phase i environmental site assessment€¦ · cercla liability (hereinafter, the “landowner...

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT

Thrash Property 124 River Street

Santa Cruz, California 95060

Prepared For:

Mr. Bob Thrash 124 River Street

Santa Cruz, CA 95060

Geare Group Project No.: 19-026 Property Reconnaissance Date: March 20, 2019

Report Date: April 3, 2019

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

THRASH PROPERTY

124 RIVER STREET

SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA 95060

GEARE GROUP PROJECT NO. 19-026

SECTION NFA REC CREC HREC BER

5. Records Review X

6. Property History X X

7.3 Hazardous Substances/ Petroleum Products

X

7.4 Storage Tanks X X

7.5 PCBs X

8.1 Asbestos X

8.2 Radon X

8.3 Lead-Based Paint X

8.4 Drinking Water X

8.5 Mold/Water Intrusion X

8.6 Flood Plains/Wetlands X *Costs depicted, if any, are estimates for investigations and/or program development, and do not constitute a quote to provide services. Additional costs may be incurred as a result of the completion of the recommended activities.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 7

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 9

1.1. Purpose......................................................................................................................................... 9

1.2. Detailed Scope of Services ........................................................................................................ 10

1.3. Significant Assumptions ........................................................................................................... 11

1.4. Limitations and Exceptions ...................................................................................................... 11

1.5. Special Terms and Conditions ................................................................................................. 13

1.6. User Reliance ............................................................................................................................. 13

2. GENERAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 14

2.1. Location and Legal Description ............................................................................................... 14

2.2. Site and Vicinity General Characteristics............................................................................... 14

2.3. Current Uses of the Subject Property ..................................................................................... 15

2.4. Description of Property Improvements .................................................................................. 16

2.5. Current Uses of Adjoining Properties ..................................................................................... 16

3. USER PROVIDED INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 17

3.1. Title Records, Environmental Liens and AULs ..................................................................... 17

3.2. Specialized Knowledge or Commonly Known or Reasonable Ascertainable Information 17

3.3. Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues ..................................................................... 18

3.4. Reason for Performing the Phase I ESA ................................................................................. 18

4. INTERVIEWS ................................................................................................................................... 19

4.1. Property Owner, Operator and/or Escort .............................................................................. 19

4.2. Local Government Officials ..................................................................................................... 19

4.3. Other Contacts .......................................................................................................................... 20

5. RECORDS REVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 21

5.1. Standard Environmental Record Sources .............................................................................. 21

5.2. Additional Environmental Record Sources ............................................................................ 24

5.3. Records Review Summary ....................................................................................................... 25

6. HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 26

6.1. Aerial Photographs ................................................................................................................... 26

6.2. Fire Insurance Maps ................................................................................................................. 27

6.3. Property Tax Files ..................................................................................................................... 27

6.4. Recorded Land Title Records .................................................................................................. 27

6.5. USGS Topographic Map .......................................................................................................... 27

6.6. Local Street Directories ............................................................................................................ 27

6.7. Building Department Records ................................................................................................. 28

6.8. Zoning/Land Use Records ........................................................................................................ 28

6.9. Other Historical Sources .......................................................................................................... 28

6.10. Previous Assessments ................................................................................................................ 28

6.11. Data Gaps .................................................................................................................................. 28

6.12. Prior Use History Summary..................................................................................................... 29

7. PROPERTY RECONNAISSANCE ................................................................................................ 30

7.1. Methodology and Limiting Conditions ................................................................................... 30

7.2. Hazardous Substances and Petroleum Products .................................................................... 31

7.3. Storage Tanks ............................................................................................................................ 33

7.4. PCBs ........................................................................................................................................... 34

8. NON-ASTM SCOPE ISSUES .......................................................................................................... 35

8.1. Asbestos ...................................................................................................................................... 35

8.2. Radon ......................................................................................................................................... 35

8.3. Lead-Based Paint ...................................................................................................................... 36

8.4. Drinking Water ......................................................................................................................... 36

8.5. Preliminary Evaluation for Microbial Contamination .......................................................... 36

8.6. Flood Plains and Wetlands ....................................................................................................... 37

9. FINDINGS, OPINIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................... 38

10. RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................. 39

11. DEVIATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES ...................................................................... 40

12. WRITTEN DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL .......................... 41

APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 .......................................................................... Topographic Map and Property Diagram APPENDIX 2 ........................................................................................................................... Photographs APPENDIX 3 ................................................................................................... Supporting Documentation APPENDIX 4 ............................................................................................................... Regulatory Records APPENDIX 5 ..................................................................................................... Historical Documentation APPENDIX 6 ....................................................................................................... Personnel Qualifications

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Property Name: Thrash Property Property Address: 124 River Street Santa Cruz, California 95060

At the request of the Client, the Geare Group has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the above-referenced Property. The ESA was conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard Practice E1527-13. At the request of Client, this ESA also includes a preliminary evaluation of certain ASTM non-scope considerations. The Property consists of one rectangular-shaped parcel of land totaling approximately .1 acres (4,443 SF). The Property is identified with the Santa Cruz County Assessor’s parcel number 008-311-05. The parcel is accessed from River Street to the southwest and Lindberg Street to the northwest. The Property is improved with one single-story, retail commercial structure constructed with CMU load bearing walls and a poured concrete foundation. The Subject Property is occupied by Fastenal Hardware and Supply. The Subject Property building is comprised of approximately 3,260 square feet of rentable space. The Property structure has a poured concrete foundation. The interiors of the building are finished with gypsum wallboard, painted CMU walls, and vinyl floors. A driveway and wood framed shed is located at the northeast perimeter of the Property. A Topographic Map and Property Diagram are provided in Appendix 1 of this report. Photographs of the Property are provided in Appendix 2. Findings, Opinions and Conclusions

We have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527 of 124 River Street, Santa Cruz, California, the Property. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section 11 of this report. This assessment has revealed no evidence of RECs or CRECs in connection with the property. An historical recognized environmental condition (HREC) refers to an environmental condition which would have been considered a REC in the past, but which is no longer considered a REC based on subsequent assessment and/or remediation of any contaminants to below the most restrictive (generally residential) cleanup target concentrations or regulatory closure with no formal or implied restricted uses. The Geare Group did identify an HREC in connection with the Property, the presence of an historical UST. According to documents provided by the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department, a 500 gallon UST was operated at the Property prior to 1987, when Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department (SCCEHD) issued a directive for the fuel UST to be processed for closure. In 1988, a sampling event was conducted at the UST location and all soil samples obtained by Toxscan were found to have no detectable levels of hydrocarbon contamination and that soil levels met the regulatory standards. A permit was issued at that time for the UST to be closed. No further documentation was found regarding the UST issue in the SCCEHD files. This finding constitutes an HREC for the Property.

