HomeMy WebLinkAboutParcel Map 23354 Parcel 3 WQMPCity of Temecula
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP)
TEMECULA VALLEY TOYOTA
LD24-0576, PA23-0382
41892 MOTOR CAR PARKWAY
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
APN: 921-680-003-7
PREPARED BY:
VENTURA ENGINEERING INLAND, INC.
27393 YNEZ ROAD, SUITE 159
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
(951) 252-7632
wilfredo@venturaengineeringinland.com
PREPARED FOR:
TEMECULA VALLEY TOYOTA
ATTENTION: TOM RUDNAI
26631 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
(951) 225-0555
trudnai@tvtoyota.com
DATE OF WQMP
Revision 3: July 31, 2024
Revision 2: June 20, 2024
Revision 1: May 6, 2024
Original Date: January 1, 2024
Preliminary Approval Date: November 24, 2023
APPROVED BY:
APPROVAL DATE:
APPROVED BY
CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC WORKS
david.pina 08/14/2024
08/14/2024 08/14/2024
08/14/20
ii WQMP
Preparation Date: July 31, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
Applicant's Certification
Project Name: Temecula Valley Toyota
Permit Application Number: LD24-0576, PA23-0382
APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION
I have read and understand that the City of Temecula has adopted minimum requirements for
managing urban runoff, including stormwater, from land development activities, as described in
the BMP Design Manual. I certify that this WQMP has been completed to the best of my ability
and accurately reflects the project being proposed and the applicable BMPs proposed to minimize
the potentially negative impacts of this project's land development activities on water quality. I
understand and acknowledge that the plan check review of this WQMP by City staff is confined
to a review and does not relieve me, as the Applicant, of my responsibilities for project design.
I hereby declare that the design is consistent with the requirements of the City of Temecula BMP
Design Manual, which is a design manual for compliance with local City of Temecula Stormwater
and Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls Ordinance (Chapter 8.28 et seq.) and
regional MS4 Permit (California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Order
No. R9-2013-0001 as amended by R9-2015-0001 and R9-2015-0100) requirements for
stormwater management; as well as the requirements of the City of Temecula Engineering and
Construction Manual (Chapter 18) and the City of Temecula Erosion and Sediment Control
Ordinance (Chapter 18.18 et seq.).
Applicant’s Signature Date:
Print Name
Company
STOP! Before continuing this form review Chapter 1.3 of the BMP Design Manual. If the
project type is listed in Table 1-2, permanent stormwater requirements do not apply to
your project. Write your exempt project category in the space provided below and skip to
Step 3. Do not complete Steps 1, 2, or 4 of this WQMP.
Project is not Exempt
Exempt Project category
WQMP 3
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Step 1: Source Control BMP Checklist
Source Control BMPs
All development projects must implement source control BMPs 4.2.1 through 4.2.6 where
applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4.2 and Appendix E of the City BMP Design Manual for
information to implement source control BMPs shown in this checklist.
Answer each category below pursuant to the following:
• "Yes" means the project will implement the source control BMP as described in Chapter
4.2 and/or Appendix E of the City BMP Design Manual. Discussion / justification must be
provided and show locations on the project plans. Select applicable Source Controls
in the Source Control BMP summary on the following page.
• "No" means the BMP is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement.
Discussion / justification must be provided.
• "N/A" means the BMP is not applicable at the project site because the project does not
include the feature that is addressed by the BMP (e.g., the project has no outdoor
materials storage areas). Discussion / justification must be provided.
Source Control Requirement Applied?
4.2.1 Prevention of Illicit Discharges into the MS4 ☒ Yes ☐No ☐N/A
Discussion / justification:
Roof runoff is being routed through inline filters and allowed to run off the site. Due to site
constraints, the project will be treating an equal area tributary to the proposed on-site
biofiltration basin as swap.
4.2.2 Storm Drain Stenciling or Signage ☒ Yes ☐No ☐N/A
Discussion / justification:
The biofiltration basin outlet will be stenciled.
4.2.3 Protect Outdoor Materials Storage Areas from Rainfall,
Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
☐ Yes ☐No ☒ N/A
Discussion / justification:
No outdoor material storage areas proposed.
4.2.4 Protect Materials Stored in Outdoor Work Areas from
Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
☐Yes ☐No ☒ N/A
Discussion / justification:
No outdoor storage areas proposed.
4.2.5 Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On,
Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
No trash enclosure proposed, already exists on the project site.
4 WQMP
Preparation Date: July 31, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
4.2.6 Additional BMPs Based on Potential Sources of Runoff
Pollutants
(see the checklist for Source Control BMP Summary)
☒Yes ☐No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification. Clearly identify which sources of runoff pollutants are discussed:
Please see the summary below.
Source Control BMP Summary
Select all source control BMPs identified for your project in sections 4.2.1 through 4.2.6 above in
the column on the left below. Then select “yes” if the BMP has been implemented and shown
on the project plans, “No” if the BMP has not been implemented, or “N/A” if the BMP is not
applicable to your project.
☒ SC-A. On-site storm drain inlets ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-B. Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump
pumps
☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-C. Interior parking garages ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☒ SC-D1. Need for future indoor & structural pest control ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-D2. Landscape/outdoor pesticide use ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-E. Pools, spas, ponds, fountains, and other water
features
☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-F. Food service ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-G. Refuse areas ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-H. Industrial processes ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-I. Outdoor storage of equipment or materials ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-J. Vehicle and equipment cleaning ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-K. Vehicle/equipment repair and maintenance ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-L. Fuel dispensing areas ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-M. Loading docks ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☒ SC-N. Fire sprinkler test water ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-O. Miscellaneous drain or wash water ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☒ SC-P. Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-Q. Large trash generating facilities ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-R. Animal facilities ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-S. Plant nurseries and garden centers ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-T. Automotive facilities ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
Note: Show all source control measures applied above on the plan sheets.
WQMP 5
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Step 2: Site Design BMP Checklist
Site Design BMPs
All development projects must implement site design BMPs SD-A through SD-H where
applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4.3 and Appendix E of the City BMP Design Manual for
information to implement site design BMPs shown in this checklist.
Answer each category below pursuant to the following:
• "Yes" means the project will implement the site design BMP as described in Chapter 4.3
and/or Appendix E of the City BMP Design Manual. Discussion / justification must be
provided and show locations on the project plans.
• "No" means the BMP is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement.
Discussion / justification must be provided.
• "N/A" means the BMP is not applicable at the project site because the project does not
include the feature that is addressed by the BMP (e.g., the project site has no existing
natural areas to conserve). Discussion / justification must be provided.
Site Design Requirement Applied?
4.3.1 Maintain Natural Drainage Pathways and Hydrologic
Features
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. None to maintain.
4.3.2 Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. None to conserve.
4.3.3 Minimize Impervious Area ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. None to minimize.
4.3.4 Minimize Soil Compaction ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. None to conserve.
4.3.5 Impervious Area Dispersion ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. No way to disperse.
6 WQMP
Preparation Date: July 31, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
4.3.6 Runoff Collection ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. None way to collect runoff feasibly.
4.3.7 Landscaping with Native or Drought Tolerant Species ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The only new planting proposed is in the biofiltration basin. This will be native or drought
tolerant species as required.
4.3.8 Harvesting and Using Precipitation ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. Harvesting and re-use is not
feasible.
WQMP 7
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Step 3: Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist
☒ Check this box only for the Preliminary WQMP phase. Construction BMPs have not been
included at this time; however, the Construction BMPs and this checklist must be completed and
provided during the final engineering plan check process.
Minimum Required Standard Construction Stormwater BMPs
If you answer “Yes” to any of the questions below, your project is subject to Table 1 on the following page
(Minimum Required Standard Construction Stormwater BMPs). As noted in Table 1, please select at
least the minimum number of required BMPs 1, or as many as are feasible for your project. If no BMP is
selected, an explanation must be given in the box provided. The following questions are intended to aid
in determining construction BMP requirements for your project.
Note: All selected BMPs below must be included on the BMP plan incorporated into the
construction plan sets.
1. Will there be soil disturbing activities that will result in exposed soil areas?
(This includes minor grading and trenching.)
Reference Table 1 Items A, B, D, and E
Note: Soil disturbances NOT considered significant include, but are not limited to,
change in use, mechanical/electrical/plumbing activities, signs, temporary trailers,
interior remodeling, and minor tenant improvement.
☒ Yes ☐ No
2. Will there be asphalt paving, including patching?
Reference Table 1 Items D and F
☒ Yes ☐ No
3. Will there be slurries from mortar mixing, coring, or concrete saw cutting?
Reference Table 1 Items D and F
☒ Yes ☐ No
4. Will there be solid wastes from concrete demolition and removal, wall
construction, or form work?
Reference Table 1 Items D and F
☒ Yes ☐ No
5. Will there be stockpiling (soil, compost, asphalt, concrete, solid waste) for over
24 hours?
Reference Table 1 Items D and F
☒ Yes ☐ No
6. Will there be dewatering operations?
Reference Table 1 Items C and D ☐ Yes ☒ No
7. Will there be temporary on-site storage of construction materials, including
mortar mix, raw landscaping and soil stabilization materials, treated lumber,
rebar, and plated metal fencing materials?
Reference Table 1 Items E and F
☒ Yes ☐ No
8. Will trash or solid waste product be generated from this project?
Reference Table 1 Item F
☒ Yes ☐ No
9. Will construction equipment be stored on site (e.g.: fuels, oils, trucks, etc.?)
Reference Table 1 Item F
☐ Yes ☒ No
10. Will Portable Sanitary Services (“Porta-potty”) be used on the site?
Reference Table 1 Item F
☒ Yes ☐ No
1 Minimum required BMPs are those necessary to comply with the City of Temecula Erosion and Sediment Control
Ordinance (Chapter 18.18 et seq.) and the City of Temecula Engineering and Construction Manual (Chapter 18).
8 WQMP
Preparation Date: July 31, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
Table 1. Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist
Minimum Required
Best Management Practices
(BMPs)
CALTRANS
SW
Handbook2
Detail
BMP
Selected
Reference sheet No.’s where each
selected BMP is shown on the
plans.
If no BMP is selected, an
explanation must be provided.
