be submitted along with the building plans and approved prior to
issuance of a building permit.
..
..
.
.
.
..
...
..
...,.
..
1 "2 <6 cro 1.+
I 2..?1lJQ
Stephen Christensen
January 28,2008
Page 10 of 15
This concludes our environmental noise assessment. If you have any questions, or if we can be
of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely yours,
Michael S. Thill
ILLINGWORTH & RODKIN, INC.
(07-131)
"""
4tft
I...
''''''''
'lW!'l'.,
,.
,~
1300b L-\qi
Figure I - Noise Measurement Locations
,,",
'i-M
""
..
qiJ1!!
..
so
c:
80
75
70
<
~:
-
"!i
>- cO
"
.~ "
z
:0
.c
'.
:0
,.
;C
0:00
Xoise Levels at LT.1
-50 feet from the Center of Dougherty Road
Tuesday, July 17. 2007
" .
.. --.-----"-
---------------------------
--------------------
2CC
:.CC
IwNGWORTH&RODKIN,1Nc.
II1I Acoustics. All Quality 1111
6:CO
3:00
10:00
12:00
1 :00
16:00
1800
Hour Beginning
20:00
2200
I '3 I q, Lf-~ ~
'!IIr
1"""
.""
",,'
. Leq
-<>- LII ",
-- LiIO
..
---f;- LI.50;
U90
IIlIf
....
Figure 2
..
"",
-
'"',
-
.-.'
-
t!\If!P'
I '
11 ---lJ--- i ----~-----------------
::~ A----+--------------------
b\t ,- .f!
l~ . ~\,"""" ;
},'. ""WJ'~
,~ <;f-fH'J".'
J%I--
...
..
'.
.w
$I
....
"1M
,.
-
-
i.m
coo
200
".00
IWNGWORTH&RODKfN,k
Ill. Acoustics. Air Quality 1111
..
..
..
..
,.
.,..
..
Noise Levels at LT-l
-50 feet from tile Center of Dougherty Road
Wednesday. July 18, 2007
s:oo
e:oo
lOCO
12:00
14:00
lS.CO
18:00
20:00
22:00
Hour Beginning
I "?'t 'tJ
Y:t:1i
. Le'<
--<>- L '. 1
~LI:10
........;;+- LI ~C"
U9C
7S e1BA. Ldn
Figure 3
so
6:
,,0
7<
70
~ ;;c:
"'!:i
'" ,0
"
...;
.~ <<
Z
~C
:\'oise Levels at LT-1
-50 feet from the Center of Dougherty Road
Thursday, July 19, 2007
I ..diiJ
\'%r-;;;C-- --irI--.~------:.-;------------
/.\'1 ra'l ;." IJ\ '
I.t--t-_____,~:~=-----------------
<: _, 4 II. ,~q i ",
'~~ml,'
-0
20
000
2:00
IWNGWORTH&RooK/N,INC.
If II Acoustics. All Duality 1111
-:00
E:OO
eoo
10:00
12:00
1-00
16:00
18:00
20:00
22:00
Hour Beginning
13 ?; ~ LtCrct
....
-
. Leq
-O-LII
IOIi!
--UIO'
...
--p,......- U:.Q';
L,90.
-
It!\l!;
-,
Figure 4
-
"..~
~
...
....
',~
,-
13 LfCV yctct
iI\,\tii
,.
Figure 5 - Sample Noise Modeling Receivers and Noise Levels Assuming 7-Foot Barrier
?-foot B,rr;" I \
..
<ill
] Dl.'> I!Ot Sl ~.'ti 1\
\"1! I \{if Cl~TU\
-
I 57 Ldn I
-
0'
@ .
61 Ldn I
56 Ldn
62 Ldn
.59 Ldn
67 Ldn
...
,.
~>"', .' 'I ,.'."- I
' .' i ~d:~="'~:~~'~'.,,
.'owu,' ~u ,jj "'J! ':<,<",,,,.i
"""
..
..
...
..
...
.-
...
...
...
) 3 S at y,t1<<
'f'I.'iii
From: "Erica Fraser" <Erica.Fraser@cLdublin.ca.us>
Subject: Cost of Project
Date: January 30,20085:52:55 PM GMT
To: "Jerry Haag" <jphaag@pacbell.net>
WII!l
~
Jerry -
This is Eden's estimate of building the affordable project. Let me know if you need anything else.
The estimated total cost of the Arroyo Vista Affordable Apartments is $56,995,000. The total includes approximately
$41,030,000 for the Affordable Family Apartments and approximately $15,965,000 for the Affordable Senior
Apartments.
The sources of funding for the Affordable Family Apartments would most likely include the City of Dublin, the Dublin
Housing Authority from Citation Homes Central's site purchase, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Investor, Affordable
Housing Program (AHP) funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank and a permanent bank loan. The sources of
funding for the Affordable Senior Apartments would most likely include the same sources except that HUD Section
202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly Program would be included and there would be no permanent bank loan"
f'~"il"
Erica Fraser, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Dublin
925-833-6610
-
-
-
.,1
-
I?, ( rJI... 1.1 ~ g
-' ~ f)
Attachment 7
Phase I & Phase II Environmental Site
Assessments
&
Asbestos Survey
...
13"10:0 '14(
"'"
'....
ciOlil
cllll
LIMITED PHASE II
ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
On
Proposed Residential Development
Arroyo Vista, APN 941-0007-001-07
6700 Dougherty Road
Dublin, California
For
CITATION HOMES
...
-
,,""'
....
..
~
by
...
TERRASEARCH, inc.
"'-
Project No. 11557.E
February 6, 2008
c,.
..
S'.
i'-
..
SAN JOSE
322 Piercy Road
San Jose, CA 95138
Phone: (408) 362-4920
Fax: (408) 362-4926
LIVERMORE
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Livermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 243-6662
Fax: (925)243-6663
SACRAMENTO
4200 N. Freeway Blvd.
Suite 2
Sacramento, CA 95834
Phone: (916) 564-7809
Fax: (916) 564-7672
OAKLAND
7700 Edgewater Drive
Suite 847
Oakland, CA 94621
Phone: (510) 633-1332
Fax: (408) 362-4926
FRESNO
4339 N. Golden S1ale Blvd
Suite 103
Fresno, CA 93722
Phone: (559) 271-0773
Fax: (559) 271-0763
WEBSn'E
www.terrasearchinc.com
E-MAIL
info@terrasearchinc.com
'Ht Environmental. Geotechnical. Special Inspections. Materials Testing
W TifiRifJJ.SiiJJ.ifC1flltlt:.
SERVING NORTHERN CALIFORNIA SINCE 1969
I ~t(}6 ~~~
l'iI!"i'
Project No. 11557.E
February 6,2008
Mr. Mike Sullivan
Citation Homes
404 Saratoga Avenue, Suite 100
Santa Clara, California 95050
Subject:
Proposed Residential Development
Arroyo Vista, APN 941-0007-001-07
6700 Dougherty Road,
Dublin, California
LIMITED PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
".-
References:
1)
Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment
Arroyo Vista, APN 941-0007-001-07
6700 Dougherty Road
Dublin, California
By TERRASEARCH, inc.
Dated July 23, 2007
2) Phase II Environmental Site Assessment
Arroyo Vista, APN 941-0007-001-07
6700 Dougherty Road
Dublin, California
By TERRASEARCH, inc.
Dated July 24, 2007
.'
3) Review of Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment
Proposed "Arroyo Vista" Housing, Dublin Housing Authority, Dublin,
California
By Treadwell & Rollo, Dated 26 October, 2007
...
Dear Mr. Christensen:
~lh"~
~
At your request, TERRASEARCH, inc. has conducted a Limited Phase II Environmental Site
Assessment for the above referenced site. This Limited Phase II ESA is in response to the
review of reference 3. The following is a copy of the report, which presents the results of our
assessment. Should you have any questions relating to the contents of this report or require any
additional infonnation, please contact our office at your convenience.
~Review.e.~.d..~b~./'....."...... /.. /'
flit I ,~()
Very truly yours,
TERRASEARCH, inc. _----
r;V4/de r:;/
Simon Makdessi, P.E., G.E.
Vice President/Senior Engineer
A. Wakil Mateen
Environmental Specialist
Copies: 3 to Citation Homes
JilIlIfIt-
IlI!I!Jt'
Project No. 11557.E Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment/Dublin, California
I '2:,1.:'1 (~.'i t...fc;! '6
~,J; ~~ L ...1
February 6~"2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
"ilo1"'t
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
....
LIMITED PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
1.0
..
"" 2.0
.. 3.0
INTR 0 D U CTI ON..... ..... ........ ...... .......... ........ ............... ...... ...... ....... ........................... ........1
1.1 Obj ective ..................................................................... ..................................................1
1.2 Scope.............................................................................................................................1
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ........................................................................2
2.1 Location.........................................................................................................................2
LIMITED PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT ...............................2
3.1 Field Work................................................................................... ..................................2
3.2 Laboratory Analytical Methods and Results......................... .......................... ..............3
-
4.0 D IS CUSS ION. ................. ........ ....... ................. ......................... ...... ...... ........ .......... ............. 4
4.1 Background on D DT and D DE........................................... ..... .................. ....... ............4
4.2 Pesticide Impacted Surficial Soil.................................................................................. 5
4.3 Metal Impacted Surficial Soil .......................................................................................5
4.4 Asbestos Impacted Soil................................................................................................5
5.0 C ON CL U S ION S .... ...... .......... ................ ............... ......... .................................. ....................5
6.0 LIMIT A TI 0 NS ....... ........... ............ .................... ............. .................... ...... ...... ....................6
7.0 INFO Rl\1A TI 0 N SOUR CES .............................................................................................6
...
A TT ACHMENTS
..
Figure 1 - Site Vicinity Map, Figure 1
Figure 2 - Site Plan, Figure 2
Appendix A, Laboratory Analytical Report and Chain-of-Custody FOffilS
','"
,.f!i;jj
~'*
W'jI
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page ii
1.-.;1
..
Project No. 11557.E
Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment/Dublin, California
I 4-0 UD i..fC1 t
February 6, 2008
.'
LIMITED PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
..,
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Objective
At the request of Citation Homes, TERRASEARCH, inc. has prepared this report, which
summarizes the findings and results of this Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment for
the above referenced site.
This Limited Phase II ESA was performed in response to the review of reference 3 on our initial
Phase II ESA of reference 2. This Limited Phase II ESA replaces our initial Phase II ESA dated
July 24, 2007.
Based on the review of the initial Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Reference 1), the
property is situated within a past agricultural district. Metal pesticides, including arsenic, lead
and mercury were historically used to control pests on older agricultural areas prior to the 1940s.
After the 1940s, organochloride pesticides were used in lieu of metal pesticides. In addition, on-
site structures were constructed between the late 1970s and early 1980s. Due to the age of the
structures, an asbestos containing material (ACM) and/or lead-based material (LBM) hazard may
exist.
~"
III"
...
This Linuted Phase II Enviromnental Site Assessment was performed to evaluate the presence
and/or absence of metal and organochloride pesticide residues within the surficial soil beneath the
site, as well as total lead and asbestos residues. Ibis work was performed in accordance with our
site-specific recommendations in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment dated July 23, 2007.
Soil sampling was conducted in accordance with the sampling Method SW-846 with no
deviations.
..
..
1.2 Scope
As stated in our proposal dated January 14,2008, our services were limited to the following:
a) Collecting a total of sixteen (16) four-point composite surficial soil samples consisting of
8 samples from approximately 0.5-foot below ground surface (bgs) and 8 subsurface
samples from approximately 2.0-feet bgs and submitting the samples under chain-of-
custody documentation to a State-certified hazardous waste testing laboratory for
analysis. Each composite surficial soil sample collected from approximately 0.5-feet bgs
will be analyzed for organochloride pesticides and CAM 17 metals using Environmental
Protection Agency (EP A) Methods 5030/8080 and 601017000 series. In addition, one
discrete surficial sample of each four point composite surficial samples collected from
approximately 0.5-foot bgs will be analyzed for arsenic using EPA Method 601017000
series. Each composite subsurface soil sample collected from approximately 2-feet bgs
in each location will be analyzed for organochloride pesticides using EP A Method
5030/8080.
!IJ:IJi':"
P'
"""
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 1
Project No. 11557.E Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment/Dublin, California
I L.H ~h Y:?1 t
,)
February 6, 2008
b) Collecting a total of 16 discrete surficial soil samples from approximately 0.5-foot bgs
within 2 to 3 feet of the structures for lead based paint (LBP) and asbestos containing
materials (ACMs). The 16 discrete surficial soil samples were delivered to a State
certified hazardous waste testing laboratory and analyzed for total lead and asbestos using
EP A Methods 6000/7000 series and Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM).
c) Preparation of this report.
2.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
--
2.1
Location
The subject property is situated within the East Bay portion of the greater San Francisco Bay
Region within Alameda County. The site is located at 6700 Dougherty Road, within a mixed
residential and conunercial portion of the City of Dublin, California. The site consists of one
parcel totaling approximately 24-acres (APN 941-0007-001-07) and is currently occupied by 150
single-family residences, the Dublin Housing Authority, a maintenance facility, Arroyo Vista
Child Development Center, a baseball diamond, basketball courts and two playgrounds.
The subj ect site is located southwest of the intersection of Dougherty Road and Amador Valley
Boulevard and is bordered by Park Sierra Apartments at Iron Horse Trail to the south, Dougherty
Road to the east, AlanlO Creek and residences to the west, as well as a residence to the north. The
U. S. Anny Garrison Training Center is located east of the site, across Dougherty Road. The
location of the site is shown on Figure 1, Site Vicinity Map and Figure 2, Site Plan.
'"
Based on historical topographic maps of the Dublin Quadrangle dated 1980, the site is relatively
flat at approximately 366-feet above mean sea level (msl) and gradually slopes south southeast.
Drainage of the site appears to be to the south southeast along local topography. However,
surface water will tend to flow toward the catch basins and storm drain system located along the
city streets and Alamo Creek, located immediately west of the site.
"..
3.0
LIMITED PHASE II ENVIRONMENAL SITE ASSESSMENT
3.1 Field Work
'...
411
On January 25 and 28,2008, a TERRASEARCH, inc. field geologist visited the subject site and
advanced 32 hand auger holes for pesticides and metals analysis and 16 hand auger holes for
adjacent existing buildings for lead based paint (LBP) and asbestos (ACMs) analysis. Eight (8)
four point surficial samples (Comp-l-0.5; Comp-3-0.5; Comp-5-0.5; Comp-7-0.5; Comp-9-0.5;
Comp-l1-0.5; Comp-13-0.5, Comp-15-0.5) consisting of 32 discrete samples (SIABCD;
S3ABCD; S5ABCD; S7ABCD S9ABCD; SllABCD; S13ABCD and SI5ABCD) were
collected from approximately 0.5-foot bgs. Eight (8) four point composite sanlples (Comp-2-2;
Comp-4-2; Comp-6-2; Comp-8-2; Comp-1O-2; Comp-12-2; Comp-14-2 and Comp-16-2)
..
..
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 2
...
...
i '-'/?- "b Lft1(
..
Project No. 11557.E Limited Phase II Environmental Site AssessmentIDublin, California
February 6, 2008
conslstmg of 32 discrete samples (S2ABCD; S4ABCD; S6ABCD; S8ABCD; S10ABCD;
S12ABCD; S14ABCD and SI6ABCD) were collected from approximately 2-feet bgs using
clean steel liners, which were capped, labeled, and placed into a pre-chilled ice-chest for
temporary storage. In addition, 16 discrete soil samples consisting ofLA1-0.5 through LA16-0.5
were collected from approximately 0.5-foot bgs from the areas within 2 to 3-feet of the exterior
of the structure walls using clean brass liners, which were capped, labeled and placed into a pre-
chilled ice chest for temporary storage. The sample locations are shown on Figure 2, Site Plan.
Ill'
Ill'
~i!;
~
3.2
Laboratory Analytical Methods and Results
~
The 16 four point composite soil sanlples and 16 discrete samples (LA1-0.5 through LA16-0.5)
were immediately transported under chain-of-custody documentation to McCampbell Analytical,
Inc. of Pittsburg, California, a State-certified hazardous waste testing laboratory (Certification
No. 1644). Eight discrete samples collected from 0.5-foot bgs and consisting of SlA-0.5; S3-
0.5; S5A-0.5; S7A-0.5; S9A-0.5; SllA-0.5; S13A-0.5 and S15A-0.5 were analyzed for arsenic
using EP A Method 601017000 series. Prior to analysis, the 32 discrete surficial samples
collected from 0.5-foot bgs were combined into 8 four point composite samples (Comp-1-0.5;
Comp-3-0.5; Comp-5-0.5; Comp-7-0.5; Comp-9-0.5; Comp-ll-0.5; Comp-13-0.5, Comp-15-0.5)
by the laboratory and analyzed for organochloride pesticides and CAM 17 metals using
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Methods 5030/8081 and 601017000 series. Likewise,
prior to analysis, the 32 discrete subsurface sanlples collected from 2-feet bgs were combined
into 8 four point composite samples (Comp-2-2; Comp-4-2; Comp-6-2; Comp-8-2; Comp-l0-2;
Comp-12-2; Comp-14-2 and Comp-16-2) by the laboratory and analyzed for organochloride
pesticides using Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) Methods 5030/8081.
-
-'
~~;;
.
~"
..
Ifitl
.'
il\iJ
Sixteen (16) discrete soil samples (LA1-0.5 through LA16-0.5) were analyzed for total lead
using EPA method 6010C and asbestos analysis using PLM. ..
"J
Laboratory analytical results of most composite soil samples indicated no detectable
concentrations of organochloride pesticides (less than 0.001 milligrams per kilogram [mg/Kg] to -
less than 0.05 mg/Kg). However, composite samples Comp-1-0.5, Comp-2-2, Comp-3-0.5,
Comp-6-2, Comp-7-0.5 and Comp-9-0.5 indicated the following organochloride pesticides:
dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene (DDE) at 0.0012 mg/Kg in sample Comp-3-0.5; a-chlordane -
ranging from 0.0011 mg/Kg to 0.010 mg/Kg in samples Comp-1-0.5, Comp-2-2, Comp-3-0.5,
Comp-6-2, Comp-9-0.5; g-chlordane ranging from 0.0012 mg/Kg to 0.012 mg/Kg in samples
Comp-1-0.5, Comp-2-2, Comp-6.2, Comp-7-0.5, Comp-9-0.5; dieldrin ranging from 0.0022 -
mg/Kg to 0.0025 mg/Kg in sanlples Comp-2-2, Comp-9-0.5 and Comp-ll-0.5; heptachlor
epoxide at 0.0014 mg/Kg in sample Comp-2-2.
"""',
Laboratory analytical results of above mentioned 8 composite surficial soil samples (Comp-1-
0.5; Comp-3-0.5; Comp-5-0.5; Comp-7-0.5; Comp-9-0.5; Comp-11-0.5; Comp-13-0.5, Comp-
15-0.5) indicated the following metal concentrations: arsenic ranged from 3.8 mg/Kg to 5.3
mg/Kg; barium ranged from 200 mg/Kg to 380 mg/Kg; beryllium ranged from not detected (less
than 0.5 mg/Kg) to 0.52 mg/Kg; chromium ranged from 29 mg/Kg to 44 mg/Kg; cobalt ranged
from 8.2 mg/Kg to 13 mg/Kg; copper ranged from 18 mg/Kg to 24 mg/Kg; nickel ranged from
32 mg/Kg to 48 mg/Kg; silver ranged from not detected (less than 0.5 mg/Kg) to 0.63 mg/Kg);
~
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 3
lIJP
...
lY~ 'b 4c<t
Project No. 11557.E Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment/Dublin, California
February 6, 2008
..-
...
vanadium ranged from 43 mg/Kg to 55 mg/Kg and zinc ranged from 39 mg/Kg to 55 mg/Kg. In
addition, the following metals were not detected: cadmium (less than 0.25 mg/Kg), antimony;
molybdenum, selenium and thallium (less than 0.5 mg/Kg).
.~
Laboratory analytical results indicated that arsenic was detected in all 8 discrete surficial soil
samples SlA-0.5; S3-0.5; S5A-0.5; S7A-0.5; S9A-0.5; SllA-0.5; S13A-0.5 and S15A-0.5
collected from approximately 0.5- feet bgs at concentrations ranging from 3.7 mg/Kg to 6.0
mg/Kg.
...
"",,"
Analytical results of background metals taken from soil samples M-1 through M-4 (July 11,
2007) indicated concentrations of arsenic ranged from 4.9 mg/Kg to 6.5 mg/Kg, lead ranged
from 10 mg/Kg to 35 mg/Kg and mercury ranged from not detected (less than 0.05 mg/Kg) to
0.081 mg/Kg.
'..
"..
Furthem10re, samples M-l through M-4 indicated the following metals concentrations:
antimony ranged from not detected (less than 0.5 mg/Kg) to 0.54 mg/Kg; barium ranged from
220 mg/Kg to 420 mg/Kg; beryllium ranged from not detected (less than 0.5 mg/Kg) to 0.59
mg/Kg; chromium ranged from 41 mg/Kg to 51 mg/Kg; cobalt ranged from 10 mg/Kg to 12
mg/Kg; copper ranged from 23 mg/Kg to 26 mg/Kg; nickel ranged from 50 mg/Kg to 58 mg/Kg;
vanadium ranged from 49 mg/Kg to 66 mg/Kg and zinc ranged from 50 mg/Kg to 68 mg/Kg. In
addition, the following metals were not detected: cadmium (less than 0.25 mg/Kg), molybdenum
(less than 1.5 mg/Kg), selenium, silver and thallium (less than 0.5 mg/Kg).
,.
~
Discrete surficial soil samples, LA1-0.5 through LA16-0.5, indicated total lead concentrations
ranging from 5.2 mg/Kg to 20.0 mg/Kg. According to laboratory analysis, asbestos was not
detected (less than 1 percent) in all discrete soil san1ples LA1-0.5 through LA16-0.5).
-
The laboratory analytical results for these samples are presented in Table 1 and Table 2. The
McCampbell Analytical, Inc. Reports and Chain-of-Custody documents are attached to
Appendix A, Analytical Laboratory Report and Chain-of-Custody Form.
..
4.0
DISCUSSION
...
4.1
Background on DDT and DDE
""
DDT and DDE were the most common and widely used chemicals for controlling insect pests on
agricultural crops and controlling insects that carry diseases such as malaria and typhus. The US
EPA banned all uses of DDT, except for public emergency, in 1972 primarily because amounts
were building-up in the environment and because some cancer tests in laboratory animals
revealed positive results. Technical DDT is primarily a mixture of three forms (p,p' -DDT, o,p'-
DDT, and o,o'-DDT), all of which are white, crystalline, tasteless, and almost odorless solids.
DDE is found in small amounts as contaminants in technical DDT and is a breakdown product of
DDT as well.
..
..
..
..
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 4
..
,...,
Il../ ~ Vb ~t1t
-
Project No. 11557.E
Limited Phase II Environmental Site AssessmenUDublin, California
February 6, 2008
4.2 Pesticide Impacted Surficial Soil
Most organochloride pesticides were not detected (less than 0.001 mg/Kg to 0.05 mg/Kg) in the
16 composite soil samples (Comp-l through Comp-16) collected from the subject site. Very low
concentrations of DDE were detected within composite soil sample Comp-3-0.5 at 0.0012
mg/Kg, which is below the Environmental Screening Levels (ESL) for Shallow Soil (less than 3
meters) and Groundwater for Residential Developments established by Regional Water Quality
Control Board - San Francisco Bay Region, November 2007 (Interim Final Version) of 1.6
mg/Kg. In addition, samples Comp-l-0.5, Comp-2-2, Comp-3-0.5, Comp-6-2, Comp-7-0.5 and
Comp-9-0.5 indicated concentrations of a-chlordane ranging from 0.0011 mg/Kg to O.OlD
mg/Kg, below the ESL of 0.44 mg/Kg. Concentrations of g-chlordane were detected within
sanlples Comp-l-0.5, Comp-2-2, Comp-6-2, Comp-7-0.5 and Comp-9-0.5 ranging 0.0012
mg/Kg to 0.012 mg/Kg, below the ESL of 0.44 mg/Kg. Low concentrations of dieldrin were
detected in composite samples Comp-2-2, Comp-9-0.5 and Comp-ll-0.5 ranging from 0.0022
mg/Kg to 0.0025 mg/Kg, below the ESL of 0.034 mg/Kg. Furthermore, low concentrations of
heptachlor epoxide were reported in sample Comp-2-2 at 0.0014, below the ESL of 0.053
mg/Kg.
4.3 Metal Impacted Surficial Soil
Laboratory analytical results of CAM 17 metals indicated most metals detected within the
surficial soil samples were at or below their respective ESLs for Shallow Soils and Groundwater
(November 2007). Note that these ESL values listed are not site-specific cleanup levels; ESLs
are guidance for Tier One site risk assessment and groundwater protection. All detected metals
except arsenic were well within their respective ESL guidance levels. In our opinion
concentrations of arsenic collected from surficial soil as well as the other metals are interpreted
as a natural occurrence from the regional geology in this region (U.S.G.S Professional Paper
1270 by Hansford T. Shacklette and Josephine G. Boemgen, 1984).
-
-
4.4 Asbestos Impacted Surficial Soil
No asbestos containing material was detected in soil samples LAl-0.5 through LA16-0.5 (less
than 1 percent).
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
. Laboratory analytical results of the sixteen (16) composite soil sanlples indicated no
detectable concentrations of most organochloride pesticides with the exception of DDE, a-
chlordane, g-chlordane, dieldrin and heptachlor epoxide. Low concentrations of DDE
(0.0012 mg/Kg), a-chlordane ranging from 0.0011 mg/Kg to 0.010 mg/Kg, g-chlordane at
0.0012 mg/Kg to 0.012 mg/Kg, dieldrin ranging from 0.0022 mg/Kg to 0.0025 mg/Kg and
heptachlor epoxide (0.0014 mg/Kg.) were detected below their respective ESLs.
..,
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 5
-
el
-
1'-1-6 UO ~cC
Project No. ll557.E
Limited Phase II Environmental Site AssessmenVDublin, California
February 6, 2008
~.
.....
. Based on the analytical results of background metal soil samples M-1 through M-4, arsenic
was detected below and/or within background concentrations in composite soil samples
collected from the surficial soil. In our opinion concentrations of arsenic collected from
surficial soil as well as the other metals are interpreted as a natural occurrence from the
regional geology in this region (U.S.G.S Professional Paper 1270 by Hansford T. Shackletle
and Josephine G. Boerngen, 1984).
~
,;j,i@I
. Mercury and lead were detected below and/or within background levels and below ESLs for
residential development.
.M
. Asbestos was not detected in soil samples LA1-0.5 through LA16-0.5.
....
In view of the above findings, it is the opinion of TERRASEARCH, inc., further environmental
assessment of the subject site is not warranted at this time.
..
However, after the demolition and removal of the residential structures we recommend that
surface samples be collected within the demolished areas, and the samples be analyzed for total
lead using EP A Method 6010/7000 series and asbestos using PLM.
..
6.0 LIMITATIONS
-
This report has been prepared for the specific application to this project in a manner consistent
with the level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science
profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. This report contains
information reported to TERRASEARCH, inc., by other sources, accordingly, errors or
omissions may be present that TERRASEARCH, inc. cannot be responsible for. This
investigation was conducted solely for the purpose of evaluating environmental conditions of
surficial soil with respect to metals arsenic, lead, mercury, and organochloride pesticides at the
subject site. Surface and subsurface conditions may vary away from the sampling locations at
the site.
'il.M
..
..
Our Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment provides an evaluation of enviromnental
conditions on the property and environmental conditions will vary between sampling points.
Furthermore, our Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment is only an assessment of
envirorunental conditions on the subject property. No guarantee or warranty is made as to actual
onsite environmental conditions. It is impossible to know all actual site conditions without
testing all soil on site. Assessment of groundwater was not proposed in this phase of work.
..
7.0 INFORMATION SOURCES
oil
Barclay's California Code of Regulations, Title 22. Register 91, No. 22, 05-31-1991
..
Regional Water Quality Control Board - San Francisco Bay Region, November 2007 (Interim
Final Version). Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for Shallow Soil (less than 3 meters)
and Groundwater for Residential Developments.
..
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 6
~
..
-
I c...l (, 1Yf.) '1-'1 i
~
Project No. 11557.E
Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment/Dublin, California
February 6, 2008
U.S.G.S Professional Paper 1270 by Hansford T. Shacklette and Josephine G. Boerngen, 1984.
DISC, August 26, 2002. Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Fields for School Sites
(Second Revision), 12 pages.
..
TERRASEARCH, inc., July 23, 2007. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment at Proposed
Residential Development, Arroyo Vista, 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin, California. Project No.
11557.E.
""
TERRASEARCH, inc., June 26,2007, Proposal Phase I and Limited Phase II Environmental
Site Assessment on Arroyo Vista, 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin, California. Proposal No.
P2007.E.0327.E.
US EP A, DDT and Associated Organic Pesticides, General Infonnation and Chemical
Characterization via the Internet.
-
.....
!I!IIlfII!'1
"",,,"
~
~
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 7
~
..
..
,-
...
...
,.
..
..
'.
,;.,I
.m
t'.
!;j!$
.
..
,illII
...
..
...
l1li
..
o
,
"\
''';:~';"<(,,,,?
".~':.e}>~~~~ It
.,f~~~ 'Il
N~"').il
,,'
I',
I h'i~.
. ~~'v
"):.
o
'~\-.
~n R~mo~'...
.,
Source:
It..lle;;
Lft1 Z
:. ~ =:~<'=
',- .,,' ;',t", .
" .,~~ .
;r ~:,,:~;:~~ ~: ::~
, '}-_....
~ " l~-
;' TAS$AJA
ItEGtoN
VICINITY MAP
FIGURE
eiSRuss7iiicit--=
"JliT WRIGHT BROlllERS AVEMlE. LNERMORE CAUFORNIAll4&6O PHClIE: (S25) ~
LIMITED PHASE" ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD, (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
JOB NUMBER DATE BY
1
11557.E
0212008
AWM
f ~ ~~ ~~ i^~
!If
(,~ C1
y,?1(
,
\
/ /
/ I
/ /
'4:5/
//;9/
/0/
I /
l.f/
IS I
1'<;(: /
! !
/ /
\ / /
\ / /
\ _/ ,//
\ \..._---_/ /'
\,,,----------_//
Residence
- -
~ \\
\~\
\ ~ \
\ ~ \
\-0 \
\ ,..., \
\~ \
\ \% '\
\'f-\
\ \
, \
\ \
\
,
.t
;r ".
0'f';;;1
, LA16=D:5
~, R ~15D-0~0;' '" m
,~ .S16D-2 _ "
. S11O.0.5-
S12D-2
\
\
\
"
", '""
~~
~ -<fAz~'
~~
Residence ~ ~~~
/ /' r& .
// / '"'.", Ou '-',
/ / "'"" <~t-: '~
\ / // ~~1>()
\'-' / j' ~.
'-, ",.~'"-,_....:._-->/ // ~
'"'.."__ '___ _ ....._""__~ M2
J
~
j
i
II
~
Residence
-
Residential Development
S11C-0.5
~1~
S118-0.5
S128-2
.
\
1
~"~.
M3
. S15A-0,5
. S16A-2
../ . '.'_' LA~:9..5
/'" ; i'o ,. <It A ;
, S15C-0.s....::J:-'
.S16C-2 Ufj~
l
j
S130-0,5
S140-2
.
S13A-0.5
S14A-2
.
.......
"'''---
. ~'''''
.
S9B-0,5
S10B-2
U: ,\~~
, ",!;-A2-0.5
.., ~.=c(])
l.._..
m....._....._..._.., ;. ~.; ,
" ~;::. .
S9A-0.5
S10A-2
.
i
7J
CD
Vl
0:
CD
:J
n
CD
""-,.,......
"
S70-0.5
S80-2
.
"
,...... ~""",._.,. ~'.. . ,. .---........= ~
-. -- ~.-' ~"" ~"'..
~<.~.~
: .':':....::.::::::::::=":=-.=.""..:.,,..~:."".:::.::""~:~:.;:.::..,=.-:-:~:.;"~.:::;:::;
,,,.. <= -~'<....,.",..,..~... "'"~ "",( -"..;,>:",,:~:,.' ,,,., ....,
- -
I)
~:M1 !
:@r
--\-
"","' ',--~-- '~
/
I
,
~~
-,; i
(5- C c:
"'
; """ """ ",:-...,,.,...=."""'- ::...... ,...". --;:.-.~"",..<
.
I
DOUGHERTY ROAD
LEGEND:
Property Line
S150-0.5
.S16C-2
Location of Discrete Soil Samples for backgound CAM
17 Metals (July 11, 2007)
Location of Discrete Soil Samples for Pesticides and
CAM17 metals
Location of Discrete Soil Samples for Asbestos and Lead
Based Paint (LBP)
NOTE: Except for Metal background Samples Ml, M2, M3 andM4, all
samples and site plan are from current sampling assessment.
@M4
(!)LA15-O,5
II TSRRASS"iiiicil:.c
257 WRIGHT BROTHERS AVENUE. LIVERMORE CALIFORNIA 94550. PHONE: (925) 243-6662
SITE PLAN
Figure No.
LIMITED PHASE II-ENVIRONMETAL SITE ASSESSMENT
6700 DUBLIN BOULEVARD (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
Project No.
11557.E
Scale:
Drawn by:
GC
Date:
2
NTS
02/2008
'.
..
APPENDIX A
..
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT
AND
CHAIN OF CUSTODY FORMS
...
..
..
..
-tiM
".
...
..
..
,.
..
...
..
15o'b L{4't;
-
-
15\0{) yq~
-
lii!"
-
"When Ouality Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road. Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Web: www"mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Telephone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
McCampbell Analytical. Inc.
TERRASEARCH Inc. Client Project ill: #11557.E; Arroyo Vista Date Sampled: 01/25/08
257 Wright Brothers Ave. Date Received: 01/25/08
Client Contact: WakiI Mateen Date Reported: 02/05/08
Livermore, CA 94550
Client P.O.: Date Completed: 02/05/08
-
~
WorkOrder: 0801640
February 05, 2008
Dear Wakil:
Enclosed within are:
1) The results of the 24 analyzed samples from your project: #11557.E; Arroyo Vista,
2) A QC report for the above samples,
3) A copy of the chain of custody, and
4) An invoice for analytical services.
All analyses were completed satisfactorily and all QC samples were found to be within our control limits.
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to give me a call. Thank you for choosing
McCampbell Analytical Laboratories for your analytical needs.
Best regards,
vlr Q~
Angela RydeIius
Laboratory Manager
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
JIIII'I"1
-
I
.
I
t
t
i
t
.
I
i
~f~; ,
Chain of Custody
net(!H!n('(! No
pauur0'_':-:::z.:
o&u (PLf-0
r;;
.....;)
h
e
II l~
1f r>
'f],
'r. :1:
';l- ~i .' g. ;i1i
~e ~f ..... ,tl
&/1 ." f' n.
ilk '. itI
]~ tn
fl~ ~c. ~ ' fl :r:
jL.~ 'j
,,1 . ..!~ ..> ...
~J. :l~ ~~ J
'n v. llie:. <~ >(( i
r.i;~ n, III t:.
1- :t: Ul~
- -
~
~
~
~~~
. o,~<,,,,,'rr&.~'~'~ ....f...~. '''J\'''",*~<.''.K''I.~.^l. ~1"^,,"l11'nll'lt.
. TIIRRASIIJJIlt;!IINt:.
21\1 WRIGHT fillOTII\:.RS lIVEtIllf:. UVEnMOHE CAlIFOlll1lA fl45!i1 PIlONt:: (1)15) 2U.f1t\n2
~
:ll
~;anJ{lla IU
Oatil
Tlmo
Ml\lllll
P<oaolY,
if:
l!!.~ -.
\~~ ill
lQ n
(~~ ~
110. A: I~ iE
('MIRI"ctl. .l:..!-. ...l:.-
r.,. ~A:" I J',
i.AJ..--:of.' -ll;':7 I '). At
l...~ {.f.ll ,{-\ i (. ( .T:>) .- ....; S "<<J
C>>~-2..- '? )
,.:5.1. (n ,B; '-f~.
C011- 3 _0.
S ,::I ( 4tC.d}..L
~~a;~~) ,
?~,-::; .. 0,5""
~.:...-h:1,A c /))
~-:: ~t..>
c;s;::;n:::;___ p, 5'
$r,(fL d,;' .,... 'j
w:::"'p ~~(t- ;2
-2-8L41 8: (A/~)
_5~; /
.'}..
x
q: /.5-
q~3~
'i : L15'
li) : /i)
)v:Jo
iO:50
/J:(f
/1: '/5-
--!I
Lf
y
'/
if
l/
l./ _~________~
L_- ~ -L.
/_~':I. __ X
l.U
---..-....... ~....--- ---- ----'- ,---.. ~ --- -...........--.----------
x..
x
./
J..
''^
--------.......-.
--------------
__L____L___
.y
- ---- --- ---- -- - -...-- - - -- --..- --.......---
1'R\!act Infjltnt.UOh
Sam Ill. Recllllll
nQJlnqlllal\4ld Ii'll
Cmnllllny;
ttallllqoll".1I 8V1 nallnl\ul6had 0'11
P"':Oc.l:':a"'u;~.. ,- - j /. '. / '" --:~., I('AllIl'ooy.......,. I " A..z,.y/ ~h:j ~.~II"'''Y;
_, ., _~ t' ytJtLO f/L.J"'fJt!. " TolHI nO,l\f flll!,lalnlWJ -") N. . ~ ~
P,oer.! 'n.: / . I .' llf11o. .., ,,0/', ()alo;, ?.:- ^ ,11m",
'(A-c-n - .' . ..---i2.-'~ /-"",,-v<:J
I .J '7~' c::- I ~WI JIlluCl! . PlOf'" D \ ""iI~ L. 1'111' ,
~,z.-."'h -- / I i'il .y-~- --- "'/I--"Tr;JO<~( ,.
t::p..J~/,I.:' JJ/.c..... ..I", l:.:c D"/,{, if Tnmllnr..ltltlI PtI~II~91f}l,'H'" ,/ A/(..f.:.J, I1!tlludNillII6
1J. ,II ",;'[J;\;;l1lO\lUr: -- ./ ~ -/ ~ ./ I 1 lJ I \.( j
_~l ~:1A'\1! /--- ,t21'.(OITJlftlOlllOOn' IRlon.I"'Il/. ;I J.. " / ,,1I,,"OIO'U: Olg.;;..r.;;;;:'__~h"_-
~ s..m"1"'..<1I01l"~.-;"/ h '-. ( f/ / I IRoulln.. nePOI'~la~;I,fMll;! Re1:'::.h~.;:ll.'....t/ Rellnqul.hedllVl ~1I"'lllf'''.IlOl/'l ___
~ ,/ //f/[.;</~ r Itovel1\ r IIoml" CI.openy; YI~\ r.t)II~lf"'V; . ItIf.sny:
c /' ~ Tlmfl' 1 ;T [oare' t 1.7' 'UN111' fOnw' 11...,,; -_ I DRIll:
.~ SlllnlJard Ii-Day . 24-l1r ~n.ht 72-l1r ' : l.v;~ 'I ].~ jV r.' I'
~ rllrT' Arrnsod 11mo ( ..,."...n, .. --'.J .' Pluco: I /7, PJaoo; 1'161,,,;
.'. (1'1.."...CiI<JuOntl) ~ _ I" f(:' ~d \dlJM :1<:-
* ' alhorn ';J I 'C r'e Plln'atitl1;t . ~_ . iiiii;t';;IIliD-m., ,I" i l'lllllml tllltllU. /
t:i 91'u.,181 InGllu"II""JCofll,"onl. ,.:J- p., klbJ',' I 'f<;vt .tr.1)ti:;;-~{r;::~fi''''Cl--- ,,-{:) , , j 7, ~~o~.......L y
~ . " J' Ii ,. 'v, 11 ) J i, I Sluml I ". ..IDII0111'A'EAO SPACE ABSENT ."_ _ ~m.lt'A'NERS_
$V --...
?O ..') j I:) _0. ~.., 5 .1'1 "" ';' " ') ,:,"r, r. ':.- . "..: "" ^ _" IK OECIllOFtINf\lED t"LAl).. _.?R(StRVED IN lAl3_
ji . I '" j . ",,)/1,....f,..o"~ .... '_1'" ...,~../' _J i ,-..)'1/.., v'''' J 1" - ---
I'"p~;.::r- f....' ~,... '..',~ i
nalll:
Tlmll:
lnllltl: ---'
..--.............--
Pia",,:
p.lll,;;rNIlIII":
u,
~
~
Cf
j
~
Chain of Custody
'h
r
"
~ ~
~ j..~ n f ~
..; ll'l o-.'m ..~ ~ v,
Gt- ~ !!! ~( H ~5 .~ ! :~, ';12~
U . j I.. ::i..i] ~., i il' j ~ ~..' ~;.;\
UO T." il_' li\ ~ ".n.. ..;"" !",~
Malrll! PloaSN.. ('''n,.I~, p: 'j l~ ~ '1"' ru l!:.' Ci ,~. fii ~, llll~ j '"
I_.?~"').t)~ II: 5'[) "91.-f!r- tv \ ta_ --X X
......-........_~.-::;; A_~# ___ __"""'"', ..-_,_'.....~_ _W' _.,........ _"""'"'-~....,._ ........-........__
1 ~, ~
--------
__1 X __.
~ )('
X- )(
-..---- -_..~ ---.... ----........
j.. t.
-----------
xx
;<. t
---_..."~
)( X
)(. x
. EHVriiOMJIoIII,^L"it.OlE.C' PllGN,.SPECI...tltJ4I',tc, ',IIGt,""I,tM, ,l,"llW, JllE"lIr"l
TliIifRAlI_AIIC!lINC
157 WRIGHT flROTHER9 AVENUE, LIVEIlMOItE CALlFORN11\ O~5!il PitON!;: (02.')l2i~"MIl2
:illllil'lo, ill
!Jute
lime
_L~!--=I' o. :; '/
LA - 2-C),5
'-II -"3 _D,S-
L..A - V -&. '> /l:Jj~
------'--- -~
LA - S-().5 1.~:d1
Lli - 6 -o,f'
T
LA - 7_0, <;
-;'.It ;) , .
Ln -<i-t>. S
LA- -9- (J, 5
-
L-IJ -( D -0, <) .~!
l;> ~ t)O
f'" .-
j,y: p']
t
I
,
I
I
... ......
I I
-
f
-.JI ..../ I
'") '7....
i."/" :7 S
[,1:'Iu
1~:5l}
I: P&_
/:t'1~
ISlmple nee.lllt
PnlJIId: Inflll'mlUon
mlocHlllll\ll; /I, t /, r /':. ..
FiyYI,-/ rl {/ I;> I~ Tt.lIHI,ln. or nlmlal'kf'3
PlliJttd No.: ; / .:::;-t.;"'jo..,_.
1/ _~ r/ ' c::: , ilo\1!!JIll!!t-l!
S~UI~ / P t ("\ J r:::--
~O L.-e.s!..~"t<t I'c:I. 1--1:\.,.') {"1 TOn\flltt:!lure
'~ ('I."JUfl':''''UOr. '--/7/ /,"-. " //
t! r.{/I//2 ~~ f':Mt....Tl.lA li1l'll~onl
.;. ....,W. -...... /. ' 1/---\ 1'~-:o"lft1a ll11ptlrt l~8; lovol2
11 4;f2r-J
'r; ""vt/;. 7,,,--f-..::........ I II 'lltel:t r fI evcl4 .
.Li /' '"
\ll f Slandard 5.0ay :!4.J1r
i,' TtltrI A1"Ollll,ITII1Ifl
t~1 (PI"~tI<l CIrcle O!Wl)
.l.,
?
t:; ST~li:lllUdkmlC()mllwllts:
:'f1
'"
~
"-J
LO
.(1l.J1r
72.111
Omol'li
,
;:;;'
nallnqulJlled DVl nellnlJlIlJhed nYI
?'.o.";'.ii'iinf__ __'!,. l"."Otnflll"l';
/ ......4--"'.v.>:; A ;" ., 4'~ ~
TIll''': .3 ~ (:;()lhal'7_JC"...I'i); nuo;
Plaf''!'p/!fr; b.{'i'yl PlllCO:
!"lito!l N~OO )ri 117.f7,' I. ~ Pllnls,l Nam,,:
hk "']:{.J.U '-f , 'ji"
flJOtllthtll>:~ ./1'5;-( ~ SJIl',..I",o:
~yt~,
nalll1l1ul.ha" DV: -" RllllnlJuJ.hud BYI
Com[l.uy: I\.~ A- I COII'\jlBIl)':
Time: I ~~h)(I()a'fjJ :(.p(';1. lime:
PIli"..: '^^l,)\~ Pial:..:
I',&tle.d N~IIfe! ~ "rlnletl tlamn:
mUII&ln:: Jlv{ \J{J2\ SIOllal,,"~
T
1
Ilurutenz tln.__..,_~_
PllOA..."_'J."_ 01 -""1----
.. _._.
------
nelJllqnJlhed 8'/1
t.t1J1I1'''''V:
Inalu:
ro;i-;,:----
Tin",:
Plu<Cl';
Prlnl<lil Nama:
910ftUfuffJ:
RaUnl1ulaltud Dyt
...OllllJIII/Y:
1011111:
lt~~= _
Pb.u~o;
\J'
,)J
-- d
..c.
~
~
I I .- I
I Dula:
[',11111111 t"'",o:
SlollOturn:
l
~
i . . I, I I i i Ii I t ~ I
Chain of Custody
flerO.e...:.! Pln.~,_
H
il
PU'JO...::J__. or .,.,,' 'J~",,..
--'-
f';;' tf
"
. ~~,~...".~---......,"'-,~~,,- ~ (! ~
'~~ ~
TIIRRAJSIIAIfC/f /Nt:. n U l~
0( '/! :1:' ~
II.' ~'- ~i: >>' " g. ~~
I!l~ ~t! .I" .~
267 WRIGIIT flllonlERS AVENUE, LNEIlMOIU; CAtWORNtTI Ot551 PlIONI:: (1)25) 2-1:1.116112 iil m "" ,- n
vR ~I ~? ~~ .- fl (I.
ffi H.I ~g " ft'
r ~'i },.
~r~ n ~> ' ~, :} 1~
~l ';11 ,~~ .lln:
19' :;: .21 .( ~ ""111 i'l r~ ,~ '~~
110. ~' ~l) ',; 6- (1 p: ?l <; ;,
:il\fI\J11a III Oalo Tilllo Mill,l. PfOIlOf'J.. ~n<\IAI"lllA. ; 3i r.: j~ j; 1I1l;. u~ ftJL niL::. J1
- - - ~.. - -
Lit -II-b.,-J 1- ,,,"";1,-)" -6'? / : /.') S:c-t.~ () ,:C(,. I X _L
. '- --..~ --~--
Lit - I ;'J - 0\5 1:,:;,(;> f ~ x
, I -- - - - - - --
.
Lit -[) '- c, 5 I . 36 \ )<.. X
. , - - - - - - - -- --
LA - fi./- t;l 5! t j , .." c" \- I )( X
'._'._"~"", <'>/ - - - - -- -
LA-IS _D,S ./; t/f t- 1 y.. )(
i - - - - -- - - -- - -- '-
L/+ - it:> -0\5 \} I; 5-0 V I X x
",'-- - - - - - -, - -
-- - - - - - - - - - -
- - --" -- -- - -- -_..
,. - - - - - - - - - f--- -
-- --- --,-.-.
JlI1lIed: Jnrtllmallnn Sample AltCalJlt Rallnqula"ell aYI n.IIOI\III,h.d Bv. Ilallnqulltllld Ity.
l~mrocIN..ft'dA "01 '~ t:> l'.oinpHJl1;. _ .A " ..> ....r:;j,'.' ~;';(lIlY; C'."llljny;-~"'---'----
;J" .;'11,'-
Tlll~1 n.!!.J10~lJ1!!l1!!(tf!l .. .' ".
_.n:'^L.~ J Thno: 1}(\IO,l_ ,;?~,. -b;~ Tim,,: tnolO: -- TImn: -P};ir,;:_.
15,t1lttr.l 11".: II ~-f '" E .3' ; ~)
~IOltB~J5 -;j~,j t,'. T:J....j~)<bl~~ linnl' SfIjl..!:!!, I.., f'>:JI'_L. ., 1'1"':0: I'lar-...
p~ hll'lj!J"jt~ 1_ 'AI -161<- P,h,lo,l tllllllll' i",l;,i;,;rNllnlll: --'-
P,,~u.lfI#il">>./h ~_ (// /' ~! onlp!!!!!'!.!rr\ / '
r.on'onl~~!,oo"l 11Ilanft~ V Slllnalllro: -ftlijllllt"ro:
\.. -~ ~#
~;p~ RllfUlrlleval
, -, -"-
f I Rnlllloll f 11.1MII2 nellll/ltlllh8C1 BV' RaUiI/lullfllld IlVl ~"l~4J~~!!!!t!L..._
~ .,"'-, ~lImluIIIY: Mtr( COIl\fl8ny; 0"1(18I\y:
I ILovol!! r J l8\lil' 4
(SlMd8nI5.il8Y 1 limo; .....J.V [lnln: \ (;J '/ II l.[ limo: ~onlo: "' ~- --- Tlma: 10iii0:
24.hr .,lohr n-hr J ..---
Tum Annlmll1ln6 "Inll": . , 1'8"": 1'10'''':
lPlcaou GI..:lo 0110) - (Jfh"", ",lnftlll H81lIlf.Ae\1 vi'wz7r:- Piiiii&;INI'''';;;----- p(lI\lfKin~l",i;------.~----
!ll'odalli;iliii<:t).III,1Conllntlnl,,: -
5~Jflallf:&: J J vD "vl.VV ~ltOflAhllU: - SftlnnlUJn~
~ -
\j\
~
c:.
a
li
"
b
~
1)
'~
f'
'"
~
"
~
~
''(1
4:
.-S'-
~
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
~.. 1534 Willow Pass Rd
W(~~ Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
'B' (925) 252-9262
CHAIN-Of-CUSTODY RECORD
Page 1 of I
WorkOrder: 0801640
ClientID: TSIL
DEDF
D Excel
DFax
~Email
D HardCopy D Third Party
Report to:
Wakil Mateen
TERRASEARCH Inc.
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Livermore, CA 94550
Bill to:
Angelica Garcia
TERRASEARCH Inc.
322 Piercy Road
San Jose, CA 95138
agarcia@terrasearchinc.com
Requested TAT:
5 days
Email: wakilm@terrasearchinc.com
TEL: (925) 243-6662 FAX: (925) 243-6663
ProjeclNo: #11557.E; Arroyo Vista
po:
Date Received: 01/2512008
Date Printed: 01/28/2008
Sample 10
CllentSamplD
Matrix Collection Date Hold
0801640-001 Camp 1 (S1A,B,C,D) Soil 1/25/089:15:00 D A A
0801640-001 S1A-0.5 Soil 1/25/089:15:00 D B
0801640-002 Camp 2 (52 A,B,C,D) Soil 1/25/089:30:00 D A
0801640-003 Camp 3 (53 A,B,G,D) Soil 1/25108 9:45:00 D A A
0801640-003 S3A-0.5 Soil 1/251089:45:00 D B
0801640-004 Camp 4 (S4 A,B,C,D) Soil 1/25/08 10:15:00 D A
0801640-005 Comp 5 (S5 A,B,C,D) Soil 1/25/08 10:30:00 D A A
0801640-005 S5A-0.5 Soil 1/25/08 10:30:00 D B
0801640-006 Camp 6 (56 A,B,G,D) Soil 1/25/08 10:50:00 D A
0801640-007 Camp 7 (57 A,B,C,D) Soil 1/25/08 11 :15:00 D A A
0801640-007 S7A-0.5 Soil 1/25/08 11 :15:00 D B
0801640-008 Gomp 8 (S8 A,B,C,D) Soil 1/25/08 11 :45:00 D A
0801640-009 LA-1-0.5' Soil 1/25/08 11 :50:00 D A A
0801640-010 LA-2-0.5' Soil 1/25/0812:00:00 D A A
0801640-011 LA-3-0.5' Soil 1/25/0812:05:00 D A A
Test Leaend:
Isl
1101
141
~I
1 3 I
181
12 1
17 I
1121
L 1 I
L6 I
1111
PB S
CAM17MS S
ASMS S
ASBESTOS S
8081 S
Prepared by: Melissa Valles
Comments:
NOTE: Samples are discarded 60 days after results are reported unless other arrangements are made. Hazardous sar;nples will be returned to client or disposed of at client expense.
1
,
1
,
I
\T'
(),
~
~
~
~
f I
I I
l
.
Ii
s
t
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
l 1534 Willow Pass Rd
,_~~ Pitlsburg, CA 94565-170 J
'iJl!l!J' (925) 252-9262
CHAIN-Of-CUSTODY RECORD
Page J of I
WorkOrder: 0801640
ClientlD: TSIL
DEDF
o Excel
o Fax
0Email
o HardCopy 0 ThirdParty
Report to:
Wakil Mateen
TERRASEARCH Inc.
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Livermore, CA 94550
Email: wakilm@terrasearchinc.com
TEL: (925) 243-6662 FAX: (925) 243-6663
ProjectNo: #11557.E; Arroyo Vista
po:
Bill to:
Angelica Garcia
TERRASEARCH Inc.
322 Piercy Road
San Jose, CA 95138
agarcia@terrasearchinc.com
Requested TAT:
5 days
Date Received: 01/25/2008
Date Printed: 01/28/2008
Sample ID
ClientSamplD
Matrix
Collection Date Hold
0801640-012 LA-4-0.5' Soil 1/25/0812:15:00 0 A A
0801640-013 LA-5-0.5' Soil 1/25/0812:25:00 0 A A
0801640-014 LA-6-0.5' Soil 1/25/08 12:35:00 0 A A
0801640-015 LA- 7 -0.5' Soil 1/25/0812:40:00 0 A A
0801640-016 LA-8-0 .5' Soil 1/25/08 12:50:00 0 A A
0801640-017 LA-9-0.5' Soil 1/25/081:00:00 0 A A
0801640-018 LA-10-0.5' Soil 1/25/08 1 :05:00 0 A A
0801640-019 LA-11-0.5' Soil 1/25/081:15:00 0 A A
0801640-020 LA-12-0.5' Soil 1/25/08 1 :20:00 0 A A
0801640-021 LA-13-0.5' Soil 1/25/08 1 :30:00 0 A A
0801640-022 LA-14-0.5' Soil 1/25/081:35:00 0 A A
0801640-023 LA-15-0.5' Soil 1/25/08 1 :45:00 0 A A
0801640-024 LA-16-0.5' Soil 1/25/08 1 :50:00 0 A A
Test Leqend:
L 1 I
16 I
L111
8081 S
ASBESTOS S
L3 I
L8 I
L 4 I
191
I 2 I
17 1
1121
ASMS S
CAM17MS S
[5 I
[101
PB 5
Prepared by: Melissa Vallcs
\J'
~
\!J
.....c:
-i\
A
Comments:
NOTE: Samples are discarded 60 days after results are reported unless other arrangements are made. Hazardous samples will be returned to client or disposed of at client expense.
..
..
t 6'1 v~b t{C1 ~
-
WJi
"When Oualitv Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road. Pittsburg. CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Tele bone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
-
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
Sample Receipt Checklist
Project Name:
#11557.E; Arroyo Vista
Date and Time Received: 1/25/084:29:58 PM
IIlilI"
Client Name:
TERRASEARCH Inc.