8

The ASTM Standard was designed solely to meet the requirements of the USEPA’s All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) to permit the potential purchaser to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability, but recognizes that a User may choose to evaluate other business environmental risks (BERs). The investigation has revealed no BERs associated with the standard ASTM scope considerations. At the request of Client, the Geare Group conducted a preliminary evaluation for asbestos-containing material (ACM), radon, lead-based paint (LBP), drinking water quality, mold, floodplains and wetland which are ASTM Non-Scope Considerations. This investigation has revealed no concerns relating to these ASTM Non-Scope Considerations in connection with the Property. No significant data gaps were identified that would affect the ability of the environmental professional to identify RECs at the Subject Property. Recommendations The Geare Group recommends no further investigation at this time.

9

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purpose This ESA was designed to provide an objective, professional opinion of environmental risks, if any, associated with the Subject Property through the identification of RECs, to the extent feasible pursuant to the process prescribed in the Standard. The term RECs is defined in the Standard as “the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release or a material threat of release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, ground water, or surface water of the property. The term includes hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with laws. The term is not intended to include de minimus conditions that generally do not present a threat to human health and the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Conditions determined to be de minimus are not recognized environmental conditions.” An environmental condition, which in the past would have been considered an REC, but has either been addressed to the satisfaction of the appropriate government agency or for other reasons would not be considered an REC today, is considered an historical recognized environmental condition (HREC). While HRECs will be identified in this report, these generally do not require additional investigation or action. This ESA is intended to permit the lender to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability (hereinafter, the “landowner liability protections,” or “LLPs”): that is, the practice that constitutes “all appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership and uses of the property consistent with good commercial or customary practice” as defined at 42 U.S.C. §9601(35) (B). It is still the lender’s responsibility to perform all other requirements to qualify for LLPs.

10

1.2. Detailed Scope of Services

This ESA was conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard Guide for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process E1527-13 (Standard), the All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI) Rule 40 CFR Part 312, and any additional requirements of Client. While the AAI rule still references the E1527-05 as demonstrating compliance with AAI, the USEPA’s position is that the revised standard includes improvements to the previous standard and its use will provide greater clarity with regard to potential contamination at a property; therefore the USEPA recommends that environmental professionals and prospective purchasers use E1527-13 standard. The scope of services for this assessment included an evaluation of the following:

• Physical characteristics of the Property based on a review of referenced sources such as topographic maps and available geologic, soils and hydrologic reports

• Information of properties, with the specified minimum search distances from the Property, available in the agency databases specified in Section 8.2.1 of the ASTM Standard and in local environmental records

• Current and past uses of the Property and surrounding area through an evaluation of historical sources specified in Section 8.3.4 of the ASTM Standard, such as aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, city directories, interviews and prior reports.

• Current Property conditions based on visual observations during the Property reconnaissance and interviews with individuals familiar with current and past operations

• The ASTM Standard recognizes that there may be environmental issues or conditions at a property that parties may wish to consider. These are considered ASTM Non-Scope Considerations. At the request of the Client, the scope of services for this assessment included the following:

• Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) Screening, consisting of a review of available analytical data, the age of the improvements, dates of renovation, and other relevant information. The level of this preliminary assessment was not intended to comply with the survey requirements of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) 40 CFR Part 763, National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 40 CFR 61; the General Duty Clause, 29 USC 654, Section 5; or other federal, state or local regulation.

• Radon Screening, based on available analytical results, published regional average levels, the usage of the buildings, and the type of construction and mechanical systems present. This evaluation was not designed or intended to comply with any regulatory agency requirements. Sampling, if any, was conducted using short-term radon detectors. The results of such testing are intended solely as a screen and may not be indicative of long-term average radon levels.

11

• Lead-Based Paint (LBP) Screening based on available analytical data, the age of the

improvements, dates of renovation, and the current and proposed usage of the property. This evaluation was not designed or intended to comply with survey requirements outlined in Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations or other federal, state or local regulation.

• Lead in Drinking Water Evaluation based on available analytical data, a determination of the source of the drinking water supply and a review of publically available compliance data reports.

• Water Intrusion/Water and Mold Impacted Building Materials Screening based on visual observations for signs of water intrusion, water damage, and suspect mold growth and interviews with property representatives. These observations were limited to the areas walked and should not be considered a comprehensive survey of the Property. A finding in this report that “mold is not a significant concern” or “no significant mold was identified” should not be interpreted as the building is free of mold.

• Flood Plains and Wetlands Evaluation based solely on a review of available Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) or equivalent, wetland maps and visual observations. This assessment is not intended to be a formal flood plain determination or wetland delineation, and no warranty is made thereof.

1.3. Significant Assumptions

The Geare Group assumes the Property has been correctly and accurately identified by the User, designated representative of the User, property contact, property owner, and property owner’s representatives. The Geare Group assumes that the User and any of its designated representatives, including but not limited to, property contacts, property escorts, and property brokers, used good faith in answering questions about and in obtaining information for the Property. Groundwater flow and depth to groundwater, unless otherwise specified by on-site well data, or well data from adjacent sites, are assumed based on contours depicted on the United States Geological Survey topographic maps.

1.4. Limitations and Exceptions

• The scope of work completed was designed solely to meet the needs of the Geare Group’s Client. The Geare Group shall not be liable for any unintended usage of this report by

12

another party. In addition, based on the ASTM guidelines, the ESA is only valid if completed within 180 days of an acquisition or the transaction necessitating the ESA.

• No ESA can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for RECs in connection

with a property. This ESA was designed to reduce, but not eliminate the potential for RECs at the property, within reasonable limits of time and cost. The ESA is not intended to be exhaustive or all-inclusive and does not represent a guarantee of the identification of all possible environmental risk.

• An ESA is intended to be a non-intrusive investigation and generally does not include

sampling or testing of air, soil, water or building materials. No destructive testing was completed and concealed areas, such as behind walls or within machinery, were not accessed. Testing, if any, is designed solely to meet the needs of the ESA, not to meet any local state or federal regulations and should not be utilized as such.