A. Select Erosion Control Method for Disturbed Slopes (choose at least one for the appropriate
season)
Vegetation Stabilization
Planting 3 (Summer)
SS-2, SS-4 ☐
Precise Grading Plan
Sheet 10
Hydraulic Stabilization
Hydroseeding2 (Summer)
SS-4 ☐
Bonded Fiber Matrix or
Stabilized Fiber Matrix 4 (Winter)
SS-3 ☒
Physical Stabilization
Erosion Control Blanket3
(Winter)
SS-7 ☒
B. Select erosion control method for disturbed flat areas (slope < 5%) (choose at least one)
Will use erosion control
measures from Item A on flat
areas also
SS-3, 4, 7 ☒
Precise Grading Plan
Sheet 10 Sediment Desilting Basin (must
treat all site runoff)
SC-2 ☐
Mulch, straw, wood chips, soil
application
SS-6, SS-8 ☐
2 State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2003. Storm Water Quality Handbooks, Construction
Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual. March. Available online at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/construc/stormwater/manuals.htm.
3 If Vegetation Stabilization (Planting or Hydroseeding) is proposed for erosion control it may be installed between
May 1st and August 15th. Slope irrigation is in place and needs to be operable for slopes >3 feet. Vegetation
must be watered and established prior to October 1st. The owner must implement a contingency physical BMP
by August 15th if vegetation establishment does not occur by that date. If landscaping is proposed, erosion
control measures must also be used while landscaping is being established. Established vegetation must have a
subsurface mat of intertwined mature roots with a uniform vegetative coverage of 70 percent of the natural
vegetative coverage or more on all disturbed areas.
4 All slopes over three feet must have established vegetative cover prior to final permit approval.
WQMP 9
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Table 1. Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist (continued)
Minimum Required
Best Management Practices
(BMPs)
CALTRANS
SW Handbook
Detail
BMP
Selected
Reference sheet No.’s where each
selected BMP is shown on the
plans.
If no BMP is selected, an
explanation must be provided.
C. If runoff or dewatering operation is concentrated, velocity must be controlled using an energy
dissipater
Energy Dissipater Outlet
Protection 5
SS-10 ☐ N/A
D. Select sediment control method for all disturbed areas (choose at least one)
Silt Fence SC-1 ☒
Precise Grading Plan
Sheet 10
Fiber Rolls (Straw Wattles) SC-5 ☒
Gravel & Sand Bags SC-6 & 8 ☒
Dewatering Filtration NS-2 ☐
Storm Drain Inlet Protection SC-10 ☒
Engineered Desilting Basin
(sized for 10-year flow)
SC-2 ☐
E. Select method for preventing offsite tracking of sediment (choose at least one)
Stabilized Construction Entrance TC-1 ☒
Precise Grading Plan
Sheet 10
Construction Road Stabilization TC-2 ☐
Entrance/Exit Tire Wash TC-3 ☐
Entrance/Exit Inspection &
Cleaning Facility
TC-1 ☐
Street Sweeping and Vacuuming SC-7 ☒
F. Select the general site management BMPs
F.1 Materials Management
Material Delivery & Storage WM-1 ☒ Precise Grading Plan
Sheet 10 Spill Prevention and Control WM-4 ☒
F.2 Waste Management 6
Waste Management
Concrete Waste Management
WM-8 ☒
Precise Grading Plan
Sheet 10 Solid Waste Management WM-5 ☒
Sanitary Waste Management WM-9 ☒
Hazardous Waste Management WM-6 ☐
Note: The Construction General Permit (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ) also requires all projects
not subject to the BMP Design Manual to comply with runoff reduction requirements through the
implementation of post-construction BMPs as described in Section XIII of the order.
5 Regional Standard Drawing D-40 – Rip Rap Energy Dissipater is also acceptable for velocity reduction.
6 Not all projects will have every waste identified. The applicant is responsible for identifying wastes that will be
onsite and applying the appropriate BMP. For example, if concrete will be used, BMP WM-8 must be selected.
10 WQMP
Preparation Date: July 31, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
Step 4: Project type determination (Standard or Priority
Development Project)
Is the project part of another Priority Development Project (PDP)? ☒ Yes ☐ No
If so, Standard and PDP requirements apply. Go to Step 4.1 and select “PDP”
The project is (select one): ☐ New Development ☒ Redevelopment 7
The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is: 20,087 ft2
The total existing (pre-project) impervious area is: 105,587 ft2
The total area disturbed by the project is: 20,890 ft2
If the total area disturbed by the project is 1 acre (43,560 sq. ft.) or more OR the project is part of a larger
common plan of development disturbing 1 acre or more, a Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number
must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board.
WDID#: N/A, Disturbance is Less Than 1 Acre
Is the project in any of the following categories, (a) through (f)?8
Yes
☐
No
☒
(a) New development projects that create 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces
9(collectively over the entire project site). This includes commercial, industrial, residential,
mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land.
Yes
☒
No
☐
(b) Redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of
impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site on an existing site of 10,000
square feet or more of impervious surfaces). This includes commercial, industrial,
residential, mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land.
Yes
☐
No
☒
(c) New and redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of
impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site), and support one or more of
the following uses:
(i) Restaurants. This category is defined as a facility that sells prepared foods and
drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment
stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) code 5812).
(ii) Hillside development projects. This category includes development on any
natural slope that is twenty-five percent or greater.
(iii) Parking lots. This category is defined as a land area or facility for the temporary
parking or storage of motor vehicles used personally, for business, or for
commerce.
(iv) Streets, roads, highways, freeways, and driveways. This category is defined as
any paved impervious surface used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks,
motorcycles, and other vehicles.
7 Redevelopment is defined as: The creation and/or replacement of impervious surface on an already developed
site. Examples include the expansion of a building footprint, road widening, the addition to or replacement of a
structure, and creation or addition of impervious surfaces. Replacement of impervious surfaces includes any
activity that is not part of a routine maintenance activity where impervious material(s) are removed, exposing
underlying soil during construction. Redevelopment does not include routine maintenance activities, such as
trenching and resurfacing associated with utility work; pavement grinding; resurfacing existing roadways; new
sidewalks construction; pedestrian ramps; or bike lanes on existing roads; and routine replacement of damaged
pavement, such as pothole repair.
8 Applicants should note that any development project that will create and/or replace 10,000 square feet or more of
impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site) is considered a new development.
WQMP 11
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Project type determination (continued)
Yes
☐
No
☒
(d) New or redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 2,500 square feet or more of
impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site), and discharging directly to
an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA). “Discharging directly to” includes flow that is
conveyed overland a distance of 200 feet or less from the project to the ESA, or
conveyed in a pipe or open channel any distance as an isolated flow from the project to
the ESA (i.e. not commingled with flows from adjacent lands).
Note: ESAs are areas that include but are not limited to all Clean Water Act Section
303(d) impaired water bodies; areas designated as Areas of Special Biological
Significance by the State Water Board and San Diego Water Board; State Water
Quality Protected Areas; water bodies designated with the RARE beneficial use by
the State Water Board and San Diego Water Board; and any other equivalent
environmentally sensitive areas which have been identified by the Copermittees.
See BMP Design Manual Chapter 1.4.2 for additional guidance.
Yes
☐
No
☒
(e) New development projects, or redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000
square feet or more of impervious surface, that support one or more of the following
uses:
(i) Automotive repair shops. This category is defined as a facility that is categorized
in any one of the following SIC codes: 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532-7534, or 7536-
7539.
(ii) Retail gasoline outlets (RGOs). This category includes RGOs that meet the
following criteria: (a) 5,000 square feet or more or (b) a projected Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) of 100 or more vehicles per day.
Yes
☐
No
☒
(f) New or redevelopment projects that result in the disturbance of one or more acres of land
and are expected to generate pollutants post construction.
Note: See BMP Design Manual Chapter 1.4.2 for additional guidance.
Does the project meet the definition of one or more of the Priority Development Project categories (a)
through (f) listed above?
☐ No – the project is not a Priority Development Project (Standard Project).
☒ Yes – the project is a Priority Development Project (PDP).
Further guidance may be found in Chapter 1 and Table 1-2 of the BMP Design Manual.
The following is for redevelopment PDPs only:
The area of existing (pre-project) impervious area at the project site is: 105,587 ft2 (A)
The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is 20,890 ft2 (B)
Percent impervious surface created or replaced (B/A)*100: 19.7%
The percent impervious surface created or replaced is (select one based on the above calculation):
☒ less than or equal to fifty percent (50%) – only newly created or replaced impervious areas are
considered a PDP and subject to stormwater requirements
OR
☐ greater than fifty percent (50%) – the entire project site is considered a PDP and subject to
stormwater requirements
12 WQMP
Preparation Date: July 31, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
Step 4.1: Water Quality Management Plan requirements
Step Answer Progression
Is the project a Standard Project,
Priority Development Project (PDP), or
exception to PDP definitions?
To answer this item, complete Step 4
Project Type Determination Checklist,
and see PDP exemption information
below.
For further guidance, see Chapter 1.4
of the BMP Design Manual in its
entirety.
☐ Standard
Project
Standard Project requirements apply, STOP,
you have satisfied stormwater
requirements.
☒ PDP
Standard and PDP requirements apply.
Complete Exhibit A “PDP
Requirements.”
http://temeculaca.gov/wqmpa2
☐ PDP
Exemption
Go to Step 4.2 below.
Step 4.2: Exemption to PDP definitions
Is the project exempt from PDP definitions based on either of the following:
☐ Projects that are only new or retrofit paved sidewalks, bicycle
lanes, or trails that meet the following criteria:
(i) Designed and constructed to direct stormwater runoff to
adjacent vegetated areas, or other non-erodible permeable
areas; OR
(ii) Designed and constructed to be hydraulically disconnected
from paved streets or roads [i.e., runoff from the new
improvement does not drain directly onto paved streets or
roads]; OR
(iii) Designed and constructed with permeable pavements or
surfaces in accordance with City of Temecula Guidance on
Green Infrastructure;
If so:
Standard Project
requirements apply, AND
any additional requirements
specific to the type of
project. City concurrence
with the exemption is
required. Provide
discussion and list any
additional requirements
below in this form.
STOP, you have
satisfied stormwater
requirements.