WorkOrder N': 0801640
Matrix Soil
Carrier:
Client Drop-In
Checklist completed and reviewed by: Melissa Valles
"""
Chain of Custodv ICOCllnformation
Chain of custody present? Yes ~ NoD
Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received? Yes ~ NoD
Chain of custody agrees with sample labels? Yes It] NoD
Sample IDs noted by Client on COC? Yes ~ NoD
Date and Time of collection noted by Client on COC? Yes 0 NoD
Sampler's name noted on COC? Yes 0 NoD
Samole Receiot Information
Custody seals intact on shipping container/cooler? Yes D NoD NA0
Shipping container/cooler in good condition? Yes ~ NoD
Samples in proper containers/bottles? Yes 0 NoD
Sample containers intact? Yes ~ NoD
Sufficient sample volume for indicated test? Yes It] NoD
Samole Preservation and Hold Time IHTllnformation
All samples received within holding time? Yes It] NoD
ContainerlTemp Blank temperature Cooler Temp: 16.7'C NAD
Water - VOA vials have zero headspace / no bubbles? Yes D NoD No VOA vials submitted 0
Sample l@Pels checked for correct preservation? Yes 0 NoD
TTLC Metal - pH acceptable upon receipt (pH<2)? Yes D NoD NA0
...~
~
-
..
..
.,."
hW
-
,"*
-
,.~
""""
---------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
Client contacted:
Date contacted:
Contacted by:
Comments:
""""
""""';
-
-
'<iri
,M
-
-
~
..
'*
..
..
..
..
,"""
,.
4~
l 5 '6 j)~ 4
Q2 McCam~~~~~u~~c~::~ical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701 \7
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Teleobone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
TERRASEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #11557.E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/25/08
Vista Date Received: 01/25/08
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/25/08
Livennore, CA 94550 Client P.O.: Date Analyzed: 01/28/08-01/30/08
Organochlorine Pesticides by GC-ECD (8080 Basic Target List)*
Extraction Method: SW3550C Analytical Method: SW8081B Worl< Order: 080] 640
Lab ill 0801640-001A 080 1640-002A 080 1640-003A 080 1640-004A Reporting Limit for
Client ill Comp ] Comp 2 (S2 Comp 3 (S3 Comp 4 (S4 DF=]
IS1A.B.C.D\ A.B.C.D\ A.B.C.D\ A.B.C.D\
Matrix S S S S
S w
DF 10 1 1 1
Comoound Concentration mg/kg figIL
A]drin ND<O.O] 0 ND ND ND 0.00] NA
a-BHC ND<O.OlO ND ND ND 0.00] NA
b-BHC ND<O.O]O ND ND ND 0.00] NA
d-BHC ND<O.OlO ND ND ND 0.00] NA
!!-BHC ND<O.OlO ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Chlordane ITechnical\ ND<0.25 ND ND ND 0.025 NA
a-Chlordane 0.0] 0 0.0048 0.00] I ND 0.00] NA
,,-Chlordane 0.012 0.0068 ND ND 0.00] NA
n n-DDD ND<O.OlO ND ND ND 0.00] NA
n.n-DDE ND<O.OlO ND o 0012 ND 0.001 NA
n.n-DDT ND<O.O]O ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Dieldrin ND<O.OlO 0.0022 ND ND 0.001 NA
Endosu]fan I ND<O.OIO ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Endosulfan II ND<OO]O ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Endosulfan sulfate ND<O.O]O ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Endrin ND<O"OlO ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Endrin aldehvde ND<O.OlO ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Hentachlor ND<O.OIO ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Hentach]or enoxide ND<OO]O 0.00]4 ND ND 0.001 NA
Hexach]orobenzene ND<O.] 0 ND ND ND 0.01 NA
H exachl orocvcl onentad i ene ND<O ? 0 ND ND ND 0.02 NA
Methoxvch]or ND<OOlO ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Toxanhene ND<0.50 ND ND ND 0.05 NA
Surro...ate Recoveries 1%\
O/OSS: 91 105 108 108 I
Comments I T I I
· water samples in fig/L, soil/s]udge/solid samples in mglkg, wipe 'samples in fig/wipe, filter samples in fig/filter, product/oil/non-aqueous liquid samples
and all TCLP & SPLP extracts are reported in mg/L.
ND means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means analyte not applicable to this analysis.
# surrogate diluted out ofrange or surrogate coelutes with another peak/sample contains surrogate.
(h) a lighter than water immiscible sheen/product is present; (i) liquid sample that contains >-1 vol. % sediment; U) sample diluted due to high
organic content; (k) p,p,- is the same as 4,4,-; (I) tlorisil (EPA 3620) cleanup; (m) silica-gel (EPA 3630) cleanup; (n) e]emental sulfur (EPA 3660)
cleanup; (0) sulfuric acid permanganate (EPA 3665) cleanup; (r) results are reported on a dry weight basis; (p) see attached narrative.
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
~ Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
yqi
I ?t1 u,~
~ McCampbell Analvtical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg. CA 94565-1701
Web: www,mccampbell,com E-mm1: main@mccampbell,com
"When Oualitv Counts" Telephone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
TERRASEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #11557 E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/25/08
Vista Date Received: 01/25/08
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/25/08
Livermore, CA 94550 Client P.O.: Date Analyzed: 01/28/08-01/30/08
Organochlorine Pesticides by GC-ECD (8080 Basic Target List)*
Extraction Method: SW3550C Analytical Method: SW8081B Work Order: 0801640
Lab ill 080 1640-005A 0801640-006A 0801640-007A 080 1640-008A Reporting Limit for
Client ill Comp 5 (S5 Comp 6 (S6 Comp 7 (S7 Comp 8 (S8 DF=I
A.B.C.m A.Rc.m A.B.c.m A.RC.m
Matrix S S S S
S W
DF 10 1 1 1
Compound Concentration mglkg flg!L
Aldrin ND<OOlO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
a-BHC ND<O,OlO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
b-BHC ND<O,OIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
d-BHC ND<O,OIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
g-BHC ND<OOIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Chlordane (Technical) ND<0,25 ND ND ND 0,025 NA
a-Chlordane ND<OmO 0,0017 0,0011 ND 0,001 NA
"-Chlordane ND<O,OIO 0,0014 0,0012 ND 0,001 NA
n n-DDD ND<O,OIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
D"D-DDE ND<O,OIO ND ND ND 0,00] NA
n.n-DDT ND<O"OIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Dieldrin ND<O,OIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Endosul fan I ND<OOIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Endosulfan II ND<O,OlO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Endosulfan sulfate ND<OmO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Endrin ND<O,OlO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Endrin aldehyde ND<O"OlO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Hentachlor ND<O,OIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Hentachlor enoxide ND<O,OIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Hexachlorobenzene ND<O,lO ND ND ND 0,01 NA
H exachl orocycl onentadi ene ND<0,20 ND ND ND 0,02 NA
Methoxychlor ND<O,OIO ND ND ND 0,001 NA
Toxanhene ND<0,50 ND ND ND 0,05 NA
Surrol!ate Recoveries (%)
O/OSS: 85 I 108 112 I 91 I
Comments j
· water samples in flglL, soil/sludge/solid samples in mglkg, V\~pe samples in flglwipe, filter samples in flglfilter, productloil/non-aqueous liquid samples
and all TCLP & SPLP extracts are reported in mg/L.
ND means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means analyte not applicable to this analysis,
# surrogate diluted out of range or surrogate coelutes with another peak/sample contains surrogate,
(h) a lighter than water immiscible sheen/product is present; (i) liquid sample that contains >-1 vol. % sediment; U) sanlple diluted due to high
organic content; (k) p,p,- is the same as 4,4,-; (I) tlorisil (EPA 3620) cleanup; (m) silica-gel (EPA 3630) cleanup; (n) elemental sulfur (EPA 3660)
cleanup; (0) sulfuric acid permanganate (EPA 3665) cleanup; (r) results are reported on a dry weight basis; (p) see attached narrative,
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
fi-- Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
-
"",,,,'
tIlll!lI
M"
~
.
/(;0
4Lft
-
e McCampbell Analvtical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Q\4f. Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
"When Oualitv Counts" Teleobooe: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
TERRASEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #11557.E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/25/08
Vista
257 Wright Brothers Ave. Date Received: 01/25/08
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/25/08
Livennore, CA 94550
Client P.O.: Date Analyzed 02/01/08
Arsenic by ICP-MS*
E~'traction method SW3050B Analytical methods 6020A Work Order: 0801640
Lab ID Client ID Matrix Extraction Type Arsenic DF %SS
0801640-00 I B S] A-0.5 S TOTAL 4.4 I 112
0801640-003B S3A-0.5 S TOTAL 4.2 I III
0801640-005B S5A-0.5 S TOTAL 6.0 I 108
0801640-007B S7A-0.5 S TOTAL 4.3 I 118
'."
"",,
.....
"u
,,'"
Reporting Limit for DF =]; W TOTAL NA llg/L
ND means not detected at or
above the reporting limit S TOTAL 0.5 mg/Kg
.water samples are reported in ~g/L, product/oil/non-aqueous liquid samples and all TCLP / STLC / DlSTLC / SPLP extracts are reported in
mg/L, soil/sludge/solid samples in mg/kg, wipe samples in ~g/wipe, filter samples in ~g/filter.
# means surrogate diluted out of range; NO means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means not applicable to this sample or
instrument.
TOTAL = acid digestion.
WET = Waste Extraction Test (STLC).
01 WET = Waste Extraction Test using de-ionized water.
i) aqueous sample containing greater than -I vol. % sediment; for DlSSOL VEO metals, this sample has been preserved prior to filtration; for
TOT AL^ metals, a representative sediment-~ater mixture was digested; j) reporting limit raised due to insufficient sample amount; k) reporting
limit raised due to matrix interference; m) estimated value due to lowlhigh surrrogate recovery, caused by matrix interference; n) results are
reported on a dry weight basis; p) see attached narrative.
:t*
..
..
DHS ELAP Certification W 1644
~ Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
..
'.
..
..
...
I ~L 0:0 '-I-C1r6
-
Qf:IP McCampbell Analytical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road. Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
". Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
"When Oualitv Counts" Teleohone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
TERRASEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #11557.E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/25/08
Vista Date Received: 01/25/08
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/25/08
Livermore, CA 94550 Client p.o.: Date Analyzed 01/31/08
-
Jil!I'lIF
CAM I CCR 17 Metals*
Lab ill 0801640-001A 080 I 640-003A 080 I 640-005A 0801640-007 A Reporting Limit for DF =1;
Client ill Comp I Comp 3 (53 Comp 5 (55 Comp 7 (57 ND means nol detected
(SIA,B,C,D) A,B,C,D) A,B,C,D) A,B,C,D) above the reporting limit
Matrix 5 5 5 5 s I W
Extraction Type TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL mg/Kg I mglL
ICP-MS Metals, Concentration*
Analvtical Method: 6020A E>.traction Method: SW3050B Work Order: 0801640
iIlIIMlo!
Antimony ND ND ND ND 0.5 NA
Arsenic 4.0 4.7 4.9 4.7 0.5 NA
Barium 230 250 380 200 5.0 NA
Beryllium ND 0.51 ND ND 0.5 NA
Cadmium ND ND ND ND 0.25 NA
Chromium 43 44 39 41 05 NA
Cobalt 12 12 8.2 10 05 NA
Copper 19 23 23 22 0.5 NA
Lead 9.9 13 9.3 II 0.5 NA
Mercury ND ND ND 0.051 0.05 NA
Molvbdenum ND ND ND ND 0.5 NA
Nickel 48 48 35 47 05 NA
Selenium ND ND ND ND 0.5 NA
Silver 0.63 ND ND ND 0.5 NA
Thallium ND ND ND ND 0.5 NA
Vanadium 43 52 45 43 0.5 NA
Zinc 42 49 39 55 50 NA
O/OSS: 98 95 98 100
Dilution Factor I
I
I Comments
'water samples are reported in llg/L, product/oil/non-aqueous liquid samples and all TCLP / STLC / DISTLC / SPLP extracts are reported in
mgfL, soil/sludge/solid samples in mgJkg, wipe samples in llg/wipe, filter samples in llg/filter.
# means surrogate diluted out ofrange; ND means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means not applicable to this sample or
instrument.
TOTAL = acid digestion.
WET = Waste Extraction Test (STLC).
Dr WET = Waste Extraction Test using de-ionized water.
i) aqueous sample containing greater than -I vol. % sediment; for DISSOLVED metals, this sample has been preserved prior to filtration; for
TOTAL^ metals, a representative sediment-water mixture was digested; j) reporting limit raised due to insufficient sample amount; J) analyte
detected below quantitation limits; k) reporting limit raised due to matrix interference; m) estimated value due to low/high surrrogate recovery,
caused by matrix interference; n) results are reported on a dry weight basis; p) see attached narrative.
~
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
fl- Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
...
Qrt McCampbell Analvtical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
,."" "When Oualitv Counts" Telenbone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
TERRA SEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #11557.E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/25/08
Vista
257 Wright Brothers Ave. Date Received: 01/25/08
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/25/08
Livennore, CA 94550
Client P.O.: Date Analyzed 01/28/08
Lead by ICP*
Extraction method SW3050B Analytical methods 601 OC Work Order: 0801640
Lab ID Client ID Matrix Extraction Type Lead DF %SS
0801640-009 A LA-I-OS' S TOTAL 9.9 I 106
0801640-010A LA-2-0.S' S TOTAL 9.2 I 100
0801640-011A LA-3-0.S' S TOTAL 8.5 I 106
0801640-012A LA-4-0.S' S TOTAL 5.2 1 101
0801640-0 I 3A LA-S-OS' S TOTAL 15 I 97
0801640-014A LA-6-0S' S TOTAL 12 I 101
080 I 640-0 I SA LA-7-0S' S TOTAL 6.4 I 101
080 I 640-0 I 6A LA-8-0S' S TOTAL 20 I 106
0801640-0 I 7 A LA-9-0S' S TOTAL 8.0 I 104
080 I 640-0 I 8A LA-lO-OS' S TOTAL 13 I 100
0801640-019 A LA-I I-OS' S TOTAL 8.8 I 103
0801640-020A LA- 12-0S' S TOTAL 32 I 105
080 I 640-021 A LA- 13-0S' S TOTAL 7.9 I 101
0801640-022A LA-14-0.S' S TOTAL IS I 101
! ~~ Z Db L.fq ct'
...
Reporting Limit for DF =1; W TOTAL NA Jlg/L
ND means not detected at or S
above the reporting limit TOTAL 5.0 mgIKg
.water samples are reported in Ilg/L, productloillnon-aqueous liquid samples and all TCLP / STLC / DISTLC / SPLP e>.1:racts are reported in
mgIL, soillsludge/solid samples in mglkg, wipe samples in Ilglwipe, filter samples in Ilglfilter.
# means surrogate diluted out ofrange; ND means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means not applicable to this sample or
instrument.
TOTAL = acid digestion.
WET = Waste Extraction Test (STLC).
DI WET = Waste Extraction Test using de-ionized water.
i) aqueous sample containing greater than - I vol. % sediment; for DISSOLVED metals, this sample has been preserved prior to filtration; for
TOTAL metals, a representative sediment-water mixture was digested; j) reporting limit raised due to insufficient sample amount; k) reporting
limit raised due to matrix interference; m) estimated value due to low/high surrrogate recovery, caused by matrix interference; n) results are
reported on a dry weight basis; p) see attached narrative.
~
..
..
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
~ Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
..
..
I~
..'" t.1t1~
,,!f- .
..~ 1\_~J
t} McCampbell Analvtical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Q{ai. Web: www.mccampbelLcom E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
"When Oualitv Counts" Teleuhone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
TERRASEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #1 1557.E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/25/08
Vista
257 Wright Brothers Ave. Date Received: 01/25/08
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/25/08
Livermore, CA 94550
Client P.O.: Date Analyzed 01/28/08
Lead by ICP*
Extraction method SW3050B Analytical methods 60 I OC Work Order: 0801640
Lab ID Client ID Matrix Extraction Type Lead DF % SS
080]640-023A LA-]5-0.5' S TOTAL ]2 ] ]03
080] 640-024A LA-] 6-0.5' S TOTAL 6.3 ] ]04
Reporting Limit for DF =]; W TOTAL NA Jlg/L
ND means not detected at or
above the reporting limit S TOTAL 5.0 mg/Kg
.water samples are reported in jlg/L, productloil/non-aqueous liquid samples and all TCLP / STLC / DISTLC / SPLP extracts are reported in
mgIL, soil/sludge/solid samples in mglkg, wipe samples in jlglwipe, filter samples in jlglfilter.
# means surrogate diluted out ofrange; ND means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means not applicable to this sample or
instrument.
TOTAL = acid digestion.
WET = Waste Extraction Test (STLC).
DI WET = Waste Extraction Test using de-ionized water.
i) aqueous sample containing greater than -] vol. % sediment; for DISSOLVED metals, this sample has been preserved prior to filtration; for
TOTAL metals. a representative sediment-water mixture was digested; j) reporting limit raised due to insufficient sample amount; k) reporting
limit raised due to matrix interference; m) estimated value due to low/high sumogate recovery, caused by matrix interference; n) results are
reported on a dry weight basis; p) see attached narrative.
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
~ Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
..
...
-
i>El'
-
"'"
11ft"
",,",'
"When Ouality Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbel1.com E-mail: main@mccampbel1.com
Tele hone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
QC SUMMARY REPORT FOR 6010C
w.o. Sample Matrix: Soil
QC Matrix: Soil
WorkOrder 0801640
C;M
EPA Method 6010C Extraction SW3050B BatchlD: 33387 Spiked Sample ID 0801605-001A
Sample Spiked MS MSD MS-MSD Spiked LCS LCSD LCS-LCSD Acceptance Criteria (%)
Analyte
mg/Kg mg/Kg % Rec. % Rec. %RPD mg/Kg % Rec. % Rec. %RPD MS / MSD RPD LCS/LCSD RPD
Lead 6.9 50 118 118 0 10 lIS 98.8 . 15.2 75 - 125 20 80 - 120 20
O/OSS: 99 250 104 103 0.290 250 98 98 0 70 - 130 20 70 - 130 20
All target compounds in the Method Blank of this extraction batch were ND less than the method RL with the following exceptions:
NONE
~
Sample ID
BATCH 33387 SUMMARY
Date Sampled Date Extracted Date Analyzed Sample ID
Date Sampled Date Extracted Date Analyzed
0801640-009A )1/25/08 11:50 AM 01/25/08 11/28/08 10:24 AM 0801640-0 I OA ) 1/25/08 12:00 PM 01/25/08 )]128/08 10:26 AM
0801640-011A )1/25/08 12:05 PM 01125/08 11/28/0810:33 AM 0801640-012A )]/25/08 ]2:]5 PM 01/25/08 JI/28/08 10:35 AM
0801640-013A )1/25/08 12:25 PM 01/25/08 11/28/08 10:37 AM 0801640-014A )1125/08 12:35 PM 01/25/08 )1/28/0810:40 AM
0801640-015A )1/25/08 12:40 PM 01/25/08 11/28/0810:42AM 0801640-016A )1/25/081250 PM 01/25/08 )] /28/08 10:45 AM
0801640-0] 7 A 01/25/08 1:00 PM 01/25/08 11/28/0810:47 AM 0801640-0] 8A 0]/25/081:05 PM 01/25/08 )]/28/0810:49 AM
0801640-019A 01/25/081:15 PM 01/25/08 11/28/08 10:52 AM 0801640-020A 01/25/081:20 PM 01/25/08 )]/28/0810:54 AM
0801640-021 A 01/25/08 1:30 PM 01/25/08 11/28/08 11:01 AM 0801640-022A 01/25/08 1:35 PM 01/25/08 )1/28/08 II :03 AM
0801640-023A 01/25/08 ]:45 PM 01/25/08 11/28/0811:05 AM 0801640-024A 01/25/08 1:50 PM 01/25/08 )1/28/08 1108 AM
"M
*"
MS - Matrix Spike; MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS = Laboratory Control Sample; LCSD - Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate; RPD = Relative Percent Deviation.
<ill
% Recovery = 100. (MS-Sample) / (Amount Spiked); RPD = 100. (MS - MSD) / ((MS + MSD) /2).
MS / MSD spike recoveries and / or %RPD may fall outside of laboratory acceptance criteria due to one or more of the following reasons: a) the sample is in homogenous
AND contains significant concentrations of analyte relative to the amount spiked, or b) the spiked sample's matrix interferes with the spike recovery.
,'iIlI
NIA = not applicable to this method.
,,,.,
.,"
-,-"
~ QAlQC Officer
...
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
..
-
!~
-
"When Oualitv Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Tele hone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
McCampbell Analytical. Inc.
....~
QC SUMMARY REPORT FOR 6010C
w.o. Sample Matrix: Soil
QC Matrix: Soil
WorkOrder 0801640
EPA Method 6010C Extraction SW3050B BatchlO: 33387 Spiked Sample 10: 0801605-001A
Sample Spiked MS MSD MS-MSD LCS LCSD LCS-LCSD Acceptance Criteria (%)
Analyte
mg/Kg mg/Kg % Rec. % Rec. %RPD % Rec. % Rec. %RPD MS / MSD RPD LCS/LCSD RPD
Lead 6.9 10 118 118 0 115 98.8 152 75 - 125 20 80 - 120 20
%SS: 99 250 104 103 0.290 98 98 0 70 - 130 20 70 - 130 20
All target compounds in the Method Blank of this extraction batch were ND less than the method RL with the following exceptions:
NONE
$'\,
Sample ID
Date Sampled
SA TCH 33387 SUMMARY
Date Extracted Date Analyzed Sample ID
Date Sampled
Date Extracted Date Analyzed
0801640-009A 01/25/08 11: 50 AM 01/25/08 01/28/0810:24 AM 0801640-0 I OA 01/25/08 12:00 PM 01/25/08 01/28/08 10:26 AM
0801640-011A 01/25/0812:05 PM 01/25/08 01/28/0810:33 AM 0801640-012A 01/25/0812:15 PM 01/25/08 01/28/08 10:35 AM
0801640-013A 01/25/08 12:25 PM 01/25/08 01/28/0810:37 AM 0801640-014A 01/25/08 12:35 PM 01/25/08 01/28/08 10:40 AM
0801640-015A 01/25/0812:40 PM 01/25/08 01/28/0810:42 AM 0801640-016A 01/25/08 12:50 PM 01/25/08 01/28/08 10:45 AM
0801640-017A 01/25/08 1 :00 PM 01/25/08 01/28/0810:47 AM 0801640-018A 01/25/08 1 :05 PM 01/25/08 01/28/08 10:49 AM
0801640-019A 01/25/081:15 PM 01/25/08 01/28/0810:52 AM 0801640-020A 01/25/08 I :20 PM 01/25/08 01/28/08 10:54 AM
0801640-021 A 01/25/08 1 :30 PM 01/25/08 01/28/0811:01 AM 0801640-022A 01/25/08 1:35 PM 01/25/08 01/28/08 11:03 AM
0801640-023A 01/25/081:45 PM 01/25/08 01/28/08 11:05 AM 0801640-024A 01/25/081:50 PM 01/25/08 OJ/28/08 11:08 AM
MS = Matrix Spike: MSD - Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS = Laboratory Control Sampie: LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate; RPD = Relative Percent Deviation.
% Recovery = 100' (MS-Sample) / (Amount Spiked); RPD = 100' (MS - MSD) 1 ((MS + MSD) 12).
MS 1 MSD spike recoveries and / or %RPD may fall outside of laboratory acceptance criteria due to one or more of the following reasons: a) the sample is in homogenous AND
contains significant concentrations of analyte relative to the amount spiked, or b) the spiked sample's matrix interferes with the spike recovery.
N/A = not applicable to this method.
NR = analyte concentration in sample exceeds spike amount for soil matrix or exceeds 2x spike amount for water matrix or sample diluted due to high matrix or anaiyte content.
""
Je- QAJQC Officer
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
I t~)
"When Oualitv Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Tele bone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
QC SUMMARY REPORT FOR SW8081B
w.o. Sample Matrix: Soil
QC Matrix: Soil
WorkOrder 0801640
EPA Method SW8081B Extraction SW3550C BatchlD: 33411 Spiked Sample ID: 0801636-012A
Sample Spiked MS MSD MS-MSD LCS LCSD LCS-LCSD Acceptance Criteria (%)
Analyte
mg/kg mglkg % Rec. % Rec. %RPD % Rec. % Rec. %RPD MS / MSD RPD LCSILCSD RPD
AI drin ND 0.010 108 107 1.54 109 109 0 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
g-BHC ND 0.010 83.6 83 0.651 79"1 80.5 1.68 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
p,p-DDT ND 0.025 83.5 81.9 1.83 75.5 76.9 1.78 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
Dieldrin ND 0.025 102 100 1.92 96.9 99 2.21 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
Endrin ND 0.025 102 99.7 1.78 95.7 97.1 1.39 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
Heptachlor ND 0.010 76.5 76.1 0"548 70.5 71.8 1. 83 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
O/OSS: 105 0.050 105 103 2.18 105 97 8.29 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
All target compounds in the Method Blank of this extraction batch were ND less than the method RL with the following exceptions:
NONE
Sample ID
Date Sampled
BATCH 33411 SUMMARY
Date Extracted Date Analyzed Sample ID
Date Sampled
Date Extracted Date Analyzed
0801640-001A 01/25/089:15 AM 01/25/08 01/30/085:33 AM 10801640-002A 01/25/089:30 AM 01/25/08 01/29/082:00 AM
0801640-003A 01/25/089:45 AM 01/25/08 01/29/082:56 AM 0801640-004A 01/25/0810:15 AM 01/25/08 01/29/083:54 AM
0801640-005A 01/25/0810:30 AM 01/25/08 01/30/08 6:32 AM I 0801640-006A 01/25/08 1050 AM 0] /25/08 01/29/08642 AM
0801640-007 A 01/25/08 II: 15 AM 01/25/08 01/30/08436 AM 0801640-008A 01/25/08 11:45 AM 01/25/08 01/28/084:56 PM
-iW
.
MS = Matrix Spike; MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS = Laboratory CDntrol Sample; LCSD - Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate; RPD = Relative Percent Deviation.
.. % Recovery = 100' (MS-Sample) 1 (Amount Spiked); RPD = 100' (MS - MSD) 1 ((MS + MSD) 12).
MS 1 MSD spike recoveries and lor %RPD may fall outside of laboratDry acceptance criteria due to one Dr more of the follDwing reasons: a) the sample is inhomogenous AND
contains significant concentrations of analyte relative to the amount spiked, or b) the spiked sample's matrix interferes with the spike recDvery.
...
N/A = not enDugh sample to perfDrm matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate.
NR = analyte cDncentration in sample exceeds spike amDunt fDr sDiI matrix Dr exceeds 2x spike amDunt fDr water matrix Dr sample diluted due to high matrix Dr analyte content.
...
DHS ELAP Certification W 1644
~ QAlQC Officer
..
..
till'
I
I
J6 4-'1 c{
.."
"When Oualitv Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg. CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Tele hone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
~
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
QC SUMMARY REPORT FOR 6020A
w.o. Sample Matrix: Soil
QC Matrix: Soil
WorkOrder 0801640
~F
EPA Method 8020A Extraction SW3050B BatchlO: 33410 Spiked Sample 10 0801636-012A
Sample Spiked MS MSD MS-MSD Spiked LCS LCSD LCS-LCSD Acceptance Criteria (%)
Analyte
mglKg mg/Kg % Rec. % Rec. %RPD mglKg % Rec. % Rec. %RPD MSIMSD RPD LCS/LCSD RPD
Arsenic 2.7 50 101 99 1.48 10 102 103 1.46 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
%SS: 112 250 I I 3 115 2.25 250 III 113 0.929 70 - 130 20 70 - 130 20
All target compounds in the Method Blank of this extraction batch were ND less than the method RL with the following exceptions:
NONE
",'I
-"
BATCH 33410 SUMMARY
Sample 10 Date Sampled Date Extracted Date Analyzed Sample 10 Date Sampled Date Extracted Date Analyzed
0801640-001B 01/25108 9:] 5 AM 01/25108 )2/0J/08 11:06 PM 0801640-003B 01/251089:45 AM 01/25108 )2/01/08 11: 14 PM
0801640-005B )1/25108 10:30 AM 01/25108 )2/01/08 I J:22 PM 080 J 640-007B 11/25/08 1l:15 AM 01/25108 )2/01/08 II :30 PM
MS = Matrix Spike; MSD - Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS = Laboratory Control Sample; LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate; RPD - Relative Percent Deviation.
% Recovery = 100' (MS-Sample) 1 (Amount Spiked); RPD = 100. (MS - MSD) 1 ((MS + MSD) 12).
MS 1 MSD spike recoveries and lor %RPD may fall outside of laboratory acceptance criteria due to one or more of the following reasons: a) the sample is inhomogenous
AND contains significant concentrations of analyte relative to the amount spiked, or b) the spiked sample's matrix interferes with the spike recovery.
N/A = not applicable to this method.
", -
. .~H
~. .~H..D
.In
""p
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
fl-
QAlQC Officer
...
1 '.'
'(it) C:
"When Ouality Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg. CA 94565-]70]
Web: www"mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Tele hone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
QC SUMMARY REPORT FOR 6020A
w.o. Sample Matrix: Soil
.ac Matrix: Soil
WorkOrder 0801640
EPA Method 6020A Extraction SW3050B BatchlO: 33410 Spiked Sample 10 OB01636-012A
Sample Spiked MS MSD MS-MSD Spiked LCS LCSD LCS-LCSD Acceptance Criteria (%)
Analyte
mg/Kg mg/Kg % Rec. % Rec. % RPD mg/Kg % Rec. % Rec. %RPD MS/MSD RPD LCS/LCSD RPD
Antimony ND 50 107 106 0.468 10 103 104 1.84 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Arsenic 2.7 50 101 99 1.48 10 102 103 1.46 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Barium 230 500 106 107 0.837 100 108 110 1.84 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Beryllium 0.62 50 114 114 0 10 1]2 112 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Cadmium ND 50 99.5 98.9 0.583 ]0 97.1 98.6 1.56 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Chromium 35 50 86.1 85.4 0.475 10 101 103 1.86 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Cobalt 15 50 89.] 89.2 0.0336 10 92 92 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Copper ] 8 50 79.9 78.8 0.899 10 88.9 90.4 1.75 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Lead 13 50 102 102 0 10 102 101 0.295 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Mercury ND 1.25 93.9 94.3 0.4]6 0.25 96.4 96.3 0.0415 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Molybdenum ND 50 92.1 91.9 0.194 10 94 96.2 2.32 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Nickel 16 50 94.7 94.4 0.252 10 104 105 1.43 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Selenium ND 50 108 102 4.91 10 103 103 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Silver ND 50 118 119 0.572 10 119 119 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Thallium ND 50 101 101 0 10 ]01 101 0 70 - 130 20 80 - ] 20 20
Vanadium 130 50 92.8 95.4 0.744 10 102 103 0.979 70 - 130 20 80 - ] 20 20
Zinc 62 500 97.4 97.1 0.201 100 109 III 1.46 70 - 130 20 80 - ] 20 20
o/o5S: 112 250 113 115 2.25 250 III 113 0.929 70 - 130 20 70 - 130 20
All target compounds in the Method Blank of this extraction batch were ND less than the method RL with the following exceptions:
NONE
~ri
Sample 10
0801640-00 I A
0801640-005A
Date Sampled
01/25/089:15 AM
)1/25/08 10:30 AM
BATCH 33410 SUMMARY
Date Extracted Date Analyzed Sample ID
0]/25/08 0]/31/081:20 PM 080]640-003A
01/25/08 01/3]/081:37 PM 0801640-007A
Date Sampled
0]/25/089:45 AM
11/25/0811'15AM
Date Extracted Date Analyzed
01/25/08 01/31/08 I :29 PM
01/25/08 01/31/081:45 PM
"..
."",,
MS = Matrix Spike; MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS - Laboratory Control Sample; LCSD - Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate; RPD - Relative Percent Deviation.
..
% Recovery = 100' (MS-Sample) / (Amount Spiked); RPD = 100' (MS - MSD) / ((MS + MSD) / 2).
MS / MSD spike recoveries and / or %RPD may fall outside of laboratory acceptance criteria due to one or more of the following reasons: a) the sample is inhomogenous
AND contains significant concentrations of analyte relative to the amount spiked, or b) the spiked sample's matrix interferes with the spike recovery.
"joI
NfA = not applicable to this method.
.", = 0",''''0
. on;!
. ~~ --,"-
. .--
...' . .n.'",,,
..
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
~
QA/QC Officer
...
..
I (?1 t)b L.t cq c/
..
"1'
1ERRASEARCH mc. Client Project ID: #11557.E; Arroyo Vista Date Sampled: 01/28/08
257 Wright Brothers Ave. Date Received: 01/28/08
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Reported: 02/04/08
Livennore, CA 94550
Client P.O.: Date Completed: 02/04/08
nWhen Ouslitv Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampb.ll.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
T.lephon.: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
-
.."\
~.,
WorkOrder: 0801673
February 04, 2008
Dear Wakil:
Enclosed within are:
I) The results of the 8 analyzed samples from your project: #11557.E; Arroyo Vista,
2) A QC report for the above samples,
3) A copy of the chain of custody, and
4) An invoice for analytical services.
All analyses were completed satisfactorily and all QC samples were found to be within our control limits.
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to give me a call. Thank you for choosing
McCampbell Analytical Laboratories for your analytical needs.
Best regards,
oL. Q~
Angela Rydelius
Laboratory Manager
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
i
i
.
s,
'"
..,
I~
J1
g
n
1;
c
~
.....
'"
,t.
q
.'
9
~
~
.
08D/&7-3 aln 0 usto y I'UU~-=Z~._ ~t __.L-
'-
..
fil' e
. ~-,,,.,,,,",,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,"'--""."".'~' n
i ~
TIIIIRA!lIIAIIC. 1Nt:. a fn
l'I .t 11' ~
n
on '(JJ ".
0( :il ';: J:
0"..... n~ ..... '-
II, :1(tt 21 tU ~ ~f,
2:11 WRIGHT AnOn-It:nS AVENUE, I.IVERMOR!: CAUFOmll^ (I'l!i~ I PlfDI1f:: (025) 2.1:l.I1M2 l!t- I rJ d 'R.
,tl 2~ ~ st' """,~
M R 'g i$o .. ~i ,<,
jrJ ~ tl TI~ T1ij ?
,~ R r;0. ,~' ~I~
~ !J!, l2! -> .:i' ;5\
~'L1 ..:~ ~'~ ..?~ 11 - "-
fla. ~ ~I1 r~ l~! flit ~~ ,
Samllla If) Dal" flmA MablJl f'rc...rv. Rl~ Uit'l '., f
: ; wL ::1 ,./
~'''':P'l- 0,,:; /-'1 ~ [I - - - - - - -
i -/;f? -.08 I () :<1l& , X X
';:)'(1'1161(.,1>) ~/;-{ {' L Ce .t
~ ....-... .,.....-.......--- ~
~~O-l I 10:}0 ( ..3- X
:1iQS:.41 !3/cl 7">) I 1
, - - - --- - -
~/j-C?,5' ! \ ,
">li [ri, /? (".d">) i- i/ : 0 () t t l/ ,x .L
, -
(~~ Iti- .2- I J!: J{) I 1
5/,2...f}-lg/C,.l>) \ i/ X
-t , - - - - -- ..........- ~ - - -
r::.~~ /3- C.h .:, i I(?~()() I tf >( //x
:;-;'1') l/i>? L- ^) ! J i
Ii ---r- , - -~ -. '"- - - -
~~-z. ,.,) I //2 : /i ; l/ X
/;,./,/ U- I BI C, I
. - -- -~ ...---
~ /::r-C..s, I ,. ;"') 'f ...."- ! \ LI L- X
:::>/f.,-! r', 8,cl]),) III :,ji) =i= i .
, - - - - - - -
:..&~i b - '1. L i .' gO I. t.! X
.1t./".(~ (' t'j)
( , " ~ .." ""- --
-. --- - -
-
Ph'\lect IntOl'ntilllOh 5111111\1e necelpt Rellnqulshed BVl nellnqulMlsd nVI hcllnquls"sd By:
"~<ld NurllO: t1 COOtP8ny~ fJ.;> ,J~." [F.'lTIIliln y; ~ C<jr"lla;;Y;---~-
J~' t "0'" ')
t' I-rr~(/ '7 j " \'/-GIl~ Tnlal Oil, or !l!!!!!mllQr!l .~~ _ v~,_/J:.;:;y'-, " ~. !' .
pm[....iTh: Tlrno~ '1'- Oulo:. /;'.i)/o<? Tkne: 01110: T1rne: Onln:
I ---}y .n j" ~ .~ ..S / :'..;: l:::,
I'J', / :,.. HOB.I S!,Sl:fl Pl!~/ Ir:lh j Plaoo: Plat:B~
.. /.,;.., \.. 1..--"
~OHUlll;,J/l: . ,'~ "'?tJ 11'/.' 7 Pl~ I""'"lAb ;t~, filL,:/-; ~!,l HeinO'; -- Pii;;itiif Name: --
tJ' ( 00 T:>t)'J{),4 k ' I h /C1 T""'P~ll"'1\
P,OJ..,,1 M1inaUb': {/ 4/:: ~~\ r SI~lIC:
l/!,j, . \, ,/-, Confnrmllln r"I'.ord glo~JI,," // flI(J'lAllItO:
:1ompler'fI. sl(]n.....fUro~ t ('/ I R.Cllnrt level ' Z (..'4,.(' /__-- ../
-:2/ / / I }RGut\ns ( IUI'I.\I2 /tllllnqlllahlll:l llVI I nellnqu\alllll\ nvt It''II.!~9~~!!,cd n'r.
/ /")~~k/ COtllflany: IVI '1,- \ Cumpany: vomf)uny:
(., t.J;. - < r 11~611l ! 1 tllvct.l
"/ " Tlmo:.'j 'd1,>; ~ IOnto; r' ....t~' Tlma: ~-=
, ~land8rd S.Da)' \ 'l4-hr ~n.hr 72.111' Tlmo: Onto:
{" . _~...._ . ~~I/ ,,,,:.J ()<:~ -
r'ln"u: I I'lll"n~ r>lat:t>: ..)
(Ploallo Clrcla One) \ 0 h y(.;1\8).- f>"ntodNo~,t IS.lF 0
I Olll ~ P,lulo,' NOlfll\; I P,lntetlHA"'O:
oi''''. '.'""'4'r' "'if . ." /In!. 1 ....~-- 2J.
Sl1JnollllB: i\1fL S~Jn"llIru: QOOO CONomoIt .- SI~P"'TE /'~
l ',(J -+-
, " I nij \ 1", . / HEAD IMeR AUE~ r-- COHTMNiM_
- .., .:'...,.......".;'" ~ ' "', M~"" PREHftYlD IN LA.
Ch .
fC
d
Itefe.ell<'l ,'g
/'
",,>;,
\IOA-10 · G \ MUALlll Ontilll I
PRESERVATION
~
~
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
1534 Willow Pass Rd
Pitlsburg. CA 94565-1701
~ (925)252-9262
CHAIN-Of-CUSTODY RECORD
Page 1 of 1
WorkOrder: 0801673
ClientID: TSIL
DEDF
D Excel
DFax
DEmail
D HardCopy D ThirdParty
Report to:
Wakil Mateen
TERRASEARCH Inc.
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Livermore, CA 94550
Bill to:
Requested TAT:
5 days
Email: wakilm@terrasearchinc.com
TEL: (925) 243-6662 FAX: (925) 243-6663
ProjectNo: #11557.E; Arroyo Vista
po:
Date Received: 01/28/2008
Date Printed: 01/28/2008
agarcia@terrasearchinc.com
Sample ID
ClientSamplD
Matrix
Collection Date Hold
0801673-001 Comp 9-0.5 S9 Soil 1/28/0810:00:00 0 A A
0801673-001 Camp 9A-0.5 Soil 1/28/0810:00:00 0 B
0801673-002 Comp 10-2 S10 Soil 1/28/0810:30:00 0 A
0801673-003 Comp 11-0.5 S11 Soil 1/28/08 11 :00:00 0 A A
0801673-003 Comp 11A-0.5 Soil 1/28/08 11 :00:00 0 B
0801673-004 Comp 12-2 S12 Soil 1/28/08 11 :30:00 D A
0801673-005 Camp 13-0.5 S13 Soil 1/28/0812:00:00 0 A A
0801673-005 Camp 13A-0.5 Soil 1/28/0812:00:00 0 B
0801673-006 Camp 14-2 S14 Soil 1/28/0812:15:00 0 A
0801673-007 Camp 15-0.5 S15 Soil 1/2810812:35:00 0 A A
0801673-007 Camp 15A-0.5 Soil 1/28/08 12:35:00 0 B
0801673-008 Camp 16-2 S16 Soil 1/28/08 1 :00:00 0 A
Test Leqend:
11 1
16 1
1111
12 I
17 I
1121
r 3 1
181
141
191
15 1
[1Q)
8081 S
ASMS S
CAM17MS S
Prepared by: Maria Venegas
Comments:
NOTE: Samples are discarded 60 days after resulls are reported unless other arrangements are made. Hazardous samples will be returned to client or disposed of at client expense.
i
J I ~ I " I , I i I . ,
i
,
,
,
t
--..i
Cf
Ql>
..L
~
..P-...
,
f ,
I '''; Ii /,)
!! crt) "1 0'1>
"\Vhen Oualitv Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg. CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbeltcom E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Telepbone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
Mil
Sample Receipt Checklist
Client Name:
TERRASEARCH Inc.
Date and Time Received: 1/28/08 2:56:35 PM
.-
Project Name:
#11557.E; Arroyo Vista
Checklist completed and reviewed by: Maria Venegas
WorkOrder N': 0801673
Matrix Soil
Carrier:
Client Drop-In
;.H
Chain of Custodv ICOCllnformation
~
Chain of custody present? Yes ~ NoD
Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received? Yes ~ NoD
Chain of custody agrees with sample labels? Yes 0 NoD
Sample IDs noted by Client on COC? Yes ~ NoD
Date and Time of collection noted by Client on COC? Yes ~ NoD
Sampler's name noted on COC? Yes 0 NoD
Sample Receipt Information
Custody seals intact on shipping container/cooler? Yes D NoD NA~
Shipping container/cooler in good condition? Yes ~ NoD
Samples in proper containers/bottles? Yes 0 NoD
Sample containers intact? Yes 0 NoD
Sufficient sample volume for indicated test? Yes 0 NoD
""'"
j,~
Sample Preservation and Hold Time IHTllnformatlon
All samples received within holding time? Yes 0 NoD
ContainerfTemp Blank temperature Cooler Temp: 15.4'C NAD
Water - VOA vials have zero headspace / no bubbles? Yes D NoD No VOA vials submitted 0
Sample labels checked for correct preservation? Yes 0 NoD
TTLC Metal - pH acceptable upon receipt (pH<2)? Yes D NoD NA0
t'-
..
Client contacted:
Date contacted:
Contacted by:
Comments:
..
,.
..
..
..
~fj. McCampbell Analvtical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
,,~, Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
"When OuaJitv Counts" Telephone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
lERRASEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #ll557.E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/28/08
Vista Date Received: 01/28/08
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/28/08
Livermore, CA 94550 Client P.O.: Date Analyzed: 01/29/08-01/30/08
Organochlorine Pesticides by GC-ECD (8080 Basic Target List)*
Extraction Method: SW3550C Analytical Method: SW8081B Work Order: 0801673
Lab ill 0801673-001A 0801673-002A 0801673-003A 0801673-004A Reporting Limit for
Client ill Comp 9-0.5 S9 Comp 10-2 SID Comp 11-0.5 SII Comp 12-2 S 12 DF=I
.
Matrix S S S S
S w
DF 1 1 1 1
Compound Concentration mg/kg flgIL
Aldrin ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
a-BHC ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
b-BHC ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
d-BHC ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
g-BHC ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Chlordane (Technical) ND ND ND ND 0.025 NA
a-Chlordane 0.0043 ND ND ND 0.001 NA
g-Chlordane 0.0029 ND ND ND 0.001 NA
n.n-DDD ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
n.n-DDE ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
n.n-DDT ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Dieldrin 0.0025 ND 0.0022 ND 0.001 NA
Endosulfan I ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Endosulfan II ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Endosulfan sulfate ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Endrin ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Endrin aldehvde ND ND ND ND 0"001 NA
H entachl or ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Hentachlor enoxide ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Hexachlorobenzene ND ND ND ND 0.01 NA
H exachl orocvcl onentadiene ND ND ND ND 0.02 NA
Methoxvchlor ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
Toxanhene ND ND ND ND 0"05 NA
Surrol'ate Recoveries 1%)
o/o8S: I 109 I 104 I III I 108
Comments I I I
· water samples in flg/L, soil/sludge/solid samples in mg/kg, wipe samples in flg/wipe, filter samples in flg/filter, productloil/non-aqueous liquid samples
and all TCLP & SPLP extracts are reported in mg/L.
ND means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means analyte not applicable to this analysis.
# surrogate diluted out of range or surrogate coelutes with another peak/sample contains surrogate.
(h) a lighter than water immiscible sheen/product is present; (i) liquid sample that contains >-1 vol. % sediment; Ul sample diluted due to high
organic content; (k) p,p,- is the same as 4,4,-; (I) florisil (EP A 3620) cleanup; (m) silica-gel (EP A 3630) cleanup; (n) elemental sulfur (EP A 3660)
cleanup; (0) sulfuric acid permanganate (EPA 3665) cleanup; (r) results are reported on a dry weight basis; (p) see attached narrative.
! "1-~
t' '''S ';;l
t,_ . iJ
4~t6
t'ii",
-
,..,
-
-
-
'"'fl!
l!!III'fP'
'!""
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
~ Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
..
,-,-"
,'....
~
a
,.
'..
-
1~
Lft:1 i
'I Jf1
~f!I McCampbell Analvtical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road. Pitt.burg. CA 94565-1701 '"
Web: www.mccampbelLcom E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
r.~ "When Oualitv Counts" Telephone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
TERRASEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #11557.E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/28/08
Vista Date Received: 01/28/08
257 Wright ~rothers A \'e. Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/28/08
Livermore, CA 94550 Client P.O.: Date Analyzed: 01/29/08-01/30/08
Organochlorine Pesticides by GC-ECD (8080 Basic Target List)*
Extraction Method: SW3550C Analytical Method: S W808] B W 011< Order. 0801673
Lab ill 0801673-005A 0801673-006A 0801673-007A 0801673-008A Reporting Limit for
Client ill Comp 13-0.5 513 Comp 14-2 514 Comp 15-0.5 515 Comp 16-2516 DF=1
Matrix S S S S
5 w
DF I I 1 I
Compound Concentration mg/kg flg/L
A]drin ND ND ND ND 0,00] NA
a-BHC ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
b-BHC ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
d-BHC ND ND ND ND 0.001 NA
,,-BHC ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Chlordane ITechnical\ ND ND ND ND 0,025 NA
a-Chi ordane ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
!!-Chlordane ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
n n-DDD ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
n n-DDE ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
n n-DDT ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Dieldrin ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Endosulfan I ND ND ND ND 0,00] NA
Endosu]fan II ND ND ND ND 0,00] NA
Endosu]fan sulfate ND ND ND ND 0,00] NA
Endrin ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Endrin aldehvde ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Hentachlor ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Hentach]or enoxide ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Hexach]orobenzene ND ND ND ND 0.0] NA
H exach] orocvc] onentadiene ND ND ND ND 0.02 NA
Methoxvch]or ND ND ND ND 0.00] NA
Toxanhene ND ND ND ND 0,05 NA
Surro"-ate Recoveries t%'
0/0$5: ]08 ]]6 99 ]0] I
Comments I I I I I
. water samples in flglL, soil/sludge/so]id samples in mglkg, wipe samples in flglwipe, filter samples in flglfilter, product/oil/non-aqueous liquid samples
and all yeLP & SPLP extracts are reported in mg/L.
ND means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means analyte not applicable to this analysis.
# surrogate diluted out ofrange or surrogate coelutes with another peak/sample contains surrogate.
(h) a lighter than water immiscible sheen/product is present; (i) liquid sample that contains >-1 vol. % sediment; U) sample diluted due to high
organic content; (k) p,p,' is the same as 4,4,-; (I) t10risil (EPA 3620) cleanup; (m) silica-gel (EPA 3630) cleanup; (n) elemental sulfur (EPA 3660)
cleanun; (0) sulfuric acid permanganate (EPA 3665) cleanup; (r) results are reported on a dry weight basis; (p) see attached narrative.
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
~ Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
",,'~ r "'\~ 11 b '"
I' (:;) \';'V -r-t'D
It McCampbell Analvtical. Inc. 1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Q~. Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: rnain@mccampbell.com
"\\'ben aualitv Counts" Telephone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
lERRASEARCH InC. Client Project ill: #11557.E; Arroyo Date Sampled: 01/28/08
Vista
257 Wright Brothers Ave. Date Received: 01/28/08
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen Date Extracted: 01/28/08
Livermore, CA 94550
Client P.O.: Date Analyzed 02/01/08
Arsenic by ICP-MS*
E","traction method SW3050B Analytical methods 6020A Work Order: 0801673
Lab ID Client ID Matrix Extraction Type Arseni c DF %SS
0801673-001B S9A-0.5 S TOTAL 5.7 I 113
0801673-003B S IIA-0.5 S TOTAL 5.2 I III
0801673-005B S 13A-0.5 S TOTAL 3.7 I III
0801673-007B S 15A-O.5 S TOTAL 4.4 I 115
Reporting Limit for DF =1; W TOTAL NA J.lg/L
ND means not detected at or S
above the reporting limit TOTAL 0.5 mgIKg
.water samples are reported in Ilg/L, product/oil/non-aqueous liquid samples and all TCLP / STLC / DISTLC / SPLP extracts are reported in
m~, soil/sludge/solid samples in mg/kg, wipe samples in Ilg/wipe, filter samples in Ilg/filter.
# means surrogate diluted out of range; ND means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means not applicable to this sample or
instrument.
TOTAL = acid digestion.
WET = Waste Extraction Test (STLC).
DI WET = Waste Extraction Test using de-ionized water.
i) aqueous sample containing greater than -I vol. % sediment; for DISSOLVED metals, this sample has been preserved prior to filtration; for
TOTAL^ metals, a representative sediment-water mixture was digested; j) reporting limit raised due to insufficient sample amount; k) reporting
limit raised due to matrix interference; m) estimated value due to low/high sumogate recovery, caused by matrix interference; 11) results are
reported on a dry weight basis; p) see attached narrative.
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
fl-- Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
'>'f~.'
...
..
..
!trlli
..
-..
...
..
..'
iii.
..
.,.
..
..
-
M.".':
...
-
-
-
M
..
"When Oualitv Counts"
1"1 (~.
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg. CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail.main@mccampbell.com
Tele bone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
t.tt1't
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
lERRASEARCH Inc.
Client Project ill: #1l557.E; Arroyo
Vista
Date Sampled: 01/28/08
Date Received: 01/28/08
Date Extracted: 01/28/08
Date Analyzed 02102108
257 Wright Brothers Ave.
Client Contact: Wakil Mateen
Client P.O.:
Livermore, CA 94550
CAM / CCR 17 Metals*
,"
Lab ill 0801673-001A 0801673-003A 0801673-005A 0801673-007A Reporting Limit for D F = I:
Client ill Comp 9-0.5 89 Comp 11-0.5 811 Comp 13-0.5 813 Comp 15-0.5 815 ND means not detected
above the reporting limit
Matrix 8 8 8 8 s I W
Extraction Type TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL mg/Kg I mglL
ICP-M8 Metals, Concentration*
Analvtical Method: 6020A Extraction Method: SW3050B Work Order: 0801673
~ilution Factor I
Antimony NO NO NO NO 0.5 NA
Arsenic 4.2 4.8 3.8 5.3 0.5 NA
Barium 280 220 260 250 5.0 NA
Beryllium NO NO 0"52 0.50 05 NA
Cadmium NO NO NO NO 0.25 NA
Chromium 29 39 40 42 0.5 NA
Cobalt 13 9.5 9.3 II 0.5 NA
Copper 18 20 24 23 05 NA
Lead 9.5 19 II 14 0.5 NA
Mercury NO NO 0.078 NO 0.05 NA
Molvbdenum NO NO NO NO 0.5 NA
Nickel 32 38 37 43 05 NA
Selenium NO NO NO NO 05 NA
Silver NO NO NO NO 0.5 NA
Thallium NO NO NO NO 05 NA
Vanadium 55 50 47 52 05 NA
Zinc 50 47 50 55 5.0 NA
%SS: 108 108 107 108
i
I Comments
.water samples are reported in Jlg/L, product/oillnon-aqueous liquid samples and all TCLP / STLC / DISTLC / SPLP extracts are reported in
mg/L, soil/sludge/solid samples in mg/kg, wipe samples in Jlg/wipe, filter samples in Jlg/filter.
# means surrogate diluted out of range; NO means not detected above the reporting limit; N/A means not applicable to this sample or
instrument.
TOTAL = acid digestion.
WET = Waste Extraction Test (STLC)"
DI WET = Waste Extraction Test using de-ionized water.
....
i) aqueous sample containing greater than -I vol. % sediment; for DISSOLVED metals, this sample has been preserved prior to filtration; for
TOT AL^ metals, a representative sediment-water mixture was digested; j) reporting limit raised due to insufficient sample amount; J) analyte
detected below quantitation limits; k) reporting limit raised due to matrix interference; m) estimated value due to lowlhigh surrrogate recovery,
caused by matrix interference; n) results are reported on a dry weight basis; p) see attached narrative.
..
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
v~ Angela Rydelius, Lab Manager
...
I i1 ~ '-tct~
-
"When Oualitv Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbel1.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Tele hone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
!!1ft
QC SUMMARY REPORT FOR SW8081B
w.o. Sample Matrix: Soil
QC Matrix: Soil
WorkOrder 0801673
EPA Method SWBOB1B Extraction SW3550C BatchlD: 33465 Spiked Sample ID: 0801673-008A
Analyte Sample Spiked MS MSD MS-MSD LCS LCSD LCS-LCSD Acceptance Criteria (%)
mglkg mglkg % Rec. % Rec. %RPD % Rec. % Rec. %RPD MS I MSD RPD LCS/LCSD RPD
Aldrin NO 0.010 87.1 866 0.556 94.4 98.1 3.85 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
g-BHC NO 0.010 72.3 72.7 0.461 74.7 75.3 0.843 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
p,p-DDT ND 0.025 712 72.4 1.59 72.4 75.3 3.72 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
Dieldrin ND 0.025 97.3 98.9 1.65 87.2 88.3 1.31 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
Endrin NO 0.025 88.9 91 2.27 87.4 90.4 3.47 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
Heptachlor ND 0.010 76.9 78.6 2.18 79.1 81 2.40 70 - 130 30 70 - 130 30
%5S: 101 0.050 110 118 6.92 108 112 3.47 70 - 130 30 70 - J30 30
All target compounds in the Method Blank of this extraction batch were ND less than the method RL with the following exceptions:
NONE
"'~
~~L
..
~
.....
Sample 10
Date Sampled
BATCH 33465 SUMMARY
Date Extracted Date Analyzed Sample 10
Date Sampled
Date Extracted Date Analyzed
080J673-001A 01/28/08 10:00 AM OJ/28/08 01/30/085:09 PM 0801673-002A 01/28/08 10:30 AM 01/28/08 01/30/086:06 PM I
0801673-003A 01/28/08 11:00 AM 01/28/08 01/29/088:36 AM 0801673-004A OJ/28/08 I] :30 AM 01/28/08 01/29/089:32 AM
0801673-005A 01/28/0812:00 PM 01/28/08 01/29/08 10:28 AM 0801673-006A 01/28/0812:15 PM 01/28/08 01/30/087:03 PM I
0801673-007 A 01/28/08 ] 2: 35 PM 01/28/08 01/29/08 11:24 AM 0801673-008A 01/28/08 I :00 PM 01/28/08 01/29/0812:21 PM I
..,
..,
it,
-
liI!l"
..,
lfllMiJ
..,
jyMi
""
MS = Matrix Spike; MSD - Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS = Laboratory Control Sample; LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate; RPD = Relative Percent Deviation.
","",'.
% Recovery = 100. (MS-Sample) / (Amount Spiked); RPD = 100. (MS - MSD) 1 ((MS + MSD) 12).
MS 1 MSD spike recoveries and lor %RPD may fall outside of laboratory acceptance criteria due to one or more of the following reasons: a) the sample is inhomogenous AND
contains significant concentrations of analyte relative to the amount spiked, or b) the spiked sample's matrix Interferes with the spike recovery.