• Information in this report is based on personal interviews, government records, published

resources, and various historical documents. Accuracy and completeness of information varies among information sources and is often inaccurate or incomplete. The information utilized in this ESA is from sources deemed to be reliable; however, no representation or warranty is made as to the accuracy thereof. The Geare Group will have no ongoing obligation to obtain and include information that was not reasonably ascertainable, practically reviewable or provided to the Geare Group in a reasonable timeframe to formulate an opinion and complete the assessment by the agreed upon due date.

• Unless specifically identified in the scope of work, the ESA excludes consideration of non-

ASTM scope issues including, but not limited to, lead in drinking water, asbestos, lead-based paint, industrial hygiene, health and safety, endangered species, wetlands, indoor air quality, vapor intrusion, electromagnetic fields, biological agents or mold.

• The ESA includes some information that may be relevant to regulatory compliance, but is not

intended and shall not be construed as a compliance audit and cannot be considered a verification of regulatory compliance. While the general environmental setting of the property is described, this assessment is not intended to be a formal flood plain or wetland determination, and no warranty is made thereof. Depending on its past, present or future intended use, the property under review may or may not be subject to regulation and permitting under environmental and health and safety laws, such as, but not limited to, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and other federal, state and local regulations. The Geare Group assumes no responsibility or liability respecting regulatory permitting or compliance issues.

• Client is advised that if the ESA is obtained with the intent of qualifying the purchaser as an

innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser under CERCLA, there will be continuing obligations of due care and responsiveness and additional legal requirements that likely apply to such status. The Geare Group accepts and undertakes

13

no responsibility as to such requirements and advises that counsel be separately consulted with respect to such requirements.

1.5. Special Terms and Conditions

There are no special terms and conditions associated with the assignments. 1.6. User Reliance This investigation was conducted on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Mr. Bob Thrash (Client). This report, and the findings contained herein, shall not, in whole or part, be disseminated or conveyed to or used by any other party without the prior written consent of the Geare Group. The Geare Group acknowledges and agrees that the report may be conveyed to and relied upon by the Client, its successors and assigns, rating agencies and bond investors.

14

2. GENERAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

2.1. Location and Legal Description

Property Name: Thrash Property

Property Address: 124 River Street

City, State Zip Code: Santa Cruz, California, 95060

Legal Description The Geare Group was not provided a legal description of the Subject Property. The Property is identified with the Santa Cruz County Assessor’s parcel number 008-311-05.

2.2. Site and Vicinity General Characteristics

The Geare Group has attempted to determine the general physical setting of the Subject Property and vicinity. Information regarding the topography, surface water, geology and hydrology are used to evaluate the likelihood of hazardous substances or petroleum products migrating onto the Subject Property from adjacent properties, within the Subject Property or from the Subject Property to offsite receptors. The information obtain are from readily accessible sources that describe the general area in which the Subject Property is located. No subsurface investigation or other testing was conducted at the property. Actual conditions may vary from general conditions in the area.

Property Elevation: The Subject Property is situated at approximately 14 feet above

mean sea level.

Topography: The property is flat. The general area slopes gently to the east towards the San Lorenzo River.

USGS Topographic Map: The Subject Property is covered by the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) Topographic Map, Santa Cruz, California, 7.5 minute series, published in 1954 and photo-revised in 1994. A copy of the applicable topographic map is included in Appendix 1.

On-Site Water Bodies: No surface water bodies were observed on or bordering the Subject Property.

Nearest Surface Water Based on the topographic map, the nearest surface water body is the

15

Body: San Lorenzo River located about .1 miles east of the Property.

Geology and Soils: West Santa Cruz Terrace Groundwater Basin includes nearly the entire City of Santa Cruz. It is bounded to the south by Monterey Bay and to the north by a series of hills that define the contact of Quaternary and Pliocene deposits (Purisima Formation). The eastern boundary coincides with the western boundary of the Santa Cruz Creek Water District, and the Santa Cruz Valley Groundwater Basin. The western and northwestern boundaries include Pre-Cretaceous meta sedimentary rocks (Jennings 1958). Elevation ranges from near sea level to approximately 100 feet above sea level. The basin is drained by a series of streams flowing southward from the mountains. The largest of these streams is the Lorenzo River. The basin extends northward upstream along the Lorenzo River. The basin boundary confidence is considered low due to undetermined depth of the terrace deposits and the lack of information regarding groundwater occurrence or movement.

Depth to Ground Water: Ground water is expected at approximately 10 to 20 feet below ground surface based on historic levels in the area.

Anticipated Flow Direction: Ground water at the Subject Property is expected to flow from northwest to southeast.

Basis of Flow Direction: According to the USEPA Ground Water Handbook, Vol. 1 Ground Water and Contamination, September 1990, the water table typically conforms to surface topography. This means that the direction of flow for shallow ground water is generally from higher elevations to lower elevations. Localized flow direction, however, may vary as a result of tide, rainfall, development, geologic characteristics, nearby surface water bodies, underground utilities such as storm drains, septic systems and sewers, or other influences such as the presence of high volume wells.

2.3. Current Uses of the Subject Property

Property Usage: The Subject Property is occupied by a single story commercial

structure.

Tenants: The Subject Property is occupied by Fastenal Hardware Supply.

16

2.4. Description of Property Improvements

Property Size: .1 acres

Source: County Assessor

Number of Buildings: One

Date of Construction: Circa 1946

Source: Santa Cruz County Assessor

Building Size: 3,260 SF

Source: Santa Cruz County Assessor

Source of Heating/Cooling: Heating is provided by natural gas space heaters.

Utility Providers:

• Potable Water City of Santa Cruz • Electricity Pacific Gas and Electric • Natural Gas Pacific Gas and Electric

• Fuel Oil NA

• Sewage Disposal City of Santa Cruz

• Storm Water City of Santa Cruz

• Solid Waste Waste Management

2.5. Current Uses of Adjoining Properties Adjoining properties, based on the ASTM Standard, are properties the border of which is contiguous or partially contiguous with that of the Subject Property, or that would be contiguous or partially contiguous with that of the Subject Property but for a street, road or other public thoroughfare separating them. The following adjoining properties were noted.

North: The adjoining property to the north is occupied by the Riverwalk

Apartments at 110 Lindberg Street.

17

East: The adjoining property to the east is Bank of America at 104 River Street.

South: The adjoining property to south is River Street beyond which is a multi-family facility at 140 River Street.

West: The adjoining property to the west is Outdoor World at 136 River Street.