☐ Projects that are only retrofitting or redeveloping existing paved
alleys, streets or roads that are designed and constructed in
accordance with the City of Temecula Guidance on Green
Infrastructure.
Complete Exhibit A
“PDP Requirements.”
Select Green Streets
Exemptions where
applicable.
Discussion / justification, and additional requirements for exceptions to PDP definitions, if applicable:
Project is not exempt from PDP requirements.
Exhibit A
City of Temecula
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
ii PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Preparer's Certification Page
Project Name: Temecula Valley Toyota
Permit Application Number: PA23-0382
PREPARER'S CERTIFICATION
I hereby declare that I am the Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of Stormwater best
management practices (BMPs) for this project, and that I have exercised responsible charge over
the design of the BMPs as defined in Section 6703 of the Business and Professions Code, and
that the design is consistent with the PDP requirements of the City of Temecula BMP Design
Manual, which is a design manual for compliance with local City of Temecula Stormwater and
Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls Ordinance (Chapter 8.28 et seq.) and
regional MS4 Permit (California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Order
No. R9-2013-0001 as amended by R9-2015-0001 and R9-2015-0100) requirements for
stormwater management.
I have read and understand that the City of Temecula has adopted minimum requirements for
managing urban runoff, including stormwater, from land development activities, as described in
the BMP Design Manual. I certify that this PDP WQMP has been completed to the best of my
ability and accurately reflects the project being proposed and the applicable BMPs proposed to
minimize the potentially negative impacts of this project's land development activities on water
quality. I understand and acknowledge that the plan check review of this PDP WQMP by City
staff is confined to a review and does not relieve me, as the Engineer in Responsible Charge of
design of stormwater BMPs for this project, of my responsibilities for project design.
Engineer of Work's Signature, PE Number & Expiration Date
Wilfredo Ventura
Print Name
Ventura Engineering Inland, Inc. (951) 240-5222
Company & Phone No.
July 31, 2024___________________
Date
Engineer's Seal:
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 3
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Step 1: Site Information Checklist
Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns
Project Watershed (Complete Hydrologic Unit,
Area, and Subarea Name with Numeric Identifier;
e.g., 902.52 Santa Margarita HU, Pechanga HA,
Wolf HSA)
902.51: Santa Margarita HU, Pechanga HA,
Pauba HSA, Long Canyon
Current Status of the Site (select all that apply):
☒ Existing development
☐ Previously graded but not built out
☐ Demolition completed without new construction
☐ Agricultural or other non-impervious use
☐ Vacant, undeveloped/natural
Description / Additional Information:
Project site is currently an operating car dealership.
Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply and provide each area on site):
☒ Pervious Area: 0.136 Acres ( 5,945 Square Feet)
☒ Impervious Area: 2.424 Acres ( 105,587 Square Feet)
Description / Additional Information:
The project site currently is paved parking, landscaping areas, driveways, parking areas, and
buildings.
How is stormwater runoff conveyed from the site? At a minimum, this description should
answer:
(1) Whether existing drainage conveyance is natural or urban;
(2) Is runoff from offsite conveyed through the site? If yes, describe the offsite drainage areas,
design flows, and locations where offsite flows enter the project site, and summarize how such
flows are conveyed through the site;
(3) Provide details regarding existing project site drainage conveyance network, including any
existing storm drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, stormwater treatment
facilities, natural or constructed channels; and
(4) Identify all discharge locations from the existing project site along with a summary of
conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge locations. Provide summary of
the pre-project drainage areas and design flows to each of the existing runoff discharge
locations. Reference the Drainage report Attachment for detailed calculations.
4 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Describe existing site drainage patterns:
Hydrology Note: The project has not performed hydrology calculations at this time. The project
site already was already developed as a car dealership. The existing development was not
required to implement any stormwater BMPs. The site sheet flows to Motor Car Parkway
(1) The project site currently sheet flows overland and through roof drains to adjacent areas that
then discharge into the existing curb and gutter adjacent to the project site and eventually in
the adjacent public storm drain inlets.
(2) Off-site flows do not flow onto or through the site.
(3) There is an existing storm drain manhole just to the west of the project site in the existing
alley.
Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns
Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities:
The project proposes the redevelopment and construction of a new covered waiting lane, new
buildings, a patio, biofiltration basin and some re-striping. The project twill maintain the same
general flow patterns and due to the restrictions of the site, the project proposes to treat an area
of the parking area upstream of the biofiltration basin where treatment is feasible equal to the
required volumetrics of the proposed elements.
Proposed Land Cover Includes (select all that apply and provide each area on site):
Existing to Remain
☐ Pervious Area: 0 Acres ( 0 Square Feet)
☐ Impervious Areas: 0 Acres ( 0 Square Feet)
Existing to Be Replaced
☒ Pervious Area: 0.0013 Acres ( 58 Square Feet)
☒ Impervious Areas: 0.4567 Acres ( 19,894 Square Feet)
Newly Created
☒ Pervious Area: 0.0184 Acres ( 803 Square Feet)
☒ Impervious Areas 0.4611 Acres ( 20,087 Square Feet)
Total
☒ Pervious Area: 0.0184 Acres ( 803 Square Feet)
☒ Impervious Areas 0.4611 Acres ( 20,087 Square Feet)
Description / Additional Information:
List/describe proposed impervious features of the project (e.g., buildings, roadways, parking
lots, courtyards, athletic courts, other impervious features):
New Roofs, New Buildings, ADA Path, Driveways
List/describe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas):
Landscape revegetation, Biofiltration Basin
Describe any grading or changes to site topography:
Minimal grading in support of the proposed structures and elements.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 5
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Provide details regarding the proposed project site drainage conveyance network, including
storm drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, stormwater treatment facilities,
natural or constructed channels, and the method for conveying offsite flows through or around
the proposed project site. Identify all discharge locations from the proposed project site along
with a summary of the conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge
locations. Provide a summary of pre- and post-project drainage areas and design flows to each
of the runoff discharge locations. Reference the drainage study for detailed calculations.
Describe proposed site drainage patterns:
The project will be adding new covered drive lanes at the service building, new roof over the
services lanes, new building additions, new patio area, a new ADA path to the adjacent street
and a new biofiltration basin.
Due to site constraints and design on the small, compact lot, roof runoff will be discharged to the
adjacent areas via downspout filters. This will then sheet flow off the project site as there is no
feasible area to include treatment facilities directly where the new impervious areas discharge.
The site also contains a large vehicle parking area. An equivalent value of other impervious
areas will be treated with the new biofiltration basin as they are tributary to the area that a
biofiltration basin can be built in. Currently, the project site sheet flows off the project without
any treatment and into the local storm drain system.
In addition, the proposed conditions reduces the imperviousness of the project site through the
addition of the biofiltration basin.
The compliance point for the project in the existing conditions and proposed conditions is the
adjacent storm drain; however, the existing conditions is overland, untreated flows and the
proposed conditions is through a biofiltration basin.
6 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Description of Receiving Water(s) and Pollutants of Concern
Describe flow path of stormwater from the project site discharge location(s), through urban
storm conveyance systems as applicable, to receiving creeks, rivers, and lagoons as applicable,
and ultimate discharge to the Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable):
Local drainage to Murrieta Creek to Temecula Creek to Santa Margarita River to Margarita
Lagoon to the Pacific Ocean.
List any 303(d) impaired water bodies 1 within the path of stormwater from the project site to the
Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable), identify the
pollutant(s)/stressor(s) causing impairment, and identify any TMDLs and/or Highest Priority
Pollutants from the WQIP for the impaired water bodies (see BMP Design Manual Appendix
B.6.1):
303(d) Impaired Water Body Pollutant(s)/Stressor(s)
TMDLs / WQIP Highest
Priority Pollutant
Long Canyon Not Listed Eutrophication
Murrieta Creek
Chlorpyrifos, Copper Indicator
Bacteria, Total Dissolved
Solids, Toxicity
Eutrophication
Temecula Creek
Chlorpyrifos, Copper Indicator
Bacteria, Total Dissolved
Solids, Toxicity
Eutrophication
Santa Margarita River Indicator Bacteria, Iron,
Manganese, Nitrogen Eutrophication
Identify pollutants expected from the project site based on all proposed use(s) of the site (see
BMP Design Manual Appendix B.6.):
Pollutant
Not Applicable to
the Project Site
Anticipated from the
Project Site
Also a Receiving
Water Pollutant of
Concern
Sediment ☐ ☒ ☐
Nutrients ☐ ☒ ☐
Heavy Metals ☐ ☒ ☐
Organic Compounds ☐ ☒ ☐
Trash & Debris ☐ ☒ ☐
Oxygen Demanding
Substances ☒ ☒ ☒
Oil & Grease ☐ ☒ ☐
Bacteria & Viruses ☐ ☒ ☐
Pesticides ☐ ☒ ☐
1 The current list of Section 303(d) impaired water bodies can be found at
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_quality_assessment/#impaired
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 7
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Site Requirements and Constraints
The following is for redevelopment PDPs only:
The area of existing (pre-project) impervious area at the project site is: 105,587 ft2 (A)
The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is 20,087 ft2 (B)
Percent impervious surface created or replaced (B/A)*100: 19.7 %
The percent impervious surface created or replaced is (select one based on the above calculation):
☒ less than or equal to fifty percent (50%) – only newly created or replaced impervious areas
are considered a PDP and subject to stormwater requirements
OR
☐ greater than fifty percent (50%) – the entire project site is considered a PDP and subject to
stormwater requirements
List applicable site requirements or constraints that will influence stormwater management
design, such as zoning requirements including setbacks and open space, or local codes
governing minimum street width, sidewalk construction, allowable pavement types, and
drainage requirements:
Limited space for inline BMPs. Equivalent areas on site will be treated.
Optional Additional Information or Continuation of Previous Sections As Needed
This space provided for additional information or continuation of information from previous
sections as needed.
No additional space required.
8 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Step 2: Strategy for Meeting PDP Performance Requirements
PDPs must implement BMPs to control pollutants in stormwater that may be discharged from a
project (see Chapter 5). PDPs subject to hydromodification management requirements must
implement flow control BMPs to manage hydromodification (see Chapter 6). Both stormwater
pollutant control and flow control can be achieved within the same BMP(s). Projects triggering
the 50% rule must address stormwater requirements for the entire site.