""""OJ
N/A = not enough sample to perform matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate.
NR = analyte concentration in sample exceeds spike amount for soil matrix or exceeds 2x spike amount for water matrix or sample diluted due to high matrix or analyte content
ft'"
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
~ QAlQC Officer
1IIIft"
.".-_-::i _ ~.-......_'..~___-":"-_'-"_'J'J'_-'
MIiIiIt
"..
'MlitJiW
It'"
.....
,""'
..
\ 7<6 00 '1 At(
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-1701
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbell.com
Tele hone: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
"When Oualitv Counts"
QC SUMMARY REPORT FOR 6020A
w.o. Sample Matrix: Soil/Soil
QC Matrix: Soil
WorkOrder 0801673
EPA Method 6020A Extraction SW3050B BatchlD: 33410 S piked Sam p Ie 10 0801636-012A
Sample Spiked MS MSD MS-MSD Spiked LCS LCSD LCS-LCSD Acceptance Criteria (%)
Analyte
mg/Kg mg/Kg % Ree. % Rec. % RPD mg/Kg % Ree. % Ree. %RPD MS / MSD RPD LCS/LCSD RPD
Antimony ND 50 107 106 0.468 10 103 104 1.84 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Arsenic 2.7 50 101 99 1.48 10 102 103 1.46 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Barium 230 500 106 107 0.837 100 108 110 1.84 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Beryllium 0.62 50 114 114 0 10 112 112 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Cadmium ND 50 99.5 98.9 0.583 10 97.1 98.6 1.56 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Chromium 35 50 86.1 85.4 0.475 10 101 103 1. 86 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Cobalt IS 50 89.1 89.2 0.0336 10 92 92 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Copper 18 50 79.9 78.8 0.899 10 88.9 90.4 1.75 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Lead 13 50 102 102 0 10 102 101 0.295 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Mercury ND 1.25 93.9 94.3 0.416 0.25 96.4 96.3 0.0415 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Molybdenum ND 50 92.1 91.9 0.194 10 94 96.2 2.32 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Nickel 16 50 94.7 94.4 0.252 10 104 105 1.43 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Selenium ND 50 108 102 4.91 10 103 103 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Silver ND 50 118 119 0.572 10 119 119 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Thallium ND 50 101 101 0 10 101 101 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Vanadium 130 50 92.8 95.4 0.744 10 102 103 0.979 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Zinc 62 500 97.4 97.1 0.201 100 109 III 1.46 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
O/OSS: 112 250 113 lIS 2.25 250 III 113 0.929 70 - 130 20 70 - 130 20
All target compounds in the Method Blank of this extraction batch were ND less than the method RL with the following exceptions:
NONE
Sample 10
BATCH 33410 SUMMARY
Date Sampled Date Extracted Date Analyzed Sample 10
Date Sampled Date Extracted Date Analyzed
0801673-001A )]/28/08 10:00 AM 01/28/08 02/02/08 1:54 AM 0801673-001B 11/28/08 10:00 AM 01/28/08 n/01/08 II :38 PM
0801673-003A ) 1/28/08 II :00 AM 01/28/08 02/02/082:01 AM 0801673-005A )1/28/08 12:00 PM 01/28/08 02/02/08209 AM
0801673-005B )1/28/08 12:00 PM 01/28/08 02/01/089:29 PM 0801673-007A )]/28/08 12:35 PM 01/28/08 02/02/08 I :39 AM
0801673-007B )1/28/08 12:35 PM 01/28/08 02/01/089:37 PM
MS - Matrix Spike; MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS - Laboratory Control Sample; LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate; RPD - Relative Percent Deviation.
% Recovery = 100' (MS-Sample) / (Amount Spiked); RPD = 100' (MS - MSD) / ((MS + MSD) / 2).
MS / MSD spike recoveries and lor %RPD may fall outside of laboratory acceptance criteria due to one or more of the following reasons: a) the sample is inhomogenous
AND contains significant concentrations of analyte relative to the amount spiked, or b) the spiked sample's matrix interferes with the spike recovery.
N/A = not applicable to this method.
.'0 _
. .~i"o
...,~ .
. .... '".. ..
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
vi2- QAlQC Officer
..
11~
..
"When Oualitv Counts"
1534 Willow Pass Road, Pittsburg, CA 94565-170 I
Web: www.mccampbell.com E-mail: main@mccampbcll.com
Tele hODe: 877-252-9262 Fax: 925-252-9269
fl!lIIP
McCampbell Analvtical. Inc.
QC SUMMARY REPORT FOR 6020A
W.O. Sample Matrix: Soil
QC Matrix: Soil
WorkOrder 0801673
I!l!I!I!t'l1
EPA Method 6020A Extraction SW3050B BatchlD: 33444 Spiked Sample 10 0801502-202A
Analyte Sample Spiked MS MSD MS-MSD Spiked LCS LCSD LCS-LCSD Acceptance Criteria (%)
mglKg mg/Kg % Rec. % Ree. %RPD mg/Kg % Ree. % Ree. %RPD MS/MSD RPD LCSILCSD RPD
Antimony ND 50 119 120 0.449 10 104 105 0.961 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Arsenic 4.0 50 III 110 1.20 10 93.5 98.2 4.85 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Barium 82 500 114 115 1.25 100 94.6 95.4 0.864 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Beryllium ND 50 III III 0 10 99.3 101 1.66 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Cadmium ND 50 III 110 0.163 10 95.2 96.8 1.63 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Chromium 25 50 106 106 0 10 99.6 101 1.80 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Cobalt 10 50 109 110 0.939 10 101 101 0 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Copper 16 50 129 III 11.7 10 94.4 96.2 1. 85 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Lead 5.8 50 1]2 113 0.837 10 III 113 1.69 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Mercury 0.057 1.25 III 114 2.66 0.25 118 116 1.44 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Molybdenum ND 50 III 114 2.37 10 85.1 85.2 00705 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Nickel 25 50 112 112 0 10 95.5 96.8 1.42 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Selenium ND 50 104 108 4.03 10 90.4 94 3.85 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Silver ND 50 116 117 0.497 10 111 110 0631 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Thallium ND 50 112 113 0.728 10 109 110 0.822 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Vanadium 58 50 105 105 0 10 101 102 0.0986 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
Zinc 44 500 III 112 0.750 100 962 97.6 1.51 70 - 130 20 80 - 120 20
O/OSS: 118 250 116 116 0 250 87 87 0 70 - 130 20 70 - 130 20
All target compounds in the Method Blank of this extraction batch were ND less than the method RL with the following exceptions:
NONE
-
--
...
-
..
-
J;i.<il4
..
....
..
..,
Sample ID
I 0801673-003B
BATCH 33444 SUMMARY
Date Sampled Date Extracted Date Analyzed Sample ID
)]/28/0811:00 AM 01128/08 )2/01/08 11:46 PM I
-
Date Sampled Date Extracted Date Analyzed
-
..
..
...
MS = Matrix Spike; MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS = Laboratory Control Sample; LCSD = Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate; RPD = Relative Percent Deviation.
..
% Recovery = 100' (MS-Sample) 1 (Amount Spiked); RPD = 100' (MS - MSD) 1 ((MS + MSD) 12).
#'1ll'';;
MS 1 MSD spike recoveries and 1 or %RPD may fall outside of laboratory acceptance criteria due to one or more of the following reasons: a) the sample is inhomogenous
AND contains significant concentrations of analyte relative to the amount spiked, or b) the spiked sample's matrix interferes with the spike recovery.
....
N/A = not applicable to this method.
'0 = ~M''''_
. _~__,_ _~M_~_ _~'"_ ~__.._. ,_
....
DHS ELAP Certification NO 1644
~ QAlQC Officer
Mh.
....
-
,,-
1'60 Zfb ~i
%1'-1
.
~
~~
~~
~
ASBESTOS TEM LABORATORIES, INC.
EP A Interim Method
Polarized Light Microscopy
Analytical Report
Laboratory Job # 299-00523
630 Bancroft Way
Berkeley, CA 94710
(510) 704-8930
FAX (510) 704-8429
WV'oI'N. asbestostemlabs. com
$;ii
With Branch Offices Located At:
1016 GREG S1REET, SPARKS, NY 89431
Ph. (775) 359-3377
'ii>i!lI
~
-
~
~
\<6 i ()D 4~~
Accredited by
~w[&~
..
..,,'"
ASBESTOS TEM LABORATORIES, INC
NVlAP Lab Code: 101891-'>
CA DOHS ELAP
-
Feb-Ol-08
~
Melissa Valles
McCampbell Analytical
1534 Willow Pass Road
Pitts burg, CA 94565
-
RE:
LABORATORY JOB # 299-00523
Polarized light microscopy analytical results for 16 bulk sample(s).
Job Site: Arroyo Vista
Job No.: 11557 E
....
fij.\t.
...
Enclosed please find the bulk material analytical results for one or more samples submitted for asbestos
analysis. The analyses were performed in accordance with EPA Method 600/R-93/ll6 or 600/M4-82-020 for
the determination of asbestos in bulk building materials by polarized light microscopy (PLM). Please note that
while PLM analysis is commonly performed on non-friable and fine grained materials such as floor tiles and
dust, the EP A method recognizes that PLM is subject to limitations. In these situations, accurate results may
only be obtainable through the use of more sophisticated and accurate techniques such as transmission electron
microscopy (TEM) or X-ray diffraction (XRD).
wf
-
-
Prior to analysis, samples are logged-in and all data pertinent to the sample recorded. The samples are checked
for damage or disruption of any chain-of-custody seals. A unique laboratory ID number is assigned to each
sample. A hard copy log-in sheet containing all pertinent information concerning the sample is generated. This
and all other relevant paper work are kept with the sample throughout the analytical procedures to assure proper
analysis.
....
iIIIh
-
III!
Each sample is opened in a class 100 HEP A negative air hood. A representative sampling of the material is
selected and placed onto a glass microscope slide containing a drop of refractive index oil. The glass slide is
placed under a polarizing light microscope where standard mineralogical techniques are used to analyze and
quantify the various materials present, including asbestos. The data is then compiled into standard report format
and subjected to a thorough quality assurance check before the information is released to the client.
-
..
-
Sincerely Yours,
tiiWi"
;7!!~. ~~
..
Lab Manager
ASBESTOS TEM LABORATORIES, INC.
~';;;'i';
1IIIfIt,
--- These results relate only to the samples tested and must not be reproduced, except in full, with the approval
of the laboratory. This report must not be used to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other agency of
the U.S. Government. ---
..
II'!"
"".
630 BANCROFT WAY .
www.asbestostemlabs.com
BERKELEY, CA 94710 . (510)704-8930 . FAX (510)704-8429
With Offices in Reno, NV (775) 359-3377
-
"'",
\.....
,~
~
~
>~M
~
'ftff
POLARIZED LIGHT MICROSCOPY
ANALYTICAL REPORT
1 ~ ~l.lfb t..ti:( 't
EP A Method 600/R-93/116 or 600/M4-82-020
Page: ! of ~
Contact: Melissa Valles Samples Indicated: 16 Report No. 067009
. Reg. Samples Analyzed: 16 Date Submitted: Jan-28-08
Address:McCampbell Analytical Split Layers Analyzed: 0
Date Reported: Feb-Ol-08
1534 Willow Pass Road
Pittsburg, CA 94565 Job Site / No. Arroyo Vista
11557 E
OTHER DATA
1) Non-Asbestos Fibers DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE ill ASBESTOS 2) Matrix Materials FIELD
0/0 TYPE 3) Date/Time Collected LAB
4) Date Analyzed
0801640-009A 1)None Detected Soil
N one Detected 2)99-100% Gyp, Calc, Bndr, Other
m.D.
Lab ID # 299-00523-001 3\1 an-25-08 1150 41 Feb-Ol-08 Soil-Beige
0801640-010A 1 )None Detected Soil
None Detected 2)99-100% Gyp, Calc, Bndr, Other
m.n.
Lab ID # 299-00523-002 3) Jan-25-08 1200 4) Feb-01-08 Soil-Tan
0801640-011A 1)None Detected Soil
None Detected 2)99-100% Gyp, Calc, Bndr, Other
mn
Lab ID # 299-00523-003 3)Jan-25-08 1205 4)Feb-01-08 Soil-Tan
0801640-012A 1)None Detected Soil
None Detected 2)99-100% Gyp, Calc, Bndr, Other
m.D.
Lab ID # 299-00523-004 3) Jan-25-08 12: 15 41Jan-31-08 Soil-Tan
0801640-013A 1)1-5% Cellulose Soil
<10/0 Chrysotile 2)95-99% Calc, Qtz, Lzdt, Other
m.D.
Lab ID # 299-00523-005 ) Jan-25-08 12:25 4)Feb-01-08 Soil-Brown
0801640-014A 1 )]-5% Cellulose Soil
None Detected 2) 95-99% Gyp, Calc, Mica, Other
mn
Lab ID # 299-00523-006 3) Jan-25-08 12:35 4)Jan-31-08 Soil-Tan
0801640-015A 1)None Detected Soil
None Detected 2)99-100% Gyp, Calc, Bndr, Other
mn
Lab ID # 299-00523-007 3) Jan-25-08 12:40 4)Jan-31-08 Soil-Tan
0801640-016A 1)1-5% Cellulose Soil
None Detected 2) 95-99% Gyp, Calc, Mica, Other
mn
Lab ID # 299-00523-008 3) Jan-25-08 12:50 4Jan-31-08 Soil-Tan
0801640-017 A 1)None Detected Soil
None Detected 2)99-100% Qtz, Calc, Opq, Other
m.D.
Lab ID # 299-00523-009 3) Jan-25-08 13 :00 4)Feb-01-08 Soil-Brown
0801640-018A 1)1-5% Cellulose Soil
None Detected 2) 95-99% Gyp, Calc, Mica, Other
- mn
Lab ID # 299-00523-010 3) Jan-25-08 13:05 4)Jan-31-08 Soil-Brown
Detection Limit of Method is Estimated to be 1 % Asbestos Using a Visual Area Estimation Technique
7C'~ A..e~--~ ~~----
Lab QC Reviewer -- Analyst
ASBESTOS TEM LABORATORIES, INC. 630 Bancroft Way, Berkeley CA 94710 (510) 704-8930
www.asbestostemlabs.com With Offices in Reno, NV (775) 359-3377
Contact: Melissa Valles Samples Indicated: 16 Report No. 067009
Reg. Samples Analyzed: 16 Date Submitted: J811-28-08
Address:McCampbell Analytical Split Layers Analyzed: 0 Date Reported:
Feb-Ol-08
1534 Willow Pass Road
Pitts burg, CA 94565 Job Site / No. Arroyo Vista
11557 E
OTHER DATA DESCRIPTION
1) Non-Asbestos Fi bers
SAMPLE ill ASBESTOS 2) Matrix Materials FIELD
3) OatelTime Collected
0/0 TYPE 4) Date Analyzed LAB
1 )<1 % Cellulose Soil
0801640-019A
<10/0 Tremolite 2) 100-100% Fldsp, Calc, Other m.p.
Lab ID # 299-00523-011 3\Jan-25-0813:15 41Jan-31-08 Soil-Tan
0801640-020A 1)None Detected Soil
None Detected 2)99-100% Gyp, Calc, Bndr, Other
mn
LabID# 299-00523-012 3) Jan-25-08 13 :20 4)Jan-31-08 Soil-Grey
1 )None Detected Soil
0801640-021A None Detected 2)99-100% Gyp, Calc, Bndr, Other
mn
Lab ID # 299-00523-013 3) Jan-25-08 13:30 4)Feb-01-08 Soil-Brown
1)N one Detected Soil
0801640-022A None Detected 2)99-100% Qtz, Calc, Opq, Other
m.n.
Lab ID # 299-00523-014 3) Jan-25-08 13:35 4\Feb-Ol-08 Soil-Brown
1)None Detected Soil
0801640-023A None Detected 2)99-100% Qtz, Calc, Opq, Other
m.n. .
LabID# 299-00523-015 ) Jan-25-08 13 :45 4)Jan-31-08 Soil- Tan
0801640-024A 1)None Detected Soil
<10/0 Tremolite 2) 100-100% Other m.p., Fldsp, Gyp
Lab ID # 299~00523-016 3) Jan-25-08 13:50 4)Feb-01-08 Soil-Brown
1)
2)
Lab ID # 3) 4)
1)
2)
Lab ID # 3) 4)
1)
2)
Lab ID # 3) 4)
1)
2)
Lab ID # 3) 4)
POLARIZED LIGHT MICROSCOPY
ANALYTICAL REPORT
EP A Method 600/R-93/116 or 600/M4-82-020
l ~ 'l/~
Page:
-
'-1q~
-
'il!Wi
~ of ~
-
~;
..
-
....
b.c~
-
...
..
-
....
#@i
-
-
..
~
Detection Limit of Method is Estimated to be 1 % Asbestos Using a Visual Area Estimation Technique
7"/U-<- ~~~ ~~~--
Lab QC Reviewer Analyst
ASBESTOS TEM LABORATORIES, INC. 630 Bancroft Way, Berkeley CA 94710 (510) 704-8930
www.asbestostemlabs.com With Offices in Reno, NV (775) 359-3377
...
~--
..
~
~
:.l
~
-:r-
~
McCampbell A.:alytical, Inc.
.. n' ~ 1534 Willow PIS s Rd
r\~ Pillsburg, CA 91.:565-1701
'W"~ Phone: (925)2i:2-9262
. Fax: (925) 2;:2-9269
CHAIN-Of-CUSTODY RECORD
Page I of I
VVork()rder 0801640
ClientlD: TSIL
EDF: NO
Subcontractor:
Abeslos TEM Laboratcries
630 Bancroft Way
Berkeley, CA 94710
TEL:
FAX:
ProieclNo:
Acct #:
(510) 704-8930
(510) 704-8429
#11557.E; Arroyo Visla
N/A
Dnle Received: 01/25/2008
Do.le Prillled: 01/25/2008
Sample 10
Collection Date
C IlamtsamplO
TAT IASbestos-r~
R~quested Tests
0801640-009A
I-OB01640-010A:
i 0801640-011A!
0801640-012A!
0801640-013A'
0801640-014A'
--. ,-_... -_._..~. .----.
0801640-015A
0801640-016A
..-.. --- ."-
0801640-017A ~_
0801640-018A i
0801640-019A i-.
0801640-020A
0801640-021 A
0801640-022A i
08~164~:0~3P,1
0801640-D24A :
Comments:
Matrix
L:.A-=-i::D-:5-'- ,J I Soil 1/25/08 11 :50:00 -AM i Slandard I 1
_._.. _ ~-2-0.5' ~-SOil 1/25/0812:00:.00 PMlitai1dard~ 1.. ._>--_
LA-3-0.5' v' Soil 1/25/0812:05:00 PMJStandard 1 i
LA-4-O.5'- /J-:u S~~__~/25/~812:15:00 Pr;,l:Standardi ~_I
~-5-0.5' ,Soil, 1/25/08 _12:25:~PM Standard I 1 i
LA-6-0.5' Ii' Soil i 1/25/0812:35:00 PM 'Slandardi 1
LA-]-0.5' ..1----Soil --. I 1/25/0812:40.00 PM !Standard:- -1 .
'LA-8-0.5' ,/ ; Soli : 1/25/08 1-2:50:00 PM .4;tandard 1 '
LA-9-0.5'~- Soil I 1/25/081:00:00 PM ,Sta-;;dard--- 1 -..J
~-10-0.5~_! -1. Soil L 1/25/08'1:05:00 ~~_:Stan~ard: _ _ 1 1---
~-11-0.5' if I Soil 1/25/081:15:00 PM 'Standard,' 1 .
~-12-0.5'.1 Soii---~51081:20:00 P~ IStandard 1 ,
lA-13-0.5~, Soil I 1/35/081:30:00 pMlStandard1-. 1 _ --1- . --ll',-
lA-14-0.5' I ~25/081:35:00PM 'Standard 1 I t-
tA:::i5..o:i5' /_-l___~Oil ! 1125/081:45:00PM ;~tandard' : ~__ I .-
~-16-0.5' I I Soil 1/25/081:50:00 PM iStandard: 1 ..-.
, -.--' I _.__1.
.--.------+ -
l~~
I
...L__.
I
------'-r--
I
f
I
-1--
,
- ----.---- .-- --I
;
PLEASE USE 'CLIENTSAMPID' AS THE SAMPLE ID AND EMAIL ASAP!
Please email results to Melissa Valles at s~bdata(lV,mccampbell.com upon completion.
-. -- . __u ~ ---L-DateITime' ~ ~D~~trri~e f5 C'
! R.II.....,. by' .A,{( \[~ J.'tf!/ tf5 _ ~ R",,;,,,, by, ~~ ?tg-
:ReIl'.'""'b~/f17!~;(~,,~;;~;J ;R.~ 1{~[o~C!_17;;<>
I l ~ i . l , , "'
TABLE 1
LABORATORY ANAL YTICAL RESULTS OF SOIL SAMPLES FOR OCP & CAM 17 METALS
6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin, CA
Project No. 11557.E
January 25/28, 2008
['650() ,t.fq~
,
Comp-I-O.5 <0.001 0.010 0.012 <0.001 <0.001 <0.5 4.0 230 <0.5 <0.25 43 ]2 19 9.9 <0.05 <0.5 48 <0.5 0.63 <0.5 43 42
Comp-2-2 <0.001 0.0048 0.0068 0.0022 0.0014 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Comp-3-0.5 0.0012 0.0011 <0.001 <0.001 <0.00] <0.5 4.7 250 <0.5 <0.25 44 12 23 13 <0.05 <0.5 48 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 52 49
Comp-4-2 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.00] <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Comp-5-0.5 <0.001 <0.001 <0,001 <0.00] <0.001 <0.5 , 4.9 380 <0.5 <0.25 39 8.2 23 9.3 <0.05 <0.5 35 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 45 39
Comp-6-2 <0.001 0.0017 0.0014 <0.001 <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA N&. NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Comp-7-0.5 <0.001 0.0011 0.0012 <0.001 <0.001 <0.5 4.7 200 <0.5 <0.25 41 10 22 11 0.051 0.051 47 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 43 55
Comp-8-2 <0.001 <0.00] <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Comp-9-0.5 <0.00] 0.0043 0.0029 0.0025 <0.001 <0.5 4.2 280 <0.5 <0.25 29 13 18 9.5 <0.05 <0.5 32 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 55 50
Comp-1O-2 <0.00] <0.001 <0.001 <0.00] <0.00] NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Comp-I ] -0.5 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.0022 <0.00] <0.5 4.8 220 <0.5 <0.25 39 9,5 20 19 <0.05 <0.5 38 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 50 47
Comp-12-2 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Comp-13-0.5 <0.001 <0.00] <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.5 3.8 260 0.52 <0.25 40 9.3 24 11 0.078 <0.5 37 <0.5 <0.5 < 0.5 47 50
Comp-14-2 <0.00] <0.00] <0.001 <0.00] <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Comp-15-0.5 <0.00] <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.5 5.3 250 0.50 <0.25 42 11 23 14 <0.05 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 52 55
Comp-] 6-2 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
M-l * NA NA NA NA NA <0.5 4.9 220 - <0.5 <0.25 41 10 23 11 <0.05 <0.5 52 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 49 51
M-l * NA NA NA NA NA <0.5 5.5 250 <0.5 NA 45 12 24 10 <0.05 <0.5 52 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 54 50
M-3 * NA NA NA NA NA 0.54 5.9 260 <0.5 <0.25 49 12 26 35 0.081 <0.5 58 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 56 68
M-4 * NA NA NA NA NA <0.5 6.5 420 0.59 NA 51 11 24 14 <0.05 <0.5 50 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 66 60
ESLs 1.6 0.44 0.44 0.034 0.053 6.1 0.38 750 4.0 1.7 750 40 230 200 1.0 40 150 10 20 1.2 15 600
it
Of
,'"
'T
DDE
.. Sb
As
Ba
Be
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Hg
Pb
Mo
Ni
Se
Ag
TI
V
Zn
NA
<
mg/Kg
*
ESLs
DicWorodiphenyldichloroethy lene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Mercury
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Seienium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Not analyzed.
Less than laboratory detection limit.
Milligrams per kilogram, equivalent to parts per million (ppm).
Background metals samples, (July I I, 2007)
Environmental Screening Levels for Shallow Soils and Groundwater (less than 3 meters) by RWQCB, November 2007.
I ~CtJ Ob y.t14
TABLE 2
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL RESULTS OF SOIL
SAMPLES FOR ARSENIC, LBP & ASBESTOS
6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin, CA
Project No. 11557.E
January 25/28, 2008
","{>Ii'
1i~1~?0T~~r;~~'~~-"~~~~y~1~+~:~. ~~~-~~" ;:;;~~ ~l;~\71~~
, . I~ ~ ,~t~~tI!t~~j~ ;, 1fJ,Q21~v: {
L:, " _._~k!_._", _. _ __ .1.. .. ' ___ ~.'j"d;~.,.j
SIA-O.5 NA 4.4 NA
S3A-O.5 NA 4.2 NA
S5A-O.5 NA 6,0 NA
S7 A-O.5 NA 4.3 NA
S9A-O.5 NA 5.7 NA
SIIA-O.5 NA 5.2 NA
S13A-O.5 NA 3.7 NA
SI5A-O.5 NA 4.4 NA
LA1-O.5 <1% NA 9.9
LA2-0.5 <1% NA 9.2
LA3-0.5 <1% NA 8.5
LA4-0.5 <1% NA 5.2
LA5-0.5 <1% NA 15
LA6-0.5 <1% NA ]2
LA7-0.5 <1% NA 6.4
LA8-0.5 <1% NA 20
LA9-0.5 <1% NA 8.0
LAIO-O.5 <1% NA ]3
LAI1-O.5 <1% NA 8.8
LAI2-0.5 <1% NA 32
LAI3-0.5 <1% NA 7.9
LA14-0.5 <1% NA ]5
LAI5-0.5 <1% NA ]2
LA16-0.5 <1% NA 6.3
ESLs --- 0.38 200
..
<
ArseDic
Lead
Not analyzed
Less than laboratory detectioD limit.
Milligrams per kilogram, equivaleDt to parts per million (ppm).
EDvironmental Screening Levels for Shallow Soils and GrouDdwater
(less than 3 meters) by RWQCB, November 2007.
As
Pb
NA
....
mglKg
ESLs
...
.
,tlM
tC61 00 ~C11.'
IProll
1208 Main Street, Redwood City, CA 94063
(650) 569-4020 Fax (650) 569-4023
Con sui tin U & [n U I nee r in U
.'#;jj
Date: Septem ber ] ], 2007
Report #: 667-AA07
DOSH Certified Site Surveillance Technician: Robert Newman
Certificate No.: 00-2767
LIMITED ASBESTOS SURVEY AND EVALUATION
CONDUCTED AT:
6700 Dougherty Road
Dublin, California
PREPARED FOR:
Citation Homes
404 Saratoga A venue, Suite 100
Santa Clara, CA. 95050
PREPARED BY:
PROTECH CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING
September 2007
Glen Koutz
Cal-OSHA Certified Asbestos Consultant
Certificate #92-0019
'$di
~<<iII
....
.~"'IOJ
-
\~~ ObLf'ti
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ASBESTOS BUILDING SURVEY REPORT
REPORT BODY
Introduction Page 3
Results Page 4
ACM Evaluation and Assessment Page 10
Conclusions and Recommendations Page 12
Discussion Page 13
· Asbestos and its uses
· Current asbestos regulations
Exclusions and Report Limitations Page 14
-
Survey Methodology Page 15
ApPENDICES
PLM Laboratory Reports Appendix 1
"",",".
~..
~
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 2
..,..'
I <tG1 (Jb
,.,I.l"
\,1":: . ,i
, .
INTRODUCTION
''ri
On August 23, 2007, ProTech Consulting and Engineering performed a pre-demolition
inspection for asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and asbestos-containing construction
materials (ACCM) of a multi-unit housing complex located at 6700 Dougherty Road,
Dublin, California. ProTech's asbestos inspection services were conducted at the request of
Mr. Stephen Christensen with Citation Homes, of Santa Clara, California,
The following report presents the results of ProTech's asbestos building survey, Asbestos-
related consulting services were conducted by Mr. Robert Newman, Mr. Newman is a Cal-
OSHA Certified Site Surveillance Technician, certificate number 00-2767. The objective of
ProTech's asbestos inspection was limited to providing the following scope of services:
. Conduct a non-demolition inspection of the subject site to identify, inventory, and
catalog visibly accessible suspect friable and non-friable asbestos-containing
materials (ACM);
. Collect samples of suspect ACM for laboratory analysis;
. Submit suspect ACM samples for laboratory analysis by polarized light microscopy
(PLM) to determine asbestos content;
. Evaluate and assess the friability and condition of identified ACM;
. Identify the approximate location of each ACM;
. Make general recommendations as appropriate.
'PiIi
Limitations:
Asbestos inspection services were limited by the client to a survey of 16 housing units
and the community center. The units surveyed by ProTech comprise approximately
10% of the total housing units within the community. The construction materials appear
to be largely homogeneous throughout the site. ProTech did not inspect any units other
than those specifically addressed in this report.
The information contained in this report is limited to those areas and suspect asbestos
materials found to be visually accessible through reasonable means. No demolition of
building materials was conducted to determine the presence of asbestos in wall cavities,
chases or other inaccessible areas. ProTech cannot warrant that this building does not
contain ACM in locations other than those noted in this report, however, a good faith effort
was made to conduct a comprehensive survey within the limitations of the stated scope of
services. This report presents a complete record of all significant findings, evaluations and
sample results.
~-
Thank you for using ProTech Consulting and Engineering. Please feel free to call with any
questions or concerns regarding this report at (650) 569-4020.
...
....,
....
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes /6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
.lob No. 667-AA07
Page 3
,~
lCfD Vb ~~
RESUL TS
The following is an inventory of the suspect asbestos-containing materials identified during
ProTech's inspection of the subject site, The table provides the following information:
I.
2.
3.
4.
Item number: A reference number assigned to each identified homogeneous suspect asbestos material type.
SusDect Asbestos Material DescriDtion: A description of each identified suspect asbestos material type.
PLM SamDle #'s: ldentifies the sample number(s) associated with a specific suspect asbestos material.
Asbestos Content: Report of corresponding laboratory results. Materials found to contain asbestos during
laboratory analysis are highlighted in bold italicized type face.
c
"t C t
d Offi
ommumry en er an lees
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
I Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, None detected
throughout 06, 07
2 White sheetrock surfacing texture- throughout 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, None detected
13, 14
3 Tan 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - mixed with IS} 16} 17* None detected to
carpet throughout <1% C hr_ysotile
4 Black mastic under tan 12 x12 vinyl floor HB} 16B} 17B 7% Chrysotile
tile - mixed with carpet throughout
5 Beige 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - top layer in day care 18, 19 None detected
6 Yellow mastic under beige 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - top l8B,19B None detected
layer in day care
7 White sheet flooring - daycare restroom and storage 20 None detected
closet
8 Tan pebble pattern sheet flooring - janitor 21 70% Chrysotile
closet in day care
9 Yellow carpet mastic - offices 22, 23 None detected
10 Brown baseboard mastic - warehouse and daycare in 24 None detected
janitor closet and laundry room
11 White 12 x 12 glued up ceiling tiles with brown mastic- 25, 26 None detected
day care
12 Yellow ceramic tile mastic - warehouse bathroom walls 27 None detected
13 Gray ceramic tile mortar - warehouse bathroom floors 28 None detected
14 Gray exterior stucco - throughout 29, 30 None detected
15 Brown composition shin.gle roof - throughout 31,32 None detected
16 Black roof tar paper 33, 34 None detected
*No asbestos detected 111 sample
U "t #20 (S" I St
2 b d
)
m mg]e ory e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
17 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throughout
18 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
]9 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
20 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 07B 10% Chrysotile
floor tile - throughout
21 Gray ceramic tile mortar - bathrooms 09 None detected
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes /6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 4
..
lii:!iil~'-;
..
Wf.l:
!ii>:~
....
lOP
..
..
...'
..
~
...-
-
J?t (O{) 4t1<l
22 Gray transite columns - front entry 10 20% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
23 Gray exterior stucco - throughout 11 None detected
24 Brown comDosition shingle roof 12, 13 None detected
25 Black roof tar DaDer 14, 15 None detected
m wo-s or
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
26 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03,04 None detected
throughout
27 White sheetrock surfacing texture- throughout 05, 06, 07, 08 None detected
28 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 09 None detected
29 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 09B 10% Chrysotile
floor tite - throufdlOut
30 Tan pebble pattern sheet flooring - 2tod floor 11 70% Chrysotite
bathroom
31 Tan ceramic tile mastic -bathroom 12 None detected
32 Gray transite colu11ln - front entry 13 20% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
33 Gray exterior stucco -Ihroughout random (see map) 14 None detected
34 Brown composition shingle roof 15, 16 None detected
35 Black roof tar DaDer 17 None detected
U 't #21 (T
t
)
:j,~
mt mgle story e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
36 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throughout
37 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
38 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
39 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 07B 10% Chrysotite
floor tite - throurdlOut
40 Gray ceramic tile mortar - bathrooms 09 None detected
41 Gray transite columns - front entry 10 20% Chrysotite
5% Crocidolite
42 Gray exterior stucco - throughout 11 None detected
43 Brown comoosition shingle roof top laver 12 None detected
44 Grav comDosition shinQ:le roof - middle laver 13 None detected
45 Black roof tar DaDer - bottom layer 14 None detected
U ' #26 (S'
2 b d
)
,~
'.
..
U'
o (S' I S
2B d
)
....
mt#S mgle tory e rooms
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
46 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01, 02, 03 None detected
throughout
47 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
48 White 12 x 12 vinvl floor tile - top laver throughout 07 None detected
49 Yellow mastic under white 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - 07B None detected
top laver throughout
.<l.
'.
Asbestos BlIildin~ Survey
Citation Homes /6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 5
-
t~t.Ob t1ot~
50 Brown 12 x 12 vinvl floor tile - throughout 08 None detected
51 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 08B 10% Chrysotile
floor tile - thro Uf! ho ut
52 White ceramic tile mortar - bathroom 09 None detected
53 Gray transite columns - front entry 10 20% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
54 Gravexterior stucco - throughout 11 None detected
55 Brown composition shingle roof - top laver 12 None detected
56 Grav composition shingle roof - middle laver 13 None detected
57 Black roof tar paper - bottom laver 14 None detected
U .t #70 (T
t
)
m wo -s ory,
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
58 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03,04 None detected
throughout
59 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 05, 06, 07, 08 None detected
60 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 09 None detected
61 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 09B 10% Chrysotile
floor tile - throuf!hout
62 Tan pebble pattern sheet flooring - 2'w floor 11 70% Chrysotile
bathroom
63 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathrooms 12 2% C hrvsotile
64 Gray transite column - front entry 13 20% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
65 Grav exterior stucco -throughout front entrv 14 None detected
66 Brown composition shingle roof - top laver throughout 15,16 None detected
67 Grav composition sheet roof - middle laver 17, 18 None detected
68 Black roof tar paper - bottom laver 19 None detected
U .t #76 (S. I t
2 b d
)
m mgle S ory e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM As bestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
69 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throuollOut
70 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
71 Brown 12 x 12 vinvl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
72 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 07B 10% Chrysotile
floor tile - throuf!hollt
73 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathrooms 09 2% Chrvsotile
74 Gray transite column - front entry 10 15% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
75 Grav exterior stucco - throughout front entrv 11 None detected
76 Brown composition shingle roof - top laver throughout 12, 13 None detected
77 Black roof tar paper 14 None detected
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 6
.'
...~
....
-
~~
-
~,
!lII\f'!'
tOr 3 tJ1) t..f (1 t
mt mgle story e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample HIS Content (0/0)
78 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throughout
79 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
80 Brown 12 x 12 vinvl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
81 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 07B 10% Chrysotile
floor tile - throuf!hout
82 Tan ceramic tite mastic - bathrooms 09 2% Chrvsotite
83 Gray transite column - front entry 10 15% Chrysotite
5% Crocidolite
84 Gray exterior stucco - throughout front entry 11 None detected
85 Brown comoosition shingle roof - tOD layer throughout 12, 13 None detected
86 Black roof tar naoer 14 None detected
U . #78 (S' I
2 b d
)
mt mgl e story e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM As bestos
# Sample #'s Content (0/0)
87 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01, 02, 03 None detected
throughout
88 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
89 Brown 12 x 12 vinvl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
90 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 07B 10% Chrysotile
floor tite - throuf!hout
91 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathrooms 09 2% Chrvsotite
92 Gray transite column - front entry 10 20% Chrysotite
5% Crocidolite
93 Grav exterior stucco - throughout front entrv II None detected
94 Brown comDosition shingle roof - too laver throuQhout 12, J3 None detected
95 Black roof tar oaoer 14 None detected
U . #85 (S'
2 b d
)
c-M
mt mgl e story e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (0/0)
96 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throughout
97 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
98 Brown 12 x 12 vinvl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
99 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - 07B None detected
throughout
100 Tan ceramic tite mastic - bathrooms 09 2% Chrvsotile
101 Gray transite column - front entry 10 15% Chrysotite
5% Crocidolite
102 Grav exterior stucco - throughout front entrv 11 None detected
103 Brown comoosition shingle roof - too laver throughout 12, 13 None detected
104 Black roof tar naner 14 None detected
U . #103 (S' I
2 b d
)
...
"'"
,.
..
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 7
..
..
~t:,
\t1'~ Jb ~i -
U 't #106 (S'
2 b d
)
t
m mgJe S ory e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
105 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throu,ghout
106 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04,05,06 None detected
107 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
108 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - 07B, None detected
throughout
109 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom 09 2% Chrysotite
110 Gray transite column - front entry 10 20% Chrysotite
5% Crocidolite
I j I G ray exterior stucco - throughout front entry II None detected
112 Brown composition shingle roof - top layer throughout 12 None detected
] 13 Grav composition shingle roof - middle layer 13 None detected
114 Black roof tar paper - bottom layer 14 None detected
U 't #117 (S' I t
2 b d
)
m mgle S ory e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
115 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throughout
116 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
117 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
118 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl 07B 10% Chrysotite
floor tite - throufdlOut
119 White 12 x 12 self stick vinyl floor tile- front entry 09 None detected
120 Brown ceramic tile mastic - bathroom 10 2% Chrysotile
121 Gray transite column - front entry 11 15% Chrysotite
5% Crocidolite
122 Gray exterior stucco - throughout front entry 12 None detected
123 Brown composition shingle roof 13, 14 None detected
124 Black roof tar paper 15 None detected
Unit #122 ADA Unit
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM As bestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
125 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throughout
126 White sheetrock surfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
127 White 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07, 08 None detected
128 Yellow mastic with residual black mastic under white 07B,08B None detected
12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout
129 Tan baseboard mastic - throughout kitchen 09 None detected
130 White sheet flooring - bathroom and laundry room 10 None detected
131 Gray exterior stucco - throughout 11 None detected
132 Brown composite shingle roof - throughout 12, 13 None detected
133 Black roof tar paper - throughout 14 None detected
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 8
..
110.
-
..
-
....
~
..
iilf
..
l>W
..'
+&;;,
~..
fi!!lI!I>'
-
I t1G ut L.(t1 t
mt mgl e story e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
134 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throughout
135 White sheetrock surfacinQ texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
136 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
]37 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - 07B None detected
throughout
138 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom 09 2% Chrvsotile
139 Gray transite column - front entry 10 15% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
]40 Gray exterior stucco - throughout front entry 11 None detected
141 Gray comnosition shingle roof - too layer throuQhout 12, 13 None detected
142 Black roof tar oaoer 14 None detected
U . #129 (S'
2 b d
)
mt mg e story e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
143 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01, 02, 03 None detected
throu Qhout
144 White sheetrock surfacinQ texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
145 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
]46 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - 07B None detected
throu.ghout
147 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom 09 2% Chrvsotile
148 Gray transite column - front entry 10 15% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
149 Gray exterior stucco - throughout front entry 11 None detected
150 Brown comoosition shingle roof - too layer throughout 12 None detected
151 Gray comoosition shingle roof - middle layer 13 None detected
152 Black roof tar oaoer - bottom layer 14, None detected
U . #141 (S'
2 b d
)
,~
mt #1 mgl e story e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM As bestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
153 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 0], 02, 03 None detected
throu ghout
154 White sheetrock surfacilw texture -throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
155 Brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
156 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - 07B None detected
throughout
157 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom 09 2% Chrvsotile
158 Gray transite column - front entry 10 15% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
]59 Gray exterior stucco - throughout rear 11 None detected
160 Gray comoosition shingle roof -throughout 12, 13 None detected
161 Black roof tar oaner - bottom layer 14 None detected
U'
43 (S'
2 b d
)
1\1;;....
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 9
","'
lQCJ ou l1C1i
...
"'"
m mgle s ory e room
Item Suspect Asbestos Material Description PLM Asbestos
# Sample #'s Content (%)
162 Wall/ceiling sheetrock, joint tape and compound - 01,02,03 None detected
throughout
]63 White sheetrock sLllfacing texture - throughout 04, 05, 06 None detected
]64 Brown ]2 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 07 None detected
]64 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - 07B, None detected
throughout
165 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom 09 2% C hrvsotile
166 Gray transite column - front entry 10 20% Chrysotile
5% Crocidolite
167 Gray exterior stucco -throughout front entry 11 None detected
168 Gray composition shingle roof - top layer throughout 12, ]3 None detected
169 Black roof tar paper 14 None detected
U 't #150 (S'
t
2 b d
)
~
,,",'
..
ACM Ev ALVA TION & ASSESSMENT
Item Floor Tile <1 % Quantity
3 Tan ]2 x 12 vinyl floor tile - mixed with carpet throughout - 3,000 sq ft.
Community center and Offices
-
Friability Assessment
EP A / AQMD Assessment
Non-friable: This ACCM cannot be easily reduced to dust.
Not RACM: This material is not a "Regulated Asbestos Containing
Material" because it contains less than 1 % asbestos.
...
~
Item Floor Tile Mastic Quantity
4 Black mastic under tan 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - mixed with carpet lncluded with item #3
throughout - Community Center and offices
20 Black mastic under brown ]2 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout Un ]000 sq ft.
# #20
29 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout Unit 1250 sq ft,
#21
39 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout Unit 1000 sq ft.
#26
51 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout - 1000 sq ft
Unit #50
6] Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout Unit 1250 sq ft
#70
72 Black mastic under brown] 2 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout Unit 1000 sq ft
#76
81 Black mastic under brown 12 x ]2 vinyl floor tile - throughout Unit 1000 sq ft
#78
90 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout Unit 1000 sq ft
#85
118 Black mastic under brown 12 x 12 vinyl floor tile - throughout 1500 sq ft.
Unit #117
~
-
..
~,\
...
-
-
1M,
...
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
.Job No. 667-AA07
Page 10
-
~.
I .q1 Db 4-0 g
Friability Assessmen t
EP A / AQMD Assessment
Non-friable. Category 1: This ACM cannot be easily reduced to dust.
Not Currently RACM: ln its present condition, this material is not a
"Regulated Asbestos Containing Material".
Item Sheet flooring Quantity
8 Tan pebble pattern sheet flooring - janitor closet in day care 100 sq ft.
Community Center & offices
30 Tan pebble pattern sheet flooring - 2"d floor bathroom Unit #21 100 sq ft.
& 70
62 Tan pebble pattern sheet flooring - 2"d floor bathroom Unit #70 100 sa ft.
Friability Assessment
EP A / AQMD Assessment
Friable: Can be reduced to powder form by hand pressure.
RACM: This is a "Regulated Asbestos Containing Material".
Removal of this RACM may require a prior 10 (working) day EPA
notification to the local AOMD.
Item Transite Columns Quantity
22 Gray transite columns - front entry - Unit #20 8 In ft.
32 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #21 8 In ft.
41 Gray transite columns - front entry Unit #26 8 In ft.
53 Gray transite columns - front entry Unit #50 8 In ft.
64 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #70 8 In ft.
74 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #76 8 In ft.
83 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #78 8 In ft.
92 Gray transite column - front entry -Unit #85 8 In ft.
101 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #103 8 In ft.
110 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #110 8 In ft.
121 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #117 8 In ft.
139 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #129 8 In ft.
148 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #141 8 In ft.
158 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #143 8 In ft.
166 Gray transite column - front entry - Unit #150 8 In ft.
Fria bility Assessment
EP A / AQMD Assessment
Non-friable. Category 11: This ACM cannot be easily reduced to dust.
Not Currently RACM: ln its present condition, this material is not a
"Reoulated Asbestos ContaininQ Material".
"*
Item Ceramic Tile Mastic Quantity
63 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathrooms- Unit #70 75 sq ft.
73 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathrooms - Unit #76 75 sq ft.
82 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathrooms - Unit #78 75 sq ft.
91 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathrooms - Unit #85 75 sq ft.
100 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathrooms - Unit #103 75 sq ft.
109 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom - Unit #106 75 sa ft.
120 Brown ceramic tile mastic - bathroom - Unit #117 75 sa ft.
138 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom - Unit #129 75 sa ft.
J47 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom - Unit #141 75 sq ft.
157 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom - Unit #143 75 sq ft
165 Tan ceramic tile mastic - bathroom -Unit #150 75 sa ft.
--
;#lIt
.
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 11
Ill"
l~O() y.C1Z'
..
Friability Assessment
EP A / AQMD Assessment
Non-friable. Category I: This ACM cannot be easily reduced to dust.
Not Currently RACM: ln its present condition, this material is not a
"Regulated Asbestos Containing Material".
..
~1'
....
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
..
· Asbestos Removal Options:
No recommendations presented herein are intended to dissuade the client from the
option of complete ACM removal. Asbestos removal can be a permanent remedy
against future exposure. Always use a certified asbestos abatement contractor to
perform asbestos-related construction work. Upon request, ProTech will assist the
client in selecting a qualified, certified asbestos abatement contractor.
-
· Renovation and Demolition:
In accordance with local, state, and federal asbestos regulations, ProTech recommends
that any asbestos-containing material that may be impacted during repairs, renovation, or
demolition be removed prior to those destructive activities.
..
..
In preparation for this task, ProTech recommends that the following steps be taken:
I. Upon request, ProTech's accredited project designers will develop an asbestos
abatement scope of work. The abatement design/specification will set forth the
guidelines for proper and cost effective removal of ACM as needed. ProTech's
project specification will outline the performance parameters for hazard remediation
work standards, contamination control, health and safety, contractor qualifications,
regulatory compliance, clearance and release criteria, and other requirements specific
to this project.
...'
"""
..
2. ProTech will assist the client or manage the selection of qualified asbestos
abatement contractors, Prospective bidders must be licensed by the State of
California and register with the Department of Occupational Safety and Health
(DaSH).
-
3. The owner may need to obtain an EPA generator identification number if greater
than 50 pounds of friable/hazardous ACM will be removed and disposed of. An
EPA generator lD can be obtained by calling EPA at (916) 255-1136,
..
4. During the removal of asbestos-containing materials, ProTech's certified field
technicians can represent the owner, providing quality control oversight of the
asbestos abatement operation. On-site consultants monitor the contractor's
compliance with accepted industry standard practices and regulatory standards, and
ensure that the project is completed on time and within budget.
..
-
5. The most critical point in an asbestos abatement project is determining when the
work has been completed, the contractor can be released, and the building/area can
be occupied, ProTech conducts final visual inspections and clearance air monitoring
to certify that industry clearance standards are met prior to general re-entry of the
asbestos abatement work area. Upon request, ProTech will conduct 3rd party
clearance monitoring,
-
1f"!f-
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
.Job No. 667-AA07
Page 12
.'
-
~
i qCl (Db';',. Lt-0~
I . !
".
DISCUSSION
Asbestos and its uses:
Asbestos is a term that refers to a group of naturally occurring fibrous minerals. Because
of their resistance to decay and their remarkable insulating properties, asbestos fibers have
been incorporated into thousands of products and materials, Collectively these products are
frequently referred to as asbestos-containing materials (ACM). Many types of ACM have
been used in the construction of buildings and homes. ACM types are generally put into
one of three classifications, they are:
I. Surfacing materials
Surfacing materials are those products which have been sprayed or trowelled onto ceilings, walls and other
structural elements. (e.g. fireproofing, thermal insulation or decoration) Because of the type of mixture
used in the construction industry, these materials are commonly friable, that is they are easily crushed or
reduced to powder form with hand pressure.
2. Thermal systems insulation ITS!)
The insulation applied to mechanical systems, hot water pipes and heating ducts often contains asbestos.
Hot water pipes and heating systems are covered with asbestos insulation primarily to prevent heat loss and
to protect other nearby surfaces from the hot pipes. Much of this asbestos insulation was manufactured
from 1920 to 1972, and it was used in construction until 1978.
3. Miscellaneous
Miscellaneous ACM materials include all asbestos products which cannot be classified as either surfacing
matcrial or TSI. These materials are usually non-friable and generally do not release asbestos fibers into the
air unless damaged. Products such as floor tile, mastic, roofing material and concrete asbestos products are
examples of miscellaneous ACM.
Current Asbestos Regulations:
The following is a summary of select major state and federal asbestos regulations. These
summaries are not intended to be a comprehensive discussion of the specific regulations. In
addition, this summary is not an all inclusive overview of the asbestos regulatory universe.
Division of Occupational Safety And Health (Cal.OSHA) - Title 8 CCR ~ 1529
On July 2, 1996 Cal-OSHA implemented revised general industry and construction asbestos standards which
apply to all occupational exposure to asbestos. The new Cal-OSHA construction standard requires owners
of buildings built prior to 1981 to presume that a variety of building materials contain asbestos unless they
are sampled and proved to not contain asbestos. Employers whose employees work in these same buildings
face the same responsibility to either test materials or treat them as ACM.
,,"""'"
The standard describes four classes of asbestos-related work: I) removal of asbestos thermal systems
insulation and surfacing materials, II) removal of asbestos material which are not thermal systems
insulation or surfacing materials, III) repair and maintenance operations where small amounts of asbestos or
presumed asbestos (PACM) is likely to be disturbed, and lV) maintenance and custodial activities during
which employees contact but do not disturb ACM or PACM and activities to clean up dust, waste, and
debris resulting from Class 1, 11, and III activities. For each class, OSHA specifies the type of training,
work practices, air sampling, and personal protection required of the employer and worker. This new
regulation is ajobs based standard. Specific notifications and work practices are required if asbestos will be
disturbed.
,;~
EPA's NESHAP Regulation - 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart M
NESHAP requires building owners to inspect a building for asbestos prior to renovation or demolition.
The EPA must be notified in advance of all demolition (whether there is asbestos present or not) and if
more than 160 square feet, 260 linear feet, or 35 cubic feet of Regulated Asbestos Containing Materials
(RACM) are going to be disturbed during renovation. RACM must be removed before any demolition or
Asbestos Building Survey .Job No. 667-AA07
Citation Homes /6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin Page 13
lIP'
~DD~tf?t~
,,~,
lIP'
renovation work disturbs it. Specific work practices must be followed during the removal of RACM.
RACM must be adequately wet when disturbed and must remain wet until placed in leakproof containers.
No visible emissions are allowed during collection, packaging, transportation, or disposal of RACM.
Records must be kept regarding the transportation and disposal of RACM.
..
In many areas, including the San Francisco Bay Area, the federal NESHAP regulation is enforced by the
local air quality management district (AQMD). ln many cases, EPA has "delegated" NESHAP enforcement
to these local agencies. Each AQMD has developed an enforcement regulation based on the NESHAP
regulation, and in many instances these local regulations are more stringent then the Federal EPA NESHAP
regulation.
"..
\If!il':-"
EXCLUSIONS AND REPORT LIMITATIONS
"'"
.
This asbestos inspection report has been prepared by ProTech for the exclusive use of
ProTech and its client, and not for use by any other party. The investigation and
sampling plan discussed in this report may not be appropriate for uses beyond its
intended purpose and stated scope. Any use by a third party of any of the information
contained in this report shall be at their own risk and shall constitute a release and an
agreement to defend and indemnify ProTech from any and all liability in connection
therewith whether arising out of ProTech's negligence or otherwise.
..
..
.
Consulting services performed by ProTech were limited to this asbestos survey. No
other services were requested by the client. Lead inspection & assessments, PCB
investigations, hazardous material audits, indoor air quality investigations, Phase I & II
site assessments, and other general environmental consulting are additional services
routinely performed by ProTech, These services were not performed at this site. A
general environmental audit may be performed to assess the need for additional
environmental consulting services.
..'
...
,..-~
· Asbestos inspection services were limited by the client to a survey of 16 housing units
and the community center. The units surveyed by ProTech comprise approximately
10% of the total housing units within the community. ProTech does not represent this
limited survey as a comprehensive inspection or evaluation of the entire 150 unit
complex. ProTech recommends that an expanded, comprehensive asbestos survey be
conducted at this site prior to demolition.
..
-
· ProTech's evaluations do not attempt to forecast or anticipate planned or unforeseen
events which may negatively impact ACM condition. All conclusions and
recommendations presented herein are based on visible conditions present at the time of
inspection. Changes in material condition due to deterioration, unforeseen accidents, or
planned events such as renovation or demolition may render the recommendations and
conclusions presented in this repOlt obsolete.
..
....
· ProTech cannot warrant that units do not contain ACM in locations other than those
noted in this report. If suspect asbestos materials are discovered during future repairs,
demolition or renovation operations, all general work activities which could impact the
discovered suspect ACM should cease until confirmation sampling and/or asbestos
abatement options can be assessed.
..
· All reasonable efforts were made to examine below carpeted areas and resilient floor
coverings to determine and quantify the presence of suspect asbestos materials.
ProTech accepts no liability for additional materials or under-reporting of asbestos
materials which exist below other floor coverings.
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes /6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
."
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 14
.>
"Zo' ao ~~
. All quantification of ACM is approximate and should not be relied upon for bidding
purposes. This repOlt is not represented as, nor intended to be, an asbestos-abatement
scope of work or project specification.
. Fiberglas insulated mechanical systems were inspected as completely as possibly
without destroying the integrity of the Fiberglas insulation. The condition and presence
or absence of asbestos associated with mechanical systems is assumed to be consistent
with those areas exposed and examined during our inspection. However, ProTech does
not guarantee that this is the case.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
~#Iit
Inspection and Sample Collection:
A survey of the subject site was conducted to identify and catalog visibly accessible suspect
asbestos materials and to develop a sampling strategy for characterizing ACM, Following
the initial inspection, samples were collected of suspect asbestos materials from each
homogenous sample area, Samples were collected by misting small sample areas with
water, then cutting or scraping the sample from the substrate with an appropriate sampling
tool. Whenever possi ble, samples were collected from areas previously damaged or
deteriorating, No building systems, components, or structures were demolished to obtain
samples of potentially hidden ACM.
dl,iit
Each suspect bulk sample was sealed in its own Zip-lock plastic container and labeled with a
unique identification number. Sampling tools were individually cleaned before and after
each sample was collected to avoid sample cross contamination. Decontamination was
accomplished using single-use, pre-moistened cloths.
ProTech's inspector collected a total of three-hundred & thilty three (333) suspect asbestos
samples, all of which were analyzed by PLM for asbestos content. Samples were recorded
on ProTech's in-house chain-of-custody form. This form accompanied the samples to
Forensic Analytical Services, Inc. of Hayward, California which is accredited by the
National Vol untary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) for analysis of bulk
building material samples for asbestos.
Sample Analysis:
To determine asbestos content, the samples were submitted to the certified laboratory for
analysis, Suspect asbestos samples were subjected to analysis by polarized light
microscopy (PLM).
"'~
Bulk sample analysis was conducted in accordance with the EPA interim method for
determination of asbestos in bulk materials. Samples were first examined by a stereoscopic
microscope for determination of homogeneity and preliminary evaluation of composition
and presence of fibers. Fibers observed during this examination were then mounted in
various refractive index oils and examined in polarized light. During this examination, all
minerals and/or man-made materials were identified and the percentages of each were
estimated and/or counted,
...
...
'....
~
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
.lob No. 667-AA07
Page 15
..
Ijij:tf,
7f'l' i'~ IIC(~
~,,;"".$ i{....p' 't" C) l
..