3. USER PROVIDED INFORMATION

The Standard lays out the responsibilities of the User of the report in order for the User to satisfy the all appropriate inquiry, into previous ownership of the property, requirement in order to qualify for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability, herein after landowner liability protections. These responsibilities include: • Review title and judicial records provided for environmental liens or activity and use limitations

(AULs)

• Provide any specialized knowledge or experience with the property that is material to any RECs at the property

• Provide any actual knowledge of any environmental lien or AULs encumbering the property or in

connection with the property • Provide reason for purchase price being significantly lower than fair market value, if applicable • Provide any commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information within the local community

about the property that might relate to RECs in connection with the property • Identify the reason the ESA is being performed

3.1. Title Records, Environmental Liens and AULs

User did not provide the Geare Group with any recorded land title records or lien records, filed under federal, tribal, state or local law, for review.

3.2. Specialized Knowledge or Commonly Known or Reasonable Ascertainable Information User did not inform the Geare Group of any specialized knowledge of the Subject Property that would relate to the presence of RECs, in connection with the Subject Property. The User also did not indicate that they were aware of any commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information

18

within the local community about the Subject Property that is material to RECs in connection with the Subject Property. 3.3. Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues User did not indicate to the Geare Group that the transaction price for the Subject Property was significantly below the fair market price value of other comparable properties. 3.4. Reason for Performing the Phase I ESA

The Geare Group was retained by the User to conduct this ESA. It was designed to provide an objective, professional opinion of environmental risks, if any, associated with the Subject Property through the identification of RECs, to the extent feasible pursuant to the process prescribed in the Standard.

19

4. INTERVIEWS

4.1. Property Owner, Operator and/or Escort

Contact Name/Title: Bob Thrash

Company: NA

Telephone Number: (831) 728-1622

Pertinent Information: Mr. Thrash provided for access and site operations information and history.

4.2. Local Government Officials

Contact Name/Title: Staff

Department: City of Santa Cruz Fire Department

Telephone/Website: (831) 420-5280

Pertinent Information: The Geare Group contacted the fire department in an effort to obtain information pertaining to any above ground storage tanks, underground storage tanks, reported incidents of fires, hazardous materials, spills, leaks or other similar circumstances that could be of environmental concern at the Subject Property, and of historical uses of the Subject Property. The Geare Group was advised that all hazardous materials related files are maintained by the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department (SCCEHD).


Department: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department


Pertinent Information: The Geare Group contacted the department for information regarding citizen complaints and any investigations on the use, handling, release or discharge of solid or liquid wastes, hazardous materials or any other circumstance of environmental concern at the Subject Property. According to documents provided by the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department, a 500 gallon UST was operated at the Property prior to 1987, when Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department (SCCEHD) issued a directive for the fuel UST to be processed for closure. In 1988, a sampling event was conducted at the UST location and all soil samples obtained by Toxscan were found to have no detectable

20

levels of hydrocarbon contamination and that soil levels met the regulatory standards. A permit was issued at that time for the UST to be closed. No further documentation was found regarding the UST issue in the SCCEHD files. This finding constitutes an HREC for the Property. Files found are included in Appendix 3.


Department: Santa Cruz Building and Planning Department


Pertinent Information: The Geare Group requested information regarding permit history, zoning and land use for the Subject Property. The subject Property is zoned CC for community commercial use and is developed with a conforming use. No permit violations were revealed.

4.3. Other Contacts


Company: Santa Cruz County Assessor’s Office


Pertinent Information: The Geare Group contacted the Assessor’s office to determine parcel identification and information.

21

5. RECORDS REVIEW The Geare Group ordered a report from Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) containing the standard environmental record sources identified in ASTM E1527-13 as well as any additional environmental record source determined to be: 1) reasonably ascertainable; 2) sufficiently useful, accurate and complete; and 3) generally obtained, pursuant to local good commercial or customary practice in initial ESAs in the type of commercial real estate transaction involved. A detailed description of the records reviewed and a listing of all of the identified sites are provided in Appendix 4. Accuracy and completeness of record information varies among information sources, including governmental sources. Record information is often inaccurate or incomplete. While the Geare Group cannot warrant the accuracy of the information, it has made a reasonable effort to compensate for mistakes or insufficiencies in the information reviewed that are obvious in light of other information of which the Geare Group has actual knowledge. The purpose of the records review is to help identify RECs in connection with the Property. This includes both indications of the storage, use, generation, disposal, or release of hazardous substance at the Property and the potential for contaminants to migrate onto the Property from off-site sources via soil, groundwater, or vapor. In evaluating the potential for a vapor encroachment condition (VEC), the Geare Group attempted to determine if there was information indicating that chemicals of concern were located within the critical distance, defined as the lineal distance between the nearest edge of the contaminated plume and the nearest target property boundary. Based on ASTM E2600-10 Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions, the critical distance is equal to 100 feet, with the exception of dissolved petroleum hydrocarbons, which have a critical distance of 30 feet. If non-aqueous phase petroleum hydrocarbons are present, the 100 feet distance is utilized. If a VEC was identified, the Geare Group attempted to determine if the VEC represented a REC.

5.1. Standard Environmental Record Sources • Subject Property

The Subject Property address is not listed in any of the databases reviewed. • Adjoining Property No adjoining properties are listed in the database report, other than the following:

o Former George Wilson facility at 125 River Street (140 River Street) (adjoining and cross-gradient to the west) is listed in the LUST, Hist Cortese, ENVIROSTOR, RESPONSE, HIST CAL Sites, DEED and CERS databases. This site operated a fuel UST and sheet metal fabrication facility. The LUST release impacts were limited to the area directly beneath the former Wilson facility (currently the multi-family facility at 125 River Street) west of River Street. The LUST case for the site was closed by the RWQCB

22

in 2015. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) listing for this site includes the ENVIROSTOR database. The site was located in the floodplain of the San Lorenzo River and has been filled in over the years. A Manufactured Gas Plant located across the Street (north of Pacific Avenue) utilized portions of the site for storage. The Site has also been used for a marble and granite works, Salvation Army building, residences, stores, warehouses, a laundry, a blacksmith, wood dealer, automobile service and fueling operations and sheet metal fabrication. The site is overseen by DTSC for ongoing operation and maintenance activities, which includes maintenance of and annual inspection of the site cap, which consists of a building foundation that spans the entire site footprint. The site formerly performed groundwater monitoring to analyze for petroleum hydrocarbons and related chemicals; however, the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board granted site closure in 2015, and eliminated the requirement for ongoing groundwater monitoring at the site, with which DTSC concurred. On-site groundwater monitoring wells were either destroyed or transferred to Pacific Gas and Electric for groundwater monitoring for the nearby Santa Cruz MGP site. Currently the entire site is a multi-family residential building with a partially-subterranean parking lot. This site has been certified by the DTSC with no further action required, but with deed restrictions relating to future sub-surface construction. Due to the status of this listing, this facility does not pose an REC for the Property.