Structural BMPs must be verified by the City at the completion of construction. This may include
requiring the project owner or project owner's representative and engineer of record to certify
construction of the structural BMPs (see Chapter 1.12). Structural BMPs must be maintained
into perpetuity, and the City must confirm the maintenance (see Chapter 7).
Provide a narrative description of the general strategy for pollutant control and flow control at
the project site in the box below. This information must describe how the steps for selecting and
designing stormwater pollutant control BMPs presented in Chapter 5.1 of the BMP Design
Manual were followed, and the results (type of BMPs selected). For projects requiring flow
control BMPs, indicate whether pollutant control and flow control BMPs are integrated or
separate. At the end of this discussion, provide a summary of all the BMPs within the project
including the type and number.
Describe the general strategy for BMP implementation at the site.
Due to site constraints of the existing facility, the area of required treatment with be obtained by
flows tributary to the BMP and not the newly created areas. An equivalent area will be able to be
treated in this way.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 9
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
STORMWATER POLLUTANT CONTROL BMP SELECTION
Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet:
Attachment
Sequence Contents Checklist
Special Considerations for
Redevelopment Projects (50% Rule)
see chapter 1.7 and Step 1.3
☒ Less than or equal to fifty
percent (50%)
☐ Greater than fifty percent (50%)
Refer to Figure 5-1: Stormwater Pollutant Control BMP Selection Flow Chart
Attachment 1a DMA Exhibit (Required)
See DMA Exhibit Checklist on the
back of this form.
See Chapter 3.3.3 for guidance
☒ Included
☐ Entire project is designed with
Self-Mitigating and De-Minimis
DMAs. The project is compliant
with Pollution Control BMP sizing
requirements. STOP *
Attachment 1b Figure B.1-1: 85th Percentile 24-hour
Isohyetal Map with project location
☒ Included
Attachment 1c Worksheet B.3-1 Structural BMP
Feasibility: Project-Scale BMP
Feasibility Analysis
☒ Included
Attachment 1d Worksheet B.2-1 DCV 2 ☒ Included
Attachment 1e Applicable Site Design BMP Fact
Sheet(s) from Appendix E
☒ Included
☐ Entire project is designed with
Self-Retaining DMAs. The project
is compliant with Pollution Control
BMP sizing requirements. STOP *
Attachment 1f Structural BMP Inventory ☐ Included
Attachment 1g Structural Pollutant Control BMP
Checklist for each Structural BMP
☒ Included
Attachment 1h Is Onsite Alternative Compliance
proposed?3
☒ No
☐ Yes - Include WQE worksheets
Attachment 1i Offsite Alternative Compliance
Participation Form - Pollutant Control
Refer to Figure 1-3:Pathways to
Participating in Offsite Alternative
Compliance Program
☒ Full Compliance Onsite
☐ Partial Compliance Onsite with
Offsite Alternative Compliance or
Full Offsite Alternative
Compliance. Document onsite
structural BMPs and complete
- Pollutant Control Offsite
Alternative Compliance
Participation Form, and
- WQE worksheets
* If this box is checked, the remainder of Attachment 1 does not need to be filled out.
2 All stormwater pollutant control worksheets have been automated and are available for download at:
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/dpw/watersheds/DevelopmentandConstruction/BMP_Design_Manual.
html
3 Water Quality Equivalency Guidance and automated worksheets for Region 9:
http://www.projectcleanwater.org/water-quality-equivalency-guidance/
10 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 1a: DMA Exhibit Checklist
See Chapter 3.3.3 for guidance
☒ Point(s) of Compliance
☒ Project Site Boundary
☒ Project Disturbed Area Footprint
☒ Drainage management area (DMA) boundaries, DMA ID numbers, DMA areas (square
footage or acreage), DMA land use and pollutants of concern, and DMA type (i.e., drains to
structural BMP, self-retaining, self-mitigating, or de-minimis) Note on exhibit de-minimis areas
and discuss reason they could not be included in Step 1.3 per section 5.2.2 of the manual.
Include offsite areas receiving treatment to mitigate Onsite Water Quality Equivalency.
☒ Include summary table of worksheet inputs for each DMA.
☒ Include description of self-mitigating areas.
☒ Potential pollutant source areas and corresponding required source control BMPs (see
Chapter 4, Appendix E.1, and Step 3.5)
☒ Proposed Site Design BMPs and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness.
Show sections, details, and dimensions of site design BMP’s per chapter 5.2.3 (tree wells,
dispersion areas, rain gardens, permeable pavement, rain barrels, green roofs, etc.)
☐ Proposed Harvest and Use BMPs
☒ Underlying hydrologic soil group (Web Soil Survey)
☐ Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands, pond, lake)
☒ Existing topography and impervious areas
☒ Proposed grading and impervious areas. If the project is a subdivision or spans multiple lots
show pervious and impervious totals for each lot.
☒ Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite
☐ Potable water wells, onsite wastewater treatment systems (septic), underground utilities
☒ Structural BMPs (identify location, structural BMP ID No., type of BMP, and size/detail)
☐ Approximate depth to groundwater at each structural BMP
☐ Approximate infiltration rate and feasibility (full retention, partial retention, biofiltration) at
each structural BMP
☐ Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected and or conveyed through the project
site, if applicable.
☐ Temporary Construction BMPs. Include protection of source control, site design and
structural BMPs during construction.
377.00'CL
30
.
0
0
'
30
.
0
0
'
AP
N
:
9
2
1
-
6
8
0
-
0
2
1
OW
N
E
R
:
M
T
S
A
N
J
A
C
I
N
T
O
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
D
I
S
T
R
I
C
T
AP
N
:
9
2
1
-
6
8
0
-
0
0
4
OW
N
E
R
:
D
I
E
G
O
O
F
T
E
M
E
C
U
L
A
L
L
C
S
1
0
°
1
2
'
4
5
"
E
7
7
1
.
8
5
'
N
1
0
°
1
2
'
4
5
"
W
9
2
2
.
7
6
'
BA
S
I
S
O
F
B
E
A
R
I
N
G
S
N
1
0
°
1
2
'
4
5
"
W
3
7
7
.
0
0
'
SDSDSDSD
S
S
S
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
NO
PARKING
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
S
D
S
D
APPROX SITE LOCATION
85TH=0.91
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-8 July 2018
Worksheet B.2-1. DCV
Design Capture Volume Worksheet B-2.1
1 85th percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= inches
2 Area tributary to BMP (s) A= acres
3
Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1.1
and B.2.1) C= unitless
4 Tree well volume reduction TCV= cubic-feet
5 Rain barrels volume reduction RCV= cubic-feet
6
Calculate DCV =
(3630 x C x d x A) – TCV - RCV DCV= cubic-feet
0.91
0.4796
0.869
0
0
1,377
E-107 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
E.17 PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
Location: 805 and Bonita Road, Chula vista, CA.
Biofiltration with partial retention (partial infiltration and biofiltration) facilities are vegetated surface
water systems that filter water through vegetation, and soil or engineered media prior to infiltrating
into native soils, discharge via underdrain, or overflow to the downstream conveyance system.
Where feasible, these BMPs have an elevated underdrain discharge point that creates storage
capacity in the aggregate storage layer. Biofiltration with partial retention facilities are co mmonly
incorporated into the site within parking lot landscaping, along roadsides, and in open spaces. They
can be constructed in ground or partially aboveground, such as planter boxes with open bottoms to
allow infiltration. Treatment is achieved through filtration, sedimentation, sorption, infiltration,
biochemical processes and plant uptake.
Typical biofiltration with partial retention components include:
Inflow distribution mechanisms (e.g, perimeter flow spreader or filter strips)
Energy dissipation mechanism for concentrated inflows (e.g., splash blocks or riprap)
Shallow surface ponding for captured flows
Side Slope and basin bottom vegetation selected based on climate and ponding depth
Non-floating mulch layer (Optional)
Media layer (planting mix or engineered media) capable of supporting vegetation growth
Filter course layer consisting of aggregate to prevent the migration of fines into
uncompacted native soils or the optional aggregate storage layer
Aggregate storage layer with underdrain(s)
Uncompacted native soils at the bottom of the facility
Overflow structure
MS4 Permit Category
NA
Manual Category
Partial Retention
Applicable Performance
Standard
Pollutant Control
Flow Control
Primary Benefits
Volume Reduction
Treatment
Peak Flow Attenuation
Description
E-108 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
Typical plan and Section view of a Biofiltration with Partial Retention BMP
E-109 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
Partial infiltration BMP with biofiltration treatment for storm water pollutant control.
Biofiltration with partial retention can be designed so that a portion of the DCV is infiltrated by
providing infiltration storage below the underdrain invert. The infiltration storage depth should be
determined by the volume that can be reliably infiltrated within drawdown time limitations. Water
discharged through the underdrain is considered biofiltration treatment. Storage provided above the
underdrain within surface ponding, media, and aggregate storage is included in the biofiltration
treatment volume.
Integrated storm water flow control and pollutant control configuration. The system can be
designed to provide flow rate and duration control by primarily providing increased surface ponding
and/or having a deeper aggregate storage layer. This will allow for significant detention storage,
which can be controlled via inclusion of an orifice in an outlet structure at the downstream end of
the underdrain.
Siting Criteria Intent/Rationale
Placement observes geotechnical
recommendations regarding potential
□ hazards (e.g., slope stability, landslides,
liquefaction zones) and setbacks (e.g.,
slopes, foundations, utilities).
Selection and design of basin is based
on infiltration feasibility criteria and
appropriate design infiltration rate (See
Appendix C and D).
Contributing tributary area shall be ≤ 5
acres (≤ 1 acre preferred).
Must not negatively impact existing site
geotechnical concerns.
Must operate as a partial infiltration design and
must be supported by drainage area and in-situ
infiltration rate feasibility findings.
Bigger BMPs require additional design features
for proper performance.
Contributing tributary area greater than 5 acres
may be allowed at the discretion of the [City
Engineer} if the following conditions are met:
1) incorporate design features (e.g. flow
spreaders) to minimizing short circuiting of
flows in the BMP and 2) incorporate
additional design features requested by the
City Engineer for proper performance of the
regional BMP.
□ Finish grade of the facility is ≤ 2%. Flatter surfaces reduce erosion and
Design Adaptations for Project Goals
Recommended Siting Criteria
□
□
E-110 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
Siting Criteria Intent/Rationale
channelization within the facility.