WM
Evaluation of Asbestos-Containing Materials:
In evaluating each asbestos material, the adhesion of the asbestos material to the underlying
substrate, deterioration, and damage from vandalism or any other cause was assessed.
Evidence of debris on horizontal surfaces, hanging material, dislodged chunks, scraping,
indentations, or cracking were indicators of poor material condition.
..
~
-
Accidental or deliberate physical contact with asbestos materials can result in damage.
Inspectors looked for any evidence that asbestos-containing materials had been disturbed,
Indicators such as: finger marks in the material, graffiti, pieces dislodged or missing,
scraping marks from movable equipment, or furniture, or an accumulation of suspect
asbestos dust or debris on floors, shelves, or other horizontal surfaces indicate poor material
condition.
"...
~
Asbestos-containing materials may deteriorate as a result of either the quality of the
installation or environmental factors which affect the cohesive strength of the asbestos-
containing material or the strength of the adhesion to the substrate. Deterioration can result
in an accumulation of dust on the sUlface of the asbestos-containing material, delamination
of the material, or an adhesive failure of the material where it pulls away from the substrate
and either hangs loosely or falls to the floor and exposes the substrate. Inspectors touch the
asbestos-containing material to determine if dust is released when the material is lightly
brushed or rubbed.
-
.,.
,...
'IM'"
Asbestos Building Survey
Citation Homes / 6700 Dougherty Road, Dublin
Job No. 667-AA07
Page 16
-
...
~
"
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-116, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
1208 Main SI.
Rcchvood City, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
Final Report
ttt1 '6
1454
8103535
09105/07
09107/07
09107107
09107/07
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd., Dublin, Unit If117 - POfl 0904-667-14
Date(s) Collected: 09104/2007
Sam pic If)
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
Percent in
Layer
'" 01
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: 01'1'- Whi le Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: While Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Ccllulose (20 %)
106772]5
~
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
,.,
'" 02
,. Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: Pai nt
10677216
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
~-
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %)
03 10677217
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Skimeoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
'rota I Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 (;[,)
04 10677218
". Layer: OfT-White Skimcoatl.loint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Asbestos (ND)
~
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
....,
Asbestos (ND)
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
,W/i Cell ul ose Cfraee)
OS 10677219
Layer: OfT-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
,..., Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ul ose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
FASI Job ID: ]454
Total Samples Submitted: 14
Total Samples Analyzed: ] 4
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887.8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
I of 3
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lne
..
20~OO q4Z
-
Report Number:
Date Printed:
13103535
09/07/07
-
Sample ID
Asbestos
Type
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
06 10677220
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
07 10677221
Layer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
09 10677222
Layer: White Tile
Layer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Ccllulosc (Trace)
10677223
10
Laycr: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
Percent in
Layer
ND
ND
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
..
2%
11 10677224
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose ('Trace)
12 10677225
Layer: Grey Cementitious Material ND
Layer: Beige Cemcntitious Material ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Compositc Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
13
10677226
Layer: Stoncs
Layer: Black Tar
I,ayer: Black Fel t
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
]4
10677227
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Componcnts:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
..
~
ND
Chrysotile 10 %
Asbestos (Trace)
~I
ND
ND -
Asbestos (ND)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (2 % )
Chrysotile
Asbestos (20 % )
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
IS %
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Crocidolite
S%
"""
-
2 of 3
.'
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
.l
205 UO ~Crt
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103535
09/07/07
Sample ID
15
Layer: Black Fibrous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (95 %)
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
10677228
ND
Asbestos (ND)
-
....
...
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification CLOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected',
Analytical results and reports are generated by Forensic Analytical at the rcquest of and for the exclusive use of the person or entity (client) named on such reporJ. Results. reports or
- copies of same will not be released by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior written request from c1icnt. This report applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
lahoratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
,,~ use and interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of thc U.S. Government. Forcnsic Analytical is not able to assess the degrec of hazard rcsulting from materials analyzed. Forcnsic Analytical reserves the right to disposc of
all samples after a period of Ihirty (30) days, according to all statc and fcderal guidclines, unless otherwise specified. All sal11plcs were rceeived in acceptable condition unless
... orhenvise noted.
3 of 3
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
~
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-1l6, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers [ne
Project Manager
1208 Main Sl.
Redwood City, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
..
Final Report
-
~Ol# '!fJl-[~ (
tII!If';
t\I!!I!'l!
1454
8103537
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd., Dublin, Unit 11129 - POll 0904-667-13
Oate(s) Collcctcd: 09/04/2007
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percen tin
Layer
01 10677230
Layer: White Drywall NO
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material NO
I.,ayer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint NO
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677231
Layer: White Drywall NO
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound NO
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: OfT. White Skimcoat/Joint Compound NO
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 (,70) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
03 10677232
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: OfT-White Skimcoat/.Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: OIT-White Skimcoat/.Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint NO
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677233
Layer: OfT-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound ND
Layer: Paint NO
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
05 10677234
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ul ose (Trace)
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos
Type
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 13
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
Percent in
Layer
-
-
1 of 3
".'
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engincers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
2 V1 rY() q'tq (t
13 1 03537
09/07/07
Perccnt in
Laycr
Sam pic ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
06 10677235
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Componcnts: Asbestos (ND)
Cell ulose (Trace)
07
10677236
Layer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Compositc Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace) Synthetic (Trace)
09
Layer: Y el loIV Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Componcnts:
Cellulose (Trace)
10677237
10 10677238
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
,,.. TOlal Compositc Valucs of Fibrous Componcnts:
Ccll ul osc (Tracc)
II
10677239
l,W>ll'
Layer: Grey ('cmentitious Material
Laycr: Bcigc Cementilious Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
12 10677240
I ,ayeI': Stoncs
Laycr: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
13
10677241
.
Layer: Stones
I.ayer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Componcnts:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
14 10677242
Layer: Black Fi brous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (95 %)
~
>tiOS
'.~jI
Asbestos (ND)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (2 % )
Chrysotile
Asbestos (20 % )
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
ND
ND
2%
lS %
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos
Type
Crocidolite
Percent in
Layer
S%
Asbcstos
Type
-AiM';
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
2 of 3
WI'
lliif;
1.0C6 Jt ~t -
Client Name: Protcch Consulting & Enginccrs lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
BI03537
09/07/07
-
Sam pic ID
Lab Numbcr
Asbestos
Typc
Percent in
Laycr
Asbeslos
Type
Percent in
Laycr
Asbcstos
Type
Percent in
Layer
-
~
...
III/'
~
w'
~
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification CLOQ') = 1 %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'ND' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and rcports arc gencratcd by Forcnsic Analytical at thc rcqucst of and for thc cxclusive use of thc person or cntity (c1icnt) namcd on such rcport. Rcsults. rcports or
copies of same will not be relcascd by Forcnsic Analytical to any third party without prior writtcn request from client. This report applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory documcntation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interprctation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of the U.S. GOl'ernment. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves the right to dispose of
all samples after a period of thirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidclines, unless otherwise spccified. All samples were received in acceptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
"'~,
M'"
3 of 3
..
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
l't
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-l16, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
1208 Muin Sl.
Redwood City, CA 94063
Client 10:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
Final Report
20'1UO ;,\ C1 ~
1454
B 1 03539
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd - Dublin Unit 11103 - 1'0110904-667-13
Date(s) Collected: 09104/2007
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
01 10677247
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677248
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Off-White Skimeoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Maleriul ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 I/O) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
03 10677249
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Off-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.Joinl Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
i,~
TOlal Composite Values of Fibrous Componcnts:
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677250
Layer: OfT-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composile Values of Fibrous Componcnts:
Cellulose (Trace)
05 10677251
Layer: Off-White Ski mcoat/.Joi nt Compound ND
I ,ayeI': Puint ND
Asbestos (ND)
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
~
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Tracc)
FASI Job 10: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 13
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Laycr Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
I of 3
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
..
..
2(0 ~ l,ttttt
....
~
Report Number:
Date Printed:
B I 03539
09/07/07
-
Sample ID
Asbestos
Type
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
06 10677252
Layer: orf- White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cell uIose (Trace)
07 ] 0677253
L,ayer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
'rota I Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace) Synthetic (Trace)
09 ]0677254
L,ayer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
10 ]0677255
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
11
10677256
Layer: Grey Cementitious Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose efrace)
12
10677257
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 (It))
10677258
13
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black 'far
Layer: Black Fell
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
]0677259
14
Layer: Black Fibrous Material
'rota I Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (95 (70)
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
~
ND
ND
-
..
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
..
Chrysotile 2%
..
Asbestos (2 % )
\iilftl
..
Chrysotile 15 % Croeidolite 5%
Asbestos (20%)
..
ND
ND
-
Asbestos (ND)
-
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
-
..
ND
ND
ND
-
....
Asbestos (ND)
-
"'"
ND
"'"
Asbestos (ND)
.'
....
..
irll.
2 of 3
....
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
2 ( I 07) t.f~:;f 't
Clicnt Namc: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103539
09/07/07
Sample If)
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
--
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification CLOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and reports are generated by Forensic Analytical at thc request of and for the exclusive use of the person or entity (client) named on such rcport. Results. reports or
,.., copies of same IVillnol be releascd by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior written requcst from clicnt. This rcport applics only to the samplc(s) testcd. Supporting
laboratory docllmentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in fuJI, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation or test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This repol1 must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agem;y of the US Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degrec of hazard rcsulting from materials analyzed. Forcnsic Analytical reserves the right to dispose of
all samples after a period of tllirty (30) days, according to all state and lCderal guidelines, unless otherwise specificd. All samplcs were rcceived in acceptable condition unless
otherwise nOled
3 of 3
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
~
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-ll6, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers [nc
Project Manager
1208 Main SI.
Redwood City, CA 94063
..
irIlil'r
Final Report
1l "2. <4:> L.\:t1 ~
....
*ll'
..
IJ9!lI!l'1
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
1454
8103540
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
m~
Date(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd - DublinLJnit 1/76 - POII0904-667-13
Percen tin
Layer
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 13
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
~
Percent in
Layer
..
01 10677260
Layer: White Drywall
I,ayer: Off-White Skimcoat/.Ioint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 (Je>)
02 10677261
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: WhilC Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
I,ayer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %)
03 10677262
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Ski meoat/.Joi nt Compound
Layer: While Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
'fotal Compositc Values of Fibrous Componcnts: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %)
04 10677263
Layer: OfT-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose ('Frace)
05 10677264
Layer: Off-White Skimcoatl.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Tracc)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
'"'!IF
.....
~
...
..
..
""'"'
"'"
ND
ND
,..,.
Asbestos (ND)
....
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND) "'+
1 of 3
..
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
- 12 OD'.. (+t't t
2:;. ;
,
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Ine
Report Number:
Date Printed:
BI03540
09107/07
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
06 10677265
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
07 10677266
Layer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
09 10677267
Layer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
I () 10677268
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (Trace)
ND
10 %
Chrysotile
Asbestos (2 % )
2%
Chrysotile
Asbestos (20%)
IS %
Crocidolite
5%
11
10677269
Layer: Grey Cementitious Material ND
Layer: Beige Cementitious Material ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
12 10677270
I,ayer: Stones ND
Layer: Black Tar ND
Layer: Black Felt ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
Asbestos (ND)
13
]0677271
I,ayer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrolls Glass (45 (1(J)
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
~
14
Layer: Black Fibrous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (95 %)
10677272
ND
Asbestos (ND)
l;:>i#
',*1lllJ
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887.8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
2 of 3
'.
.,
-
2tJOf) t{c-'1<l
-
"""
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103540
09/07/07
-
Sample ID
Lab Numbcr
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
~.
..
-
...
..
~,
..
-
.."
..
-
..
"'-
.'
t;Ji?->
-
~~
Il!JIf'"
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'ND' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical rcsults and rcports are gencrated by Forcnsic Analytical at thc rcquest of and for the cxclusive usc of thc pcrson or entity (client) named on such rcport. Results. reports or
copies of sarne will not bc rclcascd by Forcnsie Analytical to any third party without prior writtcn rcquest frorn client. This rcport applics only to thc samplc(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon request. This report rnust not be reproduced except in full. unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of the U.S. Governmcnt. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves the right to disposc of
all samples after a period of thirty (30) days. according to all statc and federal guidelines. unless otherwise specified. All samples were received in acceptablc condition unless
otherwise noted.
"""'"
~-
3 of 3
..
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
~
~
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-l16, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
1208 Mai n Sl.
Redwood City, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
Final Report,
"2 15 't 4,Vf(t
1454
BI03542
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
Date(s) ColIel'ted: 09/04/2007
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd - Dublin Unit 1/143 - POII0904-667-13
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
\~
l.
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 (70)
03 10677297
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: OfT- White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
.. Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 ':{,)
Asbestos (ND)
lIi
Percen tin
Layer
Asbestos
Type
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
04 10677298
,. Layer: OfT-White Skimeoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
.. Cellulose (Trace)
OS ]0677299
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.loint Compound ND
... Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
.\\W!I
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 13
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
..
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
01 10677295
Layer: White DrywaJl ND
I,ayer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: Oil-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %)
02 10677296
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Skimeoat/.Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimco{jt/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
1 of 3
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
..
..
2 I (p a:f) L\-'1 {
-
...
Report Number:
Date Printed:
13103542
09/07/07
...
Sample lD
Pcrccnt in
Layer
Pcrccnt in
Layer
.~,%
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
-
06 10677300
Layer: Off-White Skimcoatl.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
07 10677301
I,ayer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose efrace) Synthetic (Trace)
09
10677302
l.ayer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
10 10677303
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
'rotal Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
11
]0677304
ND
ND
....
Asbestos (ND)
.'
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND) ...
~
Chrysotile 2%
-
Asbestos (2 % )
-
-
Chrysotile 15 % Crocidolite 5%
Asbestos (20%)
-
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
Layer: Beige Cementitious Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
12 10677305
Layer: Stones ND
Layer: Black Tar ND
Layer: Black Felt ND
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Fibrous Glass (45 c/o)
Layer: Stones
l.ayer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
14 10677307
Layer: Black Fibrous Material
Total Compositc Valucs of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (95 (70)
13
10677306
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
ND
...
~'
-
2 of 3
...
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
211'V yCt<[
Client Name: Protceh Consulting & Engineers lne
Report Number:
Date Printed:
B 1 03542
09/07/07
Sample ID
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
~.~iW
....
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical rcsults and reports arc gcneratcd by Forensic Analytical at the rcquest of and for the exclusive use of the person or entity (client) named on such report. Results, reports or
.... copies of same will not be released by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior written request from elient. This report applics only to the sample(s) lested. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of the U.S. GOl't'fIlmenl. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves the right to dispose of
"'" all samples ann a pcriod of thirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidelines, unless otherwise specified. All samples were received in acceptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
3 of 3
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
"
Forensic Analytical
-
ill<
Final Report
'2 (ct (J() '+1 ,t
-
..,.,
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-] ] 6, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Enginccrs Inc
Projcct Manager
J 208 Main Sl.
Rcdwood City, CA 94063
..
fu.h
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
]454
B ] 03543
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
-
""'"
Date(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd., Dublin, Unit 1/78 - POll 0904-667-]3
Perccnt in
Layer
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: ] 3
Total Samples Analyzed: ] 3
Pcrcent in Asbestos
Layer Type
""'"
f!I!IIIIII
Percent in
Layer
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
01 10677308
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: 01'1'- Whitc Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
'rota I Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cell ulose (20 (X,)
02 10677309
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimeoat/.loint Compound
I ,ayeI': Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %)
03 10677310
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off- White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Laycr: Oil-White Ski mcoat/.Ioi nt Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Compositc Values of Fibrous Componcnts:
Ccllulose (20 %)
04 106773]]
Laycr: Off-Whitc Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
'rota I Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components:
Ccll ul osc (Tracc)
05 10677312
Layer: 011'- White Ski mcoat/.Ioi nt Compound
L,ayer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
"""
~,
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-.
.'
ND -
ND
ND ...
ND
..
ND
Asbestos (ND) ~l.~
-
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
~.
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
-
1 of 3
Jl"IP.
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Ine
2 I '1 5{) "f'et g
Report Number:
Date Printed:
13103543
09/07/07
Percen tin
Layer
Sam pie fl)
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
06 106773]3
Layer: o IT- White SkimcoatlJoint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
07 10677314
Layer: 'ran Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
'rotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cdlul ose (Trace)
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
14 10677320
Layer: Black Fi brous Material
'rotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (95 (70)
''lihW
09 10677315
Layer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
10 10677316
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
II 10677317
Layer: Red-Brown Cementitious Material
Layer: Paint
'rota 1 Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
12 10677318
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 (fc,)
.tIII.Il
>ill
...
..
13
10677319
...
..
""
,.
..
.'.
Chrysotile
Asbestos (Trace)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (2 % )
Chrysotile
Asbestos (20 % )
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
ND
10 %
2%
15 %
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos
Type
Crocidolite
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
5%
.,...
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
2 of 3
_f
M>l
'~ ZD rJf) ~q
-
Client Name: Proteeh Consulting & Engineers 'ne
Report Number:
Date Printed:
BI03543
09/07/07
-
Sample ID
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
"""
ft'!'
-
...
~;
-
-
flI!Wl!'
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = 1 %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'ND' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and reports are generatcd by Forensic Analytic,11 at the request of and for the exclusive use of the person or cntity (client) named on such report. Results. reports or
copies of same will not be rcleased by Forcnsic Analytical to any third party without prior writtcn rcquest from client. This rcport applics only to thc samplc(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full. unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of tcst rcsults and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorscmcnt by NVLAP or any other
agency of the U.S. Government. Forcnsic Analytical is not ablc to assess the degrec of hazard rcsulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical rescrvcs the right 10 dispose of
all samples after a period of thirty (30) days. according to all statc and federal guidclines. unlcss othcrwise specified. All samplcs wcre reccived in aceeptablc condition unless
othcrwise noted.
3 of 3
...^
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
~
~
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-116, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Ine
Project Manager
1208 Main Sl.
Redwood City, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
Final Report
-// .b.... ~ 1.0 ({
~.D \ .{,
\,.
1454
B 103544
09/05/07
09/07/07
09107107
09/07/07
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd - Dublin Unit 11150 - POII0904-667-13
... Date(s) Collected: 0910412007
Sample If)
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
0] /0677321
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: While Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677322
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: White Skimcoal!Joinl Compound ND
Layer: While Tape ND
Layer: Paint ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
03 10677323
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: White Skimcoul/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Tape ND
Layer: Paint ND
f8'
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677324
Layer: While Skil11coat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
05 10677325
Layer: White Skimeoat/.loint Compound
Layer: Pai nl
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
ND
ND
Nil
Asbestos
Type
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: ] 3
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
I of 3
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
....
.,
"?-).~/~'t
? c,'" U -r-\
-
.....
Report Number:
Date Printed:
13103544
09/07/07
..
Sample ID
Percen tin
Layer
Percent in
Layer
itt.'t1.,
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
14 10677333
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (95 %)
06 10677326
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
07 ] 0677327
Layer: Brown Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
'rota I Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
09
10677328
I.ayer: Tan Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Talc (2 (Jc))
10
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Layer: Pai nt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
10677329
11
10677330
Layer: Tan Plaster
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
12 10677331
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
10677332
13
I.ayer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
-
ND
ND
W'
Asbestos (ND)
JIl!if'
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND) IIl!IIIPI'
Chrysotile 2%
""".
Asbestos (2 % )
-
Chrysotile 20 % Crocidolite 5%
ND
Asbestos (25%)
~
ND
ND -
Asbestos (ND)
..
ND
ND
ND
-
Asbestos (ND)
~
-
ND
ND
ND
lil,~
-
Asbestos (ND)
~'~
..
ND
'i;<4,
-
..
"k
2 of 3
"""
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (5"10) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
22~Ub
4-t1~
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103544
09/07/07
Sample ID
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification CLOQ') = 1 %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical rcsults and rt'ports arc generated by Forensic Analytical at the request of and [or the exclusive use of thc person or entity (client) named on such rcport. Results. rcports or
,. copics of same will not be released by Forcnsic Analytical to any third party without prior written requcst from client. This report applics only to the samplc(s) tcstcd. Supporting
laboratory docnlllentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approvecl by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
9 use ancl interpretation of test results ancl reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agcncy of the US Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess tht' degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical rescrves the right to disposc of
.. all samples after a period of thirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidclines, unless otherwise specificd. All samples wcre received in acccptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
3 of 3
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
~
Forensic Analytical
..
Final Report
22L/ 00 ~ .,
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-116, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
1208 Main Sl.
Redwood City, CA 94063
"""i<
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
1454
B103545
09105/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
Date(s) Collected: 09/0412007
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd - Dublin Unit 1126 - 1'0#0904-667-13
Percen tin
Layer
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 13
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
.....
Sample 1D
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
01 10677334
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677335
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
I,ayer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 (10) Fibrous Glass (10 (10)
03 10677336
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimcoatl.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677337
Layer: White Skimcoatl.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose Cfrace)
05 10677338
Layer: While Skimcoat/.loint Compound
I.ayer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ul ose (Trace)
06 10677339
Layer: White Skimcoatl.loint Compound
I,ayer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
ND
ND
ND
..
..,
ND
...
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
..
ND
ND ..
ND
Asbestos (ND)
..
.'
ND
ND ..
Asbestos (ND) ~
....
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND) -~
ND
ND
p1"1
Asbestos (ND)
..
I of 3
"""'"
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
'Z 2 G VO ~';19t
B103545
09/07/07
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
Sample II)
07
I ,ayeI': Brown Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose CT'race)
]0677340
Chrysotile
Asbestos (Trace)
ND
10 %
09
]0677341
Layer: Grey Mortar
Layer: White Mortar
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
10 ]0677342
Layer: (ire) Semi-Fibrous Materia] Chrysoti]e
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (25%)
Cellulose CT'race)
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
20 %
ND
11
10677343
Layer: Tan Cementitious Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
12 10677344
I ,ayeI': Stones ND
Layer: Black Tar ND
Layer: Black Felt ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Fibrous Glass (45 (A))
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
13
10677345
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
]4 10677346
Layer: Black Felt ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (95 (lCi)
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos
Type
Crocidol i te
Percent in
Layer
5%
Asbestos
Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (51 O) 887-8828 (BOO) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
2 of 3
-
Z 2U ao Ur;;:4
...
'*'
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103545
09/07/07
-
Sample lD
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
.,
-
"...
-
..
'*
III!'
...
....
lIiif
...
II>;
...'
~'-\
..
oiIl
...
....
-
~"P;;,
"'"
~~
....
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and reports arc generated by Forensic Analytical at thc request of and for the exclusive use of thc person or cntity (client) named on such report. Results, reports or
copies of same willnol be released by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior written requcst from client. This report applies only to the smnple(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of the US Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves tbe right to dispose of
all samples after a period of thirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidelines, unless otherwise spccified. All samples were received in acceptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
~
..
y;.,
3 of 3
-
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
i~
"
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-ll6, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
1208 Mai n Sl.
Redwood City, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
Final Report
lT7Vb
1454
B 103546
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
.Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd - Dublin Unit #20 - POI10904-667-l3
Date(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Perccn tin
Layer
~
01 10677356
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Tape ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total C'omposite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677357
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Tape ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 (10) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
03 10677358
Lclycr: White Drywall ND
Layer: While Skimcoat/.loinl Compound ND
Layer: White Tape ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677359
Layer: While Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
05 10677360
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Pai nt
ND
ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
"""
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 13
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
I of 3
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
....
II!;
't 2.~ &tJ t~i
..
11M
Report Number:
Date Printed:
13103546
09/07/07
..
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
..
Sample [I)
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
..
06 10677361
Layer: White Ski meoatl.loi nt Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
07
10677362
Layer: Brown Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
09 10677363
Layer: White Grout
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
10 10677364
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulosc (Trace)
II 10677365
Laycr: Tan Ccmcntitious Material
Laycr: Paint
Total Compositc Values of Fibrous Componcnts:
Cell ulose (Trace)
12
10677366
L.ayer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Fell
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 (}(,)
13
10677367
Layer: Stones
I,aycr: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
14 10677368
Layer: Black Fclt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (95 %)
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
ND
ND
-
Asbestos (ND)
-
ND
Chrysotile 10 % ~,
Asbestos (Trace) -
ND
..
Asbestos (ND)
...
Chrysotile 20 % Croeidolite 5%
ND
Asbestos (25%)
.,
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
...
ND -
ND
ND ..
Asbestos (ND) J8li'~
-
ND
ND
ND -
Asbestos (ND)
W'"
ND
Asbestos (ND)
..
2 of 3
~'
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
2-2c,of) ~~
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Repor't Number:
Date Printed:
B103546
09/07/07
Sample ID
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
,~~
~JWo
James Flores, L,aboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = 1 %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and reports arc generated by Forensic Analytical at the request of and for the exclusive use of the person or entity (client) named on sllch report. Results. reports or
.. copies of same will not be released by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior written request from client. This rcport applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
.~ USt: and interprt:tation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of the U.S. GOl'erllmenl. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves the right to dispose of
Ii'" all samples afler a period of thirty (30) days, according to all Slate and federal guidelines, unless otherwise specified. All samples wcre received in acceptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
:I of 3
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
"'*
"
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93- I 16, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers fnc
Project Manager
1208 Main St.
Redwood City, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
..
....'
Final Report
Z3D1J YCt!
..
-
...
~
1454
B 103547
09/05/07
09/06/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
jlltt<,
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd - Community Center - Dublin -
POII0904-667-34
Datc(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Sample If)
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
lit#<
Percent in
Layer
01 10677376
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677377
Layer: OfT-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-While Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (10 %)
03 10677378
Layer: While Drywall
Layer: Off-While SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: While Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: l'ai nt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677379
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: OfT-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: Whi te Fi brclUs Material
Layer: Off-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 34
Total Samples Analyzed: 34
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
.,
Percent in
Layer
.'
-
-
-'"
"""",
...
~
""'"'"
-,
I of 6
.'
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
2 '31 0iJ '1?1 t
Client Name: Proteeh Consulting & Engineers Inc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103547
09/07/07
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
05 10677380
I.ayer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Off-Whitc Skimcoat!.loint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: OfT-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
06 10677381
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: Off- White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
07 10677382
I.ayer: White Drywall ND
Layer: 01'1'- White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
I.ayer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 '/0) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
08 10677383
Layer: OfT-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: Paint
ND
ND
ND
ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (10 %)
09 10677384
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Com posi te Values of Fi brous Com ponents: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (10 %)
10 10677385
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
2 of 6
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
--
~,z 0() ~c(
....
i)jt
Report Number:
Date Printed:
13103547
09/07/07
.
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
...
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
-
11 10677386
Layer: Off-While Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Painl
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellul ose (Trace)
12 10677387
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
TOlal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
13 10677388
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
14 10677389
Layer: OfT-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose efrace)
15 10677390
Layer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
16 10677391
Layer: Tan 'file
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Ceflulose (Trace)
17 10677392
Layer: 'fan 'file
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose efraee)
18 10677393
Layer: Beige Tile
Layer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
ND
ND
...
Asbestos (ND)
-
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
.'
--
ND
ND ...
Asbestos (ND) ~
.
ND ...
ND
Asbestos (ND) ..
Chrysotile Trace -
Chrysotile 7%
Asbestos (Trace)
-
Chrysotile Trace
Chrysotile 7% ..
Asbestos (Trace)
-
ND
Ch rysoti I e 7%
Asbestos (Trace) -
ND
ND
.
-
1M>
-'"
3 of 6
....
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
,...'
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
73-:S 6'0 '-fCf'?:
8103547
09/07/07
;I,M
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Sample ID
19
Laycr: Beige 'rile
Layer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
Lab Number
10677394
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
20 10677395
Laycr: Off-White Sheet Flooring ND
Layer: Fibrous Backing ND
'rota I Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (5 %) Synthetic (IO %)
21 10677396
Laycr: Tan Shect Flooring
Layer: Fibrous Backing
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (5 (fci)
Chrysoti Ie
Asbestos (25 % )
ND
70 %
22
10677397
Layer: Y clio\\' Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cell ulosc (Trace)
23 10677398
Layer: Yello\\' Mastic ND
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cell u! ose (Tracc)
ND
24
]0677399
Layer: Brown Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
25 !0677400
Layer: Grcy Fibrous Tile ND
Layer: Paint ND
Layer: Brown Mastic ND
ND
Wi
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (2 %) Fibrous Glass (90 %)
26 !067740l
Layer: Grey Fibrous Tile
Layer: Paint
Layer: Brown Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (2 %) Fibrous Glass (90 %)
27 10677402
Layer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
ND
ND
ND
...
Asbestos (ND)
'M
ND
Asbestos
Type
Perccnt in
Layer
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
Asbestos
Type
4 of 6
Client Name: Proteeh Consulting & Engineers Ine
Report Number:
Date Printed:
-
i4~i
2 3 ~ i5f) t..t trt
-
..
13103547
09/07/07
-
Sample ID
28
Layer: Grey Cementitious Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Ccllulosc (Tracc)
29
Layer: Grey Cementitious Material
Layer: Bcige Cemcntitious Material
Layer: Paint
'rota I Compositc Valucs of Fibrous Componcnts:
Cell ulose (Trace)
30
Layer: Grey Cementitious Material
Layer: Paint
Total Compositc Values of Fibrous Componcnts:
Ccll ul ose (Tracc)
Asbcstos
Type
Percent in
Layer
-
Lab Number
10677403
Asbestos (ND)
10677404
Asbestos (ND)
10677405
Asbestos (ND)
31
10677406
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (65 (Yo)
32 10677407
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
33
10677408
Layer: Black Fibrous Matcrial
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Componcnts: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulosc (95 %)
34 10677409
Layer: Black Fibrous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Ccllulose (95 %)
Perccnt in
Layer
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbcstos
Type
Pcrcent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
..
-
-
-
>It,
...
.'
W'
..
-
..
..
...,
-
lib
-
""
-
_1;
...
...
....
..
5 of 6
--.
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
'--/.3[.. &tJ e-Ft"l
-
Client Name: Proteeh Consulting & Engineers Ine
Report Number:
Date Printed:
B 103547
09/07/07
Sample ID
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
~J(,w
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and rcporls arc gemTatcd by Forensic Analytical at the request of and for Ihe exclusive use of the person or entity (client) named on such rcport. Results. reports or
'"' copics of same will not bc- relcilsed by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior wrinen request from client. This report applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of the U.S. Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves the right to dispose of
all samples after a period of thirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidelines, unless otherwise specified. All samples werc rcceived in acceptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
6 of 6
~
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-l16, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Enginccrs Inc
Project Manager
1208 Main S1.
Rcdwood ('ity, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
..
Final Report
:? ~ (p O'''b Lot ct <t
-
-
-
1454
8103520
09105/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09107/07
~
Date(s) Collected:
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Doughcrty Rd., Dublin, Unit 1/70 - 1'011 0904-667-18
Sample 1D
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
ii"-
01 ]0677118
Laycr: White Drywall
Layer: Whitc Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 '!(J) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677119
Laycr: White Drywall
Layer: While Skimcoatl.loint Compound
Layer: White Tape
L,ayer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
03 10677120
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Pai n t
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 (70) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
Asbestos (ND)
04 10677121
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: While Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Pai nt
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
05 10677122
Layer: White Ski mcoatl.loi nt Compound
Layer: Pai nt
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cell ulose (Trace)
Percent in
Layer
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos
Type
FASI Job ID: ]454
Total Samples Submitted: 18
Total Samples Analyzed: 18
Percent in Asbcstos
Layer Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
....
Percent in
Laycr
-
-
-
~.,
-
-
..
.'
*'1.
...
~
...
..
1Il'II!!I"t'
-
1 of 3
-
'<!llti
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
2.3(~4qZ
B I 03520
09107/07
Lab Number
Percent in
Layer
Sample ID
06
Layer: White SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
10677123
Asbestos
Type
Asbestos (ND)
Percent in
Layer
ND
ND
07 10677124
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cell uJose (Trace)
08 10677125
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
09
10677]26
Layer: Brown Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
11
lO677 I 27
Layer: Tan Sheet Flooring
Layer: Fi brous Backing
Layer: Y cllow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (5 %)
12 10677128
Layer: Tan Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Talc (2 %)
13
10677]29
Asbestos (ND)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (Trace)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (25%)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (2 % )
ND
ND
ND
10 %
ND
70 %
ND
2%
Layer: Grey Semi-Fi brous Material
I ,ayeI': Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
14 10677130
Layer: Grey Cementitious Material ND
Layer: Tan Cementitious Material ND
Layer: Paint ND
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cell ulose (Trace)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (25 % )
20 %
ND
Asbestos
Type
Crocidolite
Percent in
Layer
5%
Asbestos
Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (5'10) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887.42'18
2 of 3
Client Name: Protcch Consulting & Engineers Inc
..
t..~~ ~ ~ r,
-
~
Report Number:
Date Printed:
BI03520
09/07/07
..
Asbestos
Type
Perccnt in
Layer
Sample Jl)
IS
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
10677131
-
Layer: Stoncs
Layer: Black Tar
Laycr: Black Fclt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
16
10677132
Laycr: Stones
Laycr: Black Tar
Laycr: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
17 10677133
Laycr: Stoncs
Layer: Black Tar
Laycr: Black Fclt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 (X))
18
10677134
Layer: Stones
Laycr: Black Tar
Laycr: Black Fclt
Total Composite Valucs of Fibrous Componcnts:
Fi brous Glass (45 %)
19 10677135
Laycr: Black Fclt
Total Compositc Values of Fibrous Componcnts:
Cell ul ose (95 (ro)
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
ND
ND
ND
.....
Asbestos (ND)
...
ND
ND
ND -
Asbestos (ND)
-
ND
ND
ND -
Asbestos (ND)
-
ND
ND
ND "'"
Asbestos (ND)
.'
ND
Asbestos (ND)
..
...
-
ljlli~'
....
~~ ..
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = 1 %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'ND' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and rcports arc gencrated by Forensic Analytical at the request of and for the cxclusive use of the pcrson or entity (client) named on such report. Results. reports or
copies of same will not be released by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior written request from client. This report applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
iahoratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved hy Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agcncy of the U.S. Govcrnmcnt. Forensic Analytical is not ablc to assess the dcgrec of hazard rcsulting from matcrials analyzcd. Forcnsic Analytical rcscrves thc righllo dispose of
all samples aftcr a period of thirty (30) days, according to all statc and fcdcral guidclines. unlcss othcrwisc spccilied. All samples wcre received in acceptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
IllIJP.lI
~
3 of 3
Pi"""
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
...
~
Forensic Analytical
~1lok"j
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-116, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
12m~ Main Sl.
Rcdwood City, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
Final Report
~l3 0, '1; l~ 1.(
1454
B 103529
09/05107
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd., Dublin, Unit #]41 - POll 0904-667-13
Date(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Sample II)
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Percen tin
Layer
01 ]0677]68
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 Ifr))
02 10677169
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
I.ayer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 (70)
03 10677170
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Ofl-White Skimcoal/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: OfT-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
'rotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677171
"" Layer: OfT-White Skimcoatl.Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
,""" Cellulose ('rrace)
05 10677172
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
,.,. Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose errace)
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 13
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
I of 3
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
....
, jr'\ ..::iJ..... 4&t ~
~.e'-U
-
Report Number:
Date Printed:
BI03529
09/07/07
-
Percent in
Layer
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
-
06 10677173
Layer: Off-White Skimcoatl.loint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
07 10677174
Layer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace) Synthetic (Trace)
09
10677175
Layer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
10 10677176
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
'rotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
10677177
ND
ND
-
Asbestos (ND)
.P?
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
..
'"',
Ch rysoti Ie 2%
.'
Asbestos (2 % )
~.
-
Chrysotile 15 % Crocidolite 5%
Asbestos (20 % )
-
11
Layer: Beige Cementitious Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (rrace)
12 10677178
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
I ,ayeI': Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 (fc!)
13
10677179
Asbestos (ND)
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Fell
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
14 10677180
Layer: Black Fibrous Material
'rotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (95 %)
ND
ND
-
~
..
ND
ND
ND
1li.~
-
ND
ND
ND
1P'I'1M'
ND
~'
f!!I!Jt'-
2 of 3
"""
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
w
2.-410b~~
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
B 103529
09/07/07
Sample ID
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
Asbestos
'fype
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
'.-
..
fh'it
,>4
.,",
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and reports are gem' rated by Forensic Analyticnl nt the request of lmd for the e,~c1usive use of the person or entity (client) nnmed on such report. Results, reports or
""" cOI)ies of same willl10t be released by Forensic Analytical to any third pany without prior written requcst from client. This rcport applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
InboralOry documentntion is nvnilable upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analyticnl. The client is solely responsible for the
use ancI interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim produet endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of the U.S. Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hnzard resulting from mnterials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves the right to dispose of
all samples after a period of thirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidelines, unless othcrwise specified. All samples were received in acceptable condition unless
'.... otherwise noted.
3 of 3
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
~
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-ll6, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
1208 Main SI.
Redwood City, CA 94063
...
Final Report
-Z t.f t.. u:n ttt1-(
...
j.<L
-
1>"'
-
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
1454
Bl03528
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
-
Job lD/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd., Dublin, Unit If 106 - POll 0904-667-13
~
Date(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
Pereen tin
Layer
01 J0677]55
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Skimeoat!.Joint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimeoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %)
02 ] 0677] 56
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White SkimeoatlJoint Compound
Layer: White Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
I,ayer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
03 10677157
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: Off-White Skimeoat!.Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Fibrous Material ND
Layer: OfT-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Towl Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %)
04 10677158
Layer: Off-White Skimeoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Celfulose (Trace)
05 ]0677159
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint' ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
FASI Job lD: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: ] 3
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
Percent in
Layer
-
~
-
-
1""""7
...
..
-
-
....,
-
11<$
I of 3
.....
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engincers lnc
t ~~ Vb ~t(f:t
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103528
09/07/07
Percent in
Laycr
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
06 10677160
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
07 10677161
Layer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace) Synthetic efrace)
09 10677162
Layer: Yellow Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
10
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrolls Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose ('I' race)
10677163
11
10677164
ttI
Layer: Red-Brown Cementitious Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
12 ]0677165
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 'Ic!)
13
10677166
,uI
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
~
>Ill
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (2 % )
Chrysotile
Asbestos (20%)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Percen tin
Layer
ND
ND
ND
ND
2%
15 %
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
14 10677167
Layer: Black Fi brcws Material ND
., Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (95 %)
.,
/-
Asbestos
Type
Crocidolite
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
5%
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
2 of 3
-
:2 ~ ~ ~ ~.frt
.'
Client Name: Proteeh Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103528
09/07/07
-
Sample ID
Lab Numbcr
Asbestos
Type
Pcrcent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
~.#.i
....
-
"'"
..
',,"
..
!Ii<
..
'i1t,
-
...
'"
..
-
~
~Jko
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical r~sults and reporJs ar~ generated by Forensic Analytical at thc request of and for the ~xclusive use ofthc person or entity (client) named on such report. Results, reports or
copies of same will not be released by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior written request from client. This report applies only to the sarnplc(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
ag~ney of the US Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves the right to dispose of
all samples after a period of tbirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidelines, unlcss otherwisc spccified. All samples were received in acceptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
~,
3 of 3
~
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
''-
PI
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-1 16, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
... Pn~iect Manager
1208 Main St.
Redwood City, CA 94063
44;;
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
Final Report
ttb iYb ~'t
1454
B103512
09/05/07
09/07/07
09107107
09107/07
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Doughery Rd Dublin Unit #85 - 1'0/10904-667-13
Date(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
Percent in
Layer
01 10677053
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677054
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: White Tape ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
03 10677055
Layer: White Drywall ND
Layer: White SkimcoatlJoint Compound ND
Layer: White Tape ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677056
Layer: White Skimcoat!Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
fi:m6
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
OS 10677057
Layer: White Skimcoat!Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
"'"
ND
ND
;*
-<i$
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 15
Total Samples Analyzed: 13
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
1 of 3
Client Name: Proteeh Consulting & Engineers Ine
-
Z 4U ~ y.Crt6
l1i'!fff
-
Report Number:
Date Printed:
B1035]2
09107/07
-
Sample ID
Asbestos
Type
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
06 10677058
Layer: White Skimeoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Pai nt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell u]ose (Trace)
07 10677059
Layer: Brown Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
09
10677061
Layer: Tan Mastic
Tota] Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Talc (2 %)
10677062
10
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
II
10677063
Layer: Brown Cementitious Material
Layer: Pai nt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
12 10677064
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black 'far
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 0/,,)
13
10677065
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
14 10677066
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (95 %)
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
JIIlll'f'
ND
ND
-
Asbestos (ND)
M'
ND
Chrysotile 10 %
Asbestos (Trace) ..
Chrysotile 2%
-~
Asbestos (2%)
.
Chrysotile 20 % Crocidolite 5%
ND
Asbestos (25 % )
.'
ND
ND -
Asbestos (ND)
-
ND .~..~
ND
ND ....
Asbestos (ND) liIi,
-
ND
ND
ND ~.
Asbestos (ND)
.,
ND
Asbestos (ND)
~^
2 of 3
~
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
? tJr 1 iJf) t{ ~(
Client Name: Proteeh Consulting & Engineers Inc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
BI03512
09/07/07
Sample ID
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
,q<<
~iIW
...
""
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') == I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'ND' == 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and reports arC generated by Forensic Analytical at the re'quest of and for the exclusive use of the person or entity (client) named on such report. Results, reports or
.. copies of same will not be released by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior writtcn request from client. This rcport applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory docull1entation is available upon request. This reportll1ust not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report ll1ust not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agency of the U.S. Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degrec of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reserves the right to dispose of
all samples aftcr a period of Hlirty (30) days, according to all state i1l1d federal guidclines, unlcss othcrwise specified. All samples were received in acceptable condition unless
otherwise noted.
3 of 3
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
~
Forensic Analytical
Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
1208 Main SI.
Redwood City, CA 94063
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-1 16, Visual Area Estimation)
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
....
ti
Final Report
2 4~ 00 t.t?t~
....
..
~1
..'
1454
B103514
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
..
Date(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd., Dublin, Unit 1121 - POll 0904-667-16
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 16
Total Samples Analyzed: 16
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
-
Percent in
Layer
..
01 10677069
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 10677070
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimcoat/.loint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
03 10677071
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimeoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677072
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: While Skimeoat/.loint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 (10) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
OS 10677073
Layer: White Skimeoat/.loint Compound
Layer: Pai nt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
..
-
~
!l'l""
,..,
] of 3
".-"
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
r 1" /C/
":6 :...r (:; 'C .'
B]035]4
09/07/07
Percent in
Layer
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
06 10677074
I.ayer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cell u] ose (Trace)
07 10677075
Layer: White Skimeoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Tota] Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
08 10677076
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose ('frace)
09 10677077
Layer: Brown Tile
Layer: Black Mastic
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose ('T'race)
11
10677078
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (Trace)
ND
NO
ND
NO
NO
10 %
Layer: Tan Sheet Flooring NO
Layer: Fi brous Backing Chrysotile 70 %
Layer: Yellow Mastic ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (25%)
Cellu]ose (5 ';70)
12 10677079
Layer: White Mastic ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
..
13
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose ('Trace)
]0677080
-
14 10677081
Layer: Tan Cementitious Materia]
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
....
"t_
Asbestos (ND)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (25 % )
Asbestos (ND)
20 %
NO
ND
ND
Asbestos
Type
Crocidolite
Percent in
Layer
5%
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
Asbestos
Type
2 of 3
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
..
d ,GOb ~t1(
~,>>:>
..
Report Number:
Date Printed:
13103514
09/07/07
..
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
fif';
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Sample ID
15
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
10677082
..
I ,ayeI': Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: B]ack Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
]6
]0677083
Laycr: Stones
Laycr: B]ack Tar
Layer: Black Felt
'rota I Compositc Valucs of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
]7 ]0677084
I,aycr: B]ack Felt
Tota] Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Ce]lulose (95 %)
ND
ND
ND
....
Asbestos (ND)
-
ND
ND
ND -
Asbestos (ND)
..
ND
Asbestos (ND)
..
-
..
-
-
..
...
-
-
~~
-
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification CLOQ') = ] %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'ND' = 'None Detected'.
Analytical results and reports arc gem'rated by Forensic Analytical at the request of and for the exclusive use of the person or entity (client) named on such report. Results. reports or
copies of same wiilnol be released by Forensic Analytical to any third party without prior written request from client. This rcport applics only to the sample(s) testcd. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interpretation of lest results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agcney of the U.S. Govcrnment. Forcnsic Analytical is not able to asscss the degrce of hazard rcsulting from matcrials analyzed. Forensic Analytical reservcs the right to disposc of
all samples af"!er a period of thirty (30) days, according to ail state and federal guidelines, unless olherwisc spccified. All samples were received in acceptable condition unless
olhcnvise nOled.
-
...
3 of 3
iii'
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
...
"
Forensic Analytical
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-ll6, Visual Area Estimation)
Protech Consulting & Engineers [nc
Project Manager
120S Main St.
Redwood City, CA 94063
Client ID:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
Final Report
6 11'1) tfCtt
1454
8103527
09/05107
09/07/07
09/07/07
09107/07
Date(s) Collected: 0910412007
Job lD/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Dougherty Rd., Dublin, Unit il50 - POft 0904-667-]4
Sample If)
01
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
10677141
02
Layer: White Drywall
I.,ayer: Off- Wh i te Ski mcoat/Joi nt Com pound
Layer: White Fibrolls Material
Layer: Off- Whi te Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
'rota I Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %)
I ,ayeI': White Drywall
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: While Fibrous Material
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Pai nt
10677142
....
..
,iIi/i
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %)
03 10677143
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: Off-White SkimcoatlJoint Compound
Layer: While fibrous Material
Layer: Off-While Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %)
04 ]0677144
Layer: OfT-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Painl
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose ('Trace)
OS 10677145
Layer: OfT-While SkimcoatlJoint Compound
L,ayer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ulose (Trace)
""*
,"*
,.
-
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Asbestos (ND)
Percent in
Layer
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos
Type
FASI Job ID: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 14
Total Samples Analyzed: J 4
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
Percent in
Layer
] of 3
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
-
lot,
"2 ~ Z 61) (.j(ct t
-
....
B I 03527
09107/07
-
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
-
06 10677146
Layer: Off-White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
07 10677147
Layer: Off-White Tile
Layer: YellolV Mastic
"fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
08 ]0677]48
Layer: Tan Tile
Layer: Black Mastic Chrysotile
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (Trace)
Cellulose (Trace)
09 ]0677149
Layer: OJT-White Cementitious Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
10 10677150
Layer: Grey Semi-Fibrous Material
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (rrace)
Chrysotile
Asbestos (20%)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
10 %
ND
15 %
11 ]0677]51
Layer: Yellow Cementitious Material ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components; Asbestos (ND)
Cell ul ose (Trace)
12 10677152
Layer: Stones ND
Layer: Black Tar ND
Layer: Black Felt ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
Asbestos (ND)
10677]53
13
Layer: Stones
Layer: Black Tar
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
Asbestos (ND)
ND
ND
ND
Crocidolite
5%
....
..
i&-
....
ra,
""""
....
tlJlIIl't
"1""
~.-
.'
2 of 3
....
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 1 Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI 1 Fax: (510) 887-4218
" ....- .'" ~ ,) ~t'i'
'2,. ~ ., _ (,) I... r;
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
8103527
09/07/07
Sample ID
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
14 10677]54
L,ayer: Black Fihrous Material ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (95 %)
<I.
'.
AlII
..,.
~J(,w
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'NO' = 'None Detected',
Anal)'tical results and reports are generated by Forensic Analytical at the request of and for tbe exclusivc usc of thc pcrson or cntity (c1icnt) named on such rcport. Results. reports or
,>Ill copics of same will not bc rei cased by Forcnsic Analytical to any third party without prior written rcquest from client. This report applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
laboratory documentation is available upon requcst. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
use and interprctation of test results and rcports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim produet endorsement by NVLAP or any other
agcney of the U.S. Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resuiting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical rcscrves the right to dispose of
..... all samples after a pcriod of thirty (30) days, according to all statc and federal guidclincs, unless otherwisc specified. All samplcs werc received in acceptablc condition unlcss
otherwise noted.
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
3 of 3
"
Forensic Analytical
-
...
Final Report
-
:t6~~4cty{
Bulk Asbestos Analysis
(EPA Method 600/R-93-1 16, Visual Area Estimation)
Protcch Consulting & Engineers Inc
Project Manager
1208 Main Sl.
Redwood City, CA 94063
-
fI!!!'l!
Client 10:
Report Number:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Date Printed:
First Reported:
1454
8103515
09/05/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
09/07/07
-
Date(s) Collected: 09/04/2007
Job ID/Site: 667-AA07 - 6700 Doughcrty Rd., Dublin, Unit 11122 - 1'01/0904-667-14
Percent in
Layer
FASI Job 10: 1454
Total Samples Submitted: 14
Total Samples Analyzed: 14
Percent in Asbestos
Layer Type
~
-
Pcrcent in
Layer
Sam pie ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Asbestos
Type
01 J0677085
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
02 J 0677086
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: White Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components;
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 (J70)
03 10677087
Layer: White Drywall
Layer: While Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: While Tape
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (10 %)
04 10677088
Layer: White Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Pai nt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
OS 10677089
Layer: White Skimcoatl.loint Compound ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
ND
ND
ND
ND
~
~
Asbestos (ND)
ND
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
~
ND
ND
ND ..~
ND
Asbestos (ND)
~..
ND
ND lII'I'I!i~
Asbestos (ND)
-
1 of 3
...
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 I Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI I Fax: (510) 887-4218
''; 5 00 0/1~,
'A,ill/
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers lnc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
B I 035] 5
09/07/07
Sample ID
Asbestos
Lab Number Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
06 10677090
Layer: While Skimcoat/Joint Compound
Layer: Paint
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cell ul ose (Trace)
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
07
Layer: White Tile
Layer: Yellow/Black Mastic
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Cellulose (Trace)
10677091
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
08 10677092
Layer: While Tile ND
Layer: Yellow/Black Mastic ND
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
09 ]0677093
Layer: Y cllow Mastic ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
10
10677094
Layer: Grey Sheet Flooring ND
Layer: Fibrous Backing ND
Layer: Tan Mastic ND
'fotal Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (20 %) Fibrous Glass (5 %) Synlhetic (10 %)
1] 10677095
Layer: Grey Cemcntitious Material ND
Layer: Tan Ce1l1enlitious Material ND
Layer: Paint ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (Trace)
12 10677096
Layer: Stones ND
Layer: Black Tar ND
I.ayer: Black Fell ND
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components:
Fibrous Glass (45 %)
Asbestos (ND)
10677097
ND
ND
ND
Asbestos (ND)
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (51 D) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASt I Fax: (510) 887-4218
2 of 3
..
"? t', I .~ ,-q.. tf1 g
...., :;./LV "l)
..
Wi,
Client Name: Protech Consulting & Engineers Inc
Report Number:
Date Printed:
BI03515
09/07/07
-
~
Sample II)
Lab Number
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percent in
Layer
Asbestos
Type
Percen tin
Layer
1IIIllI'
14 10677098
Layer: Black Felt
Total Composite Values of Fibrous Components: Asbestos (ND)
Cellulose (95 o/r))
ND
...
-
..
....
..'
...,
-
-
-
""""
.,
"""""
~~
James Flores, Laboratory Supervisor, Hayward Laboratory
Note: Limit of Quantification ('LOQ') = I %. 'Trace' denotes the presence of asbestos below the LOQ. 'ND' = 'None Detected',
I\n~dytic,,\ rcslIlls and rcports arc gcncrated by Forensic Analytical at the request of and for the exclusive use of the person or entity (client) named on such report. Results. rcports or
cOP!CS of SUme will not be released by Forcnsic Analytical to any third party without prior written request from client. This report applies only to the sample(s) tested. Supporting
labonllory doelil11entarion is available llpon request. This report must not be reproduced except in full, unless approved by Forensic Analytical. The client is solely responsible for the
.Jse 'll1d interpretation of test results and reports requested from Forensic Analytical. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any other
1gency uf the U.S. Government. Forensic Analytical is not able to assess the degree of hazard resulting from materials analyzed. Forensic Analytical rescrves the right to dispose of
dl samplcs after a period "f thirty (30) days. according to all state and federal guidelines. unless otherwise specified. All samples were rcceived in acceptable condition unless
)thenvlsc llotl:d.
....
3 of 3
"""
3777 Depot Road, Suite 409, Hayward, CA 94545 / Telephone: (510) 887-8828 (800) 827-FASI / Fax: (510) 887-4218
"") ~"-I.:r1\ i.fCfl
,;,: 4;;;;,;l i) U
Attachment 8
Site Geotechnical Investigation
-
7 ~- '6' iJ'b Lt0~
~.:;;;-
,,<'!iW
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
*
on
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Vista
6700 Dougherty Road
Dublin, California
for
SCS Development
'H
~-
By
TERRASEARCH, inc.
,.
..
Project No. 11557.G
6 August 2007
(Revised 13 February 2008)
.",.
..
IiiIil
'" .
, -
~
1m ortant Information About Your
..
..
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Geotechnical Services Are Performed for
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of
their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi-
neer may not fulfi II the needs of a construction contractor or even another
civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each
geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No
one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without
first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one
- not even you - should apply the report for any purpose or project
except the one originally contemplated.
Read the Full Report
Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical
engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary.
Do not read selected elements only.
A Geotechnical Engineering Rej)ort Is Based on
A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors
Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific fac-
tors when establ ishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the
client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general
nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of
the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements,
such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the
geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates oth-
erwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was:
not prepared for you,
not prepared for your project,
not prepared for the specific site explored, or
completed before important project changes were made.
Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical
engineering report include those that affect:
the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a
parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant
to a refrigerated warehouse,
'"'"
-
..
..
....
elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the
proposed structure,
composition of the design team, or
prqject ownership.
-
As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
changes-even minor ones-and request an assessment of their impact.
Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems
that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which
they were not informed.
.,
....
Subsurface Conditions Can Change
A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at
the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer-
ing report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of
time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site;
or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes. or groundwater fluctua-
tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report
to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or
analysis could prevent mqjor problems.
-
I!ilt..
IJlIlIIIllI
~
Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional
Opinions
Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where
subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi-
neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional
judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the
site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ-sometimes significantly-
from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer
who developed your report to provide construction observation is the
most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated
conditions.
O\'lra','
-
",..,
""'"
A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final
Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your
report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engi-
neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical
engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual
"""
~
..
~4
2. t.J' 0 ,r Lft1 r
subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical
engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or
liability for the reports recommendations if that engineer does not perform
construction observation.
A j;,otechnical. Engineering Report Is Subject to
MIsinterpretation
Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering
reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo-
technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after
submitting the report, Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti-
nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can
also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by
having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction
conferences. and by providing construction observation.
Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs
Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon
their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or
omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should
never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings,
Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize
that separating logs from the report can elevate risk.
Give' Contractors a Complete Report and
Guidance
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make
contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what
they provide for bid preparation, To help prevent costly problems, give con-
tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report. but preface it with a
clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the
report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the
report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical
engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to
conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they
need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contrac-
tors have sufficient time to perform additional study, Only then might you
be in a position to give contractors tile best information available to you,
while rr Wiring them to at least share some of tile financial responsibilities
stemming from unanticipated conditions.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that
geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disci-
plines. Tllis lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that
have led to disappointments, claims. and disputes. To help reduce the risk
of such outcomes. geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of
explanatory provisions in their reports, Sometimes labeled "limitations"
many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsi-
bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities
and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions, Your geotechnical
engineer should respond fully and frankly.
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
The equipment. techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenviron-
mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical
study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually
relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions. or recommendations;
e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or
regulated contaminants, Unanticipated environmental problems 17ave led
to numerous prQject failures, If you have not yet obtained your own geoen-
vironmental information. ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man-
agement guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for
someone else.
Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold
Diverse strategies can be applied during building design. construction,
operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from
growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective. all such strategies should be
devised for the express purpose of mold prevention. integrated into a com-
prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional
mold prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or
moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, a num-
ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry,
While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been
addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings
are conveyed in this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this
prQject is not a mold prevention consultant; none of the services per-
formed in connection with the geotechnical engineer's study
were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven-
tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed
in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold
from growing in or on the structure involved.