o The Lindberg Street Redevelopment Site is adjoining to the east and north at 110 Lindberg Street is listed in the ENVIRSOTOR, RESPONSE and Hist Cal Sites databases. The Site was an auto wrecking yard from approximately 1946 through the early 1960s. It was then used for storage by a plumbing, heating and ventilation contractor through 1993 and then for woodworking and lumber storage until the Site was remediated prior to 2001. Contamination at this site was limited to soil only. The site was “certified” by the DTSC in 2001 and subsequently redeveloped with multi-family housing. Due to the status of this listing, this facility does not pose an REC for the Property.

• SEMS, NPL, Delisted NPL, CERCLIS & CERCLIS NFRAP and RCRA CORRACTS Sites No National Priorities List (NPL), Delisted NPL, or Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) site was identified in the search radii. One SEMS-ARCHIVE/CERLIS NFRAP site is listed within the search radius, the PG&E Gas Plant site at the intersection of North Pacific and River Streets, approximately .13 miles southwest of the Subject Property. The groundwater at this facility has been mapped as traveling south southeast along Pacific Avenue in a cross-gradient direction with respect to the Subject Property. Due to the status and location of this listing, this facility does not pose an REC for the Property. • CORRACTS Facilities No CORRACTS sites are listed within the search radius. • RCRA Facilities

23

While ASTM only requires reviewing the RCRA generator database for the Subject Property and adjoining properties, the database search provided by EDR looked at a wider radius to cover mapping errors. EDR identified no generator facility adjacent to the subject Property. • State and Tribal NPL and CERCLIS Equivalents Three RESPONSE sites are listed within the search radius. Two of the sites, the George Wilson site and the Lindberg Street Redevelopment site are discussed above. The remaining site is the Greyhound Bus Depot site at 425 Front Street .499 miles south the Property. This site has been “certified” by the DTSC. Due to the location and status of this listing, this facility does not pose an REC for the Property. Thirteen state equivalent CERCLIS sites (ENVIROSTOR) are listed within the search radius. All of the listed sites are either cross to down-gradient from the Property and/or located at least .10 miles distant from the Property (excluding the sites discussed above). Due to distance, location and regulatory status, these sites do not pose an REC for the Property.

• State and Tribal Landfill and/or Solid Waste Disposal Sites No state or tribal landfill or solid waste disposal sites were identified within the study radii. • State and Local Registered and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks

No Registered Underground Storage Tanks were listed on the Subject Property. Thirty leaking underground storage tank sites were identified within the study radius. All thirty sites have been granted a ‘case closed” status by the RWQCB. None of the listed sites are located adjoining the Property other than the one discussed above. Due to regulatory status, these sites do not pose an REC for the Property.

Based on the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory study Recommendations To Improve the Cleanup Process for California’s Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (“LUFTs”), October 16, 1995, petroleum contamination did not extend more than 200 to 250 feet in 90% of the release incidents investigated, in which groundwater was impacted. This information was generally confirmed by a study conducted by the Bureau of Economic Geology entitled Extent, Mass, and Duration of Hydrocarbon Plumes from Leaking Petroleum Storage Tanks in Texas, 1997, and is consistent with the Geare Group's experience in conducting subsurface investigations across the country. Based on distances of greater than 250 feet to the identified LUST sites, these facilities are not considered a REC in connection with the Subject Property.

24

• CPS-SLIC Sites No CPS-SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanups) site was identified within the study radii adjoining the Property. Of the seven listed sites, the closest site (other than the PG&E site discussed above) is the Bibbins Property at 2020 North Pacific Street, .08 miles cross-gradient. Due to groundwater direction (southerly) and regulatory status, these sites do not pose an REC for the Property. • AST/UST Sites Two UST sites were identified within the study radii. Neither of the listed sites are adjoining the Property. Due to distance and location, these sites do not pose an REC for the Property. • VCP Sites Two Voluntary Cleanup sites were identified within the study radii. Neither a located adjoining the Property. Due to the status and locations of these listings, these facilities do not pose an REC for the Property.

• Unplottable Sites EDR provided a list of “unplottable” sites which may or may not be located within the minimum search distances. The Geare Group reviewed the list of unplottable sites. Based on locations, compliance status and/or the nature of the listing, none of these sites is believed to be a REC in connection with the Subject Property.

5.2. Additional Environmental Record Sources

In addition to the databases identified above, the following surrounding listings were identified within the specified search radii: one (1) WMUDS/SWAT site, two (2) HIST CAL sites, nine (9) CERS HAZ WASTE sites, two (2) SWEEPS UST sites, three (3) HIST UST sites, two (2) CA FID UST sites, three (3) DEED sites, one (1) Cortese site, eight (8) CUPA sites, one (1) DRYCLEANERS site, twenty-three (23) Hist Cortese sites, two (2) HWP sites, one (1) EDR MGP site, and two (2) EDR Hist Auto sites. In some cases, these listings were previously discussed above wherein they were determined to not represent a recognized environmental condition. Those facilities not identified previously were determined to not represent a recognized environmental condition based upon any or all of the following considerations: distance, gradient, and/or regulatory status. No sites were identified on the additional environmental record sources that were identified as adjacent or having had a current reported release with potential to impact the Property.

25

5.3. Records Review Summary The Geare Group did not identify environmental records indicating a release of hazardous substances or petroleum products at the Property or the migration of hazardous substances or petroleum products from an off-site property to the Property via soil, groundwater or vapor that would be considered a REC or a VEC with respect to the Property.

26

6. HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION The objective of consulting historical sources is to develop a history of the previous uses of the property and surrounding area, in order to help identify the likelihood of past uses having led to RECs in connection with the Subject Property.