BMP Component Dimension Intent/Rationale
Freeboard
≥ 2 inches
Freeboard provides room for head
over overflow structures and
minimizes risk of uncontrolled
surface discharge.
Surface Ponding
≥ 6 and ≤ 12 inches
Surface ponding capacity lowers
subsurface storage requirements.
Deep surface ponding raises safety
concerns.
Surface ponding depth greater than
12 inches (for additional pollutant
control or surface outlet structures
or flow-control orifices) may be
allowed at the discretion of the City
Engineer if the following conditions
are met: 1) surface ponding depth
drawdown time is less than 24
hours; and 2) safety issues and
fencing requirements are considered
(typically ponding greater than 18”
will require a fence and/or flatter
side slopes) and 3) potential for
elevated clogging risk is considered.
Ponding Area Side Slopes
3H:1V or shallower
Gentler side slopes are safer, less
prone to erosion, able to establish
vegetation more quickly and easier
to maintain.
Mulch
≥ 3 inches
Mulch will suppress weeds and
maintain moisture for plant growth.
Aging mulch kills pathogens and
weed seeds and allows the beneficial
microbes to multiply.
Media Layer ≥ 18 inches A deep media layer provides
additional filtration and supports
Recommended BMP Component Dimensions
E-111 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
BMP Component Dimension Intent/Rationale
plants with deeper roots.
Standard specifications shall be
followed.
For non-standard or proprietary
designs, compliance with Appendix
F.1 ensures that adequate treatment
performance will be provided.
Underdrain Diameter ≥ 6 inches Smaller diameter underdrains are
prone to clogging.
Cleanout Diameter ≥ 6 inches Properly spaced cleanouts will
facilitate underdrain maintenance.
Biofiltration with partial retention must meet the following design criteria and considerations.
Deviations from the below criteria may be approved at the discretion of the City Engineer if it is
determined to be appropriate:
Design Criteria Intent/Rationale
Surface Ponding
□
Surface ponding is limited to a 24-hour
drawdown time.
Surface ponding limited to 24 hours for
plant health. Surface ponding drawdown
time greater than 24-hours but less than
96 hours may be allowed at the discretion
of the City Engineer if certified by a
landscape architect or agronomist.
Vegetation
□
Plantings are suitable for the climate and
expected ponding depth. A plant list to aid in
selection can be found in Appendix E.26
Plants suited to the climate and ponding
depth are more likely to survive.
□ An irrigation system with a connection to water
supply should be provided as needed.
Seasonal irrigation might be needed to
keep plants healthy.
Mulch (Optional or Mandatory – Dependent on jurisdiction)
Design Criteria and Considerations
E-112 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
Design Criteria Intent/Rationale
□
A minimum of 3 inches of well-aged, shredded
hardwood mulch that has been stockpiled or
stored for at least 12 months is provided. Mulch
must be non-floating to avoid clogging of
overflow structure.
Mulch will suppress weeds and maintain
moisture for plant growth. Aging mulch
kills pathogens and weed seeds and allows
the beneficial microbes to multiply.
Media Layer
□
Media maintains a minimum filtration rate of 5
in/hr over lifetime of facility. An initial filtration
rate of 8 to 12 in/hr is recommended to allow
for clogging over time; the initial filtration rate
should not exceed 12 inches per hour.
A filtration rate of at least 5 inches per
hour allows soil to drain between events,
and allows flows to relatively quickly enter
the aggregate storage layer, thereby
minimizing bypass. The initial rate should
be higher than long term target rate to
account for clogging over time. However
an excessively high initial rate can have a
negative impact on treatment
performance, therefore an upper limit is
needed.
□
Media is a minimum 18 inches deep, meeting
either of these two media specifications:
Section F.3 Biofiltration Soil Media (BSM) or
specific jurisdictional guidance.
Alternatively, for proprietary designs and
custom media mixes not meeting the media
specifications, the media meets the pollutant
treatment performance criteria in Section F.1.
A deep media layer provides additional
filtration and supports plants with deeper
roots.
Standard specifications shall be followed.
For non-standard or proprietary designs,
compliance with Appendix F.1 ensures
that adequate treatment performance will
be provided.
□
Media surface area is 3% of contributing area
times adjusted runoff factor or greater. Unless
demonstrated that the BMP surface area can be
smaller than 3%.
Greater surface area to tributary area
ratios: a) maximizes volume retention as
required by the MS4 Permit and
b) decrease loading rates per square foot
and therefore increase longevity.
Adjusted runoff factor is to account for
site design BMPs implemented upstream
of the BMP (such as rain barrels,
impervious area dispersion, etc.). Refer to
Appendix B.2 guidance.
E-113 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
Design Criteria Intent/Rationale
□
Where receiving waters are impaired or have a
TMDL for nutrients, the system is designed
with nutrient sensitive media design (see fact
sheet BF-2).
Potential for pollutant export is partly a
function of media composition; media
design must minimize potential for export
of nutrients, particularly where receiving
waters are impaired for nutrients.
Filter Course Layer
□ A filter course is used to prevent migration of
fines through layers of the facility. Filter fabric
is not used.
Migration of media can cause clogging of
the aggregate storage layer void spaces or
subgrade. Filter fabric is more likely to
clog.
□ Filter course is washed and free of fines. Washing aggregate will help eliminate
fines that could clog the facility
□
Filter course calculations assessing suitability for
particle migration prevention have been
completed.
Gradation relationship between layers can
evaluate factors (e.g., bridging,
permeability, and uniformity) to
determine if particle sizing is appropriate
or if an intermediate layer is needed.
Aggregate Storage Layer
□
Class 2 Permeable per Caltrans specification 68-
1.025 is recommended for the storage layer.
Washed, open-graded crushed rock may be
used, however a 4-6 inch washed pea gravel
filter course layer at the top of the crushed rock
is required.
Washing aggregate will help eliminate
fines that could clog the aggregate storage
layer void spaces or subgrade.
□
Maximum aggregate storage layer depth below
the underdrain invert is determined based on
the infiltration storage volume that will infiltrate
within a 36-hour drawdown time.
A maximum drawdown time is needed for
vector control and to facilitate providing
storm water storage for the next storm
event.
Inflow, Underdrain, and Outflow Structures
□ Inflow, underdrains and outflow structures are
accessible for inspection and maintenance.
Maintenance will prevent clogging and
ensure proper operation of the flow
control structures.
□ Inflow velocities are limited to 3 ft/s or less or
use energy dissipation methods. (e.g., riprap,
level spreader) for concentrated inflows.
High inflow velocities can cause erosion,
scour and/or channeling.
□ Curb cut inlets are at least 12 inches wide, have
a 4-6 inch reveal (drop) and an apron and
Inlets must not restrict flow and apron
prevents blockage from vegetation as it
E-114 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
Design Criteria Intent/Rationale
energy dissipation as needed. grows in. Energy dissipation prevents
erosion.
□
Underdrain outlet elevation should be a
minimum of 3 inches above the bottom
elevation of the aggregate storage layer.
A minimal separation from subgrade or
the liner lessens the risk of fines entering
the underdrain and can improve hydraulic
performance by allowing perforations to
remain unblocked.
□ Minimum underdrain diameter is 6 inches. Smaller diameter underdrains are prone to
clogging.
□
Underdrains are made of slotted, PVC pipe
conforming to ASTM D 3034 or equivalent or
corrugated, HDPE pipe conforming to
AASHTO 252M or equivalent.
Slotted underdrains provide greater intake
capacity, clog resistant drainage, and
reduced entrance velocity into the pipe,
thereby reducing the chances of solids
migration.
□ An underdrain cleanout with a minimum 6-inch
diameter and lockable cap is placed every 250 to
300 feet as required based on underdrain length.
Properly spaced cleanouts will facilitate
underdrain maintenance.
□
Overflow is safely conveyed to a downstream
storm drain system or discharge point. Size
overflow structure to pass 100-year peak flow
for on-line infiltration basins and water quality
peak flow for off-line basins.
Planning for overflow lessens the risk of
property damage due to flooding.
To design biofiltration with partial retention with underdrain for storm water pollutant control only
(no flow control required), the following steps should be taken:
To design biofiltration with partial retention and an underdrain for storm water pollutant control
only (no flow control required), the following steps should be taken:
1. Verify that siting and design criteria have been met, including placement requirements,
contributing tributary area, maximum side and finish grade slopes, and the recommended
media surface area tributary ratio.
2. Calculate the DCV per Appendix B based on expected site design runoff for tributary areas.
3. Generalized sizing procedure is presented in Appendix B.5. The surface ponding should be
verified to have a maximum 24-hour drawdown time.
Nutrient Sensitive Media Design
Conceptual Design and Sizing Approach for Storm Water Pollutant Control Only
E-115 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
Control of flow rates and/or durations will typically require significant surface ponding and/or
aggregate storage volumes, and therefore the following steps should be taken prior to determination
of storm water pollutant control design. Pre-development and allowable post-project flow rates and
durations should be determined as discussed in Chapter 6 of the manual.
1. Verify that siting and design criteria have been met, including placement requirements,
contributing tributary area, maximum side and finish grade slopes, and the recommended
media surface area tributary ratio.
2. Iteratively determine the facility footprint area, surface ponding and/or aggregate storage
layer depth required to provide detention and/or infiltration storage to reduce flow rates and
durations to allowable limits. Flow rates and durations can be controlled from detention
storage by altering outlet structure orifice size(s) and/or water control levels. Multi-level
orifices can be used within an outlet structure to control the full range of flows.
3. If biofiltration with partial retention cannot fully provide the flow rate and duration control
required by this manual, an upstream or downstream structure with significant storage
volume such as an underground vault can be used to provide remaining controls.
4. After biofiltration with partial retention has been designed to meet flow control
requirements, calculations must be completed to verify if storm water pollutant control
requirements to treat the DCV have been met.
Normal Expected Maintenance. Biofiltration with partial retention requires routine maintenance
to: remove accumulated materials such as sediment, trash or debris; maintain vegetation health;
maintain infiltration capacity of the media layer; replenish mulch; and maintain integrity of side
slopes, inlets, energy dissipators, and outlets. A summary table of standard inspection and
maintenance indicators is provided within this Fact Sheet.