Rei) on Your ASFE-Member Geotechncial
Engineer for Additional Assistance
Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical
engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of
genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer
witll you ASFE-member geotecllnical engineer for more information.
ASFE
Tba BIll P..pla In farlb
,~
8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017
e-mail: info@asfe.org www.asfe.org
Copyright 2004 by ASFE, Inc. Duplication. reproduction. or copying of this document. in whole or in part. by any means whatsoever. is strictly prohibited. except with ASFE's
specific written permission. Excerpting. quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of ASFE, and only for
purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report. Any other
firm. individual. or otlJer entity that so uses this document without being an ASFE member could be commiting negligent or intentional (fraUdulent) misrepresentation.
,;~
IIGERD6D45.DM
SAN JOSE
322 Piercy Road
San Jose, CA 95138
Phone: (408)362-4920
Fax: (408) 362-4926
LIVERMORE
257 Wright Brothen Ave.
Livermore, CA 94551
Phone: (925) 243-6662
Fax: (925) 243-6663
SACRAMENTO
4200 N. Freeway Blvd.
Suite 2
Sacramento, CA 95834
Phone: (916) 564-7809
Fax: (916) 564-7672
OAKLAND
7700 Edgewater Drive
Suite 847
Oakland, CA 94621
Phone: (510) 633-1332
Fax: (408) 362-4926
FRESNO
4339 N. GoldaJ. Slate Blvd.
Suite 103
Fresno, CA 93722
Phone: (559) 271-0773
Fax: (559) 271-0763
WEBSn'E
www.terrasearchinc.com
E-MAIL
info@terrasearchinc.com
..
,Ut Environmental. Geotechnical. Special Inspections. Materials Testing
WfERR4SS4RClfllll&.
SERVING NORl'HERN CALIFORNIA SINCE 1969
"2G9 lOb *0 c(
..
..
-
-
l!l$i
Project No. 11557.0
6 August 2007
(Revised 13 February 2008)
-
Mr. Charles McKeag
SCS Development
404 Saratoga Avenue, Suite 100
Santa Clara, Ca 95050
-
mf
-
Subject:
Proposed Residential Development
Arroyo Vista
6700 Dougherty Road
Dublin, California
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
..
..
II>
j;"r,'
Dear Mr. McKeag:
."
In accordance with your authorization, TERRASEARCH, inc., has investigated
the geotechnical conditions at the subject site located in Dublin, California.
N,
..
The accompanying report presents our conclusions and recommendations based
on our investigation. Our findings indicate that construction of the proposed
development is feasible on the site, from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the
recommendations of this report are carefully followed and are incorporated into
the project plans and specifications.
IIlIo
..
~
Should you have any questions relating to the contents of this report or should you
require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact our office at your
convemence.
.'
7Jj;;
Sincerely,
TERRASEARCH, Inc.,
~1 _
K, . ..~
Kamran OhI s; Ph.D., P.E.
S ior El)gin r
., \ ~
" :
-
~if
-
~j,
..
o/Roger J. Wilcox
Staff Engineer
--
-
~,*j
..
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
2lJ 0'2.. fff\ '1 t1 ~
6 August 20M
Revised (13 Februarv 200S)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pa!!e No.
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION .... 0 0 0 ...... ....,...................... ............ ..... ..... .............. ...............4
Purpose and Scope ...... .......... ....... ....... ..... ...... ......,. ...... ......................" ...... ....... ......... ..........4
Site Location and Description.. .............................. ........... ............ ........... ...........,......... .......4
Proposed Development "... ..... ....... ..,.,. ....... .... ........ ,........ ... ........ ...... ,.... ..,.. ... ..... .... .... ..........5
Geologic Setting.......................,....."......,.........,.,.................................................................5
Previous Studies by Others....,................."............,.....",.....................,..........".......,..,.,...... 7
Subsurface Conditions ... ........... .......................... ....... .......,.... ....... ..................... ..........,....... 7
Seismic Considerations.......................".........................."...........................,....,.........,........ 8
UBC Earthquake Design Criteria..... ... .... ..... ...... ...... .......... ",. .,..... ..... ..... "..... .............. '" ... ..9
Corrosivity of soil............,........... ....... ........... ............... ................. ...... ........ ....... ...............1 0
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................11
General................................,..........................."................."..........".,..............,......... ..,.... .11
Demolition .......... ........ .........,...... .............. ..... ..... .......,.... .............. ..... .......,......... ........ .......11
Grading .......... ,..... ......... .... ..... .",.... .......,. ...... ..... ,..... ,............. .... ..... ...... ..... .... ...,... .........,.. .12
Surface and Subsurface Drainage..,......... ...... ..... .........".... ........... ....., ....... ..................... ...14
Foundations........,....................,............,..............................".......................................... .. .16
Post-Tensioned Slab Foundation...,............,......,.............,........,.,.....,.,.................., .16
General Post-Tensioned and Mat Slab Foundations Construction ....................................17
Exterior Concrete Flatwork Slab-on-Grade Construction .................................................18
Retaining Walls and Sound Walls................................................................................... ..19
Spread Footings ......... ........ ...... .,...., ..... ...... ....,......." ,. ....... ,.... ..... ........ .... ... "." .......20
Friction Piers.................. .............. .......................,.. ............ ...... .................... ......... .21
Pavement Areas ............................,..............................,..,........,.......................,..............., ,21
Utility Trenches........................................................."........,...........................,................. .23
Project Review and Construction Monitoring ..... .................. ...... ...... ..... ....... ............ ..... ...24
REFERENCES ........,."....,.................,....,..................................,...................................................25
GUIDELINES FOR REQUIRED SERVICES............ .............. ....... ............. ........ ..............,...... ...26
LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS ...........................................................28
....
APPENDIX A... ,.... .... .......... ......, ..... ....,." ....,....... ........ ....... ......... ....... ....... .,....... ....., ...... .... .... ..... ,.29
Field Investigation........................................,....,................,.,.,...,........,.,............,.............,.3 0
k>..
APPENDIX B ............,.,............,.......,............,.,......,....,.......,.,....................,.........,.....,.......,..,.......39
Laboratory Investigation,......................."............,.............,.......,...................................... .40
...,
APPENDIX C ., ........ ...., ... .... ......, ,....... ,........ ......... ..... ......... ........... ........ ..................,... ........ ........ ..45
"~
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 3 of 51
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
2 f.t;~" ~ ~ '1,i
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
....
Itr;<
.,
Ilk
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
-
Purpose and Scope
-
The purpose of the investigation for the proposed development located at 6700 Dougherty Road
in Dublin, California, was to determine the surface and subsurface soil conditions at the subject
site. Based on the results of the investigation, criteria were established for the grading of the site,
the design of foundations for the proposed development, slab-on-grade construction, retaining
walls, and preliminary pavement design.
.
"'"
~
Our investigation included the following:
d.
Field reconnaissance by the Soil Engineer;
Evaluating the general geology and seismicity of the site;
Drilling and sampling of the subsurface soils;
Laboratory testing of the samples obtained;
Analysis of the data and formulation of conclusions and recommendations; and
Preparation of this written report.
..
a.
b.
.'
c.
...
-
e.
"",.
f.
-
Details of our field and laboratory investigation are presented in Appendices A and B.
.'
~
Site Location and Description
The site is irregular in shape and consists of one parcel (APN: 941-0007-001-07) totaling
approximately 24:J:: acres located in Dublin, California. The site is bounded by Dougherty Road to
the east, a residential development and Alamo Creek to the west, residential development to the
north and a mini park consisting of trees and landscape to the south. The site is currently owned
by the Housing Authority of the City of Dublin and is occupied by several one- to two-story
multifamily wood-framed houses; a leasing office; an active child care facility; landscape areas;
parking lots; sports fields; and internal streets. The houses are currently occupied and all the
utilities for these houses are active. Vegetation at the site generally consists of trees and grasses.
~
~"
.....-'
-
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 4 of 51
-'"
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
,) y, 0'1'\ tfQZ
~)..f), V
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
Topographically, the site is relatively flat with elevation ranging between 351 feet\to the
southwest of the site) to 368 feet(to the northeast of the site), and the drainage appears to follow
the topography from east to west.
The site location and description is based on a site reconnaissance by the Soil Engineer.
Proposed Development
The proposed project is understood to consist of demolishing the existing development and
constructing approximately 350 to 400 attached and detached residential units in a collaborative
effort with Eden Housing. The development is assumed to entail parking lots, and interior streets.
The proposed units will be 2 to 3 storie~ in height. Grading is expected to consist of minor cuts
and fills.
Geologic Setting
The subject site is within the Coast Ranges geomorphic province, a belt of sedimentary, volcanic,
and metamorphic rocks, which extend from southern California to Oregon. The structural
geology of the Coast Ranges is complex and dominated by transpressive stress (combined
transform and compressional) concentrated along faults within the San Andreas Fault system.
On the eastem portion of the San Francisco Bay, bedrock geology consists of sedimentary and
metamorphic rocks ranging from Cretaceous through Quaternary periods (up to 144 million years
to present).
~
The subject site is located in the East Bay portion of the San Francisco Bay Area, in the central
portion of the Amador Valley in Dublin, California, immediately west of Camp Parks. Based on
published materials by Helley et al. (1979), the materials underlying the site consist of Holocene
fine-grained alluvium (Qhaf). The fine-grained alluvium consists of unconsolidated, plastic,
moderately to poorly sorted silt and clay rich in organic matter. This unit was fonned in poorly
drained areas and in standing floodwaters and has a maximum thickness of 10 feet. Thick
sequences of clay, silt, sand and gravel underlie each of these units for several kilometers (km)
and Mesozoic and Tertiary sedimentary and meta-sedimentary rocks underlie the thick alluvium.
1 Elevations are based on North America Datum, 1983 (NAD83), unless otherwise noted.
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 5 0[51
..
2616 f/)tf1t .,
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
-
....
The Pleasanton Fault is located approximately O.S-mile (0.8-kilometer [kIn]) east and the
Calaveras Fault is situated approximately 1.2-miles (2A-kIn) west-southwest of the subject site.
The Pleasanton and Calaveras Faults are considered active according to the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zones Act (AP Zone). The Pleasanton Fault is a thrust fault, while the
Calaveras Fault is a strike-slip fault with right-lateral motion. The site is not within an AP-Zone,
but is within a Seismic Hazard Zone (DMG, 1997).
-
..
-
-
Other faults located within a 100 kIn radius of the site are shown on Table 1, based on the
EQFAULT computer program by Thomas Blake (2004).
Table 1
Earthquake Fault Zone Data
...
1I!lIJ!I-
Fault Name Fault Type Distance Fault Magnitude
(km) (Mw)
Pleasanton Reverse 1.0 6.2
Calaveras Strike-Slip 2.2 6.8
Mount Diablo Thrust 6.5 6.8
Hayward Strike-Slip 14 7.1
Greenville Strike-Slip 16 6.9
Great Valley 6 Blind Thrust 23 6.7
Concord-Green Valley Strike-Slip 27 6.9
Great Valley 7 Blind Thrust 42 6.7
San Andreas (1906) Strike-Slip 45 7.9
San Andreas (Peninsula) Strike-Slip 45 7.1
Monte Vista-Shannon Thrust 45 6.8
San Gregorio Strike-Slip 56 7.3
West Napa Strike-Slip 58 6.5
Great Valley 4 Blind Thrust 64 6.6
Zayante- V ergeles Thrust 69 7.0
Great Valley 8 Blind Thrust 73 6.6
Ortigalita Thrust 74 6.9
Point Reyes Strike-Slip 85 7.0
Hunting Creek-Berryessa Strike-Slip 86 7.1
Monterey Bay- Tularcitos Strike-Slip 89 7.1
Quien Sabe Strike-Slip 99 6.4
"','
-
..
~
"'"
-
~-
"",,"'
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 6 of 51
.,.".
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
2. ((; (p aD G\ tf ~
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
Previous Studies bv Others
We visited Dublin City Hall and were able to review a geotechnical investigation for the site by
Engeo, Inc. produced in 1979. Due to the cities incorporation four years after the project was
constructed records were not kept and no grading report was found. Alameda County Zone 7 also
has at least one monitoring well onsite with an associated boring log.
Engeo, Inc. performed 15 borings to depths of 20 to 30 feet below ground surface consisting of
mainly sandy to silty clays. They also mention a dumping zone where debris was buried just
south of the existing child care/management facilities. Zone 7 indicated that they found 10 feet of
aggregate base fill below the basketball court during their monitoring well installation.
Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface soil conditions, as encountered in the six (6) borings were found to be fairly
consistent across the site. In all borings, we encountered medium to high plasticity, medium stiff
clay to approximately 3 feet to 5 feet below existing ground surface (bgs). This material is
underlain by an intermixture of medium dense silty sand, stiff to very stiff sandy/silty clay of
varying plasticity, and poorly graded sands with some gravels to maximum depths explored of
31.5 feet in borings B 1 through B6, except for boring B4. In boring B4, we encountered gravelly
sand from approximately 15 feet bgs to approximately 20 feet bgs, as well as in boring B6 from
approximately 30 feet bgs to maximum depth explored of 31.5 feet bgs. Our findings were in
general agreement with the findings by others.
'w;;t:
Our boring locations were limited to accessible areas. Therefore, the materials beneath the
existing buildings and other areas with limited access were not tested and/or sampled. Given the
age of the existing development, there is the likelihood that undocumented fill may exist at the
site within landscape areas. Fill was encountered by others from 2 to 10 feet bgs prior to
development.
~
-
Groundwater was encountered at 30 feet, 30 feet and 28,5 feet below existing ground surface in
the test borings Bl, B3, and B6, respectively. Groundwater was not encountered by others.
,,.
TERRASEARCH, iflC.
Page 7 of 51
...
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
t(,18t~t
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
....'
....
..
However, fluctuations in the groundwater level can occur due to variations in seasonal rainfall
and urbanization of the subject property and surrounding area.
-
..
A more thorough description and stratification of the soils conditions encountered along with the
results of the laboratory tests are presented on the respective, "Logs of Borings" within Appendix
A. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2, "Site Plan'" Appendix A.
~;if
-
..
Seismic Considerations
Damage to structures related to fault movement may be divided into two categories:
-
a)
Primary deformation such as displacement of a structure located
directly on a fault and violent ground shaking; and
III!II!'"
""
b) Secondary failure such as lurch cracking, landsliding, liquefaction,
and differential compaction.
"'"
Surface faulting or ground rupture tends to occur along lines of previous faulting. Since previously
identified fault lines are not within the site or project toward the site, the possibility of surface fault
rupture is negligible witl1in the subject property.
.....
-
Ground shaking is a complex concept related to velocity, amplitude, and duration of earthquake
vibrations. Dan1age from ground shaking is caused by the transmission of earthquake vibrations
from the ground to the structure. The most destructive effects of an earthquake are usually seen
where the ground is unstable and structures are poorly designed and constructed. Maximum
accelerations in rock and soil are based on the attenuation relationships formulated by Bozorgnia
et al (1999). FRISKSP computer program by Blake (2004) was used to calculate site-specific
probabilistic peak ground accelerations (PGA) for the site. FRISKSP is a computer program for
the probabilistic estimation of seismic hazard using three-dimensional faults as earthquake
..
Hii
-
IIllIl'tf
--
sources.
..
Using a 10% probability of exceedance within 50 years with maximum-horizontal ground
acceleration was calculated for the site at 0.9g. This calculation considered all active earthquake
-
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 8 0/51
.'
~,
Project No. 1l557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
1.~r, 1J1\ Lfqa
6 August 200V
Revised (13 Februarv 20(8)
fault zones within a 1 DO-kilometer radius of the site and a return period of 475 years.
Since the property is situated on relatively flat topography, the site is not susceptible to landsliding.
The site is not susceptible to liquefaction, differential compaction and/or ground lurching, due to
the nature of the subsurface materials and the distance to active faults. Since the subject site is not
located near an ocean or lakefront, the secondary hazards oftsunamis or seiches are not probable.
UBC Earthquake Design Criteria
The 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) Chapter 16, Division IV Earthquake Design requires that
structures be designed using certain earthquake design criteria. The criteria are based in part on the
seismic zone, soil profile and the proxinlity of the site to active seismic sources (faults). During an
earthquake event, structures located very close to active faults can be subjected to near source
energy motions that may be damaging to structures, if the effects of these energy motions are not
considered in the structural design. The UBC indicates that the types of seismic sources (active
faults) that generate near source (Na and Nv) greater than 1.0 are classified as Type A or Type B.
The nearest Type A or Type B active fault to the site is the Pleasanton Fault Zone, which is situated
approximately 1,0 km west of the subject site and is categorized as a Type B fault.
Based on the geotechnical data in the referenced report and the selection of criteria of the 1997
UBC, Chapter 16, Division IV, Earthquake Design, a summary of the earthquake design criteria for
use in the design of the proposed structures is as follows:
Seismic Zone
4
~)1fIt
Soil Profile Type
Near Source FactorNa
Near Source Factor Nv
SD
1.3
1.6
,1M
'd.WI
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 9 of 51
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
21.14 ~ tf1Z
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
~
-
...'
Corrosivitv of soil
...
Corrosivity analyses were performed on a selected soil sample recovered from the soil cuttings
from the upper few feet near Boring B-3 to evaluate the corrosion potential of the soil. The sample
was tested in the laboratory for resistivity, chloride ion concentration, sulfate ion concentration, and
pH. Results of the laboratory tests and corrosivity analyses are included in Appendix B. According
to the results of the tests, the minimum resistivity of soil sample is about 755 ohms per centimeter
according to test procedure ASTM 057. Based on the findings of studies presented in ASTM STP
1013 (1989) and these results,. the soil is classified as very severely corrosive to buried metal pipe
and fittings at the site. Therefore, it is recommended that all buried iron, steel, cast iron, ductile
iron and galvanized steel piping and fittings should be properly protected against corrosion
depending upon the critical nature of the structure. Alternatively, we recommend using SDR 35
PVC pipes in lieu of steel pipes, A corrosion engineer may be consulted for development of long-
term site-specific corrosion protection measures.
_.
""'"
...
l;li!.ii
JIIIlI'
-
-,
Chloride ion concentrations were found to be 20 mg/kg or less, sulfate ion concentration were
found to be 5 mg/kg or less, and pH was found to be 7.5. The Unified Building Code, Section
1904-3-1, Table 19-A-4 presents criteria on the requirements for concrete exposed to sulfate
containing solutions. Using the criteria in this table, the sample soil is classified as having a
negligible effect on concrete and no special cement or mix design is needed for concrete mix that
will be in contact with the ground.
-
-
....
-
...
"""
..
-
~.
-
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page100/51
...
ft'
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
'1 ,0 01\ Ltt1<6
6 August 2001l
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
1. From a geotechnical point of view, construction of the proposed residential development on
the site is feasible provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the
project plans and specifications.
-
2. The most prominent geotechnical feature of the site is the presence of near surface medium
to highly expansive soil and possible presence of undocumented fill in landscape areas. The
expansive clay material is prone to heave and shrink movements with changes in moisture content
and, consequently, must be considered in tlle design of grading, foundations, drainage, and
landscaping. The recommendations provided in the following sections will minimize the impacts of
expansive soil and undocumented fill on the proposed development.
3. The proposed structures may be founded on either a post-tensioned slab foundation system
or a mat slab foundation system for the site, depending on appropriate site preparation. Complete
recommendations are provided later under tlle heading "Grading."
Demolition
iIl'N
4. There are existing building structures and utilities on the site. Prior to any grading,
demolition of the existing structures on the site should be completed. Demolition should include
the complete removal of all surface and subsurface structures. If any of the following are
encountered: concrete, septic tanks, gas and oil tanks, storm inlets, machinery, equipment, debris
and trash, these should also be removed, with the exception of items specified by the owner for
salvage. If any trees are to be removed they should be properly grubbed to adequately remove all
major root systems. In addition, any known underground structures must be located on the
grading plans so that proper removal may be carried out. It is anticipated that old utility lines will
be encountered within the site. Depending on the actual situation, some of these utility pipes may
..
.-
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 11 of 51
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
2-1 ( It ~i
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
....
-
...
be left in the ground provided that are capped and/or filled with sand or grout. Specific
recommendation can be provided during grading for the actual condition. It is vital that
TERRASEARCH, inc. intermittently observe the removal of subsurface structures and be
notified in ample time to ensure that no subsurface structures are covered and that the root
systems from grubbing operations are completely removed.
..
IWft'
-
.."
..
5. Excavations made by the removal of any structure should be left open by the demolition
contractor for backfill in accordance with the requirements for engineered fill. The removal of
underground structures should be done under the observation of the Soil Engineer to assure
adequacy of the removal and that subsoils are left ill proper condition for placement of engineered
fills. Any soil exposed by the demolition operations which are deemed soft or unsuitable by the Soil
Engineer, shall be excavated as uncompacted fill or saturated soil and be removed as required by
the Soil Engineer during grading. Any resulting excavations should be properly backfilled with
engineered fill under the observation of the Soil Engineer. It is important that TERRASEARCH,
inc. be present during demolition to ensure that all excavations created by grubbing or removal of
subsurface structures are left open and located on a grading plan. If any excavations are loosely
backfilled without our knowledge and these excavations are not located and backfilled during
grading, future settlement of these loosely filled excavations will occur and may cause damage to
structures and improvements.
.....
..
il#)J:'
..
~,ff
-
-
..
-
-
Grading
..
....
6. The grading requirements presented herein are an integral part of the grading specifications
presented in Appendix C of this report and should be considered as such.
-
~
7. The surface of the site in areas to be graded should be stripped to remove all existing
vegetation and/or other deleterious materials. It is estimated that stripping depths of 2 to 6 inches
may be necessary in landscape areas, however, the actual depth of stripping will be determined in
the field by the Soil Engineer. Anyon-site soil containing less than 3% by weight of organic
material may be used for general engineered fill. Any material that is deemed to be topsoil, (soil
with an organic content greater than 3% by weight) and requiring stripping, may not be used as
engineered fill but may be stockpiled and used later for landscaping purposes. Alternatively,
-
-
...
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Pa$e 12 of 51
...
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
2.,2 'fJ ~0~
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
stripped material may be used in the back yard areas of the new development at least seven (7) feet
away from the structures. It is noted that discing of the site may be perfonned in lieu of stripping
depending on the time of year and the nature of the vegetation. The Soil Engineer must be
consulted prior to any discing operations.
8, In addition, all existing structures and pavement areas are to be removed to expose the
underlying soil. This will allow observation of the underlying soil and evaluate its conditions.
9. The concrete and asphalt concrete (AC) pavement, as well as concrete generated during
demolition, may be processed to generate a recycled aggregate base (AB) or aggregate sub-base
(AS B) material. Use of such recycled materials as aggregate base or aggregate sub-base requires
testing for compliance with CalTrans specifications, Secti6ns 26 and 27.
10. Based on work by others, undocumented fill previously existed on the subject site prior to
development, without a grading report it is unknown if the undocumented fill was removed. All
undocumented fill, if any is encountered, must be removed and placed back as engineered fill and
compacted to a minimum degree of relative compaction of 90% at 3% to 5% above optimum
moisture content for the on-site sandy soil as determined by ASTM DI557-9I Laboratory Test
Procedure. Alternatively, additional soil borings or test pits after demolition in combination with
field and laboratory density testing could be performed to evaluate consistency of the fill. After
testing, we can decide if the existing fill should be removed or can be left in-place.
~
11. Following removal of any loose and/or soft soil, the top 8 inches of exposed native ground
for fill areas should be scarified and compacted to a minimum degree of relative compaction
ranging from 88 to 93 percent at 4 to 5% above optimum as detennined by ASTM DI557-91
Laboratory Test Procedure. All soils encountered during our investigation are suitable for use as
engineered fill when placed and compacted at the recommended moisture content and provided it
does not contain any debris.
,WI
,.
12. All engineered fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in uncompacted
thickness and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction at 4 to 5 percent above
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 13 of 51
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
t13JJQ Lft11 w'
6 August 2007 ....
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
-
optimum. Relative compaction is based on the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM
D1557-91 Laboratory Test Procedure.
-
-
13. Should general import material be used to establish the proper grading for the proposed
development, the import material should be approved by the Soil Engineer before it is brought to
the site. General import material should preferably have an expansion potential similar to or less
than the on site native soil to keep the foundation design recommendations in the report valid.
However, if select import soil is needed it should be used in the upper level of the building pads to
provide a more economical foundation system and better foundation performance. The select
import material should meet the following requirements:
1IIIf!!:'
"""
1lRf'
flIIlI!'1
c.
d.
Have an R-Value of not less than 25;
Have a Plasticity Index not higher than 12;
Not more than 15% passing the No. 200 sieve;
No rocks larger than 6 inches in maximum size;
Have a pH of6.5 to 7.5;
Have a minimum resistivity of 5000 ohms/cm; and
Have a maximum soluble sulfate content of 0.2% by weight.
-
a.
b.
e.
f.
g.
;....'
II'
Surface and Subsurface Drainage
!#tJ
..
14. All finish grades should provide a positive gradient to an adequate discharge point in
order to provide rapid removal of surface water runoff away from all foundations. No ponding of
water should be allowed on the pad or adjacent to the foundations. Surface drainage must be
provided as designed by the project Civil Engineer and maintained by the property owners at all
times. The pad should be graded in a manner that surface flow is to a controlled discharge
system.
IIIIol
..
..
-
tI)JllI:
15.
Liberal lot slopes and drainage must be provided by the project Civil Engineer to remove
-
all storm water from the pad and to minimize storm and/or irrigation water from seeping beneath
the structures. Should surface water be allowed to seep under the structures, foundation
movement resulting in structural cracking and damage will occur. Finished grades around the
perimeter of all residences should be compacted and should be sloped at a minimum 2% gradient
"~
-
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 14 of 51
II'
ifj*
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
6?u:1j?,*q~
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
away from the exterior foundation. Surface drainage requirements constructed by the builder
should be maintained during landscaping. In particular, the creation of planter areas confined on
all sides by concrete walkways or decks and the residence foundation is not desirable as any
surface water due to rain or irrigation becomes trapped in the planter area with no outlet. If such
a landscape feature is necessary, surface area drains should be provided in the planter area.
16. Continuous roof gutters are recommended. Downspouts from the gutters should be
provided with closed pipe conduits to carry stann water away from the structures and graded
areas and, thus, reduce the possibility of soil saturation adjacent to the foundations and
engineered fills. According to recent state requirements, roof downspouts drain and flows should
be directed to landscape areas where possible. From a geotechnical and maintenance point of
view it is undesirable to discharge water into landscape areas near foundations, as these areas
generally are not maintained well enough to prevent water ponding. Persistent water ponding
adjacent to foundations may cause the foundation sub grade to loose strength and may cause
dampness to the foundation and possibly interior floor. If such drainage must be implemented we
recommend that positive drainage away from the foundation is always maintained by the property
owners, area drains are located close to the discharge areas to minimize ponding of water and
ground cover and vegetation must be maintained to allow easy flow of water to the area drains.
$$
17. Flower beds or planters are not preferred adjacent to the foundations because of the
possibility of irrigation water affecting the foundations. Should planters be constructed, foliage
requiring little irrigation should be planted. It is preferred that irrigation adjacent to the building
foundations consist of a drip system. Sprinkler systems may be used, however, it is preferred that
sprinkler heads do not water closer than 3 feet from the building foundations. If sprinklers are
used within 3 feet, then excessive watering should not be allowed; and good surface drainage in
the planter area must be provided. In any case, it is recommended that area surface drains be
incorporated into the landscaping to discharge any excessive irrigation or rainwater that may
accumulate in the planter area. These surface drains must be constructed such that the surface of
the drain is lower than the surrounding grade so that easy flow of surface water runoff is allowed
into the drip inlets. Ground cover and vegetation should be maintained to allow easy flow of
water to drains.
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
'2 75 00. c..tot(
6 August 2007
Revised (13 February 2008)
.'
-
..
Foundations
_I
18. We recommend that the proposed buildings be founded on either a post-tensioned slab
foundation or a mat slab. The following recommendations are contingent upon adequate surface
drainage being constructed as recommended in this report and as designed by the project Civil
Engineer and maintained by the property owners at all times.
-
-
...
Post-Tensioned Slab Foundation
19.
Post-tensioned slabs should be a minimum 10 inches in thickness and designed using the
...
following criteria which is based on the design method of the 2004, Design of Post-Tensioned
Slabs-on-Ground published by Post-tensioning Institute:
..
Allowable Bearing Capacity
Edge Moisture Variation Distance:
Differential Soil Movement (Ym)
Swelling Mode
Center Lift Edge Lift
1,500 p.s.f. 1,500 p.s.f.
5.2 feet 2.7 feet
3.2 inches 1.1 inches
-
-
'"",
-
~'>
The above design values are based on the following soil and climate parameters:
...
Parameter
Thomthwaite Moisture Index (lm)
Predominant Clay Mineral Percent
Passing #200
Percent Clay
Liquid Limit
Plasticity Index
Depth to Constant Moisture
Soil Suction (PF)
Moisture Velocity
Estimated or Assumed Value
-20
Montmorilloni te
90%
70%
52%
35
4.5 feet
3.67
0.7 inches/month
.....
-
~
-,
-
lJ!f'l'!"
, Mat Foundations
20. Structural mat slabs should be a minimum of 1 0 inches in thickness and designed using
the method present in the 1997 Uniform Building Code, Chapter 18, Division III, Section 1815,
Design of Slab-on-Grade Foundations. Based on the above method, it is recommended that the
."
..
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 16 0/51
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
L f &; at qcrt
6 August 2007
Reyised (13 Februarv 2008)
structural mat foundation be design using a Weighted Plasticity Index value of 35 for the site in
its current condition.
21. Slab thickness and reinforcing should be designed by a Structural Engineer, but
reinforcing should be at least #3 bar on 18-inch centers each way. A modulus of subgrade
reaction of 100 psi per inch (pounds per cubic inch) may be used in designing the floor slab for a
sub grade of native soil. The mat foundation can be designed for allowable bearing pressures of
1,500 pounds per square foot (p.s.!) due to dead plus sustained live loads and 2,000 p.sJ. for all
loads including wind and seismic. Once actual structural design loads and [mal grade are known,
an estimate of settlement and modulus of sub grade reaction will be made.
General Post-Tensioned and Mat Slab Foundations Construction
22. The soils expected near finished grade are moderately expansive and therefore the slab
sub grade should be soaked to saturation (minimum 5% above optimum) to a depth of 12 to 18
inches prior to placement of the sand and Visqueen. This should be verified and approved by the
Soil Engineer. The penetration of a thin metal probe to a depth of 12 inches generally indicates
sufficient saturation
23. A vapor retarder membrane at least 10 mil thick should be placed between the prepared
subgrade and the slab to provide an effective vapor retarder, and to minimize potential moisture
condensation under floor coverings. The vapor retarder membrane shall be lapped a minimunl of
12-inches to provide a continuous vapor retarder barrier under the entire slab. Care must be taken
to assure that the membrane does not become tom and entangled with the reinforcing.
24. A minimum of two inches of moist sand should be placed over the vapor barrier to
facilitate curing of the concrete and to act as a cushion to protect the membrane. The perimeter of
the mat should be thickened a minimum of 2-inches to bear on the prepared building pad and to
confine the sand. During winter construction, sand may become saturated due to rainy weather
prior to pouring. Saturated sand is not desirable because there exists a high probability of creating
sand pockets within the slab section during the concrete pour. As an alternate, a sand-fine gravel
TERRASEARCH, illc.
Page 17 0/51
mixture that is stable under saturated conditions may be used. However, the material must be
approved by the Soil Engineer prior to use. Alternatively, the sand layer may be eliminated
provided the concrete has a maximum water/cement ratio of 0.45 and that either 2 layers of 10
mil visqueen or one layer of 20 mil visqueen, or one layer of 10 mil class A vapor retarder be
used between the sub grade and slab.
Project No. 11557.~
-
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
21i rtJ.... 4~ <t
6 Au~sU007
Revised (13 February 2008)
,.
M;;:
~;.
...
III"
.-l!
25. Slabs may be constructed at pad grade. The perimeter of the slab should be thickened to
bear on the prepared building pad and to confme the sand
tfll!'."-;
....
26. Any concrete flatwork such as steps, patios, or sidewalks should be designed
independently of the. slab, and expansion joints should be provided between the flatwork and the
structural unit.
...
-
Exterior Concrete Flatwork SIab-on-Grade Construction
.~
27. It is expected that the concrete slabs-on-grade including public sidewalks, driveways and
other landscape flatwork may experience some cracking. To reduce the potential cracking of
concrete, the following are recommended:
...
...
a.
To decrease the amount of potential swelling, the driveway sub grade soil in the
upper 12 to 18 inches of the subgrade shall be saturated until moisture equilibrium
is achieved (minimum 5% above optimum moisture) before the slab is poured.
The Soil Engineer should observe and verify the sub grade soil saturation before
the slabs are poured. Typically, 12 inches penetration with a thin metal probe may
indicate sufficient saturation. The sub grade for other flatwork slabs should be
thoroughly wetted prior to the pouring of concrete.
...
...
~
-
-'
b.
Driveway or flatwork slabs should be underlain by a minimum of 4 inches of
gravel or clean crushed rock material placed between the finished sub grade and
the slabs to serve as a capillary break between the subsoil and the slab. See the
....
~
Page 18 of 5 1
TERRASEARCH, inc.
..
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
'~~~] ~ n 4t1~
6 August i~
Revised (13 February 2008)
"Guide Specifications for Rock under Floor Slabs", Appendix C. Alternatively a
thicker slab without gravel may be used.
c. Slabs should. be properly reinforced to meet structural design criteria. The
reinforcement shall be placed in the center of the slab unless otherwise designated
by the design engineer.
d. Slabs should be poured structurally independent of the foundations. A 30-pound
felt strip, expansive joint material, or other positive separator should be provided
around the edge of all floating slabs to prevent bond to the foundation.
Retaining Walls and Sound Walls
28. If any retaining walls or sound walls are to be constructed, they should be designed to resist
lateral pressures exerted from a media having an equivalent fluid weight as follows:
Active Condition
At-rest Condition
Passive Condition
Coefficient of Friction
=
50 p.c.f. for horizontal backslope
75 p.c.f.
275 p.c.f.
0.3
=
29. For a non-horizontal backslope, the active condition equivalent fluid weight can be
increased by a 1.5 p.c.f. for each 2 degree rise in slope from the horizontal.
30. Active conditions occur when the top of the wall is free to move outward. At-rest
conditions apply when the top of wall is restrained from any movement. It should be noted that the
effects of any surcharge or compaction loads behind the walls must be accounted for in the design
of the walls.
31. The above criteria are based on fully drained conditions. If drained conditions are not
possible, then the hydrostatic pressure must be included in the design of the wall. An additional
linear distribution of hydrostatic pressure of63 p.c.f. should be adopted, in this case.
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 19 of 51
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Inyestigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
t. 7'-'1 fib ycti
6 August 2007
Revised (13 February 2008)
~,
...
1m?
...
32. In order to achieve fully drained conditions, a drainage filter blanket should be placed
behind the wall. The blanket should be a minimum of 12 inches thick and should extend the full
height of the wall to within 12 inches of the surface. If the excavated area behind the wall exceeds
12 inches, the entire excavated space behind the l2-inch blanket should consist of compacted
engineered fill or blanket material. The drainage blanket material may consist of either granular
crushed rock and drain pipe fully encapsulated in geotextile filter fabric or Class II permeable
material that meets CalTrans Specification, Section 68, with drainage pipe but without fabric. A 4-
inch perforated drain pipe should be installed in the bottom of the drainage blanket and should be
underlain by at least 4 inches of filter type material.
.'
b>
...
""
MJ'
~
.~
rfi
...
33. As an alternate to the 12-inch drainage blanket, a pre-fabricated strip drain (such as
Miradrain) may be used between the wall and retained soil. In this case, the wall must be designed
to resist an additional lateral hydrostatic pressure of 30 p.c.f.
.'
...
'.Ii"
-
34. Piping with adequate gradient shall be provided to discharge water that collects behind the
walls to an adequately controlled discharge system away from the structure foundation.
.,
-
35. Retaining walls and soundwalls may be founded on either a friction pier foundation or a
spread footing foundation using the criteria below.
...
"",
...
Spread Footines
..
-
36. Spread footings should have a minimum depth of twenty-four (24) inches below lowest
adjacent pad grade (i.e., trenching depth) for soil subgrade. At this depth, the recommended design
bearing pressure for continuous footings should not exceed 2,000 p.s.f. due to dead plus sustained
live loads and 2,600 p.s.f. due to all loads which include wind and seismic.
l8';
~
""""
37. To accommodate lateral loads, the passive resistance of the foundation soil can be utilized.
The passive soil pressures can be assumed to act against the front face of the footing below a depth
of one foot below the groUnd surface. It is recommended that a passive pressure equivalent to that
""
.....
TERRASEARCH, illc.
Page 20 of 51
-
i:ii""
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Inyestigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
2. ~D ltt\ ~ '1 C(
6 August 20~
Revised (13 February 2008)
of a fluid weighing 275 p.c.f. be used. For design purposes, an allowable friction coefficient of 0.30
can be assumed at the base of the spread footing.
Friction Piers
38. The piers should be designed on the basis of skin friction acting between the soil and that
portion of the pier that extends below a depth of one foot below finished grade. For the soils at
the site, an allowable skin friction value of 400 p.s.f. can be used for combined dead and live
loads. This value can be increased by one-third for total loads which include wind or seismic
forces. Spacing should be detennined as required by the load distribution, but minimum spacing
should not be less than 3 pier diameters, center to center. Maximum spacing and the minimum
depth of piers is to be determined by the Structural Engineer.
39. To resist lateral loads, the passive resistance of the soil can be used. The soil passive
pressures can be assumed to act against the lateral projected area of the pier described by the
vertical dimension of twice the pier diameter. It is recommended that a passive pressure
equivalent ofthat of a fluid weighing 275 p.c.f. be used below one foot.
40. It is important that care be exercised to ensure that any concrete spills during the concrete
pour must be removed and no "mushrooming" effects are allowed to remain around the top of the
pier.
Pavement Areas
41. No R-value test was performed at this time. For preliminary design purposes an R-value of
5 will be used and the calculated pavement sections for various Traffic Indices (TI) are tabulated in
Table IT:
<>liII,iiI!'
".~
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 21 of 51
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
2t& I ft) 4-ct (6
6 August 2007
Revised (13 February 2008)
..
lI<!,
..
-
TABLE II
..
'"',
..
M'k
4.5 3 8
5.0 3 10
5.5 3 12
6.0 4 12
6.5 4 14
7.0 6 12
*R-Value of78 used for Aggregate Base
..
~;^
.
~1
..
#i-I
..
42. Please note that the above design is prelinllnary and the material at subgrade level may be
different from that assunled. It is recommended that after rough sub grade is achieved, representative
samples of soil should be collected and tested to determine the actual R-Value's so that a fmal
design may be obtained for specific streets.
-
"'"
-
43. After underground facilities have been placed in the areas to receive pavement and removal of
excess material has been completed, the upper 6 inches of the sub grade soil should be scarified,
moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95% at a moisture
content above optimum in accordance with the grading recommendations specified in this report.
The pavement sub grade should not be allowed to dry excessively before covering with aggregate
base.
.,
..
..
-
-
44. All aggregate base material placed subsequently should also be compacted to a minimum
relative compaction of95% based on the ASTM D1557-91 Test Procedure. The construction of the
pavement in the pavement areas should conform to the requirements set forth by the latest Standard
Specifications of the Department of Transportation of the State ofCalifomia and/or City of Dublin,
Department of Public Works.
-
....
\III'
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 22 of 51
\III'
~".
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
?l~ Vb ~C-(~
6 August 2007
Revised (13 February 2008)
45. If planter areas are provided within or immediately adjacent to the pavement areas, provisions
should be made to control irrigation water from entering pavement subgrade. Water entering the
pavement sections at sub grade level, which does not have a means for discharge, could cause
softening of this zone and, subsequently, pavement failure could occur.
"""
46. In order to mitigate this condition, it is recommended that the subgrade beneath curb and
gutter be graded such that it has a positive fall towards the catch basins where a 2-foot long
subdrain will discharge any accumulated water into the catch basin. The subdrain trench should be a
mininlunl of 6 inches deep and consist of a 4-inch perforated solid wall PVC pipe surrounded and
underlain by Class II permeable material. The inlet portion of the subdrain pipe should be capped.
Utility Trenches
47. Applicable safety standards require that trenches in excess of 5 feet must be properly shored
or that the walls of the trench slope back to provide safety for installation of lines. If trench wall
sloping is performed, the inclination should vary with the soil type. The underground contractor
should request an opinion from the Soil Engineer as to the type of soil and the resulting inclination.
48. With respect to state-of-the-art construction or local requirements, utility lines are generally
bedded with granular materials. These materials can convey surface or subsurface water beneath
the structures. It is, therefore, recommended that all utility trenches which possess the potential to
transport water be sealed with a compacted impervious cohesive soil material or lean concrete
where the trench enters/exits the building perimeter. This impervious seal should extend a
minimum of 2 feet away from the building perimeter.
"<II
49. Utility trenches extending underneath all traffic areas must be backfilled with native or
approved import material and compacted to relative compaction of 90% to within 6 inches of the
subgrade. The upper 6 inches should be compacted to 95% relative compaction in accordance
with Laboratory Test Procedure ASTM D1557-91. Backfilling and compaction of these trenches
must meet the requirements set forth by the City of Dublin, Department of Public Works. Utility
trenches within landscape areas may be compacted to a relative compaction of 85%.
.'
*"
TERRASEARCH, illc.
Page 23 of 51
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
n ~6b 4tii
6 August 2007
Revised (13 February 2008)
...'
-
Proiect Review and Construction Monitorinl!
11M'
50. All grading and foundation plans for the development must be reviewed by the Soil Engineer
prior to contract bidding or submitted to govemmental agencies so that plans are reconciled with
soil conditions and sufficient time is allowed for suitable mitigative measures to be incorporated
into the final grading specifications.
-
...
..
51. TERRASEARCH, inc., should be notified at least two working days prior to site clearing,
grading, and/or foundation operations on the property. This will give the Soil Engineer ample time
to discuss the problems that may be encountered in the field and coordinate the work with the
contractor.
w;..
..
~.
-
...'
52. Field observation and testing during the grading and/or foundation operations must be
provided by representatives of TERRASEARCH, inc., to enable them to form an opinion regarding
the adequacy of the site preparation, the acceptability of fill materials, and the extent to which the
earthwork construction and the degree of compaction comply with the specification requirements.
Any work related to the grading and/or foundation operations performed without the full knowledge
and under the direct observation of the Soil Engineer v0.ll render the recommendations of this report
invalid. This does not imply full-time observation. The degree of observation and frequency of
testing services would depend on the construction methods and schedule, and the item of work.
Please refer to "Guidelines For Required Services" for an outline of our involvement during project
development.
-
lilli,
-
.'i
-
-
"'"
lIIIl
'"'"
..
~
"""'"
....
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 24 of 51
..
II<<
1~ ~'oO 4'::'6
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Inyestigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
6 August 2007
Revised (13 Februarv 2008)
REFERENCES
Blake, Thomas F., 2004. EQFAULT Computer Program, Version 3.0.
Blake, Thomas. F., 2004. FRlSKSP Computer Program, Version 4.00.
Bozorgnia, Y, K. W Campbell, and M Niazi, M (1999). "Vertical ground motion:
Characteristics, relationship with horizontal component, and building code
implications, "Proceedings, SMIP99 Seminar on Utilization of Strong-Motion Data, San
Francisco, pp.23-49.
Continuing Education in Enviromnental Management & Engineering, University Extension,
University of California, Berkeley. Evaluation and Mitigation of Seismic Hazards Handbook,
August 17 - 19, 2000.
ReIley, EJ. and Lajoie, K.R., 1979. Flatland Deposits of the San Francisco Bay Region,
California - Their Geology and Engineering Properties, and Their Importance to.
Comprehensive Planning. u.G.G.S. Professional Paper 943,3 Maps 1:125,000 scale.
Petersen, M., Toppozada, T., et. al., 1998. New Geologic Maps Lend Support to Better Building
Design in California Earthquake Country, California Geology, Vol. 51, No.2, p. 3-9.
Uniform Building Code, 1997. Section 16, Tables 16-J, 16-Q through 16-U.
Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Hayward 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Alameda County, CA,
2003. California Geology Survey
~
'1"fI
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 25 of 51
...
?~5 Vb LfOtct ...
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Inyestigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
6 August 2007
Revised (13 February 2008)
-
...
.
,
II!'
GUIDELINES FOR REQUIRED SERVICES
..,
..
.'
The following lists of servIces are the servIces required and must be provided by
TERRASEARCH, inc., during the project development. These services are presented in
checklist fornlat as a convenience to those entrusted with their implementation.
..
"'",
..
'"',
The items listed are included in the body of the report in detail. This list is intended only as an
outline of the required services and does not replace specific recommendations and, therefore,
must be used with reference to the total report. This does not imply full-time observation. The
degree of observation and frequency of testing services would depend on the construction
methods and schedule, and the item of work.
-
..
~,
-
The importance of careful adherence to the report recommendations cannot be overemphasized.
It should be noted, however, that this report is issued with the understanding that each step of the
project development will be performed under the direct observati~n of TERRASEARCH, inc.
...
tJiI.'lJ
-
The use of this report by others presumes that they have verified all information and assume full
responsibility for the total project.
-
liIlt
-
-
-
lllI!Ifl"
!Ill'!
TERRASEARCH, iltc.
Page 26 of 51
-
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
2~ UO 14tt1
6 August 2007
Revised (13 February 2008)
,,*
. .
Item Description Required Not
Required
1. Provide foundation design parameters X
2. Review grading plans and specifications X
3. Review foundation plans and specifications X
4. Observe and provide recommendations regarding X
demolition
5. Observe and provide recommendations regarding site X
stripping
6. Observe and provide recommendations on moisture
conditioning, removal, and/or precompaction of X
unsuitable existing soils
7. Observe and provide recommendations on the X
installation of subdrain facilities
8. Observe and provide testing services on fill areas and/or X
imported fill materials
9. Review as-graded plans and provide additional X
foundation recommendations, if necessary
10. Observe and provide compaction tests on sanitary X .
sewers, stOlID drain, water lines and PG&E trenches (if
required by city)
11. Observe foundation excavations and provide X
supplemental recommendations, if necessary prior to
placing concrete
12. Observe and provide moisture conditioning X
recommendations for foundation areas prior to placing
concrete
13. Provide design parameters for retaining walls X
14. Provide geologic observations and recommendations for X
keyway excavations and cutslopes during grading
15. Excavate and recompact all geologic trenches and/or test X
pits
16. Observe installation of subdrain behind retaining walls X
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 27 of 51
...,.
Project No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investigation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
z~ ( 1) L.fCtcC
6 August 2007
Revised (13 February 2008)
b,
..
.Wi'.
LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
.,
l~
-
1. It should be noted that it is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to notify
TERRASEARCH, inc., in writing, a minimum of two working days before any clearing, grading,
or foundation excavations can commence at the site.
1ft,
..
-
2. The recommendations of this report are based upon the assumption that the soil
conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the borings and from a reconnaissance of the
site. Should any variations or undesirable conditions be encountered during the development of
the site, TERRASEARCH, inc., will provide supplemental recommendations as dictated by the
field conditions.
..
-
..
3. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or
his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are
brought to the attention of the Architect and Engineer for the project and incorporated into the
plans and that the necessary steps are taken to see that the Contractor and Subcontractors carry
out such recommendations in the field.
"",
..
.',
..
"'"',
..
4. At the present date, the findings of this report are valid for the property investigated. With
the passage of time, significant changes in the conditions of a property can occur due to natural
processes or works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, legislation or the
broadening of knowledge may result in changes in applicable standards. Changes outside of our
control may render this report invalid, wholly or partially. Therefore, this report should not be
considered valid after a period of two (2) years without our review, nor should it be used, or is it
applicable, for any properties other than those investigated.
..
..
-
"...
5; Not withstanding all the foregoing, applicable codes must be adhered to at all times.
..
TERRASEARCH, illc.
Page 28 of 51
-
~2i~ 1 '-tt1 <6
APPENDIX A
Field Investieation
Site Plan
Loes of Test Borines
7<6qOO Lft1lt
..
io<Il.
Proiect No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investi!!ation on Arroyo Vista. Dublin
30 July 2007
..
lW~'
Field Investigation
-
..
The field investigation was performed on 16 July 2007 and 17 July 2007 and included a
reconnaissance of the site and the drilling of six (6) exploratory borings at the approximate
locations shown on Figure 1, "Site Plan".
..
"'"
Six borings were drilled to maximum depths ranging between 21.5 and 31.5 feet below the
existing ground surface. TIle drilling was performed using truck mounted drill rig, and solid
augers. Visual classifications were made from cuttings and the sanlples in the field. As the
drilling proceeded, undisturbed core samples were obtained by means of 2 inches O.D. split-tube
sampler. The sampler was driven into the in-situ soils under the impact of a 140-pound hammer
having a free fall of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampler the last 12
inches into the soil were reported without any corrections on the boring logs and were corrected
to N-Value for purposes of classification and analysis.
..
-
fIIIMJ'<'
-
The samples were sealed and returned to our laboratory for testing. Classifications made in the
field were verified in the laboratory after further examination and testing.
.'
-
The stratification of the soils, descriptions, location of undisturbed soil samples and standard
penetration resistance are shown on the respective "Logs of Test Borings contained within this
appendix.
"'"
...
\lOfIilI-
."
.
~'"
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 30 of 43
II1II"
t~
r!
'l
f.ll.t '\
\\ c""
'j; '!. '...
~ IS
c' "
#
.It 00-
"'~
'1
"
.~Ho6!
SbP~nift'~ .
l"e.lr~
..rJ>'
. C'
<;;~.
~
<> i
#',,\6~~, 'fIIq
""...
":"1r,;,V~}
"
'"
j'~
tS ~ .l:
E I ~
.:' 2
'1,,,,, J-
7_"'.1'
~-
LEGEND:
~6
.I-
9..r--d'
~
~
s"'sr=~.
c
ir..,
... .c/I',I:
-:'C'L'~=r.'7-.
l
".:J
j +..
\,
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.
(:)
/
nthSt=-
--::-i
'"
<i
Ql!
orl
JI
.,
'1;,
UI
~I
cc..~=~"",!
l<
Residential Development
/
2-cto
\
~1
Residence
Residence
Residence
~\~J
rsruJ L;I4l, 14 po C26l I5'7J
L!.~ r 0 U -=-~~ o@ Lf-1 ~
O{]~ 3 E[JJ ~~ c \P ~~
ntJ@oCT6: f23?@ r'12~ ~5rg
--U 0 LJ '-L.Jo ~ _
~::J ~@ :~ i22to , 1fl ~~
g r;u ~rO~5_ i@GSll!~ qD@1 _' ~; l5cil
III U -U J;;. ~LJ ..JOll,,< ~=- -, 01
D? I l@ljBl{f.0 .1:~!iJ. ~ .--J~LLJ-l ~~I
Li, I A o.-..J <8l r--@u~uo I! o~.c.C.~o J
LI~ -~L-"CJ.-J I,=,_~? '
L...: ~:~ I" - ~ LJ. tr:~~-r~~~,..J. .-,~ ,-<,,",--_ =:_..,,/
l'yo,:,) ~ ~ o.~...,,.,::l,;"'i lUl"'t I r::K!.- 1 [:}Ri\IE
C3E,E'1
LJ~ 0 ~
~ [3il f4V~ '-?d to
Lr' Uo L! t'
~ 14BJ. ~o m~
u --U I, ~
~:u 0 i41J0 ~ ~
I L! 0 '''''LJ g :;;.=. ,,'
IIO~ ! 46~ ........=-=- ~
D. Lj= ~LJ"i I L.r:
- I - -0' ! 1 -,'
. J "3. ' !A.,5~ J '" :;o-d'
r ~ '-i:j,," ~ ~ lr
I -'~L ~oU..J
~I=
@@@;/ [~~~~~-,;.~~
.........
:~~~~;,~:~~o ~o ~ "-----_ \
IO'f'"'I\''"''''' II ~ 0 : \:;.?J ~ .. 0 \'
\ ' r5V OJ 1 641 \ [7IJ . ~1~, fSTJ
I . 1 '-lJ O1.j-' -LJ u '-U OJ
'~f55JO "~I r=l ~'."'. fOOl 00 rc::o,
r_~ JII "v?Ci~, o\~2 ~.c l? -=5--J-g -cr
\ - ----------...., 71 o~ - ~ ibSJ ~ - I -0. """';
/~t-----------""( f" o~ Ct( 4 - -GO ~ L 9 ~2J28 '" lS-' T
(/;/ /'\./---........,/~\ \'\ ~ iI6?"d,- r- ~DIJ ~ ,I ~ CD 01 !:: 19L[? B3,
;, / "'\~~~ ..",J l"''''~..l! ~- ITiJL dJf5l
~I: \1'-----1i( ) 11'''fi~ "~:~ ~l 0 ~1'7u~.~,.~OO~\, t.
I II ij 11 I ~I ~ b~EJ ~~ ~. 0lf qj L Lr \ '
I II! c.Ot-1><j;.,JN""'-: Ii:::! I ~u2-J' Ci55l1JI5~ 1!40?8 D~IL~ [E6;lg '11 G .. ~\ II
I,!I 1,1 3j :-(aa..}Te~' '--.. =?'I~ 1 - '-' ~1'_~.!~o,O ~~j_"U2.' Uo.. ;;:l",.o.,~P.1 I
I' ~". I 1!53J 8r;B4l 1 ':'1', a~'''C>J !I"';'r ;; :.::J .
1.--3 . "e~GH"RT1 : )Jf." J -LJ 0 u-- -ug gU- --u 0 U I
,~_"cAD. - ) I", 0" 00 0 O@oo 00
" / .. - _ ~ __ i
- ""'~~"""'==~!::I:S=~=C:::::===:::>O=== _
,=-~ Kl::."'T
1
y
.-
/-"
/
//----
/
I
/
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
--------
L
~
Property Line
Approximate Boring Locations
.~
I ~ LJol
( " C0? i
i ~e)
I~ -Uo
I "86 ~
, -=1J
!
(~Io~
I ~ ''''.0.;1.".. u. " fi?iT11iO!:
I l? ~- '" u-'
.I.-::;::;ll'i=" I~
1~.::.J ~ U I
. ~ jq6;Jr,g ., ~ "Ie; ~
lJ- ~oo e Lr
lqf2J ~ <ol'fJ
0'0
"\ ( 0 0 Q 0--2-0 i~ f_____'--.
t;'3J .--J L-. '11121 uug~ _________ r---
LJ i j....r- 0'1 .. _ i i --='\.
flO:0 I $ L;;LJ f!14:'-b "" \o~ iiZEf I ,:lL,,'r'i
L-Ual L U'?,I 10 ~ '2,~M I '::_,
iio5J [T;Oi fi5J5 g~;~Oi ~B4'1"- I ~;""3
~ Li ug c; U- LJ. l&1lpt-;t~
ITO;;J CTQCi1 rii6:Jr' ~ jT24J" "!2.2J~
'i I 1J-' -U LJ 'lJ..., o----'="''''~
~r, , 1 lOB; f'!i'l,!o '-;il~ @5;i ~1261
L:::"J ls-" --'-Llo G LJ 0 u-
-- -
_r.oo~
DOUGH ERn' ROAD
Reference: Submitted to Terrasearch last June 2007 by you
SITE PLAN
eiiiRR4'iiS4RI:1t -=
257 WRIGHT BROTHERS AVENUE, UVERMORE CAlIFORNIA 94550. PHONE, (925) 243-6652
SCS DEVELOPMENT
Project No. Drawn by:
11557,G GC
Scale: Date:
NTS 07/2007
6700 DUBLIN BOULEVARD (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
Y Or <t"
;::0
C1l
1Il
is:
C1l
::::l
il
C1l
Figure No.