6.1. Aerial Photographs

Aerial photographs, which are of a sufficient resolution to allow identification of development and activities of areas encompassing the Subject Property, can be used in documenting the historical usage of a property. The Geare Group reviewed the following aerial photographs provided by EDR, copies of which are included in Appendix 5:

YEAR SOURCE 1931 UCSC 1940 UCSC 1956 UCSC 1963 UCSC 1974 USGS 1982 UCSC 1989 UCSC 1991 USGS 2007 USGS 2018 Google

Subject Property - The Property is depicted as vacant land prior to the 1956 photograph. By 1956, the current main structure of the Property is depicted. The 1963 Photograph depicts the structural additions to the existing structure. No significant changes to the Property were apparent throughout the remainder of the research period. Nearby Properties - The general vicinity of the Property is largely depicted as commercial in the first aerial photograph (1931). Vacant land is depicted to the north until the 1956 photograph, which depicts what appears to be an auto wrecking yard. By 1982 the adjoining property to the north appears to be commercial and vehicle storage. No properties of environmental concern near the Subject Property were found in review of aerial photographs aside from the auto wrecking yard to the north which is further discussed in Section 5.

27

6.2. Fire Insurance Maps

Fire insurance maps are maps that were produced for private fire insurance map companies that indicate uses of properties at specified dates and that encompass the property. These maps are often available at local libraries, historical societies, private resellers, or from the map companies who produced them. The Geare Group attempted to review Sanborn Maps at the Santa Cruz Public Library however no coverage could be found. 6.3. Property Tax Files

Tax files are files kept for property tax purposes by the local jurisdiction where the property is located and may include records of past ownership, appraisals, maps, sketches, photos. The Geare Group did not review the property tax files for the Subject Property due to the sufficient prior use history of the Subject Property obtained through the other standard historical sources. 6.4. Recorded Land Title Records

Land title records are records of historical fee ownership, which may include leases, land contracts and AULs on or of the property recorded in the place where land title records are, by law or custom, recorded for the local jurisdiction in which the property is located, often such records are kept by a municipal or county recorder or clerk. Such records may be obtained from title companies or directly from the local government agency. A chain of title was not provided to the Geare Group. The Geare Group did not review recorded land title records for the Subject Property due to the sufficient prior use history of the subject obtained through the other standard historical sources. 6.5. USGS Topographic Map

Geare Group reviewed the 7.5 minute series USGS topographic map for Santa Cruz, CA, covering the Subject Property dated 1954 and photo-revised in 1994 (see Appendix 1). Based on this map, no issues of concern were depicted.

6.6. Local Street Directories

Local street directories were published by private or sometimes government sources and show ownership and/or use of properties by reference to street addresses. Often local street directories are available at libraries of local governments, colleges or universities, or historical societies. The Geare Group reviewed the following local street directories obtained from EDR: Cole Information Services – 1992, 1995, 1999, 2003, 2008, 2013 Haines & Company – 1946, 1950, 1960, 1965, 1969, 1975, 1980, 1985 Subject Property - The Subject Property is first listed as “Thrash Marina Marine” in the 1960 directory and is subsequently listed as such through 1975. The Property is listed as vacant in the

28

1980 directory. The Property is listed as “Ski Shop Santa Cruz” from 1985 until 2010. The 2018 directory lists the Property with the current tenant; “Fastenal”. No tenants of concern were noted at the Subject Property. Nearby Properties - No historic conditions of significant environmental concern were identified at nearby properties aside from the listings for the George Wilson Facility which is first listed in 1960 and further discussed in Section 5. Other surrounding property tenants have been other various commercial tenants.

6.7. Building Department Records

Building department records generally consist of local government records indicating permission of the local government to construct, alter, or demolish improvements on the property. Often building department records are located in the building department of a municipality or county. The Geare Group attempted to review the building department records for the Subject Property at the Santa Cruz County Building Department. A FOIA request was issued to the building department on March 28, 2019. The response from the building department is still pending.

6.8. Zoning/Land Use Records

Zoning or land use records generally consist of local government records indicating the uses permitted by the local government in particular zones within its jurisdiction. The records may consist of maps and/or written records. They are often located in the planning department of a municipality or county. The Geare Group reviewed zoning/land use records for the Subject Property at the Santa Cruz Planning Department. Based on these records the Subject Property is zoned CC for commercial purposes.

6.9. Other Historical Sources

Other historical sources include sources that are credible to a reasonable person and that identify past uses of the property. This category includes, but is not limited to: miscellaneous maps, newspaper archives, internet sites, community organizations, local libraries, historical societies, current owners or occupants of neighboring properties, or records in the files and/or personal knowledge of the property owner and/or occupants. The Geare Group did not review any other historical sources and the information developed adequately revealed the site history. 6.10. Previous Assessments

The Geare Group was not provided a previous Phase I Assessment for the Property. 6.11. Data Gaps

After reviewing the above sources of information regarding historical uses of the Subject Property, Geare Group encountered the following data gaps:

29

• Some of the intervals between documented sources exceeded five years.

This data gap does not affect the ability of the environmental professionals involved on this project to identify RECs in connection with the Subject Property.

6.12. Prior Use History Summary

The Subject Property was first developed with a retail structure in circa 1950 and has had several retail tenants since that time.

Development in the vicinity of the Property since the 1930s was largely commercial. During the 1950s an auto wrecking yard was developed to the north and is further discussed in section 5. Based on the information above, it is the Geare Group’s professional opinion that the intent of the scope of work for prior use history has been met and no prior usage of the Subject Property or adjoining properties were identified that would be considered an REC for the Subject Property.

30

7. PROPERTY RECONNAISSANCE Date of Inspection: March 20 , 2019

Assessor: John Geare and Cary Geare

A copy of the assessors’ qualifications are included in Appendix 6.

Property Escort: Mr. Bob Thrash

Areas Accessed: All interior and exterior areas were accessed except the roof.

7.1. Methodology and Limiting Conditions The property reconnaissance consisted of visual observations of the Subject Property and improvements, adjoining properties as viewed from the Subject Property boundaries, and the surrounding area based on visual observations made from adjacent public thoroughfares. Building exteriors were observed along the perimeter from the ground, unless described otherwise. Building interiors were observed as they were made safely accessible, unless described otherwise. At the time of the reconnaissance, weather conditions were clear with temperatures approximately 68 degrees Fahrenheit. No significant inaccessible areas, limitations or physical obstructions were encountered during the reconnaissance. During the property reconnaissance, the Geare Group looked for the following visual indications of environmental concern at the Property. Consistent with the ASTM Standard, the efforts were made to identify the presence of the following items, which could indicate the potential presence of RECs on the Property. Photographs of the Property are provided in Appendix 2.