Non-Standard Maintenance or BMP Failure. If any of the following scenarios are observed, the
BMP is not performing as intended to protect downstream waterways from pollution and/or
erosion. Corrective maintenance, increased inspection and maintenance, BMP replacement, or a
different BMP type will be required.
The BMP is not drained between storm events. Surface ponding longer than approximately
24 hours following a storm event may be detrimental to vegetation health, and surface
ponding longer than approximately 96 hours following a storm event poses a risk of vector
(mosquito) breeding. Poor drainage can result from clogging of the media layer, filter course,
aggregate storage layer, underdrain, or outlet structure. The spe cific cause of the drainage
issue must be determined and corrected.
Sediment, trash, or debris accumulation greater than 25% of the surface ponding volume
Conceptual Design and Sizing Approach when Storm Water Flow Control is Applicable
Maintenance Overview
E-116 July 2018
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
within one month. This means the load from the tributary drainage area is too high, reducing
BMP function or clogging the BMP. This would require pretreatment measures within the
tributary area draining to the BMP to intercept the materials. Pretreatment components,
especially for sediment, will extend the life of components that are more expensive to
replace such as media, filter course, and aggregate layers.
Erosion due to concentrated storm water runoff flow that is not readily corrected by adding
erosion control blankets, adding stone at flow entry points, or minor re-grading to restore
proper drainage according to the original plan. If the issue is not corrected by restoring the
BMP to the original plan and grade, the City Engineer shall be contacted prior to any
additional repairs or reconstruction.
Other Special Considerations. Biofiltration with partial retention is a vegetated structural BMP.
Vegetated structural BMPs that are constructed in the vicinity of, or connected to, an existing
jurisdictional water or wetland could inadvertently result in creation of expanded water s or wetlands.
As such, vegetated structural BMPs have the potential to come under the jurisdiction of the United
States Army Corps of Engineers, San Diego Water Board, California Department of Fish and
Wildlife, or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. This could result in the need for specific
resource agency permits and costly mitigation to perform maintenance of the structural BMP. Along
with proper placement of a structural BMP, routine maintenance is key to preventing this scenario.
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
E-117 July 2018
The property owner is responsible to ensure inspection, operation and maintenance of permanent BMPs on their property unless
responsibility has been formally transferred to an agency, community facilities district, homeowners association, property owners
association, or other special district.
Maintenance frequencies listed in this table are average/typical frequencies. Actual maintenance needs are site -specific, and maintenance
may be required more frequently. Maintenance must be performed whenever needed, based on maintenance indicators presented in this
table. The BMP owner is responsible for conducting regular inspections to see when maintenance is needed based on the mainten ance
indicators. During the first year of operation of a structural BMP, inspection is recommended at least once prior to August 31 and then
monthly from September through May. Inspection during a storm event is also recommended. After the initial period of frequent
inspections, the minimum inspection and maintenance frequency can be determined based on the results of the first year inspections.
Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Action Typical Maintenance Frequency
Accumulation of sediment, litter, or debris Remove and properly dispose of
accumulated materials, without damage to
the vegetation or compaction of the media
layer.
Inspect monthly. If the BMP is 25% full*
or more in one month, increase inspection
frequency to monthly plus after every 0.1-
inch or larger storm event.
Remove any accumulated materials found
at each inspection.
Obstructed inlet or outlet structure Clear blockage. Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch
or larger storm event.
Remove any accumulated materials found
at each inspection.
Damage to structural components such as
weirs, inlet or outlet structures
Repair or replace as applicable. Inspect annually.
Maintain when needed.
Poor vegetation establishment Re-seed, re-plant, or re-establish vegetation
per original plans.
Inspect monthly.
Maintain when needed.
Summary of Standard Inspection and Maintenance
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
E-118 July 2018
Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Action Typical Maintenance Frequency
Dead or diseased vegetation Remove dead or diseased vegetation, re-
seed, re-plant, or re-establish vegetation per
original plans.
Inspect monthly.
Maintain when needed.
Overgrown vegetation Mow or trim as appropriate. Inspect monthly.
Maintain when needed.
2/3 of mulch has decomposed, or mulch
has been removed
Remove decomposed fraction and top off
with fresh mulch to a total depth of 3
inches.
Inspect monthly.
Replenish mulch annually, or more
frequently when needed based on
inspection.
Erosion due to concentrated irrigation flow Repair/re-seed/re-plant eroded areas and
adjust the irrigation system.
Inspect monthly.
Maintain when needed.
Erosion due to concentrated storm water
runoff flow
Repair/re-seed/re-plant eroded areas, and
make appropriate corrective measures such
as adding erosion control blankets, adding
stone at flow entry points, or minor re-
grading to restore proper drainage according
to the original plan. If the issue is not
corrected by restoring the BMP to the
original plan and grade, the City Engineer
shall be contacted prior to any additional
repairs or reconstruction.
Inspect after every 0.5-inch or larger storm
event. If erosion due to storm water flow
has been observed, increase inspection
frequency to after every 0.1-inch or larger
storm event.
Maintain when needed. If the issue is not
corrected by restoring the BMP to the
original plan and grade, the City Engineer
shall be contacted prior to any additional
repairs or reconstruction.
Standing water in BMP for longer than 24
hours following a storm event
Surface ponding longer than approximately
24 hours following a storm event may be
detrimental to vegetation health
Make appropriate corrective measures such
as adjusting irrigation system, removing
obstructions of debris or invasive
vegetation, clearing underdrains, or
repairing/replacing clogged or compacted
soils.
Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch
or larger storm event. If standing water is
observed, increase inspection frequency to
after every 0.1-inch or larger storm event.
Maintain when needed.
PR-1 Biofiltration with Partial Retention
E-119 July 2018
Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Action Typical Maintenance Frequency
Presence of mosquitos/larvae
For images of egg rafts, larva, pupa, and
adult mosquitos, see
http://www.mosquito.org/biology
If mosquitos/larvae are observed: first,
immediately remove any standing water by
dispersing to nearby landscaping; second,
make corrective measures as applicable to
restore BMP drainage to prevent standing
water.
If mosquitos persist following corrective
measures to remove standing water, or if the
BMP design does not meet the 96-hour
drawdown criteria due to release rates
controlled by an orifice installed on the
underdrain, the City Engineer shall be
contacted to determine a solution. A
different BMP type, or a Vector
Management Plan prepared with
concurrence from the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health, may
be required.
Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch
or larger storm event. If mosquitos are
observed, increase inspection frequency to
after every 0.1-inch or larger storm event.
Maintain when needed.
Underdrain clogged Clear blockage. Inspect if standing water is observed for
longer than 24-96 hours following a storm
event.
Maintain when needed.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 11
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Attachment 1f: Structural BMP Inventory
Stormwater Structural Pollutant Control & Hydromodification Control BMPs*
(List all from WQMP)
Description/Type of Structural
BMP
Plan
Sheet #
BMP
ID#
DMA
ID No. Revisions
Biofiltration with Partial Infiltration GP5, 6 BMP1 DMA1
12 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 1g: Structural Pollutant Control BMP Checklist
Provide the following items for each Structural BMP selected
Refer to Figure 5-2: Stormwater Pollutant Control Structural BMP Selection Flow Chart
☐ Not included because the entire project is designed with Self-Mitigating, De-Minimis, or Self-
Retaining DMAs. The project is compliant with Pollution Control BMP sizing requirements.
DMA ID No. DMA1 Structural BMP ID No. BMP1 Construction Plan Sheet No. PGP 5 & 6
Geotechnical/ Soils Engineering Recommendations:
Worksheet C.4-1: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition
☐ Full Infiltration
☒ Partial Infiltration
☐ No Infiltration
Worksheet D.5-1: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate
Design Infiltration rate _________ (in/hr)
Structural BMP Selection and Design (Chapter 5.5) complete and include the applicable
worksheet(s) found in appendix B (color coded Green below) and design criteria checklists from
the associated fact sheets found in appendix E (color coded Orange below) for selected
Structural BMP(s):
☒ Worksheet B.6-1 - Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an
onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/description and indicate which onsite
retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below)
☐ Retention by harvest and use (HU-1)
☐ Continuous simulation Model
☐ Worksheet B.4-1
☐ Infiltration basin (INF-1)
☐ Bioretention (INF-2)
☐ Permeable pavement (INF-3)
☒ Worksheet B.5-1
☒ Biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1)
☐ Biofiltration (BF-1)
☐ Biofiltration with Nutrient Sensitive Media Design (BF-2)
☐ Proprietary Biofiltration (BF-3)
☒ Appendix F checklist
☒ Worksheet B.5-3 Minimum Footprint
☒ Worksheet B.5-4 Biofiltration + Storage
☒ Selected BMPs have been designed to address the entire DCV. The DMA is compliant with
Pollution Control BMP sizing requirements. STOP *
☐ Other (describe in discussion section below)
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 13
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
☐ Worksheet B.6-1 - Flow-thru treatment control with alternative compliance (provide BMP
type/description in discussion section below)
☐ Describe in discussion section below why the remaining BMP size could not fit on site.
☐ Selection of Flow-Thru Treatment Control BMPs with high or medium effectiveness
☐ Vegetated swales (FT-1)
☐ Media Filters (FT-2)
☐ Sand Filters (FT-3)
☐ Dry Extended Detention Basin (FT-4)
☐ Proprietary flow-thru treatment control (FT-5)
☐ Water Quality Equivalency Worksheets20
Purpose:
☐ Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP
☐ Pollutant control only
☒ Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control (see Attachment 2)
☐ Other (describe in discussion section below)
Who will certify construction of this BMP?
Provide name and contact information for the
party responsible to sign BMP verification
forms (See Chapter 1.12 of the BMP Design
Manual)
Wilfredo Ventura
Ventura Engineering Inland, Inc.
27393 Ynez Road, Suite 159
Temecula, California 92591
(951) 252-7632
Who will be the final owner of this BMP?
☐ HOA ☒ Property Owner ☐ City
☐ Other (describe)
Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity?
☐ HOA ☒ Property Owner ☐ City
☐ Other (describe)
Discussion (as needed):
Due to site constraints the project site will be utilizing an area tributary swap to existing
impervious areas but not tributary to the proposed impervious areas; however, the new roof
areas will have down drain filters as well to partially treat the roof runoff as well.