1
BOREHOLE LOG
1.?t I DbL1C(4
Date Drilled - Start: 07/17/2007
Finished: 07117/2007
Elevation: Boring No.: B I
Logged By: R.Wilcox Sheet I of
Location: See Site Plan
Drill Rig: CME 45
Hammer: 1401bs 30"
Drilling Method: Solid Flight
Drilling Contractor: Taber Drilling
Boring Backfill Method: Grout
Total Depth of Boring: 31.5 ft.
'" f- "
"-
Q", >- Z 0
Z...J '" f- ::J ...J
0 u
:3:( t '" u
..of- Ul ~
'" ..0 :;:
~~ a ~ 0 ""
...J '"
~ co Q
I 6-8-9
(J 7)
110-11-" '
12 ,.'
-5 .=
11-11- :
11 .'
I (22) .,
LAB
TESTS
MATERlAL DESCRlPTION
>-
>-1::
<<'"
aZ
Ul
e
Ulf-
<<z
::JUl
f-f-
~z
00
::;u
OTHER
NOTES
REMARKS
Dark gray/brown, silty CLA Y (CH) with some trace affine grained sand, high plasticity,
some roots, stiff, dry to moist , 96 12
Dark6rown~ finegraiiledciayeylSandy" SiLT TML f medlumplastJCiiY:very stiff,n10lst
-
with increased sand content, low plasticity
-10~'
8-11-16 .
(27)
~-----------------------------------
. Brown to olive, silty/sandy CLAY (eL), [me grained sand, low plasticity, very stiff,
moist
-
I
~
;:r::
CJ
:J -15 ~
~ ~.
:J
o
C/)
I
TIght brown,- tliiegrainedsITriSANr5(SM), mediun1dense S1igJ1ii'), mOTs! - - - --
98
14
-
::,
.....
-20
~ ]1-14- ,.:
15 r'
(29)
-
moist
f-25
,------------------------------------
:-: Gray to brown, well graded medium grained SAND (SW), medium dense, moist
~ 10-13- .'.
14 .-:
(27) .:::
-
.JiiliiiI
""
l'-
12
Ie
co
l-
e
t:)
:I:
t)
c::
..:
w
<J)
..:
cr
c::
~
-30
~ 7-9-13
n (22)
~Bro~~ilridA~af~Vt~~~m~~m~~ry~ff,moou~~-----
33
-
....
,,,"
..,
Cl.
t:) ---'
z
::;
(/j
::J
o
o
l'-
'"
'"
Boring was terminated at 3] ,5 feet below ground surface (bgs),
Groundwater was encountered at 30 feet bgs,
,.
,.
~
t:)
~
~ ....Q.. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
i W TERR./JSS./JRCIII/'IC
g 257 Wrinht Brothers Ave. Livermore Ca, 94551 Phone (925\ 243-6662
SCS DEVELOPMENT
6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
Figure No.
2
8/6/2007
I Drawn by:
GC
I Project No.
11557.G
Reviewed By.
K. Ghiassi
Date:
Location: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE LOG
Elevation:
Date Drilled - Start: 07/17/2007
Drill Rig: CME 45
Hammer: 140\bs 30"
Boring Backfill Method: Grout
f- "
"on Z g
Z..J :I: :J
:3:< f- a w
0- w ~
..Jf- W :;<
~~ c a <(
..J a:
co "
:p:\..lit:':~,
E-
X
o
:J 10
""-
o
:J
o
r/)
b
ie
"'
f-
a
o
I
tl
ex:
<(
UJ
en
.<(
ex:
a:
UJ
f-
--,
a.
o
:i
:J
!Xl
::l
a
o
r-
"'
"'
5
Finished: 07117/2007
Logged By: R.Wilcox
15
20
25
30
Drilling Method: Solid Flight
Drilling Contractor: Taber Drilling
Boring No.:
Sheet
20"20{)
B2
.\ ...,('
.c....r~./~. ~
of
,.
Total Depth of Boring: 21.5 ft.
LAB
TESTS
MA TERIAL DESCRIPTION
J:~~~~~~~~~~_______________________
Mottled orange/dark graylbrown, silty CLAY (CL) with traces of fine grained sand, high 91
plasticity, medium stiff, moist
~~~~~~~o~~mir~~~~~ND~~~~~mdens~~ro~~~y
moist
TlgJrt gray io ~OW1~ silty CLAy-(cLT, some fine gnll"nedsand:Jolv plasticitY, very Stiff,
moist
-Browntogray ~finegrail1edcrayey SAND (SC):low plasilciry,dense, mOlSt- - - - -
Boring was terminated at 21.5 feet below ground surface (bgs),
Groundwater was not encountered,
SCS DEVELOPMENT
6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
Date'
Drawn by:
3:
o
~
'" ...!.!.. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
~ ~(iI~ T=RRASSARCI/"VI:.
ex:
o
!Xl
8/6/2007
GC
257 Wri ht Brothers Ave, Livermore Ca, 94551 Phone 925 243-6662
,.
,.!::
a:'"
CZ
W
C
93
]02 20
Project No
11557.G
Wf-
"'z
:JuJ
f-f-
~z
00
;EU
OTHER
NOTES
REMARKS
,.'
h
26
"It'
...'
5
..,
~
"'"
~
fll"'!!?
....
~
Figure No.
3
-
Reviewed By:
K Ghiass;
JIIlI!r'
"iii
""
...,
"-
c:J
,~ :Z
:J
IIJ
::>
Cl
o
....:
"'
'"
Location: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE LOG
2 c,( -3tJo qCl'l
Finished: 07!l7/2007
Elevation: Boring No.: B3
Logged By: R.Wilcox Sheet 1 of
Date Drilled - Start: 07117/2007
Drill Rig: CME 45
Hammer: l40lbs 30"
Drilling Method: Solid Flight
Drilling Contractor: Taber Drilling
Boring Backfill Method: Grout
t-
::r::
r.J
:J 15
"'-<
o
:J
o
CZJ
"-
52
If!
co
f-
Cl
(:J
:r
'-'
<r
<(
w
en
<(
<r
<r
w
f-
:I:
f-
"-
'"
Cl
I-
Z
OJ
o
u
~
o
...J
'"
5
10
20
25
30
Total Depth of Boring: 31.5 ft.
LAB
TESTS
MATERlAL DESCRlPTION
>-
>-t:
",,,,
DZ
'"
D
Dark gray to brown, silty/sandy CLA Y (CL), with gravel to 1/2", medium plasticity,
medium stiff, slightly moist
WI-
"'z
OJ",
1-1-
~z
00
::;:u
OTHER
NOTES
REMARKS
CA
] 00 18 LL=48, P1=32
Dm~rn0~row~~~rn~~an~CUY~W~~rum~~~i~ili~~ffi~
moist
-nark graytogrnytohrown~slfty-CLAY(CL),lllgh PfastiCTty-:-lTIeilium stif'"f,rnmSt - -
S~~CUY~D~~~------------------------
-nark gray to graytobroWi1~slfty-cLAV(CL),hlgh plastiCTty-:- stiff, mOTst - - - --
L~~~~~~~ru~d~~ili~0A~(~~~~mdens~~~------
Or~~~ro~~~~m~fu~5~~~~y~dedM~(~r&~~~---
111 16
B~m0~Temm~~GIDw~Gw~~dMfu~0~.----------
Groundwater was encountered at 30 feet bgs,
SCS DEVELOPMENT
6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
Date:
Drawn by.
Project No.
11557.G
~
c:J
~
~ ...Q.. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
g ~. TERilASlfYJRCI/IIVC:
<r
o
IIJ
257 Wri ht Brothers Ave, Livermore Ca. 94551 Phone 925 243-6662
8/6/2007
GC
UC=1.0
Figure No,
4
Reviewed By:
K. Ghiass[
Location: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE LOG
20 c.f 0b
, :/
>. . ~ (.,
Date Drilled - Start: 07/17/2007
Finished: 0711712007
Elevation: Boring No.: B4
Logged By: R.Wilcox Sheet of
Drill Rig: CME 45
Hammer: 140lbs 30"
Drilling Method: Solid Flight
Drilling Contractor: Taber Drilling
Boring Backfill Method: Grout
f-
::r::
o
:J 10
CL.
o
:J
o
[/]
....
~
'"
f-
Cl
el
:i
u
a:
<(
UJ
<J)
<(
a:
a:
UJ
f-
..,
a.
el
Z
:J
aJ
::l
Cl
o
,..:
"'
~
~
<.9
~
N
UJ
..J
o
J:
UJ
a:
o
aJ
:I:
t
Ul
o
f-
Z
:0
o
'-'
;;:
o
...J
co
Total Depth of Boring: 21.5 ft.
LAB
TESTS
o
o
...J
'-'
~
...:
<<
o
MA TERlAL DESCRlPTION
5
,.
,.t::
<<'"
OZ
Ul
o
Ulf-
"'z
:Ow
f-f-
~z
00
;l'U
OTHER
NOTES
REMARKS
.. '
15
20
25
30
_~~~k~~~~~N~_______________________
MonIed orange/dark gray/brown, silty CLAY (CH), high plasticity, medium stiff to stiff, 96 24 LL=53, PI=35
moist
Bro~~~Ye~MID~c0~p~hc~~~e,mOO\------------
TlghtbrOWll, fu1egrainedslltySANi:5(SM), mediun1dense,mmst - - - - - - --
L!ghtbr~n,fu1~o~~mgr~~~~~~ilt~A~(~\~~m~lls~~~-
Bfo~~~Ye~A~~c0~p~hc~~~s~0~~-----------
Boring was tenninated at 21.5 feet below ground surface (bgs),
Groundwater was not encountered.
SCS DEVELOPMENT
6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN. CALIFORNIA
...!!... GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
'.~ T=RR.lJSSARCI/IIVc.
Drawn by:
257 Wri ht Brothers Ave. Livermore Ca, 94551 Phone 925 243-6662
Oate:
8/6/2007
GC
101
85
Project No.
11557.G
r
15
\III!'
-
23
..
~
Figure No.
5
...
Reviewed By'
K. Ghiassi
~
Location: See Site Plan
..~'!'IIl
~;i<l!
'~,.,
BOREHOLE LOG
('j
c
Date Drilled - Start: 07/17/2007
Finished: 07/17/2007
Elevation: Boring No.: B5
Logged By: R.Wilcox Sheet 1 of
Drill Rig: CME 45
Hammer: 1401bs 30"
Boring Backfill Method: Grout
Drilling Method: Solid Flight
Drilling Contractor: Taber Drilling
E--
::r::
o
:J 10
~
Ci
:J
o
VJ
....
~
co
,..
o
CJ
:t
()
0:
<(
w
en
<(
0:
<r
w
,..
...,
CL
CJ
Z
::;
OJ
::>
o
o
'"
'"
'"
t
'"
Q
.....
Z
:0
o
U
,.
o
-'
co
Total Depth of Boring: 21.5 ft.
LAB
TESTS
"
o
...l
S!
2
<(
'"
"
MA TERlAL DESCRlPTION
5
J _ U~agJh91l.o'yel..3':bffi~JQck- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Dark gray to brown, silty CLAY (CH), traces fine grained, high plasticity, stiff, moist
LlghtbfowIl," fmegrainedsiliYSAND-(SM), ITiedium-dense,s!ightly-moist - - - --
with clay
-Darkbrown-;-sandyiSllry eL"A Y ((:Lj,low piastICiiY, very Stiff, mOIst - - - - - - -
-LlghtbfowIl," fu1etomedlum grau1edpoori)7 graded SAND(SP), medium dense, mOIst
Bm~gw~tem~~~~Tn~~low~ood~fu~~~~---------
Groundwater was not encountered,
,.
,.t:
",00
QZ
'"
Q
"'t-
"'z
:0",
f-t-
~z
00
;;;u
OTHER
NOTES
REMARKS
]5
20
25
30
98 21 LL=52, PI=34
93 23
SCS DEVELOPMENT
6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
Date:
Drawn by:
3:
CJ
~
N "q. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
~ '" T=RRASSARCIIIII/c.
<r
o
OJ
257 Wr; ht Brothers Ave, Livermore Ca, 94551 Phone 925 243-6662
8/6/2007
GC
Project No
11557.G
Figure No.
6
Reviewed By'
K. Ghiassi
BOREHOLE LOG
2C((P OJ' 4'1 rt
Location: See Site Plan
Finished: 07/17/2007
Elevation: Boring No.: B6
Logged By: R.Wi1cox Sheet 1 of
Date Drilled - Start: 07/17/2007
Drill Rig: CME 45
Hammer: 140lbs 30"
Drilling Method: Solid Flight
Drilling Contractor: Taber Drilling
Boring Backfill Method: Grout
i3
ie
'"
I-
Cl
(!)
:t
(.)
ex:
<l:
w
If)
<l:
ex:
ex:
w
I-
~
0-
o
Z
::i
'"
::l
Cl
"
,..:
"'
"'
::
r-
:r:
o
:J
C!..
o
:J
o
VJ
Total Depth of Boring: 31.5 ft.
LAB
TESTS
:r
t
'"
o
I-
;z
::J
o
u
3:
o
-'
'"
If'
t:l
o
-'
U
Z
~
'"
t:l
OTHER
NOTES
REMARKS
WI-
"'z
::0",
1-0-
~z
00
:;:u
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
>-
>-t:
"'v>
OZ
'"
D
5
Boring was tenninated at 31.5 feet below ground surface (bgs),
Groundwater was encountered at 28.5 feet bgs,
Dark brown, silty CLAY (CL) with mulch, low to medium plasticity, medium stiff, moist
wo.
84 16
Tigl1tbTowJ1," t1negrainedsilty-SAND(SM1 mechum-dense,sh"ghtlyrrioiSl- - - --
"'"'
..
10
trace of clay
.,
-
JMl"
J5
JD6
J4
-Darkhrown-;-tIiiegrainedsandY CLAY (eLl,low j)iastICiiY. very Stiff, n10Jst - - --
-
-BroiVn-;-finetornedruffi grameci poorly gradedSAND-(spI some graveTtoi7.2": medhim
dense
-
20
~.
-llia~~row~~~~~~8U(~I~wp~~~~~r~~--------
25
l1li"
-
30
GraveIly SAND (Sp),dens~ wet - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"'"
WI
~
s:
(!)
~
~ ",q. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
i ~(iI T=ililASSARCIIIIVC
16 257 Wri ht Brothers Ave, Livermore Ca. 94551 Phone 925 243-6662
SCS DEVELOPMENT
6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD (ARROYO VISTA)
DUBLIN. CALIFORNIA
Figure No.
..
7
b,.j
Date:
Drawn by.
Project No,
11557.G
Reviewed By:
K. Ghiassi
8/6/2007
GC
II'!'
llt':
MATERIAL TYPES
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION (ASTM D-2487-98)
CRITERIA FOR ASSIGl'I"I!,(G SOIL GROUP NAMES
GRAVELS
'"
.J
@5
OO~
~3~
~;:;g
~~8
v.l~Z
"0
<~
0"
u
>50% OF COARSE
FRACTiON PASSES ON
NOA SIEVE
CLEAN ORA VELS
0:::5% FINES
eu>.:! AND l,,:::CL-<J
Cu>4 AND l::.(:c>3
GRAVELS WITH FINES
>12% FINES
FINES CLASSIFY AS ML OR MH
FINES CLASSIFY AS CL OR CH
CLEAN SANDS Cu>6 AND I<Cr:<.3
SANDS <SIl,;, FINES
Cu>6 AND I >Cc> 3
>50% Of COARSE
FRACTION PASSES ON FINES CLASSIFY AS ML OR MH
NO.4 SIEVE SANDS AND FINES
>12% FINES
FINES CLASSIFY AS CL OR CH
SILTS AND CLAYS Pi>7AND PLOTS> "A" LINE
INORGANIC
LIQUID LL\mS<5Q Pl>4AND PLOTS< ",6." UNE
ORGANIC LL (OVEN DRlED),
LL(NOT DRIED)<O.75
SILTS AND CLAYS PI PLOTS>"A" LINE
INORGANIC
LIQUID LIMITS>50 PI PLOTS<"A" LINE
ORGAl'<lC LL (OVEN DltlED)/
LL(NOT DRlED)<O.75
'"
.J
~t3~
OCli~
u.ltn-
3~~
~~~
c.:~d
UJ.' Z
z
0:
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOlLS
SAMPLE TYPES:
.
B
IJ
r8J
MODIFIED CAUFORNlA
SPLIT SPOON
SHELBY ruBE
NO RECOVERY
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
CA - CHEMICAL ANALYSIS (CORROSIVll")
COMPLETED. REFER TO LABORATORY RESULTS,
PRlMARlL Y ORGANIC MA ITER, DARK IN
COLOR AND ORGANIC ODOR
sz
y
FIRST WATER LEVEL READING
SECOND WATER LEVEL READlNG
CD _ CONSOLIDATED DRAINED (CD) TRiAXIAL TEST TV - RESULTS OF TORVANE SHEAR TEST IN TERJ\'IS OF
COMPLETED, REFER TO LABORATORY RESULTS. UNDERAlNEO SHEAR STRENGTH (KSF)
SW - SWELL TEST COMPETED, REFER TO
LABORATORY RESULTS
""oM
CU - CONSOLlDA TED UNDRAINED (CU) TRlAXlAL TEST
COMPLETED. REFER TO LABORATORY RESULTS.
DS - RESULTS OF DlRECT SHEAR TEST IN TERMS OF
TOTAL COHESiON (C, KSFl OR EFFECTIVE
COHESION AND FRICTION ANGLES (C', KSF AND
(1 DEGREES)
PP - RESULT OF POCKET PENETROMETER TEST. IN
TERMS OF SHEAR STRENGTH (TSF)
PLASTICITY CHART
..
60
3050
- (M" ,urn)
\ \ >50
!___~ i(Highli__
; ! :
PH-OHi /
--TbT
~y\.
so
i 0-30
(Low)
.-
~
';) 40
o
3:
~ 30
G
t; 20
<
i
./
,:o!-y
'oY-'
i
,
!CL-OI
,liilll
10
o
o
'/
20
30
40 SO 60 70
LIQUID LIMITS (%)
10
,i41111
UC - RESULTS OF UNCONFiNED COMPRESSION TEST IN
TERMS OF UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH (KSF),
UU - UNCONSOLlDA TED UNDRAINED (UtI) TRIAXIAL
TEST COMPLETED, IN TERMS OF UNDRAINED
SHEAR STRENGTH (KSF),
RV. RESULTS OF R-VALUE TEST.
"100 - PERCENT MA TERlALS PASSING SIEVE NO. 200
1/1'
GROUP
SYMBOL
'2.?11 ~ 4'11
SOIL GROUP l'I"AMES Al'I"D LEGEND
GW
WELL.GRADED GRAVEL
GP
PODRL Y -GRADED GRAVEL
OM
SILTY GRA VEL
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SW
WELL-GRADED SAND
SP
POORLY-GRADED SAND
SM
SILl" SAND
SC
CLAYEY SAND
CL
LEAN CLAY
ML
SILT
OL
ORGANIC SILT
CH
FAT CLAY
MH
ELASTIC SILT
OH ORGANIC CLAY
PT
PEAT
.4.~4..
. ,...,
hCJDC:JD
~ ",-,....0", Q
h ",j) ,(J Q
. '. .'. .'..... .
..................
..................
..................
..................
...............,..
~~:~~~::~~ ~~;~f~:~:
3:":1 "'l' ''':f' '~t'~- .,
. ". \ ." ,., ....~
~:~: t :";~ :~. '~,;' ~~~
'~';y{J Y'
:. .z,,,.~:,, ,il.,
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~
~ ~,~
"'f ,\1,
DESCRIPTIVE TERM
DRY
DAMP
MOIST
WET
SA ruRA TED
SOIL MOISTURE
DESCRlPTlO:>l
DRY OF STANDARD PROCTOR OPTIMUM
SAND DRY
NEAR STANDARD PROCTOR OPTlMUM
WET Of STANDARD PROCTOR OPTlMUM
FREE W ^ TER IN SAMPLE
COMPONENTS
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL - COARSE
-FINE
SAND - COARSE
- MEDlUM
- FINE
FINES (SILT AND CLAY)
PARTiCLES SIZES
SIZE OR SIEVE NO,
OVER 12 INCHES
3 TO 12 INCHES
3/4 TO 3 INCHES
NO.4 TO 3/4 INCH
NO. 10 TO NO.4
NO. 40 TO NO. 10
NO. 200 TO NO, 40
BELOW NO, 200
BLOW COUNT:
THE NUMBER OF BLOWS OF THE SAMPLING HAMMER REQUIRED TO DRIVE
THE SAMPLER THROUGH EACH OF THREE 6-INCH INCREMENTS. LESS
THAN THREE INCREMENTS MAY BE REPORTED IF MORE THAN 50 BLOWS
ARE COUNTED FOR ANY INCREMENT, THE NOTA TlON SOlS" INDICATES 5
INCHES OF PENETRATlON ACHIEVED IN SO BLOWS.
* N-V ALUE:
~LOWS OF '40 LB HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES TO DRIVE A 2 INCH
O.D, 11-3/8 INCH LD,) SPLlTBARREL SAMPLER THE LAST 12 INCHES OF AN
18-INCH DRIVE (ASTM-1586 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST)
PL'IETRATlON RESISTA:>ICE
(RECORDED AS BLOWS/O.S F1)
SILT & CLAY
N-VALUE
(BLOWS/FOOT)'
SAND & GRAVEL
RELATIVE N-VALUE
DENSrTY [BLOWSiFooT)*
VERY LOOSE 0 - 4
LOO~ 4-10
MEDIUM DENSE 10 - 30
DENSE 30 - SO
VERY DENSE OVER 50
~H-M
80
90 100
/10
e iiiRRA'SSARC/f 1Nt:
257 WRIGHT BROTHERS AVENUE, LIVERMORE CALIFORNIA 94551 PHONE: 1925) 243-6662
...
CONSISTENCY
VERY SOFT
SOFT
MEDIUM STIFF
STIFF
VERY STIFF
HARD
0.1
2.4
~. 8
8.15
l5.)0
OVER 30
cor...tPREHENSIVE
STRENGTH
0- 0,25
0.25 -0_50
0.50 - l.0
l.0 - 2.0
2.0 -4.0
OVER 4.0
KEY TO THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS
2c,c;,' ~ Lf trt
,'" \.) ;'r)
II
/If
.'
JI!IIIf'I!
APPENDIX B
~
Laboratory Investigation
~
Summary of Laboratorv Test Results
~.
-
Proiect No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investil!ation Arroyo Vista, Dublin
~ trA ~t 't'
6 AUl!ustft007
Laboratory Investigation
The laboratory-testing program was directed towards providing sufficient information for the
detennination of the engineering characteristics of the site soils so that the recommendations
outlined in this report could be formulated.
Moisture content and dry density tests (ASTM D 2937-83) were performed on representative
relatively undisturbed soil samples in order to determine the consistency of the soil and the
moisture variation throughout the explored soil profile as well as estimate the compressibility of
the underlying soils.
The expansion characteristics of the near-surface soils were evaluated by means of Atterberg
Limits tests performed in accordance with ASTM D 4318.
The strength parameters of near surface soils were determined by means of Unconfined
Compression Tests.
A summary of all laboratory test results is presented on TABLE B-1 of this appendix and on the
respective "Logs of Test Borings", Appendix A.
-
..
,"*'
...
;>M
w
TERRASEARCH, ittc.
Page 40 of 51
'l':Mo
300 ~ 0rCl,t
6 August 2007
Proiect No. 1l557.G
Geotechnical Inyestigation Arrovo Vista, Dublin
TABLE B-1
Summary Of Laboratory Test Results
Sample Depth Dry Moisture Atterberg Limits Unconfmed Compressive
No. Density Content Strength
(ft.) (p.c.f, ) ('Yo) Liquid Plasticity
Limit Index (p.s.f.)
81-1 1 96.2 11.8
81-15 15 97.7 13.5
81-30 30 33.1
82-1 1 90.6 25.5
82-5 5 93,0 5.2
82-20 20 10J.7 20.1
83-3 3 99,8 18.5 48.1 32
83-5 5 92.5 21.6 1,952
83-30 30 111.2 15.7
84-1 1 95.7 23.5 52,6 35
B4-3 3 100.6 14.6
84-10 10 84.9 23.0
85-1 1 98.3 20.6 51.5 34
85-10 10 93.1 23.0
B6-2 3 84.3 15.8
86-15 15 105.5 13.8
..
..
.,"
iF'
...
"'.
-
-
-
Wffii
"""
~'"
~
-
-
-
~'
"~
TERRASEARCH, illc.
~
Page 41 of 51
"'3 0 t 0", Lf":~'1 {
(f;
I-
:ii
:J
"
c::
w
CD
a:
w
I::
..:
",q. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS A TTERBERG LIMITS RESUL TS
~(itf. T=ilRASSARCII"Vc.
257 Wright Brothers Ave. Livermore, Ca, 94551 Phone (925) 243-6662
CLIENT SCS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NAME
PROJECT NUMBER 11557.G PROJECT LOCATION 6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD (ARROYO VISTA), DUBL
60 V/
@ @
50 V
P
L /
A
S 40 /'
T
I II..'ZJ /
C .
I 30
T /
Y
I
N 20 ./
D /
E
X /
10
/'
CL-ML /' @ 8
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT
Specimen Identification LL PL PI Fines Classification
. 83 3.0 48 16 32
'ZJ 84 1.0 53 17 36
II.. 85 1.0 52 17 35
~
"-
~
1!2
'"
I-
'"
"
J:
U
c::
..:
w
(/)
..:
c::
c::
w
I-
',#I
--,
0..
"
z
:J
CD
::>
o
o
"-
'"
'"
;.;.li
qCii
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
D"'
,/" .:.., ..'
...q. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS
~(" T=ililASSARCIIIII/t:.
257 Wright Brothers Ave. Livermore, Ca. 94551 Phone (925) 243-6662
CLIENT SCS DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT NUMBER 11557,G
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT LOCATION 6700 DOUGHERTY ROAD (ARROYO VISTA), DUBL r
2,00
1,80
0
-- -------
/ ~
r-----
../' ....
0 /
0 /
0
I
0 .
I
0
I
0
~
0
0
0
n.
4 8 12 16
"
1lI'''
N"
1,60
..
1,40
~
1,20
....
tJl
~ -
C/)
~ 1,00
0::
I-
C/)
r--
o
ie
co
1-
o
o
::r'
t)
ex:
<:
w
ffl
<:
cr
cr
W
1-
...,
Cl.
(!)
;i
::;
ClJ
::>
o
<9
...:
u'l
u'l
o
w
Z
;:;:
Z
o
'-'
z
:::>
-
80
JIIllI"';
60
40
20
STRAIN, %
Specimen Identification
. 83 3.0
Classification
Yd MC%
92 22
~_.
ill"
III"
i
",.- ~. r_ . _. . _ ~..- ~.._. -- '-~~ . ".....
:'"'w';:'''',,,,'''' ." 'o_"'.,';.6"'_'_,',o.o:::..",:;'~.;;)~'.-"'f':-:"
'--;'::t'';;> CaDpi)
,-
Corrosivity Test Summary
:"- ./
~'~~€~~~~.:' ..
CTL# 134-182 Date: 7/24/2007 Tested By: PJ Checked: PJ
Client: Terrasearch, Inc. Project: Dougherty Road (6700), Dublin Proj. No: 11557.G
Remarks:
Sample Location or 10 Resistivity @ 15.5 DC (Ohm-em) Chloride Sulfate-(water soluble) pH ORP Sulfide Moisture
Boring I Sample, No. Depth, ft. As Rec. Minimum Saturated mg/kg mg/kg % (Redox) Qualitative % Soil Visual Description
DrvWt. DryWt. DryWt. mv by Lead AtTest
ASTM G57 Gal 643 ASTM G57 Gal 422-mod, Gal 417-mod. Gal 417-mod. ASTM G51 SM 25808 Acetate Paper ASTM 02216
B-3 - 1 - - 755' 20 <5 <0.0005 7.5 - - 19.5 Dark Brown CLAYw/ Sand
-
--
-
---
--
---
-~~-
,\.\
C)
\JJ
~
0:
APPENDIX C
The Gradin~ Specifications
Guide Specifications For Rock Under Floor Slabs
.::1 -l ;')-(} .' '/
". \.1
.'
t>:i
""
..
...
-,
-
-
..
ION
-
b;,
-
.,..,.
"",.
..
...'
.,.
.'
Proiect No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investie:ation on Arrovo Vista. Dublin
305 (JD I,,+,t~!~
6 Aue:ust 2001'
THE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
on
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Arroyo Vista
Dublin, California
1. General Description
1.1 These specifications have been prepared for the grading and site development of the
subject project. TERRASEARCH, inc., hereinafter described as the Soil Engineer, should be
consulted prior to any site work connected with site development to ensure compliance with
these specifications.
1.2 The Soil Engineer should be notified at least two working days prior to any site clearing
or grading operations on the property in order to observe the stripping of organically
contaminated material and to coordinate the work with the grading contractor in the field.
1.3 TIns item shall consist of all clearing or grubbing, preparation of land to be filled, filling
of the land, spreading, compaction and control of fill, and all subsidiary work necessary to
complete the grading of the filled areas to conform with the lines, grades, and slopes as shown on
the accepted plans. The Soil Engineer is not responsible for determining line, grade elevations, or
slope gradients. The property owner, or his representative, shall designate the person or
organizations that will be responsible for these items of work.
...
""
1.4 The contents of these specifications shall be integrated with the soil report of which they
are a part; therefore, they shall not be used as a self-contained document.
.>!iJ
2. Tests
<'j.;jO;l
2.1 The standard test used to define maximunl densities of all compaction work shall be the
ASTM Dl557-91 Laboratory Test Procedure. All densities shall be expressed as a relative
TERRASEARCH, illc.
Page 46 of 51
0:0
!~1
Proiect No. 1l557.G
Geotechnical InvestilZation on Arroyo Vista. Dublin
6 AUlZust 2007
compaction in terms of the maximum dry density obtained in the laboratory by the foregoing
standard procedure.
3. Clearing, Grubbing, and Preparing Areas To Be Filled
3.1 All vegetable matter, trees, root systems, shrubs, debris, and organic topsoil shall be
removed from all structural areas and areas to receive fill.
.1'
JIf'
3.2 Any soil deemed soft or unsuitable by the Soil Engineer shall be removed. Any existing
debris or excessively wet soils shall be excavated and removed as required by the Soil Engineer
during grading.
.'
3.3 All underground structures shall be removed from the site such as old foundations,
abandoned pipelines, septic tanks, and leach fields.
3.4 The final stripped excavation shall be approved by the Soil Engineer during construction
and before further grading is started.
3.5 After the site has been cleared, stripped, excavated to the surface designated to receive
fill, and scarified, it shall be disked or bladed until it is uniform and free from large clods. The
native subgrade soils shall be moisture conditioned and compacted to the requirements as
specified in the grading section of this report. Fill can then be placed to provide the desired
finished grades. The contractor shall obtain the Soil Engineer's approval of sub grade compaction
before any fill is placed.
4. Materials
4.1 All fill material shall be approved by the Soil Engineer. The material shall be a soil or
soil-ro<;:k mixture, which is free from organic matter or other deleterious substances. The fill
material shall not contain rocks or lumps over 6 inches in greatest dimension and not more than
15% larger than 2-1/2 inches. Materials from the site below the stripping depth are suitable for
use in fills provided the above requirements are met.
.-'
TERRASEARCH, illc.
Page 47 of 51
..
fU c+t:( t
6 AUl!ust 2007
Proiect No. 1I557.G
Geotechnical Investil!'ation on Arrovo Vista. Dublin
4.2 Materials existing on the site are suitable for use as compacted engineered fill after the
removal of all debris and organic material. All fill soils shall be approved by the Soil Engineer in
the field.
4.3 Should import material be required, it must meet the requirements as specified in the
body of this report prior to transporting it to the project.
5. Placin2:. Spreadin2:. and Compactin2: Fill Material
5.1 The fill materials shall be placed in uniform lifts of not more than 8 inches in
uncompacted thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade mixed
during the spreading to obtain uniformity of material in each layer. Before compaction begins,
the fill shall be brought to a water content that will permit proper compaction by either (a)
aerating the material if it is too wet, or (b) spraying the material with water if it is too dry.
5.2 After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, either import material or
native material shall be compacted to a relative compaction of 90% at a moisture content 2 to 3
percent above optimum as determined by ASTM D1557-91 Laboratory Test Procedure.
~
5.3 Compaction shall be by footed rollers or other types of acceptable compacting rollers.
Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill to the specified density.
Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is within the specified moisture content
range. Rolling of each layer shall be continuous over its entire area and the roller shall make
sufficient trips to ensure that the required density has been obtained. No ponding or jetting shall
be permitted.
^idlif
5.4 Field density tests shall be made in each compacted layer by the Soil Engineer in
accordance with Laboratory Test Procedure ASTM D2922-91 and D3017-88. When footed
rollers are used for compaction, the density tests shall be taken in the compacted material below
the surface disturbed by the roller. When these tests indicate that the compaction requirements on
any layer of fill, or pOliion thereof, has not been met, the particular layer, or portion thereof, shall
be reworked until the compaction requirements have been met.
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 48 of 51
Proiect No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investil~ation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
-?Jo~ q.., I \ Cl r{
6 AU!1:ust 2'1(07
5.5 No soil shall be placed or compacted during periods of rain or on ground, which contains
free water. Soil which has been soaked and wetted by rain or any other cause shall not be
compacted until completely drained and until the moisture content is within the limits
hereinbefore described or approved by the Soil Engineer. Approval by the Soil Engineer shall be
obtained prior to continuing the grading operations.
11"
6. Pavement
....
6.1 The proposed subgrade under pavement sections, native soil, and/or fill shall be
compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95% at moisture content slightly above
optimum for a depth of 6 inches.
.,
w.
..
6.2 All aggregate base material placed subsequently should also be compacted to a minimum
relative compaction of 95% based on the ASTM Test Procedure D1557-91. The construction of
the pavement in the parking and traffic areas should confOlID to the requirements set forth by the
latest Standard Specifications of the Department of Transportation of the State of California
and/or City of Dublin, Department of Public Works.
....
"""
-
6.3 It is recommended that soils at the proposed subgrade level be tested for a pavement
design after the preliminary grading is completed and the soils at the site design sub grade levels
are known.
....
-
7. Utility Trench Backfill
-
7.1 The utility trenches extending under concrete slabs-on-grade shall be backfilled with
native on-site soils or approved import materials and compacted to the requirements pertaining to
the adjacent soil. No ponding or jetting will be permitted.
""~
1IJlil'C'
7.2 Utility trenches extending under all pavement areas shall be backfilled with native or
approved import material and properly compacted to meet the requirements set forth by the City
of Dublin, Department of Public Works.
N"
TERRASEARCH, inc.
Page 49 of 51
"".
Proiect No. 1l557.G
Geotechnical Investieation on Arrovo Vista. Dublin
30'1 tth q'i (t
6 Aueu~t~07
*NOTE:
Requirements of City to be added.
7.3 Where any opening is made under or through the perimeter foundations for such items as
utility lines and trenches, the openings must be resealed so that they are watertight to prevent the
possible entrance of outside irrigation or rain water into the underneath portion of the structures.
8. Subsurface Line Removal
8.1 The methods of removal will be designated by the Soil Engineer in the field depending on
the depth and location of the line. One of the following methods will be used.
8.2 Remove the pipe and fill and compact the soil in the trench according to the applicable
portions of sections pertaining to compaction and utility backfill.
8.3 The pipe shall be crushed in the trench. The trench shall then be filled and compacted
according to the applicable portions of Section 5.
8.4 Cap the ends of the line with concrete to prevent entrance of water. The length ofthe cap
shall not be less than 5 feet. The concrete mix shall have a minimum shrinkage.
9. Unusual Conditions
9.1 In the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions are
encountered during the grading operations, the Soil Engineer shall be immediately notified for
additional reconmlendations.
.""~
TERRASEARCH, illc.
Page 50 of 51
Proiect No. 11557.G
Geotechnical Investil!ation on Arroyo Vista, Dublin
t ~. "\ 'l-: ,-
,i)"ID
6 AUl!ust 2007
Guide Specifications For Rock Under Floor Slabs
Definition
II!I
Graded gravel or crushed rock for use under slabs-on-grade shall consist of a minimum thickness
of mineral aggregate placed in accordance with these specifications and in conformance with the
dimensions shown on the plans. The minimum thickness is specified in the accompanying report.
.'
.'
Material
The mineral aggregate shall consist of broken stone, crushed or uncrushed gravel, quarry waste,
or a combination thereof. The aggregate shall be free from deleterious substances. It shall be of
such quality that the absorption of water in a saturated dry condition does not exceed 3% of the
oven dry weight of the sample.
.'
iltY
...
Gradation
-
The mineral aggregate shall be of such size that the percentage composition by dry weight, as
determined by laboratory sieves (U.S. Sieves) will conform to the following gradation:
~;"
..
Sieve Size
%"
No.4
No.8
No. 200
Percentaee Passine
90-100
25-40
18-33
0-3
...
""',
..
"01'''
-
PIa cine
~;,;
Subgrade, upon which gravel or crushed rock is to be placed, shall be prepared as outlined in the
accompanying soil report.
..
_i'~
""
.
TERRASEARCH, i/lc.
Page 51 of 51
w
rr>'
311 7Jb '+41
Attachment 9
Traffic Impact Analysis
3rt- crb Ltc( t
TRAFFIC REPORT FOR ARROYO VISTA PROJECT
This report was prepared by the City of Dublin and is based on data provided in the T JKM
Draft Traffic Study for the Arroyo Vista Housing Development, dated April 15, 2008
("T JKM 2008").
Description of the Preferred Alternative
Dwelling units. The preferred alternative (hereafter "project" or "proposed
project") proposes to redevelop an existing 23.8 acre site that currently contains 150
residences and a child care center. The existing structures will be demolished and
replaced with up to 378 dwelling units, as follows.
Affordable senior units
Affordable family units
Sinqle family townhomes
Total
50 units
130 units
198 units
378 units
dll The net increase in units from the existing development is 228 units (378 total units - 150
existing units = 228 additional units). The development will also include a village
community center and a childcare center. A vicinity map showing the project site location
" is shown in Figure 1. The proposed site plan is shown in Figure 2.
Access. The project proposes three access points to Dougherty Road, as follows.
Ventura Drive will be the northerly access to Dougherty Road. Eastbound left-turns onto
Dougherty Road will be restricted.
South Mariposa Drive will provide access to Dougherty Road near the center of the site
and will be the main project access, with full access traffic control.
Monterey Drive will be the southerly access. Access to Dougherty Road at this point will
be restricted to right-turn in and right-turn out only.
The existing North Mariposa Drive access will be eliminated
;iillf'
Project Trip Generation
~
Based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates shown in Table
1111, the project is expected to generate approximately 2,868 daily trips. Of the total project
trips, 198 trips will occur during the a.m. peak hour and 224 trips will occur during the p.m.
peak hour; 83 of the a.m. peak hour trips and 110 of the p.m. peak hour trips will be from
the project's proposed additional units and child care center.
"1W
I Text references to figures and tables will not always be in sequential order; however all of the referenced
figures and tables are attached in sequential order at the end of this report.
1
313'D UrC1C't
These trip generation figures for net additional trips are summarized as follows.
Number of a.m. peak trips
Number of p.m. peak trips
Existinq units
115
114
Proiect
198
224
Net Increase
83
110
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Trip distribution determines in what proportion vehicles would travel between the project
site and various destinations. The process also determines the various routes that
vehicles would take to each destination. Figures 5 and 6 show the distribution of the net
project trips for the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour, respectively.
lit
Significant Impact Criteria
City of Dublin intersections.
Guiding policy F of the General Plan Circulation and Scenic Highways Element requires
the City to strive to phase development and road improvements so that the operating LOS
is not worse than LOS D.
For Routes of Regional Significance (Le., Dublin Boulevard, Dougherty Road, Tassajara
Road, and San Ramon road), the City shall make a good faith effort to maintain LOS D on
arterial segments and at intersections.
Arterials and freeway segments. Based on Alameda County Congestion
Management Agency (CMA) monitoring standards, the standard of significance is LOS E.
,,""
City of Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Programs
...
Eastern Dublin TIF. In 1995, the City adopted and has since updated the Eastern
Dublin TIF. Among other things, the TIF funds improvements identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR as mitigation measures, e.g., improvements at the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty
Road intersection. The project site is not located in Eastern Dublin, but affects facilities
such as the above intersection, that are included in the TIF program.
~
-"
Downtown TIF. In 2004, the City adopted the Downtown TIF. This program
applies to new development west of Dougherty Road, including the project site. Among
the projects funded by this fee are improvements at the Dougherty Road/Dublin
Boulevard.
-"
...,.
Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee. In 1998, the City adopted the Tri-
Valley Transportation Development Fee (TVTD Fee) which funds regional roadway
improvements. This fee applies City-wide.
'",
.'
~.;
2
..
31+0() t..tt(~
Existing plus Project Conditions
This scenario adds net project traffic to existing conditions to assess traffic conditions at
the study intersections if the project were to be developed immediately. Table" shows
peak hour intersection levels of service under existing conditions.
Signalized intersections. As shown in the table, all signalized study intersections
are currently operating at acceptable City standards of LOS D or better except Dougherty
Road/Dublin Boulevard, which operates at LOS E during the p.m. peak period. The City is
currently implementing a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) to increase the capacity of
Dougherty Road in the vicinity of Dublin Boulevard. These improvements are scheduled
for completion in August 2008, and will result in intersection operation of LOS 8 or better.
Table IV summarizes peak hour intersection levels of service under Existing plus Project
conditions. Figure 7 shows the resulting turning movement volumes at the study
intersections under Existing plus Project conditions. Table IV shows slight increases in
the volume-to-capacity ("v/c") ratio and LOS compared with existing conditions shown in
Table II (e.g., intersections 2 and 4 go from LOS A to LOS B.) However, all signalized
intersections will operate at acceptable LOS C or better under Existing plus Project
conditions.
Unsignalized intersections. Table II shows that the current unsignalized South
Mariposa Drive and Ventura Drive project site intersections with Dougherty Road operate
at unacceptable LOS F and E, respectively, in the a.m. peak hour.
Table IV shows that under Existing plus Project conditions, the unsignalized intersections
will operate at acceptable levels of service, except for the South Mariposa Drive
intersection with Dougherty Road. Without signalization at this intersection, eastbound
motorists on South Mariposa Drive are likely to experience unacceptable delays due to
inadequate gaps in traffic to make left turns onto northbound Dougherty Road. This is a
potentially significant impact.
Impact TR 1. Unacceptable delays for vehicles on South Mariposa Drive turning
left onto northbound Dougherty Road under Existing plus Project conditions.
Mitiqation Measure TR 1. Prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy, the
proponents of the preferred alternative shall install a traffic signal at the South
Mariposa Drive intersection with Dougherty Road.
'...
According to the City's traffic engineer, a traffic signal at the intersection will create space
in traffic flows on Dougherty Road for vehicles on the project's minor approaches to
Dougherty Road to allow them to make left turns. Implementation of the above mitigation
measure will reduce the identified impact to less-than-significant.
,""'
3
" :.. ,"'I Llcyt
c_ ~ I
Short Term Cumulative plus Project Conditions
This discussion analyzes 2015 traffic conditions in the study area. The Dublin Traffic
Model (DTM) was used for the 2015 forecasts. In order to forecast traffic generated by
land uses, the DTM divides the region into traffic analysis zones (TAZs) which contain
information on existing and/or projected land uses that are located within a particular TAZ.
The TAl will generate a certain combination of outbound trips (trip production) and
inbound trips (trip attraction) during the analysis period(s). For example, a residential TAl
would generate a net production of trips in the a.m. peak hour and a net attraction of trips
in the p.m. peak hour. Conversely, a TAl that contains office development would generate
a net attraction of trips in the a.m. peak hour and a net production of trips in the p.m. peak
hour.
"
The expected 2015 land uses for each TAl within City of Dublin were developed using a
linear interpolation between existing 2004 land uses and 2025 Buildout land uses, in
consultation with City staff. The CCT A Model 2025 land uses were conservatively
assumed for the 2015 analysis for areas outside the City of Dublin. (T JKM 2008.)
.
Q
.11
iiIi
Under Short Term Cumulative conditions, the arterial extensions and improvements
planned to be completed in the Tri-Valley Area include the following:
..
1. Fallon Road between existing terminus at the Dublin Ranch Golf Course and Tassajara
Road (Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Program).
.,
2. Central Parkway between Arnold Road and east of Fallon Road (Eastern Dublin Traffic
Impact Fee Program).
-
3. All local and collector roadways in Eastern Dublin within Dublin Ranch and areas to the
west (Eastern Dublin Specific Plan - most are constructed).
-
4. Planned improvements to the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection and the
widening of Dougherty Road from four to six lanes from 1-580 to Houston Place (under
construction with 2008 completion date).
....,
5. All improvements identified for the Dublin Transit Center and the Blake Hunt (previously
IKEA) retail center (Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Program).
6. Windemere Parkway connection with Camino Tassajara in Contra Costa County (Now
open).
7. EI Charro Road between 1-580 and Stanley Boulevard (Pleasanton General Plan).
IJI!!'~
8. Busch Road connection with EI Charro Road (Pleasanton General Plan).
,.....
9. Stoneridge Drive connection with EI Charro Road (Pleasanton General Plan).
..
rrM;;
4
-
~;f'
3( lD oD 4'1~
10. Jack London Boulevard extension between the Livermore Airport area and EI Charro
Road (City of Livermore General Plan).
11. Widening of Route 84 (Isabel Avenue and Vallecitos Road) to six lanes north of
Stanley Boulevard and four lanes south of Stanley Boulevard and on Vallecitos Road
(Fully funded with a target completion date in 2012).
In addition, the following freeway and interchange improvements were also included:
/. The Phase I Fallon Road/I-580 interchange improvements currently planned by the
Cities of Dublin and Pleasanton, and Caltrans (City of Dublin - Construction is scheduled
from 2008 to 2009).
2. The 1-680/West Las Positas interchange in Pleasanton is not included.
3. The Isabel (Rt. 84)/1-580 interchange Stage I and" improvements. This includes the
removal of ramps at Portola Avenue (Fully funded - Construction is scheduled from 2009
to 2012).
4. Improvements to 1-580 interchanges in Livermore identified in the City of Livermore
General Plan at N. Livermore Avenue, N. First Street, Vasco Road and Greenville Road
(City of Livermore General Plan).
5. Improvement of 1-580 between Santa Rita Road/Tassajara Road and Vasco Road to
include four mixed flow lanes, one HOV lane and one auxiliary lane in each direction (Fully
funded - Construction is scheduled to be complete by 2015).
6. Construction of the West Dublin/Pleasanton BART station (Under construction -
scheduled to be completed by 2010).
7. No extension of BART facilities east of the existing Dublin/Pleasanton station.
8. The 2015 network does not assume the planned extension of Scarlett Drive from
Dougherty Road to Dublin Boulevard. Therefore Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive is
analyzed as a three-leg (liT') intersection.
""Mi
Figure 8 shows the Short Term Cumulative Conditions traffic volume forecasts using the
Dublin Traffic Model. The planned improvements at the project area intersections under
Short Term Cumulative Conditions, are shown on Figure 9.
"'*!i
Signalized Intersections. Table V shows projected peak hour intersection levels
of service under Short Term Cumulative conditions. As shown in the table, all signalized
project area intersections are expected to operate at acceptable City standards of LOS D
or better except Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard, which will operate at LOS F
during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. Among the planned City CIP improvements is
widening Dougherty Road between Scarlett Drive and the north city limits, which will
5
-. \ -. ~.~.... (J C1/
fI') f;)! -, '
"" I ~
improve intersection operations to acceptable levels, but may not be completed until after
2015.
Table VI summarizes peak hour intersection levels of service for Short Term Cumulative
plus Project conditions. Figure 10 shows the resulting turning movement volumes at the
area intersections under this scenario. Table VI shows that the Dougherty Road/Amador
Valley Boulevard intersection will continue to operate at LOS F without additional capacity
on Dougherty Road.
A review of the intersection volumes shows that most of the traffic under existing
conditions is generated from development north of the project site, including major
planned development in Contra Costa County. Figure 3 shows that 1,348 vehicles, nearly
half of the existing total 2,796 a.m. peak movements at this intersection are southbound
through trips. Similarly, the highest existing volume of vehicles in the p.m. peak hour are
the 1,258 northbound movements.
This same pattern persists under Short Term Cumulative conditions. Figure 10 shows the
highest a.m. peak volumes are the 1,860 southbound through movements, an increase of
512 vehicles at with-project conditions and 502 vehicles at without-project conditions
(Figure 8.) The highest volume of p.m. peak hour volumes are 1,392 northbound through
vehicles, an increase of 134 vehicles at with-project conditions and 129 vehicles at
without-project conditions. The increase in the through volumes from existing conditions
is 648 vehicles (636 + 12), only 12 of which are attributed to the project. As reflected in
the above discussion, the project contributes negligible amounts of traffic to the short term
cumulative conditions at the Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard intersection.
.'"
"!l~1
...'
...
The project contribution of negligible traffic to short term cumulative conditions is further
reflected in a comparison of Tables V and VI. These tables show that adding project
traffic to the intersection does not change the projected LOS F under short term ....
cumulative conditions; the intersection is projected to operate at this level with or without
the project. More importantly with the LOS F operations, the tables show that the v/c ratio
is the same during the a.m. peak hour with or without the project. The v/c ratio for the ...,
p.m. peak hour increases by only .01, from 1.00 to 1.01 with the project. This increase is
not enough to significantly degrade the intersection LOS.
","f
Based on the facts and circumstances discussed above, the project contribution to traffic
at the Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard intersection does not change the short
term cumulative effects. There is no significant cumulative impact from the project at the
Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard intersection.
Unsignalized intersections. For unsignalized intersections, Table VI shows that
the unsignalized intersection of South Mariposa Drive and Dougherty Road will operate at
unacceptable LOS F without signalization. This is a potentially significant cumulative
impact.
w'
6
!IJ!lit"
31 ~ i() l.f?r t6,
Impact TR 2. Unacceptable LOS at South Mariposa Drive/Dougherty Road under
2015 Short Term Cumulative plus Project conditions.
Mitiqation Measure TR 2. Implement Mitigation Measure TR 1.
Implementation of this mitigation will reduce the identified impact to less-than-significant
by creating space in traffic flows on Dougherty Road for vehicles on South Mariposa Drive
to turn left.
Long Term Cumulative with Project Conditions
This section analyzes 2025 traffic conditions in the project area and assumes buildout
under the Dublin general plan and development of a potential Camp Parks project. The
Camp Parks site is a 180 acre portion of the 2,478 acre RFT A site bounded by Scarlett
Drive to the west, Dublin Road to the south, Arnold Road to the east and the extension of
Central Parkway to the north. A draft Master Plan for Camp Parks refers to a potential
mixed-use project but provides no details on the potential mix or extent of uses. Therefore,
this report conservatively assumes a future residential project consisting of 1,600 homes,
with 260 single family dwellings and 1,340 multi-family dwellings.
In addition to the 2015 base network of arterial extensions and improvements described
above, the following additional improvements are included in the 2025 network:
1. Currently, there is only one access to Camp Parks off Dublin Boulevard. Two gates
along Arnold Road are closed for security reasons. Camp Parks preliminary plans would
relocate the existing Camp Parks access to the intersection of Dougherty Road/Amador
Valley Boulevard to form a four-leg intersection. This report assumes that the relocation
will be completed by 2025 as part of the Camp Parks redevelopment project.
2. The City plans to extend Scarlett Drive from Dougherty Road to Dublin Boulevard. This
report assumes that the extension will be completed by 2025. Therefore, Dublin
Boulevard/Scarlett Drive is analyzed as a four-leg intersection under 2025 Conditions
(Downtown Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Program).
.iM
3. This report assumes that Central Parkway would be extended westerly as part of the
Camp Parks redevelopment project. The extension would connect with Dougherty Road
north of Scarlett Drive and would be limited to right-turn in and right-turn out access from
Dougherty Road.
:s
4. Dougherty Road widening from four to six lanes between Houston Place and the north
city limits (Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Program).
:W
5. As described in the certified Eastern Dublin Property Owners EI R, the Hacienda Road
/1-580 interchange will be widened by adding one lane to the eastbound and westbound
off-ramps and one northbound lane to the overcrossing (Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee
Program).
7
...
31~Jb 40.1
..
Figure 11 shows the resulting turning movement volumes at the study intersections under
the Long Term Cumulative Conditions. Figure 12 shows the lane configurations and traffic
controls that are planned/programmed under the City's Capital Improvement Program
(CIP), and the City's Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program. Figure 13 shows turning movement
volumes at the project area intersections under Long Term Cumulative with Project
conditions.
..
$i'll'
iii'
...
Signalized intersections. Table VII shows Long Term Cumulative conditions with
completion of the planned Capital Improvement Projects. Table VIII shows the same LOS
operations with project traffic included.
....
1. Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard. Tables VII and VIII show the
cumulative effect of future traffic at the Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard
intersection. This intersection is expected to operate at LOS E during the a.m. and p.m.
peak periods with and without the project, which exceeds acceptable LOS D conditions. It
is recommended that the City monitor the intersection for peak hour volumes on a periodic
basis and continue to obtain updated forecasts for future years. Such monitoring should
be done to assist the City to comply with General Plan policies requiring implementation of
transportation measures to improve levels of service. In addition, current and future
phases of the 1-580 Smart Corridor Project will likely relieve some congestion at the
Dougherty Road/ Amador Valley Boulevard intersection through Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS) measures and discourage traffic from diverting off of the freeway due to
congestion or incidents.
..
...
III\I!Ilt
..
The long term cumulative scenario assumes development of the Camp Parks project and
relocation of the Camp Parks entry to the Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard
intersection. Assumed at approximately 1,600 units, the Camp Parks project will add
substantially more traffic to the intersection between the short term cumulative and long
term cumulative scenarios, especially as compared to the project. As under existing
conditions and short term cumulative conditions, however, the highest traffic volumes at
this intersection under long term cumulative conditions are a.m. peak southbound through
traffic and p.m. peak northbound through traffic. Southbound a.m. peak volumes under
short term cumulative conditions increase from 1,860 to 1,949 under long term cumulative
conditions. Northbound p.m. peak volumes under short term cumulative conditions
increase from 1,392 to 1,445 under long term cumulative conditions. The increase in the
highest volume of through movements from short term to long term cumulative conditions
is 142 vehicles, only 12 of which occur under cumulative-with-project conditions. As
reflected in the above discussion, the project contributes negligible amounts of traffic to
long term cumulative conditions at the Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard
intersection.
""""
The project contribution of negligible traffic to long term cumulative conditions is further
reflected in a comparison of Tables VII and VIII. These tables show that adding project
traffic to the intersection does not change the projected LOS E under long term cumulative
conditions; the intersection is projected to operate at this level with or without the project.
~
..,
8
..
}2.~) 7J t1 q't
Further, the tables show that the v/c ratio is the same during the a.m. peak hour with or
without the project. The v/c ratio for the p.m. peak hour increases by .01, from .95 to .96
with the project. As noted above, this increase is not enough to further degrade the
intersection LOS.
Based on the facts and circumstances discussed above, the project contribution to traffic
at the Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard intersection does not change the long
term cumulative effects. There is no significant cumulative impact from the project at the
Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard intersection.
As noted above, the project will not have a significant cumulative impact on this
intersection. No mitigations are required; however, the following are improvements that
will add capacity to the intersection improving intersection performance. The City may
wish to consider adding them to the project as conditions of approval, as appropriate.
a. Widen Dougherty Road to accommodate six travel lanes as defined in the City's
Eastern Dublin TIF program.
b. Add an exclusive southbound right-turn lane on Dougherty Road. This
improvement requires an additional right-of-way acquisition beyond what is planned
through the CIP.
c. Widen Dougherty Road which can accommodate a second northbound left-turn
lane to improve the capacity of the intersection. Currently, there are two receiving /
departing westbound lanes to accommodate two northbound left-turn lanes at the
intersection. The segment of Amador Valley Boulevard between Dougherty Road
and the adjacent Wildwood Road is 680 feet in length, which is adequate for
vehicles traveling at the posted speed limit of 25 mph to transition / merge into one
lane. This will require modifying the existing pavement striping and signage to
safely guide motorists.