OBSERVATION YES NO

Hazardous Substances and/or Petroleum Products in Connection with Identified Uses

X

Aboveground and Underground Storage Tanks X

Strong, Pungent or Noxious Odors X

Pools of Liquids X

Drums and Containers of Hazardous or Unidentified Substances and Petroleum Products

X

Electrical or Hydraulic Equipment Likely to Contain Fluids X

Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning Equipment X

31

OBSERVATION YES NO

Interior Stains or Corrosion Other than from Water X

Floor Drains, Sumps, Oil/Water Separators and Clarifiers X

Pits, Ponds or Lagoons X

Exterior Stained Soils or Pavement X

Stressed Vegetation X

On-site Solid Waste Disposal or Unknown Fill X

Waste Water X

Wells X

Septic Systems X

Other Visual Concerns X

7.2. Hazardous Substances and Petroleum Products During the property reconnaissance, the Geare Group looked for the following visual indications of environmental concern at the Subject Property. Consistent with the ASTM Standard, the efforts were made to identify the presence of the following items, which could indicate the potential presence of RECs on the Subject Property. • Hazardous Substances and Petroleum Products in Connection with Identified Uses

The Subject Property is occupied by a private residence. No hazardous substances are in use beyond household cleaning supplies.

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND PETROLEUM PRODUCTS

General Type of Material

Approximate Quantity / Container / Material

Location Storage

Condition Cleaning Compounds/ Janitorial Supplies

Various sized containers ranging in size from 2 oz. to one pint.

Cabinets Good: No leaks or spills

32

• Odors

No strong, pungent or noxious odors were noted or reported that would indicate the potential for RECs at the Subject Property were noted emanating from either the Subject Property or an adjacent property.

• Pools of Liquids

No pools or sumps containing liquids likely to be hazardous substances or petroleum products were observed or reported on or adjacent to the Subject Property. • Drums

No drums were observed or reported on or adjacent to the Subject Property.

• Hazardous Substance, Petroleum Products and Unidentified Substance Containers

No containers containing hazardous substances, petroleum products or unidentified substances were noted or reported on or adjacent to the Subject Property. • Heating and Cooling Source

No cooling is provided at the Property. Heating is provided by gas fired space heaters.

• Interior Stains or Corrosion

No evidence of stains or corrosion on the floors, walls or ceilings at the Subject Property were noted or reported.

• Drains, Sumps, Oil/Water Separators and Clarifiers

Standard interior sanitary drains and exterior storm water drains were noted. No staining indicative of dumped materials was noted.

• Pits, Ponds or Lagoons

No pits, ponds or lagoons associated with hazardous substance, petroleum products or industrial activities at the Subject Property or adjacent properties were noted or reported.

• Stained Soil & Pavement

No staining was observed in the parking/storage areas.

33

• Stressed Vegetation

No significant areas of stressed vegetation were observed or reported on or adjacent to the Subject Property. • Solid Waste

The Geare Group did not observe any areas that appeared to have been filled or graded that would suggest the presence of waste including, but not limited to, construction debris, demolition debris or other solid waste. No such filling activities were reported to the Geare Group. No improperly stored solid waste was noted. The removal of solid waste is contracted to an outside service. • Waste Water

No operations, likely to require a significant waste water discharge, were noted or reported. Waters that enter the sanitary system go to the city’s treatment plant. Storm water flows off the property by sheet flow and enters the city’s storm water system. • Wells

No dry wells, irrigation wells, injection wells, abandoned wells, oil and gas wells were observed or reported. • Septic Systems

No septic system is operated on the Property. • Other No additional concerns were observed

Visual Observations Summary No visual, olfactory or other observation were identified that would indicate the presence of RECs on the Subject Property. 7.3. Storage Tanks

An effort was made to identify all ASTs and USTs, or vent pipes, fill pipes or access ways indicating the presence of USTs, at the Subject Property.

34

• Above Ground Storage Tanks

The Geare Group did not observe the presence of aboveground tanks. • Underground Storage Tanks No evidence of a UST system is present at the Property other than evidence of a closed UST consisting of patched concrete at the north perimeter. Storage Tank Summary No information was obtained or observations made that would indicate the presence of storage tanks on the Subject Property.

7.4. PCBs Geare Group relied on visual observations and interviews with the property contacts and/or the utility company to identify known or potential PCB-containing electrical or hydraulic equipment. Where identified, efforts were made to determine ownership and to identify indications of leakage. Per the ASTM Standard, fluorescent light ballasts, potentially containing PCBs, are not addressed due to the limited quantity of material present. • PCB-Containing Electrical Equipment No transformers were observed on the Subject Property.

• PCB-Containing Hydraulic Equipment No hydraulic elevators, lifts or compactors were observed or reported at the Subject Property.

PCB Summary No information was obtained or visual observation made that would indicate an REC related to PCBs at the Subject Property.

35

8. NON-ASTM SCOPE ISSUES

8.1. Asbestos

The Geare Group's conducted a preliminary evaluation for the potential presence of ACM at the Subject Property. The determination of exact quantities and locations of all ACMs was beyond the scope of this ESA. Only readily accessible building materials were observed. Inaccessible areas are not included in our observations since they are normally investigated prior to building renovation or demolition work. Materials listed in the Green Book, which were installed prior to 1989, are suspected of containing asbestos. It should be noted that, while less likely, asbestos may still be found in current building materials, particularly non-friable products, such as sheet vinyl flooring, vinyl floor tiles, floor tile mastic, joint compound, asbestos-cement board and roofing materials. Friable ACM, when dry, can be crumbled, pulverized, or reduced to powder by hand pressure. Non-friable ACM can be crumbled, pulverized, or reduced to powder during machining, cutting, drilling, or other abrasive procedures. Friable ACM is more likely to release fibers when disturbed or damaged than non-friable ACM. Some non-friable building products, such as vinyl floor tile, floor tile mastic, joint compound, and roofing materials, can still be manufactured with asbestos and installed in the United States; however, manufacturers have largely excluded asbestos fibers from their building products since the 1980s. Based on the pre-1989 date of construction, it is possible that suspect ACM is present on the Subject Property. The friable and non-friable suspect materials observed were in good condition.