The area swap is required as the new areas are internal to the project site and the existing
storm drain will not allow for tributary treatment.
* If this box is checked, Worksheet B.6-1 does not need to be filled out.
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-9 July 2018
B.3 Structural BMP Feasibility
The purpose of this section is to determine the BMP types that are acceptable for implementation at
the project site. Through completion of Worksheet B.3-1 (see Appendix I), applicants will evaluate
the feasibility of harvest & use, full retention, and partial retention BMPs at their project site.
Worksheet B.3-1. Project-Scale BMP Feasibility Analysis
Category # Description Value Units
Capture &
Use Inputs
0 Design Capture Volume for Entire Project Site cubic-feet
1 Proposed Development Type unitless
2 Number of Residents or Employees at Proposed Development #
3 Total Planted Area within Development sq-ft
4 Water Use Category for Proposed Planted Areas unitless
Infiltration
Inputs
5 Is Average Site Infiltration Rate Less than 0.5 Inches per Hour? yes/no
6 Is Retention of the Full DCV Anticipated to Produce Negative Impacts? yes/no
7 Is Retention of Any Volume Anticipated to Produce Negative Impacts? yes/no
Calculations
8 36-Hour Toilet Use Per Resident or Employee cubic-feet
9 Subtotal: Anticipated 36 Hour Toilet Use cubic-feet
10 Anticipated 1 Acre Landscape Use Over 36 Hours cubic-feet
11 Subtotal: Anticipated Landscape Use Over 36 Hours cubic-feet
12 Total Anticipated Use Over 36 Hours cubic-feet
13 Total Anticipated Use / Design Capture Volume cubic-feet
14 Are Full Capture and Use Techniques Feasible for this Project? unitless
15 Is Full Retention Feasible for this Project? yes/no
16 Is Partial Retention Feasible for this Project? yes/no
Result 17 Feasibility Category 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Worksheet B.3-1 General Notes:
A. Applicants may use this optional worksheet to determine the feasibility of implementing capture and use techniques on their
project site. Applicants should provide inputs for yellow shaded cells and calculate appropriate values for unshaded cells.
Projects demonstrating feasibility or potential feasibility via this worksheet are encouraged to incorporate capture and use
features in their project. An automated version of this worksheet developed by the County of San Diego is included in
Appendix I.
B. Negative impacts associated with retention may include geotechnical, groundwater, water balance, or other issues identified
by a geotechnical engineer and substantiated through completion of Form I-8 included in Appendix A.2.
C. Feasibility Category 1: Applicant must implement capture & use, retention, and/or infiltration elements for the entire DCV.
D. Feasibility Category 2: Applicant must implement capture & use elements for the entire DCV.
E. Feasibility Category 3: Applicant must implement retention and/or infiltration elements for the entire DCV.
F. Feasibility Category 4: Applicant must implement partial retention BMPs.
G. Feasibility Category 5: Applicant must implement biofiltration BMPs.
H. PDPs participating in an offsite alternative compliance program are not held to the feasibility categories presented herein.
1,377
Comm
20
803
Low
Yes
Yes
Yes
1.10
2
52.14
2
4
0.00
No
No
No
5
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-25 July 2018
Worksheet B.5-1: Sizing Biofiltration BMPs
Category # Description Value Units
BMP Inputs
0 Drainage Basin ID or Name unitless
1 Effective Tributary Area sq-ft
2 Minimum Biofiltration Footprint Sizing Factor ratio
3 Design Capture Volume Tributary to BMP cubic-feet
4 Provided Biofiltration Surface Area sq-ft
5 Provided Surface Ponding Depth inches
6 Provided Soil Media Thickness inches
7 Provided Gravel Storage Thickness inches
8 Hydromodification Orifice Diameter of Underdrain inches
Biofiltration
Calculations
9 Max Hydromod Flow Rate through Underdrain CFS
10 Max Soil Filtration Rate Allowed by Underdrain Orifice in/hr
11 Soil Media Filtration Rate 5.00 in/hr
12 Soil Media Filtration Rate to be used for Sizing in/hr
13 Depth Biofiltered Over 6 Hour Storm inches
14 Soil Media Pore Space 0.30 unitless
15 Gravel Pore Space 0.40 unitless
16 Effective Depth of Biofiltration Storage inches
17 Drawdown Time for Surface Ponding hours
18 Drawdown Time for Entire Biofiltration Basin hours
19 Total Depth Biofiltered inches
20 Option 1 - Biofilter 1.50 DCV: Target Volume cubic-feet
21 Option 1 - Provided Biofiltration Volume cubic-feet
22 Option 2 - Store 0.75 DCV: Target Volume cubic-feet
23 Option 2 - Provided Storage Volume cubic-feet
24 Percentage of Performance Requirement Satisfied ratio
Result 25 Deficit of Effectively Treated Stormwater cubic-feet
Worksheet B.5-1 General Notes:
A. Applicants may use this worksheet to size Lined Biofiltration BMPs (BF -1). Applicants must provide inputs for yellow
shaded cells and calculate appropriate values for unshaded cells. Notes corresponding with each line item are provided below.
An automated version of this worksheet is available for download at the County of San Diego Department of Public Works
website and is included in Appendix I.
DMA1
20,890
0.03
1,377
796
12
21
18
1.0
0.0522
2.84
2.84
17.01
22.20
4.0
8.0
39.21
1,797
1,797
898
898
1.0
0
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-49 July 2018
B.6.3 Sizing Flow-Thru Treatment Control BMPs
Flow-thru treatment control BMPs shall be sized to filter or treat the maximum flow rate of runoff
produced from a rainfall intensity of 0.2 inch of rainfall per hour, for each hour of every storm
event. The required flow-thru treatment rate should be adjusted for the portion of the DCV already
retained or biofiltered onsite as described in Worksheet B.6-1. The following hydrologic method
shall be used to calculate the flow rate to be filtered or treated:
= × ×
Where:
Q = Design flow rate in cubic feet per second
C = Runoff factor, area-weighted estimate using Table B.1-1.
i = Rainfall intensity of 0.2 in/hr.
A = Tributary area (acres) which includes the total area draining to the BMP, including any
offsite or onsite areas that comingle with project runoff and drain to the BMP. Refer to
Section 3.3.3 for additional guidance. Street projects consult Section 1.4.3.
Worksheet B.6-1: Flow-Thru Design Flows
Flow-thru Design Flows Worksheet B.6-1
1 DCV DCV cubic-feet
2 DCV retained DCVretained cubic-feet
3 DCV biofiltered DCVbiofiltered cubic-feet
4 DCV requiring flow-thru
(Line 1 – Line 2 – 0.67*Line 3) DCVflow-thru
cubic-feet
5 Adjustment factor (Line 4 / Line 1)* AF= unitless
6 Design rainfall intensity i= 0.20 in/hr
7 Area tributary to BMP (s) A= acres
8 Area-weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix
B.2) C= unitless
9 Calculate Flow Rate = AF x (C x i x A) Q= cfs
1) Adjustment factor shall be estimated considering only retention and biofiltration BMPs located upstream
of flow-thru BMPs. That is, if the flow-thru BMP is upstream of the project's retention and biofiltration
BMPs then the flow-thru BMP shall be sized using an adjustment factor of 1.
2) Volume based (e.g., dry extended detention basin) flow-thru treatment control BMPs shall be sized to the
volume in Line 4 and flow based (e.g., vegetated swales) shall be sized to flow rate in Line 9. Sand filter
and media filter can be designed either by volume in Line 4 or flow rate in Line 9.
3) Proprietary BMPs, if used, shall provide certified treatment capacity equal to or greater than the
calculated flow rate in Line 9; certified treatment capacity per unit shall be consistent with third party
certifications.
1377
0
0
1377
1
0.4796
0.869
0.083
14 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 1i: Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation Form -
Pollutant Control
Refer to Chapter 1.8
Onsite Project Information
Record ID: Not Applicable
Assessor's Parcel Number(s) [APN(s)]
Quantity of Pollutant Control Debits or Credits (cubic feet)
☐ Debits
☐ Credits
*See Attachment 1 of the PDP WQMP
Land Use Designation
Agriculture Rural Residential
Commercial Single Family Residential
Education Transportation
Industrial Vacant / Open Space
Multi Family Residential Water
Orchard Total
Offsite Project Information – Projects providing or receiving credits (add rows as needed)
Record ID: APN(s) Project Owner/Address Credit/Debit Quantity (cubic
feet)
1. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
2. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
3. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
Total sum of Credits and Debits (∑Credits -∑Debits) (cubic feet)
Additional Information
Are offsite project(s) in the same credit trading area as the onsite project? ☐ Yes
☐ No
Will projects providing credits be completed prior to completion of projects
receiving credits?
☐ Yes
☐ No
Are all deficits accounted for?
If No, onsite and offsite projects must be redesigned to account for all deficits.
☐ Yes
☐ No
Provide Alternative Compliance In-Lieu Fee Agreement and supporting WQE calculations
as part of this attachment.
WATERSHED LOCATION MAP
902.32 SANTA MARGARITA HU
MURRIETA HA
MURRIETA HSA
LONG CANYON/MURRIETA CREEK
APPROXIMATE
SITE LOCATION
Table 2-2. BENEFICIAL USES OF INLAND SURFACE WATERS
● Existing Beneficial Use 1 Waterbodies are listed multiple times if they cross hydrologic area or sub area boundaries.
○ Potential Beneficial Use 2 Beneficial use designations apply to all tributaries to the indicated waterbody, if not listed separately.