.....
2. Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard. Tables VII and VIII show the cumulative
effect of future traffic at the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection. This
intersection is expected to operate at LOS E during the p.m. peak periods with and without
the project, which exceeds acceptable LOS D conditions. The project is subject to the
Downtown Traffic Impact Fee, a portion of which funds improvements at this intersection.
No additional lanes beyond those in the current construction project are likely to be
feasible due to physical constraints. It is recommended that the City monitor the
intersection for peak hour volumes on a periodic basis and continue to obtain updated
forecasts for future years. Such monitoring should be done to assist the City to comply
with General Plan policies requiring implementation of transportation measures to improve
levels of service. In addition, current and future phases of the 1-580 Smart Corridor
Project will likely relieve some congestion at the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard
intersection through Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) measures and discourage
traffic from diverting off of the freeway due to congestion or incidents.
'LV
,~
9
II1II
~~I ~ ~~~
The intersection is located approximately % mile north of the 1-580/Dougherty
Road/Hopyard Road interchange. Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial in the
City and is projected to carry substantial traffic volumes through buildout of the City
general plan. Dougherty Road is a major north-south arterial that continues north past the
city limits into Contra Costa County. Located near the first 1-580 interchange east of 1-
680, the long term cumulative effects at this intersection will include future traffic from
many projects in Eastern Dublin, as documented in several certified City EIRs.2 Among
the reasonably foreseeable future residential projects from Eastern Dublin that will affect
this intersection are the following.
..
..
~
..
..~
..
Eastern Dublin Property Owners: 3,108 units approved, 11 under construction
Wallis Ranch (Dublin Ranch West): 935 units approved, none built
Casamira Valley, Vargas, Tipper projects: 413 units approved, none built
Dublin Transit Center: 808 of the approved units remain unbuilt
."
..
The Eastern Dublin Property Owners area also contains lands that are planned for non-
residential commercial and office development but not built. Other reasonably
foreseeable residential projects near the project site and outside Eastern Dublin will also
affect the intersection, including the following.
..
-
Camp Parks: 1,600 unit potential
AMB: 308 units approved, none built
Windstar: 309 units approved, none built ..
The above projects would total approximately 7,470 future dwelling units contributing to
the cumulative effects at the intersection. Just as not every project trip will pass through _
the intersection, not every trip related to the above projects will pass through the
intersection, but all of the projects will affect it to varying degrees. Compared to over
7,400 future residential units, the 228 new units proposed by the project would result in a
negligible number of new units and related new trips.
A comparison of existing turning movements and long term cumulative turning movements _
reveals more directly the relative effects of the project and future development at the
intersection. Figure 3 shows a total of 4,575 existing a.m. peak turning movements and a
total of 5,062 existing p.m. peak turning movements at the Dublin Boulevard /Dougherty
Road intersection. Figure 13 shows that approximately 8,592 turning movements are
expected during the a.m. peak hour under Long Term Cumulative plus Project conditions.
Approximately 9,742 movements are expected during the p.m. peak hour under those
conditions. A comparison of Figures 3 and 13 shows that development of the project
would add negligible trips to the intersection under Long Term Cumulative conditions. Of
the projected 4,017 a.m. peak hour increase in movements over existing conditions, for
example, 54 would be generated by the project; of the 4,680 p.m. peak hour increase in
movements over existing conditions, approximately 72 would be generated by the project.
2 Among these EIRs are the Eastern Dublin EIR (SCH 91103064), the Eastern Dublin Property Owners SEIR (SCH
2001052114), the Fallon Village SEIR (2005062010),
.'
10
.
b
;t.., '.")1 "'..6. IJ. ct (6'
""" ;!Ii ~. 1/ f "'T
..,
The vast majority of increased movements would be generated by other new
development, including the projects identified above, several of which are many times the
size of the proposed project, and all of which are larger than the proposed project.
The project contribution of negligible traffic to the cumulative conditions is further reflected
in a comparison of Tables VII and VIII. These tables show that adding project traffic to the
intersection does not change the projected LOS E under long term cumulative conditions;
the intersection is projected to operate at this level with or without the project. Further, the
tables show that the vlc ratio is the same during the a.m. peak hour with or without the
project. The vlc ratio for the p.m. peak hour increases by .01, from .95 to .96 with the
project. As noted above, this increase is not enough to further degrade the intersection
LOS.
Another source of traffic at this intersection is regional commute traffic. The Eastern
Dublin Property Owners certified Supplemental EIR noted an increase in regional traffic
and changed commute patterns such that increasing amounts of traffic from east of Dublin
was moving through the area on 1-580, often using local streets to avoid localized
congestion on the freeway during commute hours. (EDPO Draft SEIR p. 3.6-6.) As a
parallel roadway to 1-580, Dublin Boulevard is among the streets most affected by cut-
through traffic. City staff has recently observed that the amount of cut-through traffic may
be declining somewhat due to improvements such as ramp metering, but is still expected
to continue to be a source of future traffic at the Dublin Boulevard/ Dougherty Road
intersection.
Based on the facts and circumstances discussed above, the project contribution to traffic
at the Dublin Boulevard/ Dougherty Road intersection does not change the cumulative
effects in the long term. There is no significant cumulative impact from the project at the
Dublin Boulevard /Dougherty Road intersection.
Unsignalized intersections. For unsignalized intersections, Table VIII shows that
the unsignalized intersection of South Mariposa Drive and Dougherty Road will operate at
unacceptable LOS F and E during, the a.m. and p.m. peak periods, respectively, without
signalization. As under the conditions analyzed above, the delay results from minimal
gaps in traffic needed for safe turns as vehicles attempt to turn left from South Mariposa
Drive onto northbound Dougherty Road. This is a potentially significant cumulative
impact.
Impact TR 3. Unacceptable LOS at South Mariposa Drive/Dougherty Road under
Long Term Cumulative plus Project conditions.
Mitiqation Measure TR 3. Implement Mitigation Measure TR 1.
rNji:Jo
Implementation of this mitigation will reduce the identified impact to less-than-significant
by creating space in traffic flows on Dougherty Road for vehicles on South Mariposa Drive
to turn left.
11
..
...
" ".ft '#.:11.. t.1?1 <t ..
.,ti:;' ~"- ()
Wi>.
Freeway Segment Analysis
..
This section discusses the cumulative effect of future traffic on freeway segments in the
project area. The level of service analysis of freeways is based on peak hour volumes,
i.e., the number of passenger cars per hour. Traffic flow is used as the basis for freeway
levels of service and for calculating the effect of the proposed project on 1-580 and 1-680
operations in 2030, the year Caltrans currently uses as the horizon year for analysis of
freeway conditions. Year 2030 forecast volumes were derived by increasing the 2025
volumes by 10 percent, an assumed growth rate of two percent per year for a five- year
period, based on past and projected growth rates along the 1-580 corridor.
.i
..
Ri'
..
..
Table IX summarizes Year 2030 levels of service on 1-580, 1-680, and SR-84 with and
without the project. Under 2030 conditions, certain segments of 1-580 and 1-680 in the
project area are expected to operate at unacceptable LOS F during the a.m. and/or p.m.
peak hour.
~~
..
"'-.
Various efficiency improvements and other efforts to reduce single-occupant vehicle trips
are detailed in the certified Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (Draft SEIR, pages 69-70.)
These efforts are ongoing but are not likely to increase freeway capacity for single-
occupant vehicles. The project is also subject to the Tri-Valley Transportation
Development Fee which funds regional roadway improvements.
..
~;Jiili
..
The City of Dublin is situated along two major regional freeways. 1-580 is an eight-lane
east-west freeway that connects Dublin with local Tri-Valley cities such as Livermore and
Pleasanton as well as regional cities such as Oakland, Hayward and Tracy. In the Dublin
vicinity, 1-580 carries between 195,000 and 218,000 vehicles per day. (TJKM 2008.) 1-
680 is a six-to-eight lane north-south freeway running south to Fremont, Milpitas and San
Jose, and north to Walnut Creek and beyond. In the Dublin vicinity, 1-680 carries between
154,000 and 173,000 vehicles per day. (TJKM 2008.)
..
IIIH
lilt
....
..
Table IX shows that the project contributes little if any traffic to the volumes of segments
projected to operate unacceptably at LOS F along 1-580 and 1-680 for Year 2030. For the
1-680 to Dougherty Road segment of 1-580, for example, the project only represents 7
vehicles out of the approximately 11,576 p.m. peak westbound volume. Table IX further
shows that none of the freeway segments performing acceptably degrades to
unacceptable levels with addition of project volume. The projected LOS on 1-580 and 1-
680 are expected to remain unchanged with the addition of project traffic.
..
~'io:
..
..
Traffic from the project is not expected to change future freeway conditions. The major
source of future traffic volumes is likely to be build out under general plans for cities and
counties along the freeways, including the reasonably foreseeable future Dublin projects ....
referenced above. As noted earlier, both 1-580 and 1-680 are regional facilities passing
through, and servicing, numerous cities and unincorporated areas. Future development in
accordance with adopted general plans will generate vehicle trips not only on local roads ..
in the particular development area, but also on nearby freeways. In Dublin, future
increased traffic volumes on the freeways is more likely to result from larger, more intense
....
12
..
:.f ):() 4'1 '6
projects such as the East Dublin Property Owners or Camp Parks projects. All of the
reasonably foreseeable future projects cited earlier are located along roads that lead into
freeway interchanges and/or are located at or near 1-580. Furthermore all of the projects
are larger than the proposed project, several of them many times larger. Compared to
future regional traffic and to other reasonably foreseeable future projects that will
cumulatively affect the freeways, the project effect is negligible.
Based on the facts and circumstances discussed above, the project contribution to future
freeway traffic does not change the 2030 cumulative effects. There is no significant
cumulative impact from the project on the 1-580 or 1-680 freeways.
Consistency with Alameda County Congestion Management Plan
The recently updated Countywide Transportation Demand Model (CMA Model) was used
to forecast traffic volumes for the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency
(CMA) Analysis, The volumes were used to analyze the Short Term Cumulative (2015)
Conditions and Long Term Cumulative (2030) Conditions, as indicated below.
Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) Arterial Impacts. Table X shows
project impacts on various segments of Dublin Boulevard, Tassajara Road, Santa Rita
Road, and Dougherty Road in the project area. The analysis measured LOS on these
roadway segments during the p.m. peak hour under Short Term Cumulative (2015)
Conditions and Long Term Cumulative (2030) Conditions with and without the Project.
The LOS results are based on the volume-to-capacity ratio for the segments. Table X
shows that all roadway segments are expected to operate at LOS D or better in the p.m.
peak hour under 2015 and 2030 conditions with and without the project, except on two
segments of Dublin Boulevard. The Dougherty Road to Hacienda Drive eastbound
segment is projected to operate at LOS F under 2030 conditions, while the westbound
segment is projected to operate at LOS E. The Dougherty Road to Village Parkway
segment is projected to operate at LOS F both eastbound and westbound under 2030
conditions.
As discussed earlier in this report, the City CIP and improvements under the City's TIF
programs will improve traffic operations along Dublin Boulevard. Even with these
improvements, however, long term cumulative operations may not reach acceptable levels
of service. As noted above for referenced Dublin Boulevard intersections, it is
recommended that the City monitor the two Dublin Boulevard segments for peak hour
volumes on a periodic basis and continue to obtain updated forecasts for future years.
Such monitoring should be done to assist the City to comply with General Plan policies
requiring implementation of transportation measures to improve levels of service. In
addition, current and future phases of the 1-580 Smart Corridor Project will likely relieve
some congestion along Dublin Boulevard through Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
measures and discourage traffic from diverting off of the freeway due to congestion or
incidents.
13
..
,~6~ L{q1>
..
As noted earlier, Dublin Boulevard is one of the City's major arterials and is projected to
handle substantial traffic volumes. Table X shows that the two affected segments have
the highest projected volumes of all the segments analyzed and that vehicles added due
to the project are negligible. Of the 3,061 vehicles using the eastbound segment between
Dougherty Road and Hacienda Drive during the p.m. peak hour, only 2 vehicles are
attributable to the project; the eastbound segment shows no increase in volume with the
project. Between Dougherty Road and Village Parkway, 17 of the 3,062 projected
eastbound p.m. peak vehicles and 4 of the 3,043 projected westbound p.m. peak vehicles
are due to the project. Further, the project vehicles do not cause any increase in the v/c
ratio or the LOS along the affected segments.
..
D
..
.
..
The two affected segments are directly east and west of the Dougherty Road/Dublin
Boulevard intersection and carry traffic through the intersection. The cumulative effect of
project and other traffic is discussed above for this intersection and applies to the adjacent
Dublin Boulevard segments as well. As demonstrated in that discussion and based on the
facts and circumstances discussed above, the project contribution to traffic on the two
Dublin Boulevard segments does not change the cumulative effects on these segments.
There is no significant cumulative impact from the project on the Dublin Boulevard
segments between Hacienda Drive and Village Parkway.
..
~
..
~
..
Freeway/State Highway Impacts. As required by the 2007 CMP, project-
generated traffic on 1-580, 1-680, and SR-84 was analyzed based on freeway capacity
standards described in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. Tables XI and XII summarize
the results of the analysis for various segments of 1-580, 1-680 and SR-84 in the project
vicinity. The analysis measured the levels of service on these freeway and State highway
segments during the p.m. peak hour under Short Term Cumulative (2015) Conditions and
Long Term Cumu~ative (2030) Conditions with and without the project. The LOS analysis
is based on the volume-to-capacity ratio for basic freeway sections and multilane
highways.
~~
.
iN.
.
1M,
.
As shown in Tables XI and XII, specific segments of 1-580 and 1-680 are expected to
operate at LOS F in the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour under 2015 and 2030
conditions with the Project. See the earlier discussion of freeways for analysis of
cumulative traffic effects on these freeways for Year 2030 conditions. The analysis would
apply to 2015 conditions as well in that freeway traffic from the project would be negligible
in comparison to future increases in regional through traffic as jurisdictions along the
freeways develop in accordance with applicable general plans and to large projects in
Dublin yet to be built, such as the Eastern Dublin Property Owners and other referenced
reasonably foreseeable future projects.
....
.
-
..
...
Based on the facts and circumstances discussed above, the project contribution to
freeway traffic does not change the cumulative effects under 2015 or 2030 conditions.
There is no significant cumulative impact from the project on the 1-580 or 1-680 freeways.
...
SR-84 south of 1-580 is expected to operate at acceptable LOS C or better in the a.m. and
p.m. peak hours under 2015 conditions with and without the Project, as shown in Table XI.
...
..
14
III
4'1'6
'Zi.t'{)
Also, SR-84 south of 1-580 is expected to operate at LOS E during the a.m. peak hour
under 2030 conditions with and without the Project, as shown in Table XII. These levels
of service do not exceed the CMA monitoring standard of LOS E.
Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority - Wheels
Currently, Wheels bus lines 3 and 202 (school days only) provide direct service to the
existing housing site from Dougherty Road with a counterclockwise loop via North
Mariposa Drive that exits from South Mariposa Drive to Dougherty Road. The bus stop is
located near the existing basketball court on the west side of South Mariposa Drive across
from the tot lot. The project will reconfigure the existing driveways accessing Dougherty
Road and will adversely affect existing onsite bus circulation.
The project proposes to remove North Mariposa Drive. This removal, together with the
proposed removal of eastbound left-turn access at the Dougherty RoadNentura Drive
intersection will affect bus circulation, especially for northbound operations. Also, the
proposed site layout will require northbound buses to make various maneuvers to exit the
project site. This is a potentially significant impact.
Impact TR 4. Adverse impacts to onsite bus circulation due to reconfiguration of
project site access to Dougherty Road.
Mitiqation Measure TR 4.
a. Southbound. Coordinate with LAVTA to develop a plan for allowing bus access
to the project that considers the most efficient location for bus stop(s).
b. Northbound.
1. Coordinate with LAVTA to develop a plan for allowing bus access to the
project considering efficient circulation routes and pedestrian safety. Future
project-related development applications shall incorporate bus facilities
showing how the plan will be implemented.
2. Implement Mitigation Measure TR 1 to allow safe pedestrian access
across Dougherty Road.
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the identified impact to less-than-
significant.
15
III!!I
??rUQ tfl1<t.
!IIII
Attachments
.
....
Fiqures referenced in the text, presented in sequential numerical order. Note: there
may be gaps in the sequence of figures.
.
IIol
Tables referenced in the text, presented in sequential numerical order. Note: there
may be gaps in the sequence of tables.
..
~
City of Dublin
April 30, 2008
IIlI
""
1088696v5
..
....
..
JIll!!
.....
-
....
IJIIII'I
.....
~
-
-
..
16
..
32.~UO LV-ti
Attachments
Fiaures referenced in the text, presented in sequential numerical order.
Note: there may be gaps in the sequence of figures.
Tables referenced in the text, presented in sequential numerical order.
Note: there may be gaps in the sequence of tables.
...
,~
City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Vicinity Map
32100 '-1qrt
Figure
I
8TH ~T
".
... .... -........... --.-... .....-.
JOHNSON OR
LEGEND
. Study Imcrsoctioll
o Project Site Dn"E-w~y
... future Roadway
1;7.00I.~i~.DM
OUBlI:, BWO.
{~T
OV../'f.NS OR
ER()CEF:. ~l \,10
Gl~ASCI" 'OR
i<
o
S
~
~
<(
::;
"
;.1.
n
~
crr-JTFlA;. Pt:WY.
B
. I;
III!
li;j
.'lt1
~.
@
~
~
.t
"
In
:!
-
JIJJ,lf
~
.'
.-.
NORTH
"l~~ :OJ ~\i~l~
~
..
..
..
3 300{) c..tt1 't
City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Proposed Site Plan
Figure
2
:\
~
~
e
.,
~
i
~
5
~
"':09
~.,.~V"
,,0>>
..
~~
~~
(~
~
..-..
NORTH
f.j:j: !I, S~illfl:o
-~-
~
151-001 . o\ilW~ - D~'
-~~
City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Existing Conditions Turning MovementVolur::nes
100~!'~cctlon I
Dougherty RdJAmador Viy, Blvd.
~e
;~I'
"'-
~
,,-1 i33ul..Jl' 1'9)4
""4 i,llo': '--1m';;
"lll:
:.!..~
Ill;;
(")~
..,
int<:.I'~C(tion 6
. Hopyord Rd.!EB I.S80 OIl.R,amp
'"
~kg
~5
, ",;"
59C)18~21_"'~
1.310 (9951'1 S-~
~~
-~
~:'
Intcr~CCtjon II
DOiJghert~. R.d./VentUra DI~
~
~&
N_
.-',
8.l21-",I....t
, 11;-" ....:.-
, 1~2
~
Inu:rSCClion 2
Dougherty RdJScarlert Dr.
~,
~
'"
~~N
~~ ..
.)> ;>I'~ "'~.T:
r ~:J...;''-'' ......~;,~,.'(;.
:1,\" 'Cr'l :I
.. .... "'.>,
;~! ..
-.,
-~
Intersection'
Dubhn BlvdJS<>rlett Dr.
,
,
,
:+-(\90 (~,307J
;~-'5 (20)
5 i9iJ ... "
820 (1.528)-+ .1.:-
21 (13,-.. ~~
-'"
"'-
...
lntcrn-cuon '2
Dougherty Rd.lN. Moripo.. Dr.
e
'"
s
~~l
~~-I
~l
3 16,-" ~ t
~ 16)" ~~
...0:
...
C
'"
II'
-3318() ,-/qi
it!!l.:
..
Figu re
3
~,W,j
II'
lc'lterscC'tlon 3
Dougherty l\d.!SICrr.t Lr..
~,
.J.
~G'I
." "'.;; It.. 1 (9)
0::: 'f""'.... .......~ 16\
.-'fio.lr'liE;9l
3' 187)-" 1'9) t....
~ (4'---1--1..-
5Or100~-~1~8:!
. -"""-
s: ::::2:
-",
~
Inters..ticn a
H>tlend, DrJDublin Blvd.
0;
M~;:-I
",-on
-~;;;- ~40 (141
8",,,, -4-404 (512,
..'fla.lr17S(lWI
42 123giJ\. t ....
18~ r1.113'-....L...!...
116(4881' ~~~
_l."ac
N",C
"'..
intersection 13
Doup,herty Rd./S. Maripo13 Dr.
~
g:
~I
26 i13j..Jl' I.) t
16 (9), t:;;::
-0
-,...
~..;:
~
,...
BLVD
OWENS n~
lntcrscctlon 4
DouF.heny Rd.!Dublin Blvd.
f!~l
;:'~.~ ~_ '63 i:J~)
. - (0"1 ..- ....g7 It.4nl
I 'I I ,. ~;. .
~''''1,,216 !:\02.
27 1871..Jl' I'''' ....
20~ ,853i-+ J.!-.'-
'-.- O"l~O
2~5 IS28) ... """ '"
~......~
N'::"-
~~~
<<>
Inter~CII0n 9
H.ciendo Dr.lVVB I.SSO OH.R.m
If.:li
'"17 "_300i~14)
.-', ~04)
'....
..1..:....
l~~
::e
c;~
"'-
Intersoction J-1
Dou~her,y Rd.IMomerey Dr
u:>
'"
~
e~
cO:
...-It
OI(ljJ ~t
t 1141'"", --
. 1&;
I~::.:.
'"
~
6,,00.R 8LVD.
G~EASON OR
Ii
LJ
<
t')
W
G
"
:r
r:ENl'AAt. r;,rN,;V
8
Jnterscctlon S
Do"gherty RdN/B I.S80 OR-P_1m
'....g
~--
~~I
~.,....: ._~21571!
.-IT ,-42e.{2!;1~
..
--"
~~
11\-
,,,,$
l::,~
.~~
0.,_'
inte"c,tion 10
H'Clenda Dr JEllt.SSC Off.rump
"~:1l
C!e
III!'
..
..
..
LEGEND
. Study Intersection
o Project Site DI'i~eWolY
XX AM Peak HourVoJumc
(XX)PM Peak HourVolume
. ... Future Roadway
-T Right turn volumes don't
go through intersection
.-.
NORTH
i'b: a,~ ;'(J!~
l1li
lit!k
"""
~
""
iiW.
~
..
It
oC
'"
~
v.
VI
~
..
..
..
,.
II
!oi!l
City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Existing Lane Configurations and Traffic Controls
3~z. rP "1'1 ~
o
Figure
4
int:~r'ScctJ()n t
Do"ghcrt,. PodJAm"dorV',.. Blvd,
\ntcncc;iCtfl '2
Dougherty IId.l,,,,,rlcu Dr.
Intersection 3
Do"gnerty RdlS..rJ71 Ln.
~l
~1'1tt
~H~
'"
~~
,ttr:i
~
IIII i=
~T'~!'
J ,ttr
-
"
'm:crs.cctlOI1 6 ,
Hc~'y"r"d RdJEB '.580 O/f.R.mp
u,
'"
...
~
""t.
IntersQction 7
Dublin BlvdJScari~cc Dr.
Inters.cctlon ...
Dougherty RdJDubli" Blvd.
L
-
-
~H~~ F
J ~, t}-
-
-
..
Incer!ccrion S
Dougherty Rd/liVB 1.580 Of[.R~m
~
'"
J.l1 ~
~>l""'t. tC:.
~. r
"
~
tt~
'"
~
lnro(tC:ctlQU 8 Int.~rs(:{tl(\n 9 Intorscttion 10
Hod.oc:" Dr.!Dublin Blvd. IH~cJ.ncb Dr,fWB 1-5800ff.R.m H"eicnd. DrJEll 1.580 .:Jff.R,mp
:-
.-
.-
,....:r
~..'~lr
-
-
..
.,J!..
)H~~~ I~
3 '''l''l''lttrr
-
-
-
O"(UiAr:~
In,crseevon 13
Dou.hcrcy Rd./5. M.~ripos3 Dr. ,
!
11~.
::1
={ ttt:
'"
'"
""
Imt:I"'S:t:ct.ion II
DOl/gherey Rd.Ncnturo D,;
I Incersection 12
Dougherty RdiN. Maripo,", Dr.
A
ii'll!
11
~...
i~tt
~
.irtt
.;#;1
BLVD
CT.
O\lVENS O~
""
Intcn;occon 14
Oo"ghort"( R<:J./Monte.'cy Dt,
~
il'1t1
BRCCER 8l \to,
(lLeA$Or, OR.
,;
a:
0:>
i
<
'"
I,)
-<
2
"I
U
~
CENfJ:\,'\t D'f<WV
B
LEGEND
. Study InterseCtion
o P,'oject Site Dr'iveway
~Trafli<: Signal
.L StOp Sign
--- -Future Roadway
.-.
NORTH
(1-1..,= : ~~ :\; .:1-:
~
c
'"
~
:s:
..
."
v.
~
I
I City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Net Project Trip Distribution Assumptions (A.M. Peak Hour)
...--..... -- -..._~,_., -
.\---
'"
",-
o
....,
cio
Q.-
2
~
i
",I...
21
-01
1~
'"
o
'\
IS7-OOITIIS.IIISI08-DM
.
Figure
5
010
OJO
.-.
NORTH
N.,t to Seal",
~ 00
~
C}\
i
~
, t ~ , , ~ - ~
t
~
1
I..C. ity of Dublin - T raffle Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Net Project Trip Distribution Assumptions (P.M. Peak Hour)
,. ...-. ._._.. .._._._,_."'--~-
Figure
6
"'10
...
\) ." \~,~
(1 ..10 I, i"" "II)
I i
rvlo 0
1/
II)
f'loat-
.~ I ,
,
(l L .L -to
/l 7.
ole
o j
""ii'"
oJfr\o
ofJ
11
11
1
V;;-"
'0
-I
.--L~I"'~D""
o
j", "'o"-"~-'''''''J''"",:_._..o
o' ::0;:'" 0
~.- .9.... ~. --,..'0
o[~ ..
jO-a
I, 1 0'0
...1.........1: 1
Dofc:P Ooid) 10 0
o:l t I I 0__.-
cdl \'" 8 h",;\ 5
3 01_3 3, 20 N 2 \. 2
....L.._J~~'L~ o\~
o 0\" 0 ':;;-'''''0''-'' \
i ";"
o
'~o
,
o\o~~o
o'TOr
0"'1"""1'"
0\.;0,;,10 '
i
o 0100
. ''''-o-~''o
10
::Q., . ..-
",~p ..~.,-'
~. \-~' ,
0-..,".. \) '.0
U\, 0".
~ >< o~/'
~ .
V)
0"....
.....
, .'\
0\".
II
o
jo
.......~. -i~~
I{)
o
--,
.L~~."
o 0
~fif
0'0
'10 oi
..!!-- _.-.lL.i..-
~~..'() j 0'
~''''''''-1i 0'-; 0 \~o. !:"'L.\O
. 10 0
,....
".....<,
-I.... ,
j---,-
9
_!l___._...~"J";~'~~!- 0
o 0 \ 0
o\~
, ,...'
4 3
\4 o.J,
0\- :~.'-"f
~ (/ Q
\~~
~:
2
4
._ "'0
w#"---'-
~.....-.
0..__."-'''-
.,.- 'P../~_.-~ ~
"
0\0
o
o ~\~
01'0 00
i 4 4 2
b!"dlJ'" '
'Q,j",
2 o~ ':'2,lt... 2 -_ _, _;;::::.:1-.-..9'1. '~~L"I';-"!---:
-'i2..!'>", 2 2 I
".o~. 0"",.,. ,
o J~.L., --!!.. 0"::,': '" '0 'Ji;To-~~~
o 0'0 0 '.01 ""'sR,-.JJ._ '). !. __.._._____n._.____!::li-'''_.:.;__......;,..__..h'~7.:.,_
f '0 er.. O. 0 t)-~v.' r.t.......T,I("..nn.l<_~"'..
~ "~"" 0 ",-'''Q 1 ;9 1(-.....~JoC....._...lO-rM.'\1f....i....,_.......~.c:_,_..""'I~_....>--__
~~-:.....() ~>._.. ~~....... '. ... ,,/ ~--._-.~--.-T..---O'~---_.._. ----:--------:-7'0-----
S
2
S
2
4
; ,
0\0
a..',
o
010
0 " -.....~
'2 ....~
~
0' ./\,\0
Q .0 "
\) \~.
\) 0 " r.-
2
3
_....--....../ ~Q ."
~....... A.
.ni_
...-.
NORTH
140\ to $c.41e
\\J
\v\l
..s;:-
O
...c
.J>
~
~
157-OOIT1I5" 1115108.. OM
City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Existing Plus Project Conditions Turning M?vementVolumes
Int:c~ncc:oon I
Dougherty Rd.!AmJdor Vly, Blvd.
-;
~~
=.'"
te ..")
.... C"'~
N~
';-t
~.l (330)_"'I~ t
~:>G t.:!1~.i-", -::-u;
1.....t.:;;
l~:N
,_.
.,:::-
....0
M",
..
I Imer~ectico b
H~"yard Rd.lEB 1.580 Off.R,mp
.~8
~:::::
~:;~
...,-
~'
,.,-
591 /839)-" /... iK
t:'10 ~9g5}-a.. fi~
I gc."2:!.
'::'~
~~
Interscction II
Dougherty Rd.Nentun Dr.
~:
E~
~~
2~ i 15)" ':1i
0"-
<'I'"
........
"'c
~
'"
)
157.0017115 . ~;I s.;oe. DM
..
-33 San Y.?\<6
Figure
7
..
....
..
intcrsc.ction '1
Dougherty RdJScJrlctl Dr.
Intcrse:ction 3
Dougherty RdoiSiern In.
~
...
'"
"'.
:g
$';.,
;;;~'~1~_1 (9)
"'.- - -5 (6)
~." r1e(19)
31 i88JJj..,A,.,
2 [41_ -,.L_
SO ~'06)",""\ ~~ =.
51:::,~
-~
...
:-...'1.
~7",Orf>
"'~'~.~
~. .~~.
r;"a.~ '
"'-
r'::,.4C
'"
;;
Il\tcrscct'Qn .
Dublin BI ,d ISc..le" Dr.
Int~nectlon 8
Hocienda Dr.lOublin Blv,t
.
,
:_691 (1.319)
:"15120)
821 rWg::{ j,C
11 i13J-~ ~~
-.,
"'-
..
<;
-..-
~.,.....
"'-'"
~~;;; ._~O (14)
"',."" -+-~04 (SlYi
.-1,'-. r'78(1~6l
43 (239)J/-'1 tf
1~' {1.1141-' ___
11~(489)" ~i~
-\OlIO
('II'.rJ~
..,...
In'ersoc~on 12
Dougherty RdJN. ~1anpo'a Dr.
Intorsection 13
D~ugl\ercy RdJS. MaripoSA Dr,
~
'"
"'.
Doos no~ (\lIl;1U with pt'OjcC't
~i
_<0
1r,_A
...'.
33120iJI)t
(lfj<3at~ ~~
I~~
i
8TH ST.
CUB./f' BLVC
\.f
JOHNSON DR,
OWENS DR,
lnter~tlct'jon 4
Oou:"erry RdJDublin 61'0.
;..
....-
",'"
-"'-<ll
~(D!2.
;:-~,::; ~_ 16314(4)
V':l....~ .....29i {G461
.-'.,... ,,716 f302j
2~~ f~~;~{ j.tr:
285 jS:?81-~ ffi~cr.
~....~~
C'\o:::..-
~~~
'"'
Inu:rsectiotl 5
Doogh'of'1J' Rd.JWB 1-500 Qfi.R.1I11
d~
&:::
~~I
~ ~_5521579i
~J. ff\::2012511
"'-
~~
~~
..
lIo!
..
.,.
-",...
.""
!ee
ntcrscctior. ~ Intcrse-Ctlon I
"H>ti"od:. DrJWB 1.580 Off.R;,,.,.,: Hadcnd. D,'jEB 1.580 Off.R.m~1
..
intcrsc::crion 14
Dougherty RdJMonlerey Ot.
a
~
~~
....-'
.-'.
2Q151-" t
;..
"
"<
'"
Ci.
!m(loer, BLVD
GLF.ASOf.. OR.
C<.
o
<
I:l
Z
'"
n
~
CEt-~TR"l Pt{\.'V'r"
8
"IN;;;
"''''
~~
~H~
';'
694 (SgG",J ~
1.093 (583)" 1t:
5~
~'"
~i1l
..,..:'1'
II!
~
..
LEGEND
. Study Inccrscoder,
o Project Site Drivcw.ljl
XX AM Peak HourVolume
(XX)PM Pa.~k HOUl'Volume
.... Future RoadW3Y
. Right turn volumes doll't
go through intersection
".'~h
..
'"'"
..
.
-.
NORTH
!-.J<"f ~~, c;( :II..~
..
~
IiIIIl
..
-
'"
cr
~
:(
.,
v,
"
.1
-
"""
....
-
...
"3 ;:A.rJ Db
4?l'6
City of Dublin - Traffic StUdy for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Short Term Cumulative (2015) Conditions Turning MovementVolumes
Figul-e
8
Intc:nectlon I
DoughCrty P.d.lAm.dor Vly.llivd.
~~
",.
;;;=,
;;:?:
~,
.-'
3S2~3451_'" ~i
502 (39<J)-" :Z~
I:!.~
~('\j -
'::,~
...
If\ten.c:crion 2-
Dougherty RdJScarlen Dr.
Intcueeti"n J
Dvughcrcy RdJS'erra Ln.
Int~cCtion 5
D"'OShorty RdJwe.I.S80 Qf\'.R.""
;;;
or.,
.,
J
~
l2.f.lel~ .
If.M..~ r_11 130;
'.r:- .....SiOi
.-'yl...lrS1,20j
40 !IDO)J~U:
2(6)_ '0 0
51 (106)" ::.~~
:ll-:::S::
N",
;:,
Intersection 8
H.cienda DdQubhn Blvd,
Imc.rn~ction 6
,Hcp)'ard f\d.JEIlI.SaO OIi.Ramp
.;:..:;l 1
~~
<!''''I
. $~l
~
~~e.7 fb75{J .!t!
1.510 I1.U05'''1 ~.~
,t:!.$'
>';'"
~.;t..
Inte"ee tion I I
Dougherty Rd.lVenturA Dr.
~
~
~~
NN
Ji'.
e (2,J !l.t.
111r'\I~;;;
tQ5
:!
lntcr~ection 7
Dublin Blvd.'Searlcn Dr.
,
,
:+-..430 (2.565)
.,r70 (70)
1.246Ifg5l{i~r
41; (60('\ I ~~
;...
-,,~
~I
~~;:;' \.. 118 (27)
M CJI ~ ..., .323 (aS2)
,.J.. -"11' 684 (2~81
. 161 (25~IJlI~ t1'"
~5('.28tj""" -__
133 t460J -.. ~ S; Si
~~~
"''''-
",00
,;()<nN
Inter$cctioro 12
Dougherty ReI/N. M.riposa Dr.
...
.,
oil
-~,
!:!-...
....'"
.-'+
3 (61-" '!l.i
3(6j~ ~!
~::
Intersec\ior, 13
DouEherty I\d./S. Maripo5.:l Dr.
l'l
~
~~
;.
28 pj)JI ~i
1(> (9J"1( ;:!~
-...
~~
i
o.
'.
BLVD
CT.
(lWeNS OR.
..~
t<fi
Intersection -1
Dough.">, Rd.!Dllblin Blvd.
:;
N
-"'-
'" '-
r'/~
-"..::oN
~ 15.~ 'L32i i.3S6j
....ttr:'"' -4-.1.427 l1.735)
....,.... ..278 (ii5t11
164 i2C>6iJl !Ill"
65i3{1.15e)"'C'?po..~
391 (S35j"1( 1@.;:S:i
~~~
~
J1\t!rsectior~ 9
H.cienda DrJWS 1-5800ff.Pwm
. ...
m~
~i;
- '" 'L314 (489)
...., ,.-1.683 (t:1031
17\
~~
o".t,
~~
Intonocoon I~
DoughertY Rd {Monterey Dr.
a>
'"
"'.
a:~
ON
lit
O(Olj ..,+
8:'4j"
~~.
N:r.
-'"
(7;:;'
~
9~m}f~ eLite.
3L EASON OR,
::i
'"
~
~
~
~
z
~
CENTRAl. PK\\'l'
.~~
~gi
t:>r,
Cf,,": ~_ 761 (60BI
'If'"
ci.::.
"""
~:5:
_..~
lntersecnon 10
Hncienda Dr IEB 1.580 Off. Ramp
0\
~ ,....
;:-;;.;
;1;-
~~
-'"
.-'
1.190(610)-'" l!.
1.100 (590)" ~FJ
rJ.-
~~
~lj(
LEGEND
. Study Intersection
o Project Site. Driv<:W3Y
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX}PM P""k Hour Volume
- -.. Future Roadwny
~ Right turn volum~ don't
go th,-oIJgh imc,'sectior.
---
NORTH
N'~! Hi ~(ai~
~
ci
'"
~
~
VI
Ii
3?1~4qt;
City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development Figure
Short Term Cumulative (2015) Conditions Lane Configurations and T raffle Controls 9
Int.::rsectJ<l" I
Dougherty Rd.iAm~dorVty. S..d
~
. ~1'1 11
" Inu:rsectioo 6
Hr:.pyard Rd.lE8 1.580 Off.R"m~
lU
"'
c:
...
~"'H+
Inrcl'\cC'tJon I J
Dougherty P.d.NenCVf';1 Dr.
A
'''-~lltt
IntCncctiof, 2
Dougherty Rd.!St~r\ett Dr.
e.
:n
;J~lil...
~~
ttr;
"'
;;
Intenec:ticn 7
Dublin BlvdJScariett Dr.
'-
:-
.-
:"
~v
InterlCCtiOfl 12
Dougherty Rd./N. Ml"poso Or.
Win not c>:ist with proj<<:cc
il'l11
Inte..e'~Q" 3 Inrersectlon 4 Intel~QctlOn S
Dougherty RdJSi.m Ln. Dou~hCr'Y Rd.iDublin Blvd, Doughe-ry Rd./INB ~sao OIf.Ram
"--
-
-
-
4H~ ~ ~a+l..l.... ~
r r
J '1ttt-' ~ ll"'lttt<< ..
-
... -
-
-
0,"."" 3
...
I"te~ccuon 8 InteneCtlon 9 IntersectIon 10
Ha'iend. Dr JDubhn Blvd. H.cicnd:! DJ:/WB 1.580 Off.!'..m HacIenda Dr.lEB ,.580 Off-Ramp Ill.
~
-
-
)+Hl..1... F .'
~ '1"'1ltt(( '"'
- tt}(
-
- UJ
o."''''P~ ~ -
Int~~.c~on /3 Iflten.ection 14 LEGEND
Dougherty RdJS. Maripola Dr. I Dougherty Rd.iMonlel-ey Dr . Study Intersection
~il,;t1 o Proiec: Site Drivcw~y
~Traffic Signal
-1 ..L Stop Sign
i~tt .. --Fulure Roadway
....~Undcr No Project -
Conditions
--
NORTH
I-,lc~ ;00 ~-:.11("
~ P'"t~
,....
BP.QDER BLve.
GLEASON DR,
0 P"
Q; 25
c
'5 <
0
Z :! cj
a: ~ a:
<
4:
'" CENTRAJ. ;'K'IIY ~
l!]llJIW
'"
;(
8 ~
SLve ~
Cl
OWEIIB OR
"".
....
I City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
I Short Term Cumulative (2015) Plus Project Conditions
Turning MovementVo\umes
lntcrsccuon I
Dougncrty RdJArnado,'Vly Blvd.
~
_N
"'-'
~i
'" .
;,-
35~ (3"5'...;1 .., t
502 i401!~ ~&t
~.C"":
~~
t"i~
....
'ntenection 2
Dovg~.rty Rd.lSeldct'C U'-
~
fi~~
u~'!e
~~,,- ,.
ofI.. o....~,
'<,,'i.
~+....
lnulf.r.ectlon 3
Dovghe"f Rd.iS.en" Ln.
,....
-;-
.......~
~:;:.~ ~_ 1 I 130j
cn.('.j:- ___ 5 (61
~'.", ,,51:2.01
40 (101)...JI .... "
2 (6i_ S-';-c'
51 (106i~ !;:...~~
/:liclli
......
:-
IntersctUQn 9
H.c,end. DrJDublin BI,d,
Imcn:ccrion 6
Hcpy;>rd Rd.JEB \.580 Oli.lUmp
....
I!:-~.
tn'C.
~\\l
~I.O.
\ ~t.
Inccrsecuon 7
Dublin Blvd.iSc.rieu Dl:
eae (682)...;1
1.51$ (1.095;-~
/
j"
~i
~.,J.
~
""111
,
,
:_1.~31 12.577)
:,,7u(701
16116/_4,,\ r"
~.247 (1.720)-+;=ii;'
49 1601' ~~
--
cr....
::
=<<:-
"'...'"
"'.......
~-'"
~~- "-'1& {27j
M C>>~ "4-1,323 r8S7i
,;, r.. r6M 1298j ,
162 (250)...JI .. "
4S0(1.2a~\_1.!..!...
B6(4Sl~}*'\. M~~
!!?e~
<<>N-
lD.:;O
"><lH'l
Incer>ccrion II
Dougher')' Rd.lVcnCl,n Dr.
'"
<:r.
~
Inlersectlon 13
Dovglo~rty Rd.lS. M~rioos. Dr,
lntcncction 12
Dougherty Rd.lN. Maripo~ Dr
Docs not c'C.iSt with pl"Olcct
g
:::
:;-f
~..,
'fiN
~+
331201...! ~.
66(38)" :3";'
-i1
~:::
E\1l
l"l'"
.II,
24 (151" '!l.t
~:A
-'"
" .
I =-
....
S
~
D'VO
CT
O\o.;ENS DR:
Incersecuon 4
DO"l:hcrlr RdiD,,!>'''' Blvd.
:;;
-.-.-
1;::cc I
~~; "\0-327 fJOi'ij
~C'>i~ 1.421 il.135)
~J . ,:"278 (650)
164 (226).,j~, ~,.,.
eeG (1, 15s~"""'I~~G;
39i i535}~le~;:.
~ifS&1
N.
~ ~<6 t.l) /..tqc{
Figure
\0
Jl"lter-s(:ctlOI,S
Dougherty RdJINB ,.500 Off.
~
i.~
~5
#'+
/
Int~rscclion 9 lncerstx:non 10
Haciendo DtJWS '.580 Off.i'.,mr H.>cicnd. Dr.lEB 1.590 Off.?',mp
"~~.
~~ 1"_31, ;489,
YffF'"''
-~
~~
5;'"
_;::i
'",
Intcrsc::uon I...
Dougherty Rd.fMMtcrcy Dr.
p,
Ill.
:=.
-'"
t=.:
N"
kIT
24 (1.)~ +
;:;
'"
~
on
;:
e~~nE~ SPiO
GLEASON OR,
a:
'"
~
!Ii
~
C!:NTPAl ::I~Nr
81
LEGEND
. Study Inceneccion
o Project Site Driveway
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX)PM Peak Houl'Volume
. u - FutlJre RoadwllY
~ Right tum volumes don't
go d1rough inlenl!t:tion
......
NORTH
N:f: !~j }:Jth:'
~
::i
'"
;l
:!;
<:
~
g
~~':j 'b ~qq,
City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
Long Term Cumulative (2025) Conditions Turning Movement Volumes
Figure
II
I In'~r!croon I
Dougherty Rd.lAm,dor Vly, Illvd,
:;;
NN
N-
It';-_
N~S. ... 5 (27\
~ ~ ~ '::25 (270',
..j oj. io.. ",:5 {1sa;
380 i:i50IJ ;0, T,.... .
~5 i10r-+- --
5;"7 {395}~ ~:~
~~
l'l~l<l
'"
Intersection 6
Hopy;>rd RdiEElI.SSG Ofl.il.)mp
,. ~
~~-
;t~
l!l .
:''t
ImcrscCtion 2
Dougherty Rd lSc-arlett Dr,
~-
:.'i:!!
~R;
. ti,y.~
<v Q'''',}
r..a~"',"""
'!:'..,.'"
't
Incenection 3
Dougherty RelSierr. In.
-~
~~l\.. 12(32)
_N_ ....5 f6i
~;io..\r5:(111):
41 (i~~(~I~1L
51 [l06;, ~!~
"'~'"
"'-0
NN-
III
'"
Intenettion 8
Hacienda Or JO\lbhn Blvd.
~
~~;;;-
!:i....c;
I!: ~,:: \"1(;4 (34)
"',';'i" -1.65411,1341
~ T .. ,ri~O Ir175}
5iJ~~1~5~~{ ~1l.
290(491)-" I~~
-.".;
:n~~
Im,erseOJon 7
Dublin BlvdJ5<:>r1ett 01'.
-""
c:g;e,
"f1--.
~::!\~ :U61 (742;
"I";"~ ;_1.967 (2,257)
I" ",~,.73 \75)
20170IJI~.("
2.104 (1.830)-+1d-J.:;;
52 f651'"'1ti ('001-,,-
. '-;1;-
.~ ;
Intonection /2
Deugher{)' P-d./N. MaripoSOl Dr.
lntenccoen 13
Dougherty Rd./S, Mariposa Dr.
~~
~~
;.,~
2e(13iJ!~
16 (9)" ~8
~~
;:!
~
Inters",oon II
Dougher{)' RdJ\lcntutil Dr.
;
~
~o,
~~
"'...;
....,
& {21J ~i
1 (1)" ~&.
~
N
'"
....
~
~~
"'N
6.
3 (6)J .f..
3 (6i1 ~g
M'ci.
e.
e.
:-
Relocatod
/Camp Parks
A'" Access
8T~ ST
DueLlN BLve
CT.
JOHNSON OR
o;r/EN:; OR
Imencctlon 4
Dou~herty Rd./Dublin !INd.
10
'"
......,
~i--
!:.IT.~
lac;: )o_IG2(62i
-N<D +-1.650 (I.F.,OI
#". ,,", ~-~14 i1<,1)
175 1~641J _i!
:.228 11.~501- ~~ i?
3941,eOI' _,,:":-
~;:-~
~
lntf:t"Sc:c.bon 9
Haciondol Dt.lWB 1-580 Off.f\.,m
~'@.
j.-,,, "'"
,a'; f.tr\::U9Q 0.3051
001>
...'"
"'-
to-i~
~
-.r.t"":
.nrenection 14
Dougheny Rd.iJ1onterey Dr,
'"
en
::.
~
e"';
~+
o \0,-" ~i
8 (1,:j4( a.~
~ti
N
'"
:3
BROOE~ 8LvD.
GLEASOh OR.
o
a:
o
~
~
~
~
~
~
CENTRAl. ~K\'\lY
B
lntcrsectlon S
Dougl"'l'tf P.d.IWB \-580 Of i.!'..,...
t...~
~~j
* 7 ~-5a9 rSGS'
,.; ~ ,,.565 i420':
~
I~S
~~
-:~
Intcr~ectlor. 10
HOClcnd. Dr jEB I-S80 On.il.)mp
~5l
oI>~
gci
;:'~
;:;C'i
If
II
:If
~~
N-
-J.
~~:
,..
LEGEND
. Study Intersection
o Project Site Driveway
XX AM Peak HourVolumc
(XX)PM Peak HourVolume
., - - Future Roadway
'.. Right turn volumes don't
go through intersection
.-.
NORTH
t;c.; :0 :.,:u~
IJi!'!'
...
~
-
~..
~
o
a:
~
:s
~
"
~
IPI!Irr
"'"
.....
~
"""
""'"
3 4-0"b y.q r
\ City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Vista Housing Development
I LongTerm Cumulative (2025) Conditions Lane Configurations and
Traffic Controls
Figu re
12
I inccrsocrion j
Dougheny ~d.lAnmlor VI)", Blvd.
''''CCI"$C\:'tiO(l;;
[)owthCI'l)' Rd.^>'VB 1-560 Olf'Ram
4H l.. t- SPLIT
S?LIl-4 ~\H~
~
lnU1nc."Crion 2
Dougherty RdJScorlett Dr.
g
~H\lJ..
f'(~
~ttt~
;:
lntenee.rion 6
liQPy.,rd fl.dJEB 1.580 Off.fl.an,p
"'
l!I
JUt
Intersection 7
Dublin Blvd15carlctt Dr.
~ Vo'8""P
-
-
~ L.l ;=
J 'i~
-.
-
-
""""\
,,'
';>-
t tt-'
"'
w
ff
Intcrs~r.tion I (
Dou~hel"'tr Rd.NDotuf"a Dr.
Im.c~n(."CtfQn 12 I
Dougherty Rd.lN. Mariposo Dr,
Will not I""S: ...Ith prole<:t
~:il., I 11
~
---1\'ittt
'.
..
-
...
'n<ersecoon 3
DOUl\heny Rd./Sicrr.,ln,
4Hl :=
J 'j ttt--
-+-
"
Intenen;on S
HaCIenda OrJDubhn Blvd.
~
-
-
)~Hll.. ~
~ 'j.l'itttr
-
-
-
(j\"HLA"~
Intersccoon 13
Dougherty RdlS. t1arrpo," Dr.
~
ll'ittt
BLVD
C1,
Olt";'ENS Ort
Intersoctlon "
Dougherty Rd.lDublin Blvd,
'L...
-
-
-
E
'"
."
tl:
)H+. ~
IC.
Hir
tt
'~
4~H~~
~ ~i1~tttii'"
-
-
-
OVE;lI.,A.t)~
Intcf!.tction 9
H""moo Dr.M'6 '-580 Ofl.R>m
Intenectjon 10
Hacienda Dr!EB I.sao Off.Ramp
w
e
~.
ii:
""
inttrsc:c;uon 1<1-
Dougt.erlY Rd)Mon,.,.oy Dr
LEGEND
. StlJdJllnt~rSeclion
o Project Site Drivoway
~Traffic Signal
.... Stop Sign
....poUnder No Proiect
Condition~
~H
4 ~\t...t
,""~ i I
~
.-..
NORTH
t..;.:, ~ !f; ;;." !.f:
~
eROOE~ BlVO.
G~EASo.~ OFt
a
0:
C
<5
~
~
.r
~
~
r.;,
~
CSNfP.AJ,.. ?KV'\'Y.
~
~
V>
'n
~
o
a:
8
City of Dublin - Traffic Study for Arroyo Visca Housing Development:
Long Term Cumulative (2025) Plus Project Conditions
Turning Movement Volumes
3'-'1- i ov t+:'/ 'l
Figure
13
IntC,.s~ctlon I
Dougnc...,y Rd.fAmador Vly. Blvd,
_19"
.,,,,,
....-
l,l)"-_l
~~ e i ~ 5 Q7i
~ ~;= 1"::25 ~3701
~.I". rZ5i1851
3~1~'I;;'Tr--
1S (10)......... _1.._
em /4D6!"I:E ~8
~-a:::.
0; ::'8
"';1\'"
co
i Inlcncction 6
Hopyard I"<.d.lEB 1-580 Of(.!\2.mp
.~~
JJJlli.
9;:~ (~67:J .. ,"
1 ,51\<< ,11()o:1,,! ~~
,- <'l
.~~
~.,
~'!i.
1nterse<non II
Doul.hef<Y Rd,Ncntun Dr,
~
Et~
....<-<.
.<Ii;
24 (15i" ~i
'g'"
I-~
tro--cL
~
:.
1i7.00ITlI; - 4.7/08 - OM
Intersection 7
Dublin BlvdJScarlen. Or.
-<>
-"'-
oco,,",.
..q--.
;;~~ :lL,:.I61 (742)
.... ~:- :.....1.968 (1.269)
F T...... ,.-13 ~75)
~ 2D (7')J'j~}r'"
~.105 <1 ,&~Ol-i ",;;;n
$2(65)"'.... -.....
I::'~;:-
~ ...
IntersCtlion 12
Dougherty I\d.lN. Mariposa Or.
Does not exist with project
Intersection 3
Dougtlcrty P.d./SierrJ Ln.
~
fJi-
-..!;:!
;;;~~ \:...1213:)
-<v_ -S161
~t'.. F53!113\
41 11131-" "i~
2 18)-+ i \...
51I'06J"I~~.~
"'-8
..i-
'"
Intersection S
H.ciend3 Dr.iDublin Blvd,
N'S_
lr.~M
'" -
~'"
Ie ~.::: "-1tl~ (:loll
M,";:" -1,65" (1,139)
. t.... F71D i575;
171 (2551-"!"1~ f
569 !1.~3"1-+i;c;::-=
293 (492)1 i;5.~;;
'_"'TO
f'o.tOv
1f)~""
In,cr..cuon 13
Dougherty Rd./5. M>rie<>>o DI.
o
~
-....
~~
"'"
~,
33 (201...... !It
66138)-~ eg
~~
N
en
::}
.:;
It'
R8lor;ated
--" Camp Paries
/ Access
JC>>1N50N DR.
8ni$~.
.........
.."'_ ___...._ _.._........ "4_."_""
DUBLIN ewe
CT,
oweNS D~
Interseuion <4
DougherTy Rd.lDublin Blvd,
o
on
r::::;
"'--
~- tS ~
~~;::-I\:...'CZ(7~1_ '
...Nct' .....'.65("11,c70)
.#T~ r324(780)
1i5(2iJ4i_"'i!li:!
1.22t: (1 4S0,-+''lI: CD h
39-4 iS80i -, i;a;.~
'R~
"I
Imer.ectJon 9
H.c,en<!a DriWS 1.580 0.-1\.".,
.~~
~~I
-"- ~3f,0 (4g0)
oM', r1 ,690: 1.~051
Intersectlon I ~
Dou@herly Rd.!Mont.rey Dr.
~
-;.;
'::'0",
"''''
.-..
24115i--.. i
, ~:!
~
M
~.
fjf\(lDER 2LVO.
GLEASON OR
c
'"
~
~
:;;
ri
o
-<
~
'"
iJ
!
CENT RAt PKW,'
8
Intersection 5
Do~l!I'tY M!W8 I-sao Off-Ram
....
rnl
~ \:...5~9 (901)
..~~
N_
SJ~
~"
jnter~cction 10
H.c;cncb D.-./EB 1.580 Off.R.mo
Ifll
II"
...
'.45(1(8801-" I!
1.140(600", i~
~-
~,~
..
LEGEND
. Swdy Interscction
o Project Sitc DrlVcW3Y
XX AM Peak Houl'Volumc
(XX)PM Peak HourVolumc
-... Future Rc:\dw.oy
... Right wrn volumes dOl'l't
go through interscction
iIIII'
..
..-..
NO Jl, T H
~io: :~I S',gi~
..
~
~.
~-
~
ci
'"
if
~
<
iJl
;:>
W"
---
"'
-
""
3*~l7b L-t'1 '6
Table II: Peak Hour Intersection levels of Sel"Vice -Existing Conditions
liD I A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak H9ur
Signalized Intersec:ti.on VIC LOS vIe LOS i
f-r ' Dougnerty P.oad/.Amador Valle)' Boulevard I .0.75 C .0:74 C I
2 Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive 0.58 A .0.55 A
3 Dougherty Road/Park Sierra .0.66. 8 .0.62 B
Dougnerty Road/Dublin Boulevard I .0.67 B .0.98 E
4 ---~._-- ~'..,.--'----._,.. --'-'--- ----
With City's Capitollmprovemen( Project 0.48 A 0:63 8
,
5 I Dougherty RoadJWestbound '-S8D off.ramp I 0.58 A I .0.56 A
6 HoprardP..oad/Eastbound 1-58.0 off.ramp O;n C .0.7/ C
7 Dublin Boulllvard/Scarlett Drive I 0.20 A .0.39 A
8 Hacienda Drive/DubUn Boulevard 0.28 A O.S4- A
9 Hacienda DrivelWestbound 1-580 offcramp 0.34 A .0;44 A
1.0 Hacienda Dr/Ve/Eastl7ound I-Sse ofT-ramp .0.53 A 0.55 A
A.M. Peak Hour P;M. Peak Hour
ID Untlina/ized Intersection
Deloy LOS Delay LOS
II DQugherty RoadNentura Drille - .0.2:(42.5) A (E) 0..0 (2:/.6) A(C)
12 Doughllrty Road/N. Mariposa Drive 0.1 (27.7) A (D) 0.1(1'1.5) ACe)
i3 Dougherty RoadlS. Mariposa Drive 1.2(62.8) A (F) 0.2(22) A{e)
! 14 Dougherty Road/Monterey Drive 0.1 (I 8.4) A (C) 0.1(12.2) A (8)
Notes: LOS'" Level o( ServIce
V I C = Volume-to.eapa.dty ratio 'for overall sIgnalized intersection
X (X) = Intersection level ofservlCe (Level of service (or the minor approach)
XX (XX) = Average defayiil secoJ1ds per vehIcle overall one.way st9p.controlled
(unsignallzed) intersection (Dela)' in seconds per vehicle to minor approach}
Bold -values indicate unacceptable l..OS conditions .