Asbestos Summary Suspect ACM were identified on the Subject Property (i.e. plaster, floor tile, roofing materials, mastics). These materials were observed to be in good condition. No fiber release is expected from these materials during normal use. 8.2. Radon A preliminary evaluation of the potential for concerns relating to radon was made using the USEPA Map of Radon Zones. The USEPA Map is based solely on averages in order to identify areas in the country with the potential for elevated indoor radon levels. Elevated levels of radon have been found in all radon zones and a finding that a property is located in a zone with predicted levels of radon below the USEPA action level does not mean a specific property does not have elevated levels of radon. The evaluation considered the location of the property, type of construction utilized and usage of the property. The Subject Property is located in Radon Zone 2, which has a predicted average indoor screening level of greater than or equal to 2 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) and less than 4 pCi/L. The USEPA action level of radon is 4 pCi/L.

36

Radon Summary The Subject Property is located in an area not expected to have elevated levels of radon. Based on the low anticipated levels, radon is not expected to pose a concern to the Subject Property. 8.3. Lead-Based Paint A preliminary evaluation for the presence of LBP was conducted at the Subject Property. The evaluation was based on the age of the improvements, the extent of renovations, the usage of the property and past analytical results, if any. The Consumer Product Safety Commission banned the use of lead in paint in 1978. Most manufactures, however, had ceased using lead well before this time. Paint applied after 1978 is not considered suspect LBP. A comprehensive LBP survey was not conducted. Conclusions are based on observations of representative areas only. A finding of “no further action is warranted” or “LBP is not a significant concern” cannot be interpreted as the building is free of LBP. Because the existing improvements were constructed before 1978, it is possible that LBP is present.

Lead Based Paint Summary Due to the good condition of the paint at the Property, LBP is not considered a concern. 8.4. Drinking Water The potential for concerns relating to elevated levels of contaminants, particularly lead, was evaluated at the Subject Property. The evaluation looked at the source of drinking water and analytical data, if available. The Subject Property receives its drinking water from the City of Santa Cruz. The water supplied to the Subject Property reportedly meets federal and state drinking water standards, including those for lead and copper and is monitored monthly by the city.

Drinking Water Summary No information was uncovered that would indicate a concern relating to drinking water quality at the Subject Property.

8.5. Preliminary Evaluation for Microbial Contamination A preliminary evaluation for the presence of mold was conducted at the Subject Property. The evaluation was based on visual observations and discussions with site representatives regarding past or current water leaks, infiltration or ponding, tenant complaints of mold or health problems and known current mold problems. Observations were limited to the portions of the property walked

37

and the evaluation should not be construed as a comprehensive mold survey for the property. No sampling was conducted. No assessment of areas behind walls or in any other way, generally inaccessible. No visual or olfactory indications of water damage or mold growth were observed. No concerns regarding mold or musty smells were reported to the Geare Group. Mold Summary No concerns relating to mold were identified.

8.6. Flood Plains and Wetlands

The Geare Group reviewed reasonably ascertainable sources to determine if the Subject Property was located in a flood plain and made visual observations to determine if it were likely that all or portions of the Subject Property could be classified as a wetlands. A review of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps, published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, was performed. According to Community Panel Number 06087C0332E, effective on May 16, 2012, the Property is located in Flood Zone AE. Flood Zone AE regions consist of areas within the 100 year floodplain. The Geare Group did not observe any water bodies or vegetation indicative of wetlands on the Subject Property. The Subject Property is covered with the buildings, concrete, and asphalt. Based on the Geare Group’s observations, it is unlikely that portions of the Subject Property would be considered wetlands. Flood Plains and Wetlands Summary No concerns relating to surface water bodies, flood plains or wetlands were identified based on visual observations or other sources of information reviewed.

38

9. FINDINGS, OPINIONS AND CONCLUSIONS We have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527 of 124 River Street, Santa Cruz, California, the Property. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section 11 of this report. This assessment has revealed no evidence of RECs or CRECs in connection with the property. An historical recognized environmental condition (HREC) refers to an environmental condition which would have been considered a REC in the past, but which is no longer considered a REC based on subsequent assessment and/or remediation of any contaminants to below the most restrictive (generally residential) cleanup target concentrations or regulatory closure with no formal or implied restricted uses. The Geare Group did identify an HREC in connection with the Property, the presence of an historical UST. According to documents provided by the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department, a 500 gallon UST was operated at the Property prior to 1987, when Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department (SCCEHD) issued a directive for the fuel UST to be processed for closure. In 1988, a sampling event was conducted at the UST location and all soil samples obtained by Toxscan were found to have no detectable levels of hydrocarbon contamination and that soil levels met the regulatory standards. A permit was issued at that time for the UST to be closed. No further documentation was found regarding the UST issue in the SCCEHD files. This finding constitutes an HREC for the Property. The ASTM Standard was designed solely to meet the requirements of the USEPA’s All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) to permit the potential purchaser to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability, but recognizes that a User may choose to evaluate other business environmental risks (BERs). The investigation has revealed no BERs associated with the standard ASTM scope considerations. At the request of Client, the Geare Group conducted a preliminary evaluation for asbestos-containing material (ACM), radon, lead-based paint (LBP), drinking water quality, mold, floodplains and wetland which are ASTM Non-Scope Considerations. This investigation has revealed no concerns relating to these ASTM Non-Scope Considerations in connection with the Property. No significant data gaps were identified that would affect the ability of the environmental professional to identify RECs at the Subject Property.

39

10. RECOMMENDATIONS No further investigations are recommended at this time.

40

11. DEVIATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES The following items deviated from the ASTM 1527-13 Standard:

• The Standard offers a “Recommended Table of Contents and Report Format.” While the Geare

Group’s report includes all of the information required by the Standard, the Geare Group did not follow the recommend table of contents and report format for all sections of the report.

• The Standard only requires that the preparer of the report determine the presence of RECs, CRECs and HREC, if any, or data gaps that prevent a conclusion regarding the presence of RECs, CRECs and HRECs be made. At the request of Client, the Geare Group has included recommendations in this report.

• At the request of Client asbestos-containing materials, radon, lead-based paint, drinking water quality, and mold were addressed in this ESA. These are considered Non-Scope Considerations by the Standard.

• At the request of Client, a preliminary evaluation was made to determine if the Property was located in a flood plain or if portions of the Property could be classified as wetlands. These are considered Non-Scope Considerations by the Standard.

41

12. WRITTEN DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR 312.

Prepared By: Reviewed By:

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

Prepared By: Reviewed By:

Cary Geare John Geare, REA

APPENDIX 1 Topographic Map and Property Diagram

phase i environmental site assessment€¦ · cercla liability (hereinafter, the “landowner...

Documents