LThe existing a.m. level of service is worse than indicated due to underserved demand resulting {rom
southbound traffic congestion.
""
3~~ Vb Lt-Cf't
I Land Use P!,Jly A.M. Peak Hour P,M; Peak Hour
(lTE Code) Size Unit Total Trip Itl:Out Trip In:Out
Ailtc Rate .' In Out Total Rate 'i' In Out Total
i'O
Lo:w Rise Apartment 58 d.u. , 1.8 684 0.61 21:79 7 28 35 0.72 65:35 27 15 42
(221)'
Rental TOWllhouse 72 d.u. 10,5 75.6 0.70 33:67 17 34 SI 10.72 51:49 26 'is 51
(22'1)2
Senior Houslng- 5.0 d.ll. 3.48 17-4 0.08 4S:SS 2 2 -I 0.11 61:39 3 2 5
Attached (IS2)
Residential
Condominium' 198 d..u. 5.79 1,147 0.45 17:83 IS 74 89' 0.53 67.:33 71 35. 104
Townhouse (230)1
I Sub Total Residelltilll 1.,162 41 138 179 127 77 204
Trips
Day Care Center (565). 48 stUl 4.48 21S 0.80 53:'17 20 18 38 0,82 47:53 18 21 39
Internalization of pay I
Care Center Trips -lOB .10 .9 -19 -9 -10 -19
(50% assumed)
Net Day Care Trips 107 10 9 19 9 It 20
I Total Project Trips 2,868 I 51 147 19B I U6 88 224
Tabl~ III: Project Trip Generation
Hot.es: d.u. '" DweUlng Units
UIl. = Students/Children
I Rates developed from ITE equations
1Daily equation for code 221 was used to. estimate the. daily trips for code 224
Source: Institute olTr;!,nsportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (7th Edition. 2003)
I'
jijl
..
..
iij,>.~
..
..
.
..
lfif
..
...
-
1m.~
"'"
-
-'
The study assumes 50 percent internalization of daycare center trips to accountfor home~based
trips made internally within the project site be~een the residences and daycare center. The other
50 percent of the day care trips are expected to originate externally.
.,..
....
...
II'
M'
"3 4~ ~ L-fq 1s',
Table IV: Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service - Existing Plus ProjeCt Conditions
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
10 Signalized fntenectlon
VIC LOS vIe LOS
I Dougherty Road I Amador Valley Boulevard 0.76 C 0.75 C
2 Dougherty Road I Scarlett Drive 0.62 B 0.61 B
3 Dougherty Road J Park Sierra 0.68 B I 0.6-4 8
4 Dougherty R,oad / Dublin Boulevard' 0.49 B 0.63 B
I 5 Dougherty R.oad I Westbound 1-580 off.ramp 0.59 A 0.56 A
6 H opyard Road I Eastbound I-S80 off-ramp 0.72 C 0.71 C
I 7 Dublin Boulevard I Scarlett Drive I 0.21 A 0.40 A
i 8 Hacienda Drive I Dublin Boulevard 0.26 A 0.51 A
,
9 Hacienda Drive I Westbound 1.580 off-ramp 0.3-4 A 0.+1 A
, 10 I Hacienda Drive I Eastbound '-580 off. ramp A
I 0.53 0.53 A
A.M. PeaK Hour P.M. Pedk.Hour
ID UnsJina/ized Intersection
Delay L.OS OelQy LOS
II Dougherty Road I Venrun Drive1 0.,2(19.2) A(C) 0.1 (l2.6) A (B)
11 Dougherty !l.o:ld I N, Mariposa Drivel - . I - ,
13 Dougherty Road I S. Mariposa Drjve~ 3.7 (91.4) A (F) 0.8 (23.2) A (C)
14 DOllgherty !l.oad / Monterey Drive< 0.2(20.6) . A (C) 0.1(12.5) A (8)
Notes: LOS = Level of ServIce
V , C = Volume-to-capatity ratio for overailsignallzed Interse.ction
X (Xl = Intersection level 01 s~i'Vice(l-evel o/service for the minor approach)
XX (X.X) ::: Averolie delay in. seconds per venide overail one-way stClp-conuolled
(unsignalized) intersection (Delay in seconds per vehicle to minor approach)
Bold values indicate unacceptable LOS conditions
'City's elP Intersection Improvement project is assumed to be complete by the time the Project Is
developed
2R.econfigured driveway under project conditions
llntersection does not exist with project
4ji
~
-...
.llII
-
~-
-;.""",.
...
3l{G tt[) ~0(
~n
-
d~
..
V:'
.
II!
'"
III'
II!
""
-
liI"
Table V: Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service -Short Term Cumulative
Conditions
i , ! A.M. Peak Hour. P.M. Peak HOllr
I '0 ! Sign"lit.ed Intersection
I VIC LOS VIC LOS
I I Dougherty Road I Amador Valley Boulevard 1.11 F 1..00 F
2 Dougherty Road I Scarlctt Drive 0.82 D 0.61 B
3 : Dougherty Road I Park Sierra 0.71 C 0.49 A
4 Dougherty Road I Dublin Soulevard 0.79 C 0.87 D
5 I Dougherty Road I Westbound 1'580 off-ramp 0.79 C 0.68 B
6 Hopyard Road I Ea$tbound I-SBQ off-ramp .0.86 D 0.83 D
7 Dublin I!oulevard lScarlett.Drive 0.36 A 0.59 A
8 Hacienda Drive I Dublin' Boulevard 0.70 B 0.68 .8
9 I Hacienda Drive IWes~ound 1.580 off-ramp 0.99 E 0.82 D
10 I Hacienda Drivel Eastbound I,S80. off.ramp 0.90 D 0.71 C
-I AM. Pea.k Hour P,M."oak'Hour
ID Ullsign"llud. 'ntersection
Delay LOS Delay LOS
II Dougherty Road I Ventura Drive 1.5(120+) A(F) 0.1(120+) A(F)
12 Dougherty Rand I N. Mariposa Drive OS( 120+) A(F) 0.5(120+) A{F)
13 i Dougherty P.oad I S. Mariposa Drive 17.9( 120+) A(F) 1.6( I '20+) A(F) I
14 I Dougherty Road I Monterey Drive 0.1 (26.4) A(D) 0.2(16.7) Ate) i
I.
"""
..
....
-
~
~
Notes: LOS = Level of Service
V I C = Volume-to-capacity ratio for overall signalized inter$enion
X (Xl = Intersection level of service (Level of ~ervice for the minor approach)
X.K(XX) = Average delay in seconds per vehicle overal! one-way' stop-controlled
()Jnsignalized) intersection (Delay in second$ per vehicle to minor approach)
Bold values indicate unacceptable LOS conditions
...
..
..
3~1.;rb tf.q~
'Table VI: Peak Hour Intersection levels of Service - Short Term Cumulative Plus
Project Conditions
i 10 I A.M. Peak Hour I P.M. Peak Hour
Signalized In~eTIectjon vie LOS vIe LOS
j
I I Dougherty Road { Amador Valley Boulevard 1.11 F 1 1.01 F
2 Dougherty Road { Scarlett Drive 0.82 D I 0.63 A
,
, i Dougherty Road I Park Sierra
3 0.7/ C 0.50 A I
" Dougherty Road { Dublin Boulevard 0.80 C 0.B7 D !
5 Dougherty Road! Westbound 1.580 off-ramp 0.81 D 0.68 B I
6 HOPl'lird Road { Eastbound I-SaD off-ramp 0.86 D 0.68 B
7 DubfinBoulevard I Scarlett. Drive 0.36 A 0.60 A
8 Hacienda Drive I Dublin Boulevard 0.70. B I 0.68 B
9 I Hacienda Drive I Westbound I.S80 off-ramp 0.99 E I 0,82 D i
10 Hacienda Drl;e I Eastbound 1-580 off-ramp 0.90 D I 0.71 C
I A.M. Peal< Hour I P.M. Peak Hour
10 Unslgnolized Intersection ...".- J
Delay LOS Delay (,05
II Dougherty Road I Ventura Drivel 0.2(28.8) A(D) 0.1 (16.9) A(C)
12 Dougherty Road ( N. Mariposa Drivel . . I - -
I Dougherty Road I S. MariPos:_Drlv:..__--1 S7.5( 1.20+) F(F) 1/2.1(120+) B(F)
13 I ------
I With va(ficsignaJs 7.4 A I 5.0 A
14 Dougherty Road! Monterey Drivel 0;2(30.7) A(D) I 0.1(17:2) A(e)
OIl
-
...
..
!IIIIl
'..
...
Notes:. LOS:: Level of Service
V Ie:: Volume-to,capacity ratlo for overall signalized intersection
X (Xl:: Intersection level of service (Level of service for the minor approach)
XX (XX) = Average delay In seconds per vehicle overall one,way step-controlled
(unslgnali2.ed) intersection (Delay In seconds per vehicle. to minor approach)
Bold values Indiane .unacceptable LOS conditions
Il\econfigured driveway under project conditions
11ntersection does not (l){lst with projeCt
3Y.1~ c.tCfi
Table VII: Peak Houl" Intersection Levels of Set'Vice . Long Term Cumulative
Conditions
.A.M. Peak Hour j P.fYI. Peok.Hour
10 SignQI~edlntl!1"Section
vie LOS 1 vie Los
I
I
Dougherty Road J Amador Valley Boulevard i
I 0.91 E 0.95 E
2 Dougherty Road I SearlettDrive 0.57 A 0.73 C I
I
3 Dougherty Road I Park Sierra 0.70 8 0.52 A
4 Dougherty Road I Dublin Boulevard 0.80 C i 0.94 E
i 5 Dougherty Road / Westbound (.SaOoff-ramp 0.55 A 0.78 C
,
I 6 Hopyard Road! Eastbound 1.580 off-ramp 0.B7 D 0.88 0
,
I 7 Dublin Boulevard I Scarlett Drive 0.78 C I 0.8t 0
8 Hacienda Drive I Dublin Boulevard 0.87 . D j 0.82
0
9 I Hacienda Drive I Westbound 1.580 off.ra~p 0.88 D I 0~75 C
10 Hacienda. Drive.! Eastbound 1-580 off. ramp O.BI D I 0.71 C
A.M. Peak ';our ! P.M. Peak Hou,
10 I Unsignalized Intersection I
OelCJY LOS Deloy LOS
II I Dougherty Road I Ventura .Drive I 0.3(120+) A(F) 0.0(35.6) A(E)
12 I Dougherty Road I N. Mariposa Drive I 0.1 (68.3) A(F) 0.1(31.8) A(D)
Dougherty Road I S. Mariposa Drive 3.1(1.20+) A(F) O.3{38.4) A(E)
13 -- c---.."---.-.------r-.
With traffIC s;fnals 2.3 A 1.3 A
14 Dougherty Road I Monterey Drive, 0.1 (30.0) A(D) 0.2(16.8) A(C)
..
Notes: LOS = Level of ~rvlce
V I C = V olume.-to-capacIIY ratio for overall ,slgnali~edintllrsection
X (X) :;i Intersection level 01 seNice (Level of seNice for the minor approach)
X.x (X.x) = AlierOlge de!ayin seconds per vehicle overall one-way stop-'controlled
(unsignalizcd) intllne.ctlon (f:)elay in se,conds per vehicle to minor approach)
80ld values indlcate unacl:epcable LOS conditions
,
: f
.
.'
.'
.,,,
...
."
""
-
"""
-
-
-
~
-
..,
-
-
-
#>1
.d
\4!1li
~ t.f~ ~b yoti
Table VIII: Peale Hour Inters~ction Levels of Service. Long Term C;umulative Plus
Project Conditions
A.M. Peak HOllr P.M. Peak Hour
ID Signalized .Interseetion
VIC LOS VIC LOS
I Dougherty Road I Amador Valley Boulevard 0.91 E 0.96 E
2 Dougherty Road 1 Scarlett Drive 0.58 A 0.75 C
3 Dougherty R.oad I Park Sierra 0.71 C 0.53 A
4 Dougherty Road I Dublin Boulevard 0.81 D 0.95 E
5 Dougherty R.oad I Westbound 1.580 off.ramp 0.55 B 0.79 C
6 Hopyard Road I Eastbound 1.580 off-ramp ,
0.87 0 0.B8 0
7 Dublin Boulevard I Scarlett Drive 0.78 C 0.81 D
8 Hacienda Drive I Dublin Boulevard 0.87 D 0.82 D
9 Hacienda Drive I Westbound I-sao off-ramp I O'aa D I 0.75 C ,
!
,
10 Hacienda Drive I Eastbound ).580 off.ramp 0.81 ' D 0.72 C I
I ,
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
10 UnsignaliJed Intersection
Delay LOS Delay LOS
II Dougherty !toad I VellwraDrive' 0.1(27.8) A(D) 0.1(16.8.) A{C)
12 I Dougherty Road tN. Mariposa Drive2 / . . . .
I Dougherty Road I S. MariPosa Drive' I 7.1(120+) A(F) I.O{J,8.8) . ACE)
I 13 ----_..---.-~- ! -~---~~-..,-,-
! I With t<a(ficsignors ! 5.5 A 4.5. A
I 14 Doughert)rRoad I Monterey Drive' 0.1(19,2) A{C) 0.1 (13.8) A(B)
Notes; LOS:= Level of Service
V I C := Volume-to.capacity ratio for overall signaiiled Intersection
X (X) = InterseCtIon level of service (Level of service {or the minor approach)
X.X . (XX) = Average delay In. seconds per vehicle overall one.way stop-controlled
(unsignalized) intersection (Delay in seconds per vehicle to minor approach)
Bold val.ues indicate unacceptable .lOS conditions
IRelionfigured driveway l.inderprolect conditions: intersection limited to right-in/right-outwith the project.
llnterseCtioll does not exist with project
3...f~ ob LP?f.
Table IX:
I
I N
Long Term Cumulative (2030) Conditions Freeway Segment Analysis
I I Year 2030 (No Project) I '(ear 2030 with Project
I C P /ty i AMP k PM P k I AMP k PM P ok
..
00 ones a DC .eo eo eo e
i J Vol. LOS Vol. LOS Vol. LOS Vol. LOS
;
1.580. 1.680 to Dougherty R.oad/Hopyard Road
Eastbound " 9.100 i 9.963 F 10.27-4 F I 9.9&3 F 10.274 F
Westbound I 5 11.500 11.:413 E 11.569 F 111.231 E 1/.576 F
/.580. Dougherty Road to Hacienda Drive
Eastbound ! 60f0 aux. ! 14.800 ! 11.6/8 D 11.129 D 111.627 D 1l.l31 D !
I .
Wenbound I -4+ aux. 10.200 110.316 F 10,401 F ! 10.326 F /0.403 F 1
,.580, Hacienda Drive to Tassajara Road
, Eastbound 5 , 11.500 9.634 D 11.646 F 9.643 D 11.647 F
Weitbound 4+ aux. I 1 0~200 111.201 F 10.<<6 F 11.20 I F 10.448 F
'-58.0. Tassitjara Road to Fallon Road
Eastbound 40+ aux. 10.100 8.476 D 10.248 F I 8,483 D 10.249 F
Weitbound 4+ aux. 10.200 1l.848 D 8.129 D I 8.848 D 8.132 D
1-580, Fallon Road to Airway Boulevard
Eas.tbound 40f0aux. 10.200 7.953 D 10.7/5 F 7.959 D 10.7/6 f
Westbound 4+aux. 10.200 8.735 D 7,753 0 8.735 D 7.756 D
1,680. Alcosta Boulc"3rd to 1.5S0
Northbound 4 9.200 6.400 C 7.801 D 6.400 C 7.802 D
Southbound 4 9.200 9.519 F 8.839 E 9.519 F 8.846 E
J.6S0. South of.I-580 .
i Northbound 3 6.900 5.856 D 6.992 F 5.856 D 6.991 F
I Southbound 3+aux. 7,900 7.559 E 7.052 E 7.S61 E 7.053 E
SR.84. South of 1.580
! Northbound 2 4.000 2.842 D 2.944 D I 2.842 D 2.944 0
I Southbound 2 4.000 2.636 C 3.252 D I 2.636 C 3.152 0
I
fL
.'
...'
..
..
-
tVi
..
~.
'l!llIP
-}
Source: 2000 Highway Capacity !'>'1onua/. Chapter 23. Exhibit23.2. L05 Criteria for Basic Freeway Segments Maximum
Service Flow Rate (or freeway $egments::'2.300 vehicles/hrllane. aux. ::Auxiliary Lane
. If number of lanes on freeway segment= N+a.ux.. capacity of segment= (N"'2300+ I OOO} vehicleslhr
For SR.S-4, Exhibit 21.2. LOS Crlt,eria for Multilane Highways (2000 HCM) was used assuming a capacity of
2.000 vehicles/hrllane
IlIIlrIl!'
~\1
\I!Il".i
.
3"tt1tA&{) LVr~
Table X: Year 2015 and Year 2030 PM Peak Hour MTS Arterial Levels of Service
.. Year 20/5 No Year 2015 plus I Year 203.0 No Year 2030 -plus
OJ ~ Project Project ~ Project Project
:: v 'U
Location \)
""" Cl 0
'-. Q. I P.M. I vie LOS Q, P.M.
0 0.3 II
:jI: Peak U Peak
Volume Volume
Oubl~n Boulevard
2.157 0.72 C 2.293 0.76 C 2.293 0.76 e
-..--
II 0.00 A 13 0.00 A 15 0.01 A
2.271 0,76 C 0.81 0 2.431 0.81 0
-lII- 0.07 A 0.13 A 387 0.13 A
1.862 0.62 8 1.864 0.62 II 3.059 1.02 3.061 1.02 F
1.360 0.45 A I 1.360 0~045 A '2.869 0.96 2.869 .0.96 E
3.0045 1.02 F I 3.062 1.02 F
3.039.--t:Oi"Fi-i<H3 -
1.01 F
975 0.2.4 A. ''In 0.24 A 2.007 0.50 A 2.009 0.50 A
.....;--_.- ~------....-
961 0.24 A 964 0.24 A 1.652 0.41 A 1.655 0.41 A
1.022 0.34 A I,Oli 0.34 A 1.742 0;58 A 1.742 0.58 A
--......----..-- ------
701 0.23 A 701 0.23 A 1.058 0.35 A 1.058 0.35 A
932 0.31 A 932 0.31 A 1.669 0.56 A \,669 0.56 A
0,16 A --....---..--.--..- -----.......-- ....--------..
471 472 0.16 A n9 0.24 A 730 0.24 A
J,911 0.64 B 1.91' OM 8 1.792 0.60 ll' 1.792 0.60 B
C.).; .- 1.3Q()
1.028 0.34 A 1.028 ,A 1.300 0.43 A 0;43 A
....
2.965 0.74 C 2.986 0.75 C 2.965 0.704 C 2.986 0.75 C
5ovthbound 2.00) 0.50 A 2.017 0.50 A 1.120 0,53 A 2.134 0.53 A
'<Mil
.'"
-~
3 L.-ft'f 10 ~ L.t q i
Table XI: Short Term Cumulative (20 I 5) Conditions Freeway Analysis
I Cop,,,", l Year 2015 (No Project) YeoT 10/5 witb Project
No of Lanes A.M. Peak P.M. Peak A.M. Peok P.M. Peak
Vol. LOS Vol. LOS Vol. LOS Vol. LOS
'-580. East of 1-680
Eastbound " 8.000 I 5,089' C 8.230 F 1_~~~_._ C 8.230 F
-_. - -.--
Westbound 5 10.000 11,\69 F 5,879 C I 11.185 F 5.886 C
I-S8D, Doughe~ Road to Hacienda Drive
Eastbound I 6'" aux. ,13;000 6.365
f-----j.-
Westbound I 4+ aux. 9.000 I 9.457
I
B 10.854 0 I 6.373 B 10.856 0
----.--..-.------:-i---~~.------
F 5.974 C I 9.457 F 5.975 C
.'
'-S80, Hacienda Drive to Tassajara Road ...
Eastbound 5 10.000 -4,253 S 10.988 ~J-..~'-~: B 10.989 F
..-------
Westbound 4+- ilUX. 9.000 8.391 E 4.293 B i 8.391 E 4.295 B
1-580, Tassajara Road to Fallon R.oad
-.:::.tt:.~~_~~x~ L- 9;~~_ M~__.__~_._ lo.o~--~-'TL.~~-.:....~.....:. I 0.026 _._.~~_~
Westbound 4+ i1UX. I 9.000 10.082 F 4.594 B 10,082 F 4.597 8 I
II.S80, Fallon R.oad to AirwayBQulavard
L_~~scbound__f--~+aux.:.._ 9;000 J-,4.18.~__.!._n 10.135
Westbound 4,+aux. 9.000 I 11.891 F 4.320
,.680, Alcosta Bouleva~d to '-5BO
....
"""
B
4,186 B 10.136
--------
1/.891 F 4.323
F
F
B
~.
o 5.473
D I 5.853 __:..._._.~:.~~~_~
c I 7.2l3 D 50480 C
.'
Northbound 4 8.000
-.:.-_...:-.,..-~ ~-- - ".
Soti~hbourid 4 8,000
1.680, South of 1-580
5,853
7;213
C 7;359
Northbound 3
6.000
7.000
4.041
6.583
c
c
8.272 F I 4.041 C
~-----1'---.-
4.231 C, 6.585 C
8.272
4.232
F
C
""'"
Southbound , 3+aux.
SR.84, .south of 1~580:
Northbound "}.
--.
Southbound2
4;000
.'4.000
2;524
-
2;260
C 1.762
B
C
2.524
2.260
C
C
(,762
-~.;.
2.345
B
C
_.
C 2.345
Source: f 985 I:"hghway Capacity. Manual, Table 3-1. Levels of ServIce for BaSIC Freeway S~cl:lons
M;u.<:i~um Service Row rate for freeway segmelit:S=2000 vehicles/hrllane. <lUX. =Auxifiary Lane
If nurilber of lanes ,on freeway segment=N+aux.,capacity of segment= (N"2000+ 1000) vehic:leslhr
For SR-B4; Table 7~ I, .LOS Criteria for Multilane Highways (1985 HeM) was used assuming a capacity or
2.000 v~hideSlhrlla.ne
Note: Bo!dvalues indicate unacceptable LOS conditions
-
""'"
. ...
-
....,
-
3 EO tJb L-f C,1S
Table XII: Long Term Cumulative (2030) Conditions Freeway Analysis
I I I Y"Dr 2030 (No Project) Year 2030 with Project -1
I "- I Capacity A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
No of Lalles A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Vol. LOS Vol. LOS Vol. LOS Vol. LOS I
I 1
1-580. East of 1-680
~._~.UbO~~~ 4 8.000 6.464 0 9.960 F. t 6.464 0 9,960 F 1
1--" i 5.708 -F-~74--c-ri5:724 -------j
! W.estbound 5 10,000 F 6,681 C I
. I
1'-S80. Dougherty Road [0 Hacienda Drive
~tbound _ ~_~.~~:.._L!!~ 8.016
Westbound 4+ aux. I 9.000 13.864
C
F
12.590
i
E 8.02:.._-=-~~_!- .1
o I 13.864 F 7.067 0 l
7,066
I-S80, Hacienda Drive co Tassajara Road
I Eastbound 5 I 10.000 J 6.520 C 12,027 F l.!.528 C 12,028. F
I Westb;und-....4;~;-1 \1.000 rl2.731-F-'-6:35I-cll2.m-'~-63S3-'--C
! 1-580, Tassajara Road. to Fallon Road
_~~stbou_n. d __ _.~:'~~:.~:.D?O 1~344 ..__~.:~:::'__._~L~.:.::.:._~_ 12.480 '__ F 1
Westbound 4+ aUx. 9.000 14,490 F 6,708 C I 14,490 F 6.711 C
'-580, Fallon Road to Airway Boulevard
Eastbound 4+aux. -'-9.000
we;d,ou;ci' 4+aux. ~G.OOO
1-680. Alcosu BQulevard to 1-580
6.632_._.__.=-~2,9n __:._1. 6.637
15.720 F 6.429 C 1 15.720
c
12.913
F
F
6.432
c
Northbound -4 8.000 . 6.646 D 9.028 F 6, 646 0 9.029 F
~._.;-_._._._. -.---.- .-. -..---.-------.-
SouthbQund 4 8,000 9,591 F 5.'182 ,.. 9.591 F 5,989 C
...
'.680, $ouch o/l-S80
Northbound 3 6.000 3.791 C 10,095 r: 3.791 C 10.095 F
~- ----- .. ------ -._._------~
Southbound 3+3UX. 7.000 .8,683 F '1.5.11 C 8.685 F 4;511 C
SR-84. South oi/.5eO
Northbound 2 4,000 3.753 E 3.198 D 3.753 E 3;198- D
-...........--.---- ----~..-
Southbound 2 4.000 3,549 E 1. 965 D 3;~49 E 2.965 0
So",.ce: 19.B5 Highway Capacity Manual, Table 3.1. levels ot Service for Basic Freeway Sections
Maximum Service Flow ratef;;,r freeway segments=2000 vehiclesfhrlfane. ,aux,=Auxiliary .lane
II numbllr 'of limes on freeway segmenc= N+aulC. capa~ity of segment=' (N~OOO+ 1000) vehicles/hr
Fcir SR-84, Table 7-1, LOS Criteria for Multilane Highways (/985 HCM) was used assuming a capacity of
2.000 vehicles/hr/Jane
Note; 601dvalues indicate unaccepcable LOS conditions
iyil
.,.
351 00 ~'b
Attachment 10
Preliminary Section 404 Delineation
.3.Sc.Bf) t.+C11!
Preliminary Section 404 Delineation
ARROYO VISTA HOUSING PROJECT
DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
Prepared For:
Jerry Haag
2029 University Avenue
Berkeley, California 94704
Contact:
Tom Fraser
fraser@wra-ca.com
Date:
July 2008
HIVlqONMENTAl CONSULTANTS
2169-8 East Francisco Blvd, San Rafael. CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 rei (415) 454-0129 fox infa@wra-ca.com www.wro-ca.com
36~"O 4c(~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................ 1
1.1 Project Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Regulatory Background.. . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL AREAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
3.0 METHODS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
3.1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U.S.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1.1 Wetlands.................................................... 3
3.1.2 Other Waters of the U.S.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
3.2 Difficult Wetland Situations in the Arid West. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
3.3 Areas Exempt from Section 404 Jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.0 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION. .......................................... 7
5.0 RESULTS............................................................. 9
5.1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U.S.. .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1.1 Wetlands.................................................... 9
5.1.2 Other Waters of the U.S.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.0 REFERENCES......................................................... 11
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Area Location Map.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Figure 2. Location of North and West Fields within Project Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Figure 3. Location of Delineation Sample Points within West Field. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A - Preliminary Section 404 Jurisdictional Data Sheets
Appendix B - Representative Photographs of the Project Area
36 ~Ub L1-'1~
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Background
On June 24, 2008, WRA, Inc. (WRA) conducted a routine wetland delineation at the 25-acre
existing Arroyo Vista housing site (Project Area) in Dublin, Alameda County, California, which is
located along Dougherty Road just north of Highway 580 (Figure 1). This delineation was
conducted in order to determine the presence or absence of potential wetlands and waters subject
to federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This report presents the results
of this delineation.
1.2 Regulatory Background
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulatory and permitting authority regarding discharge
of dredged or fill material into "navigable waters of the United States". Section 502(7) of the Clean
Water Act defines navigable waters as "waters of the United States, including territorial seas."
Section 328 of Chapter 33 in the Code of Federal Regulations defines the term "waters of the
United States" as it applies to the jurisdictional limits of the authority of the Corps under the Clean
Water Act. A summary of this definition of "waters of the U.S." in 33 CFR 328.3 includes (1) waters
used for commerce; (2) interstate waters and wetlands; (3) "other waters" such as intrastate lakes,
rivers, streams, and wetlands; (4) impoundments of waters; (5) tributaries to the above waters; (6)
territorial seas; and (7) wetlands adjacent to waters. Therefore, for purposes of determining Corps
jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act, "navigable waters" as defined in the Clean Water Act are
the same as "waters of the U.S." defined in the Code of Federal Regulations above.
The limits of Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 as given in 33 CFR Section 328.4 are as follows:
(a) Territorial seas: three nautical miles in a seaward direction from the baseline; (b) Tidal waters
of the U.S.: high tide line orto the limit of adjacent non-tidal waters; (c) Non-tidal waters of the U.S.:
ordinary high water mark or to the limit of adjacent wetlands; (d) Wetlands: to the limit of the
wetland.
2.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL AREAS
No potential jurisdictional areas were found within the Project Area during the wetland delineation
conducted by WRA on June 24, 2008.
3.0 METHODS
Prior to conducting field surveys, reference materials were reviewed, including the Soil Survey of
Alameda County (USDA 1966), the 2008 USGS 7.5' quadrangle, and aerial photographs of the site.
1
v
---
<p.;..~
~t
Dublin Arroyo Vista Biological Assessment
Alameda Coun California
ENVIRONMENTAl. CONSlJLTANTS
Date: September 2007
Basemap: USGS Tope Quad
Map By: Derek Chao
Filepath: L:\Acad 2000 FileS\16000\16142\gis\
ArcMap\Figl LocMap PS 20070925,mxd
85(, Jb \..{ q 11
A focused evaluation of indicators of wetlands and waters was performed in the Project Area on
June 24, 2008. The methods used in this study to delineate jurisdictional wetlands and waters are
based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual ("Corps Manual";
Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region ("Arid West Supplement"; Corps 2006). The
routine method for wetland delineation described in the Corps Manual was used to identify areas
potentially subject to Corps Section 404 jurisdiction within the Project Area. A general description
of the Project Area, including plant communities present, topography, and land use was also
generated during the delineation visits. The methods for evaluating the presence of wetlands and
Other Waters of the U.S. employed during the site visit are described in detail below.
3.1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U.S.
3.1.1 Wetlands
The Project Area was evaluated for the presence or absence of indicators of the three wetland
parameters described in the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and Arid West
Supplement (Corps 2006).
Section 328.3 of the Federal Code of Regulations defines wetlands as:
"Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances
do. support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. "
EPA, 40 CFR 230.3 and CE, 33 CFR 328.3 (b)
The three parameters used to delineate wetlands are the presence of: (1) hydrophytic vegetation,
(2) wetland hydrology, and (3) hydric soils. According to the Corps Manual, for areas not
considered "problem areas" or "atypical situations":
"....[E]vidence of a minimum of one positive wetland indicator from each parameter
(hydrology, soil, and vegetation) must be found in order to make a positive wetland
determination. "
Data on vegetation, hydrology, and soils collected at sample points during the delineation site visit
were reported on Arid West Supplement data forms. Once an area was determined to be a
potential jurisdictional wetland, its boundaries were delineated using GPS equipment and mapped
on a topographic map. The areas of potential jurisdictional wetlands were measured digitally using
ArcGIS software. Indicators described in the Arid West Supplement were used to make wetland
determinations at each sample point in the Project Area and are summarized below.
VeQetation
Plant species identified in the Project Area were assigned a wetland status according to the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service list of plant species that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988). This wetland
classification system is based on the expected frequency of occurrence in wetlands as follows:
3
~l?lOO Lfq It
OBL
FACW(i:.)
FAC
FACU
UPUNL
Always found in wetlands
Usually found in wetlands
Equal in wetland or non-wetlands
Usually found in non-wetlands
Upland/Not listed (upland)
>99% frequency
67 -99%
34-66%
1-33%
<1%
The Arid West Supplement requires that a three-step process be conducted to determine if
hydrophytic vegetation is present. The procedure first requires the delineator to apply the "50/20
rule" (Indicator 1) described in the manual. To apply the "50/20 rule", dominant species are chosen
independently from each stratum of the community. In general, dominant species are determined
for each vegetation stratum from a sampling plot of an appropriate size surrounding the sample
point. In general, dominants are the most abundant species that individually or collectively account
for more than 50 percent of the total vegetative cover in the stratum, plus any other species that,
by itself, accounts for at least 20 percent of the total cover. If greater than 50 percent of the
dominant species has an OBL, FACW, or FAC status, ignoring + and - qualifiers, the sample point
meets the hydrophytic vegetation criterion.
If the sample point fails Indicator 1 and both hydric soils and wetland hydrology are not present,
then the sample point does not meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion, unless the site is a
problematic wetland situation. However, if the sample point fails Indicator 1 but hydric soils and
wetland hydrology are both present, the delineator must apply Indicator 2.
Indicator 2 is known as the Prevalence Index. The prevalence index is a weighted average of the
wetland indicator status for all plant species within the sampling plot. Each indicator status is given
a numeric code (OBL = 1, FACW = 2, FAC = 3, FACU = 4, and UPL = 5). Indicator 2 requires the
delineator to estimate the percent cover of each species in every stratum of the community and
sum the cover estimates for any species that is present in more than one stratum. The delineator
must then organize all species into groups according to their wetland indicator status and calculate
the Prevalence Index using the following formula, where A equals total percent cover:
AoBL + 2A,ACW + 3AFAC + 4AFACU + 5AuPL
PI=
AoBL + AFACW + AFAC + AFACU + AuPL
The Prevalence Index will yield a number between 1 and 5. If the Prevalence Index is equal to or
less than 3, the sample point meets the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. However, if the
community fails Indicator 2, the delineator must proceed to Indicator 3.
Indicator 3 is known as Morphological Adaptations. If more than 50 percent of the individuals of
a FACU species have morphological adaptations for life in wetlands, that species is considered to
be a hydrophyte and its indicator status should be reassigned to FAC. If such observations are
made, the delineator must recalculate Indicators 1 and 2 using a FAC indicator status for this
species. The sample point meets the hydrophytic vegetation criterion if either test is satisfied.
Hydrology
The Corps jurisdictional wetland hydrology criterion is satisfied if an area is inundated or saturated
for a period sufficient to create anoxic soil conditions during the growing season (a minimum of 14
consecutive days in the Arid West region). Evidence of wetland hydrology can include primary
4
3 '3/6lifJ Ltt1 ct
indicators, such as visible inundation or saturation, drift deposits, oxidized root channels, and salt
crusts, or secondary indicators such as the FAC-neutral test, presence of a shallow aquitard, or
crayfish burrows. The Arid West Supplement contains 16 primary hydrology indicators and 10
secondary hydrology indicators. Only one primary indicator is required to meet the wetland
hydrology criterion; however, if secondary indicators are used, at least two secondary indicators
must be present to conclude that an area has wetland hydrology.
The presence or absence of the primary or secondary indicators described in the Arid West
Supplement was utilized to determine if sample points within the Project Area met the wetland
hydrology criterion.
Soils
The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) defines a hydric soil as follows:
"A hydric soil is a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or
ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions
in the upper part. 1/
Federal Register July 13, 1994,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, NRCS
Soils formed over long periods of time under wetland (anaerobic) conditions often possess
characteristics that indicate they meet the definition of hydric soils. Hydric soils can have a
hydrogen sulfide (rotten egg) odor, low chroma matrix color, generally designated 0,1, or 2, used
to identify them as hydric, presence of redox concentrations, gleyed or depleted matrix, or high
organic matter content.
Specific indicators that can be used to determine whether a soil is hydric for the purposes of
wetland delineation are provided in the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the U.S. (USDA
2006). The Arid West Supplement provides a list of 23 of these hydric soil indicators which are
known to occur in the Arid West region. Soil samples were collected and described according to
the methodology provided in the Arid West Supplement. Soil chroma and values were determined
by utilizing a standard Munsell soil color chart (GretagMacbeth 2000).
Hydric soils were determined to be present if any of the soil samples met one or more of the 23
hydric soil indicators described in the Arid West Supplement.
3.1.2 Other Waters of the U.S.
This study also evaluated the presence of "Waters of the United States" other than wetlands
potentially subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act. Other areas, besides wetlands, subject to Corps jurisdiction include lakes, rivers and
streams (including intermittent streams) in addition to all areas below the HTL in areas subject to
tidal influence. Jurisdiction in non-tidal areas extends to the ordinary high water mark (OHW)
defined as:
"...that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by
physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impresses on the bank, shelving,
changes in the characteristics of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the
5
35~~ LfCfZ
presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the
characteristics of the surrounding areas."
Federal Register Vol. 51, No. 219,
Part 328.3 (e). November 13,1986
Identification of the ordinary high water mark followed the Corps Regulatory Guidance Letter No.
05-05, Ordinary High Water Mark Identification (Corps 2005).
3.2 Difficult Wetland Situations in the Arid West
The Arid West Supplement (Corps 2006) includes procedures for identifying wetlands that may lack
indicators due to natural processes (problem areas) or recent disturbances (atypical situations).
"Problem area" wetlands are defined as naturally occurring wetland types that periodically lack
indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, or wetland hydrology due to normal seasonal or
annual variability. Some problem area wetlands may permanently lack certain indicators due to
the nature of the soils or plant species on the site. "Atypical situations" are defined as wetlands in
which vegetation, soil, or hydrology indicators are absent due to recent human activities or natural
events.
The list of difficult wetland situations provided in the Arid West Supplement includes wetlands with
problematic hydrophytic vegetation, problematic hydric soils, and wetlands that periodically lack
indicators of wetland hydrology. In addition, the problem area and atypical situation sections of the
Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) were utilized to determine if any sample points
taken within the Project Area met the criteria for a problem area or atypical situation. If any
determination was based on less than three parameters, the rationale for the wetland determination
was expl,ained on the data sheets included in Appendix A. Although the Corps Manual and Arid
West Supplement were utilized in the wetland determination, they do not provide exhaustive lists
of the difficult situations that can arise during delineations in the Arid West. As a result, WRA
interpreted the gathered data using best professional judgement and our knowledge of the ecology
of the wetlands in the region.
3.3 Areas Exempt from Section 404 Jurisdiction
Some areas that meet the technical criteria for wetlands or Waters may not be jurisdictional under
the Clean Water Act. Included in this category are some man-induced wetlands, which are areas
that have developed at least some characteristics of naturally occurring wetlands due to either
intentional or incidental human activities. Examples of man-induced wetlands may include, but are
not limited to, irrigated wetlands, impoundments, or drainage ditches excavated in uplands,
wetlands resulting from filling offormerly deep water habitats, dredged material disposal areas, and
depressions within construction areas.
In addition, some isolated wetlands and waters may also be considered outside of Corps
jurisdiction as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook
County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (531 U.S. 159 (2001)). Isolated
wetlands and waters are those areas that do not have a surface or groundwater connection to, and
are not adjacent to a navigable "Waters of the U.S.", and do not otherwise exhibit an interstate
commerce connection.
6
3lt1oOb Lftt ~.
4.0 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION
The Project Area is approximately 25 acres and is located in Dublin along Dougherty Road north
of Highway 580 and near the Highway 680/Highway 580 interchange (see Figure 1). . More than
eighty percent of the site is a housing development accessed by two main roads (Monterey Drive
and North Mariposa). The rest of the site is occupied by two undeveloped ruderal fields, one at the
northern end of the site (North Field) and one on the western edge of the site (West Field) (Figure
2). West Field is surrounded on all sides by a paved foot/bikepath. A basketball court borders the
eastern edge of this field. The entire Project Area has previously been disturbed and does not
represent a high-value habitat. This highly modified site is surrounded by other housing
developments and ruderal fields. The elevation of the Project Area ranges from 350 to 372 feet.
A biological resources assessment conducted by WRA in September 2007 discovered the
presence of wetland vegetation in the northwestern corner of West Field: one obligate wetland
species, California bulrush (Scirpus californicus), one facultative wet species, tall flat-sedge
(Cyperus eragrostis), and three facultative species, dallis grass (Paspalum dilatatum), narrowleaf
plantain (Plantago lanceo/ata), and rough cockle-bur (Xanthium strumarium). The June 2008
wetland delineation focused on this site within the Project Area. It was apparent during the
September 2007 assessment that soils in West Field have been disturbed, and this field appears
to have been graded and modified with earth-moving equipment. The central section of West Field
has been mowed and a layer of sawdust placed around sections of the perimeter of the mowed
area. The topography slopes downward from the north and east edges of West Field towards a low
point in the northwestern corner, where a drain is located. Shrubs and trees, including willow (SaJix
sp.), coyote brush (Baccharis pifularis), cotoneaster (Cotoneaster sp.), firethorn (Pyracantha sp.),
and non-native ornamentals are growing along the fence line that borders the western edge of this
field.
VeQetation
Vegetation in West Field can best be described as a combination of disturbed/mowed habitat and
ruderal herbaceous grassland. Plants observed include non-native species such as slender wild
oat (Avena fatua), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitiaJis), field
bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), sweet fennel (Foeniculum
vulgare), dallis grass (Paspalum difatatum), Harding grass (Phalaris aquatica), bristly ox tongue
(Picris echioides), curly dock (Rumex crispus), and strawberry clover (Trifolium fragiferum).
HydroloQY
Natural hydrological sources for West Field include precipitation and surface run-off from adjacent
land within the Project Area.
Soils
The Alameda County Soil Survey (USDA 1966) indicates that two different soil types occur in the
Project Area: Diablo clay (DbC) and Clear Lake clay (CdA). While the majority of the Project Area
has Diablo clay soils, which are classified as well-drained and occurring on slopes of 7-1, the area
of interest where the wetland plants occur on-site occurs in a small inclusion of Clear Lake clay
soils. This Clear Lake clay inclusion encompasses the northwestern tip of West Field. These soils
are classified as moderately well-drained, occurring on 0-3% slopes.
7
Figure 2. Location of North and West Fields within Project
Area
Dublin Arroyo Vista Biological Assessment
Alameda County, California
ENViRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Date: October 2007
Base Photo: TerraServer, 2004
Map By: Derek Chan
Filepath: L:\Acad 2000Files\16000\16142\gis\
ArcMap\Fig3 AeMal 06 25 OB,mxd
~~~ Vb <+.t1'1
5.0 RESULTS
Vegetation, soils, and hydrology data collected during the June 2008 delineation site visit are
reported on standard Corps Arid West Region data forms in Appendix A and are briefly
summarized below. Photographss of representative portions of the Project Area and sample points
are shown in Appendix B.
5.1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U.S.
5. 1. 1 Wetlands
Two sample points were taken during the June 24,2008 WRA delineation conducted in the Project
Area. These were taken in the two areas identified in September 2007 as supporting wetland
plants (WRA, 2007). Both sample points are located in the northwestern corner of West Field
(Figure 3). Sample point 1 (P1) to the east of the paved footpath, and sample point 2 (P2) to the
west of the paved footpath, as shown in Figure 3. P1 had no wetland indicators. P2 had a
dominance of facultative vegetation (dallis grass), and met the hydrophytic vegetation criteria.
However, sample point P2 lacked both hydric soils and evidence of wetland hydrology, and is not
considered a potential jurisdictional wetland. Soils were somewhat disturbed at both P1 and P2
with fill material (inclusions of gravel, cement, and bark), but below seven inches the soil was
mostly intact. In addition, both P1 and P2 were very small areas- only a few square meters in size.
5.1.2 Other Waters of the U.S.
No potential "other waters of the U.S." were observed in the Project Area during the June 2008
delineation conducted by WRA.
9
f.::J Project Boundary
o June 2008 Sample Points
o Drain
Figure 3. Location of Delineation Sample Points within
West Field
wra
Dublin Arroyo Vista Biological Assessment
Alameda County, California
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Date: June 2008
Base Photo: TerraServer, 2004
Map By: Derek Chan
Filepath: L :\Acad2000Files\16000\16142\9iS\ArCMap\
Fig3 _Ae ria 1_06_25 _ 08. mxd
3tP4a-b ~'t
6.0 REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Department
of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180-0631.
Federal Register. November 13, 1986. Department of Defense, Corps of Engineers, Department
of the Army, 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of
Engineers; Final Rule. Vol. 51, No. 219; page 41217.
GretagMacBeth. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts, revised washable edition.
Reed, P. B., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: California (Region 0).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.10).
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05-05. Ordinary
High Water Mark Identification. December 7.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2006. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. December.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Soil Conservation Service. 1966. Soil Survey of Alameda
County, California. In cooperation with the University of California Agricultural Experiment
Station.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2005. Official List of US Hydric Soils.
USDA, NRCA. 2006. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States: A Guide for Identifying
and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 6.0. In cooperation with the National Technical
Committee for Hydric Soils, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2008. Dublin quad. 7.5 minute topographic map.
WRA, Inc. 2007. Biological Resources Assessment for the Arroyo Vista Housing Project, Dublin,
Alameda County, California.
11
Appendix A - Preliminary Section 404 Jurisdictional Data Sheets
~G t't:lfQ4
Wetland Determination Data Form - Arid West Region
3 f.o ~ I() lttlt'l
Project/Site Dublin Arroyo Vista
Applicant/Owner City of Dublin
Investigator(s) Cheryl Vann, WRA, Inc.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, ete.) open field
Subregion(LRR) LRR C (MediI. CA)
Soil Map Unit Name Clear Lake clay (CdA)
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on-site typical for this time of year? ~ Yes 0 No
Are any of the following significantly dis1urbed? D Vegetation ~ Soil 0 Hydrology
Are any of the following naturally problematic? 0 Vegetation 0 Soil 0 Hydrology
City Dublin
County Alameda
State CA
Sampling Date 6/24/2008
Sampling Point P1
Section,Township,Range see 31, T2S, R1 E
Local Relief (concave, convex, none) none
Slope(%) ~
Datum: NAD 83 (feet)
Lat: 37"42'57,56" N
Long: 121054'45.10" W
NWI classification None
(If no, explain in remarks)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? 181 Yes D No
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
~I - A~. _L :~. ..t,.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? DYes ~ No Is the Sampled Area DYes 181 No
Hydric Soil Present? DYes 181 No within a Wetland?
Wetland Hydrology Present? DYes ~No
Remarks: Sample Point P1 is located in uplands.
VEGETATION
Tree stratum (use scientific names) ~ Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
~ Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species 0 (A)
1. that are OSL, FACW, or FAC?
2. Total number of dominant 1 (B)
3. species across all strata?
4. % of dominant species that 0% (AlB)
Tree Stratum Total Cover: are OBL, FACW, or FAC?
Saolina/Shrub Stratum Prevalence Index Worksheet
1. Total % cover of- Multiolv bv:
2. OBL species x1
3. FACW species x2
4. FAC species x3
Sapling/Shrub Stratum Total Cover: FACU species x4
Herb Stratum UPL species x5
1. Avena fatua 95 Yes NL Column Totals (A) (B)
2. Hordeum murinum 3 No NL
3. Prevalence Index = B/A =
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
5. 0 Dominance Test is >50%
6. 0 Prevalence Index is </= 3.01
7. 0 Morphological adaptations (provide
8. supporting data in remarks)
Herb Stratum Total Cover: 98 0 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation 1 (explain)
Woody Vine Stratum
1. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology
2. must be present.
Woody Vine Stratum Total Cover: Hydrophytic
DYes 181 No
% Bare ground in herb stratum 2 % cover of biotic crust Vegetation Present?
Remarks: During the biological assessment site visit in September 2007 Scirpus ca/ifomicus was present at this site. It is currently mowed down, as
this sample point is within and along the edge of a maintained field,
US Army Corps of Engineers
Arid West - Version 11.1.2006
SOIL
Sampling Point P1 ., f..; 1 .~ L{ qi
Profile description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist\ ~ Color (moist) ~ ~~ Texture Remarks
0-7 10VR 3/2 ~ 5VR 4/6 ~ L-!::L- clay loam mixed with fiII--gravel, cement, bark
7-10 10VR 3/1 ~ 2.5V 7/4 .1.-- L-!::L- silty clay no fill mixed in
5VR 4/6 ~ L-!::L- silty clay no fill mixed in
-
- - --
- - --
- - --
1Tvoe: C-Concentration,. D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix. 2Location: PL=Pore linino, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
o Histosol (A 1 ) o Sandy Redox (S5) o 1cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
o Histic Epipedon (A2) o Stripped Matrix (S6) o 2cm Muck (A10)(LRR B)
o Black Histic (A3) o Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) o Reduced Vertic (F1B)
o Hydrogen Sulfide (M) o Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) D Red Parent Material (TF2)
o Stratified Layers (A5)(LRR C) o Depleted Matrix (F3) o Other (explain in remarks)
o 1cm Muck (A9)(LRR D) o Redox Dark Surface (F6)
o Depleted Below Dark Surface (A 11 ) o Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
o Thick Dark Surface (A12) o Redox Depressions (FB)
o Sandy Mucky Mineral (S 1 ) o Vernal Pools (F9) 31ndicators of hydric vegetation and
o Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) wetland hydrology must be present.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? DYes 181 No
Remarks: Top seven inches of soil contained lill material (gravel, cement, bark), but was fairly homogenous and devoid offill below seven inches.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Primary Indicators (anyone indicator is sufficient) o Water Marks (B1)(Riverine)
o Surface Water (A 1 ) D Salt Crust (B11) D Sediment Deposits (B2)(Riverine)
D High Water Table (A2) o Biotic Crust (B12) D Drift Deposits (B3)(Riverine)
o Saturation (A3) D Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) D Drainage Patterns (B10)
D Water Marks (B1)(Nonriverine) D Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) D Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
D Sediment Deposits (B2)(Nonriverine) D Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) o Thin Muck Surface (C7)
D Drift Deposits (B3)(Nonriverine) o Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) o Crayfish Burrows (GB)
D Surface Soil Cracks (B6) o Recent Iron Reduction in PLowed Soils (C6) D Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
o Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) D Other (Explain in Remarks) o Shallow Aquitard (D3)
D Water-Stained Leaves (B9) o FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? DYes 181 No Depth (inches):
Water table present? DVes 181 No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? DVes 181 No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? DYes 181 No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data (str,eam guage, monitoring well, aerial photos, etc.) if available.
Remarks: A drain is located in the field roughly 40 feet north of sample point 1.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Arid West - Version 11-1-2006
Wetland Determination Data Form - Arid West Region
3 ~~ at LfCl~
Project/Site Dublin Arroyo Vista
Applicant/Owner City of Dublin
Investigator(s) Cheryl Vann, WRA, Inc.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.) flat ruderal area
Subregion(LRR) LRR C (MediI. CA)
Soil Map Unit Name Clear Lake clay (CdA)
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on-site typical for this time of year? ~ Yes 0 No
City Dublin
County Alameda
State CA
Sampling Date 6/24/2008
Sampling Point P2
Section,Township,Range sec 31, T2S, R1 E
Local Relief (concave, convex, none) none
Slope(%) ~
Datum: NAD 83 (feet)
Lat: 37042'57.85" N
Long: 121054'45.2B" W
NWl classification None
(If no, explain in remarks)
Are any of the following significantly dis1urbed?
Are any of the following naturally problematic?
o Vegetation 0 Soil 0 Hydrology Are "Normal Circumstances" present? ~ Yes 0 No
o Vegetation D Soil 0 Hydrology (If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 181 Yes 0 No
Hydric Soil Present? 0 Yes 181 No
Wetland Hydrology Present? 0 Yes 181 No
Remarks: Sample Point P2 is located in uplands.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
D Yes ~ No
VEGETATION
Tree stratum (use scientific names) ~ Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
~ Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species 1 (A)
1. that are GBL, FACW, or FAC?
2. Total number of dominant
1 (B)
3. species across all strata?
4. % of dominant species that 100% (AlB)
Tree Stratum Total Cover: are OBL, FACW, or FAC?
Saolina/Shrub Stratum Prevalence Index Worksheet
1. Total % cover of: Multiolv bv'
2. OBL species x1
3. FACW species x2
4. FAC species x3
Sapling/Shrub Stratum Total Cover: FACU species x4
Herb Stratum UPL species x5
1. Paspa/um dilatatum 90 Yes FAC Column Totals (A) (B)
2. Avena fatua 5 No NL
3. Prevalence Index = B/A =
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
5. 181 Dominance Test is >50%
6. 0 Prevalence Index is </= 3.01
7. 0 Morphological adaptations (provide
a. supporting data in remarks)
Herb Stratum Total Cover: 95 0 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation 1 (explain)
Wood v Vine Stratum
1. 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology
2. must be present.
Woody Vine Stratum Total Cover: Hydrophytic
~Yes o No
% Bare ground in herb stratum 5 % cover of biotic crust Vegetation Present?
Remarks: Dominated by one facultative species. Not a strong wetland indicator.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Arid West - Version 11-1-2006
SOIL
Sampling Point P2 3(,t1 &'tJ Y Cf'b
Profile description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist\ ~ Color (moist) ~ ~~ Texture Remarks
0-11 10YR 3/1 R- - -- silty clay mixed with some gravel and fill
- 2.5YR 7/4 .1.-- L-!::L- sandy prominent mottle
- 10YR 6/6 ~ L-!::L- silty clay faint mottle
- - --
- - --
- - --
1Tvoe: C=Concentration, D=Deoletion, RM=Reduced Matrix. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
o Histosol (A 1 ) o Sandy Redox (S5) o 1cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
o Histic Epipedon (A2) o Stripped Matrix (S6) o 2cm Muck (A10)(LRR B)
o Black Histic (A3) o Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) D Reduced Vertic (F1B)
o Hydrogen Sulfide (M) o Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) D Red Parent Material (TF2)
o Stratified Layers (A5)(LRR C) o Depleted Matrix (F3) o Other (explain in remarks)
D 1cm Muck (A9)(LRR D) o Redox Dark Surface (F6)
o Depleted Below Dark Surface (A 11 ) o Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
o Thick Dark Surface (A12) o Redox Depressions (FB)
o Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) o Vernal Pools (F9) 3Jndicators of hydric vegetation and
o Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) wetland hydrology must be present.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? DYes 181 No
Remarks: Evidence of some fill material mixed in with the soil, but not as much as at sample point 1. Hydric soils not present at Sample Point.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Primary Indicators (anyone indicator is sufficient) o Water Marks (B1)(Riverine)
o Surface Water (A 1 ) o Salt Crust(B 11 ) o Sediment Deposits (B2)(Riverine)
o High Water Table (A2) o Biotic Crust (B12) o Drift Deposits (B3)(Riverine)
o Saturation (A3) o Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) o Drainage Patterns (B10)
o Water Marks (B1)(Nonriverine) o Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) o Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
o Sediment Deposits (B2)(Nonriverine) o Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) o Thin Muck Surface (C7)
o Drift Deposits (B3)(Nonriverine) D Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) o Crayfish Burrows (CB)
o Surface Soil Cracks (B6) o Recent Iron Reduction in PLowed Soils (C6) o Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
o Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) o Other (Explain in Remarks) o Shallow Aquitard (03)
o Water-Stained Leaves (B9) o FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? DYes 181 No Depth (inches):
Water table present? DYes 181 No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? DYes 181 No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? DYes 181 No
(includes capillary fringe) Describe recorded data (stream guage, monitoring well, aerial photos, etc.) if available.
Remarks: No indicators of wetland hydrology present at sample point.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Arid West - Version 11-1-2006
310 lJb t..M 't
Appendix B - Representative Photographs of the Project Area
311~ yq~
Above: View north from sample point 1 towards drain.
Below: View west with sample point 1 in foreground and
sample point 2 across path in background.
Iwra
ENViRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Photographs taken June 24, 2008
Above: Sample point 1 - soil sample pit showing
predominance of Avena fatua vegetation.
o)wra
Below: Cement conglomerate removed from sample
point 1 soil pit.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Photographs taken June 24, 2008
~ 12 "b Lfq~'
3 7 ~ 116 L..\ 0\ ~
Above: View south with sample point 2 on the right of
the path and sample point 1 on the left.
Below: Soil pit for sample point 2, showing
predominance of Paspalum dilatatum vegetation.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANiS
Photographs taken June 24, 2008