+ Excepted from MUN (See Text)
Table 2-2
BENEFICIAL USES 2 - 21
BENEFICIAL USE
Inland Surface Waters 1, 2
Hydrologic
Unit Basin
Number
M
U
N
A
G
R
I
N
D
P
R
O
C
G
W
R
F
R
S
H
P
O
W
R
E
C
1
R
E
C
2
B
I
O
L
W
A
R
M
C
O
L
D
W
I
L
D
R
A
R
E
S
P
W
N
San Onofre Creek Watershed – continued
Las Flores Creek 1.52 +● ● ● ●●● ●
Piedra de Lumbre Canyon 1.52 +● ● ● ●●● ●
unnamed intermittent coastal streams 1.52 +● ● ● ● ●
Aliso Canyon 1.53 +● ● ● ●●● ●
French Canyon 1.53 +● ● ● ● ● ●
Cockleburr Canyon 1.53 +● ● ● ● ●
Santa Margarita River Watershed
Santa Margarita River 2.22 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Murrieta Creek 2.31 ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Bundy Canyon 2.31 ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Slaughterhouse Canyon 2.31 ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Murrieta Creek 2.32 ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Murrieta Creek 2.52 ● ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Cole Canyon 2.32 ● ● ● ● ○ ● ●● ●
Miller Canyon 2.32 ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Warm Springs Creek 2.36 ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Diamond Valley 2.36 ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Table 2-2. BENEFICIAL USES OF INLAND SURFACE WATERS
● Existing Beneficial Use 1 Waterbodies are listed multiple times if they cross hydrologic area or sub area boundaries.
○ Potential Beneficial Use 2 Beneficial use designations apply to all tributaries to the indicated waterbody, if not listed separately.
3 Rainbow Creek is designated as an impaired water body for total nitrogen and total phosphorus pursuant to Clean
Water Act section 303(d). Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) have been adopted to address these impairments.
See Chapter 3, Water Quality Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances and Chapter 4, Total Maximum Daily Loads.
Table 2-2
BENEFICIAL USES 2 - 25
BENEFICIAL USE
Inland Surface Waters 1, 2
Hydrologic
Unit Basin
Number
M
U
N
A
G
R
I
N
D
P
R
O
C
G
W
R
F
R
S
H
P
O
W
R
E
C
1
R
E
C
2
B
I
O
L
W
A
R
M
C
O
L
D
W
I
L
D
R
A
R
E
S
P
W
N
Santa Margarita River Watershed - continued
Temecula Creek 2.51 ● ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Temecula Creek 2.52 ● ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Pechanga Creek 2.52 ● ● ● ● ● ○ ● ● ●
Rainbow Creek3 2.23 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Rainbow Creek3 2.22 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Sandia Canyon 2.22 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Walker Basin 2.22 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Santa Margarita River 2.21 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
DeLuz Creek 2.21 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Cottonwood Creek 2.21 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Camps Creek 2.21 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Fern Creek 2.21 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Roblar Creek 2.21 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
O’Neill Lake 2.13 See Reservoirs & Lakes – Table 2-4
Santa Margarita River 2.13 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Wood Canyon 2.13 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Santa Margarita River 2.12 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Table 2-2. BENEFICIAL USES OF INLAND SURFACE WATERS
● Existing Beneficial Use 1 Waterbodies are listed multiple times if they cross hydrologic area or sub area boundaries.
2 Beneficial use designations apply to all tributaries to the indicated waterbody, if not listed separately.
Table 2-2
BENEFICIAL USES 2 - 26
BENEFICIAL USE
Inland Surface Waters 1, 2
Hydrologic
Unit Basin
Number
M
U
N
A
G
R
I
N
D
P
R
O
C
G
W
R
F
R
S
H
P
O
W
R
E
C
1
R
E
C
2
B
I
O
L
W
A
R
M
C
O
L
D
W
I
L
D
R
A
R
E
S
P
W
N
Santa Margarita River Watershed - continued
Santa Margarita River 2.11 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Pueblitos Canyon 2.11 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Newton Canyon 2.11 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Santa Margarita Lagoon 2.11 See Coastal Waters – Table 2-3
San Luis Rey River Watershed
San Luis Rey River 3.32 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Johnson Canyon 3.32 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Luis Rey River 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Canada Aguanga 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Dark Canyon 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Bear Canyon 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Cow Canyon 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Blue Canyon 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Rock Canyon 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Agua Caliente Creek 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
unnamed Tributary 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Canada Agua Caliente 3.31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Table 2-3. BENEFICIAL USES OF COASTAL WATERS
1 Includes the tidal prisms of the Otay and Sweetwater Rivers.
2 Fishing from shore or boat permitted, but other water contact recreational (REC-1) uses are prohibited.
3 The Shelter Island Yacht Basin portion of San Diego Bay is designated as an impaired water body for dissolved copper pursuant to Clean Water Act
section 303(d). A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) has been adopted to address this impairment. See Chapter 3, Water Quality Objectives for Pesticides,
Toxicity and Toxic Pollutants and Chapter 4, Total Maximum Daily Loads.
● Existing Beneficial Use
Table 2-3 2 - 52
BENEFICIAL USES
BENEFICIAL USE
Coastal Waters
Hydrologic
Unit Basin
Number
I
N
D
N
A
V
R
E
C
1
R
E
C
2
C
O
M
M
B
I
O
L
E
S
T
W
I
L
D
R
A
R
E
M
A
R
A
Q
U
A
M
I
G
R
S
P
W
N
W
A
R
M
S
H
E
L
L
Pacific Ocean ●●●●●● ● ●●● ●● ●
Dana Point Harbor ●●●●● ● ●● ●● ●
Del Mar Boat Basin ●●●●● ● ●● ●● ●
Mission Bay ● ●●● ●● ●● ●● ●
Oceanside Harbor ●●●●● ● ●● ●● ●
San Diego Bay 1, 3 ●●●●●● ●● ●● ●● ●
Coastal Lagoons
Tijuana River Estuary 11.11 ●●●● ●● ●● ●● ●
Mouth of San Diego River 7.11 ●●● ●● ●● ●● ●
Famosa Slough and Channel 7.11 ●●● ●● ●● ●● ●
Los Penasquitos Lagoon 2 6.10 ●● ● ●● ●● ●● ●
San Dieguito Lagoon 5.11 ●● ● ●● ●● ●●
Batiquitos Lagoon 4.51 ●● ● ●● ●● ●●
San Elijo Lagoon 4.61 ●● ● ●● ●● ●●
Agua Hedionda Lagoon 4.31 ● ●●●● ●● ●●● ●● ●
Table 2-3. BENEFICIAL USES OF COASTAL WATERS
2 Fishing from shore or boat permitted, but other water contact recreational (REC-1) uses are prohibited.
● Existing Beneficial Use
○ Potential Beneficial Use
BENEFICIAL USE S Hydrologic
Unit Basin
Number
R R
E
C
2
C
O
M
M
B W R A M S W I N E M H E I I A Q I P A Coastal Waters N A S A E C O
L
L R U G W R D V T R L 1 D E A R N M L
Coastal Lagoons - continued
●● ● ○● ●● ● 2 Buena Vista Lagoon 4.21
●● ●● ●● Loma Alta Slough 4.10
●● ● ●● ● Mouth of San Luis Rey River 3.11
●● ●● ●● ●● Santa Margarita Lagoon 2.11
●● ● ●● Aliso Creek Mouth 1.13
●● ● ●● ● ● San Juan Creek Mouth 1.27
●● ● ● ●● ●● San Mateo Creek Mouth 1.40
●● ● ●● ●● San Onofre Creek Mouth 1.51
Table 2-3 2 - 53
BENEFICIAL USES
Table 2-5. BENEFICIAL USES OF GROUND WATERS
2 These beneficial uses do not apply westerly of the right-of-way of Interstate 5 and this area is excepted from the sources of drinking water policy.
The beneficial uses for the remainder of the hydrologic area are as shown.
● Existing Beneficial Use
BENEFICIAL USE
Ground Water
Hydrologic
Unit Basin
Number
M
U
N
A
G
R
I
N
D
P
R
O
C
F
R
S
H
G
W
R
SANTA MARGARITA HYDROLOGIC UNIT 2.00
Ysidora HA 2 2.10 ● ● ● ●
DeLuz HA 2.20 ● ● ●
Murrieta HA 2.30 ● ● ● ●
Auld HA 2.40 ● ● ●
Pechanga HA 2.50 ● ● ●
Wilson HA 2.60 ● ● ○
Cave Rocks HA 2.70 ● ●
Aguanga HA 2.80 ● ● ●
Oakgrove HA 2.90 ● ●
○ Potential Beneficial Use
Table 2-5
BENEFICIAL USES 2 - 58
C-11 July 2018
Appendix C: Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Requirements
Worksheet C.4-1: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition
Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Worksheet C.4-1
Part 1 - Full Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria
Would infiltration of the full design volume be feasible from a physical perspective without any undesirable
consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated?
Note that it is not necessary to investigate each and every criterion in the worksheet if infiltration is
precluded. Instead a letter of justification from a geotechnical professional familiar with the local conditions
substantiating any geotechnical issues will be required.
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
1
Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility
locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response to this
Screening Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of
the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability.
2
Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed
without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability,
groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be
mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening
Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors
presented in Appendix C.2.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability.
NRCS value is estimated to be approximately 0.2 in/hr in hydrologic Soil Type C.
These factors combine for poor to no infiltration.
X
X
The project site does not have any current site issues with geotechnical
hazards as defined in the standards section C.2. at this time.
C-12 July 2018
Appendix C: Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Requirements
Worksheet C.4-1 Page 2 of 4
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
3
Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed
without increasing risk of groundwater contamination (shallow
water table, storm water pollutants or other factors) that cannot
be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening
Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors
presented in Appendix C.3.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability.
4
Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed
without causing potential water balance issues such as change of
seasonality of ephemeral streams or increased discharge of
contaminated groundwater to surface waters? The response to this
Screening Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of
the factors presented in Appendix C.3.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability.
Part 1
Result*
If all answers to rows 1 - 4 are “Yes” a full infiltration design is potentially feasible.
The feasibility screening category is Full Infiltration
If any answer from row 1-4 is “No”, infiltration may be possible to some extent but
would not generally be feasible or desirable to achieve a “full infiltration” design.
Proceed to Part 2
*To be completed using gathered site information and best professional ju dgment considering the definition of MEP in
the Regional MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by C ity staff to substantiate findings.
X
No issues at this time with soil contamination, groundwater, wells or other
contaminants listed in the standards.
X
No downstream impacts occur from the project site as there are not streams,
groundwater or surface waters to impact.
No
C-13 July 2018
Appendix C: Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Requirements
Worksheet C.4-1 Page 3 of 4
Part 2 – Partial Infiltration vs. No Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria
Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative
consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated?
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
5
Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any
appreciable rate or volume? The response to this Screening
Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors
presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates.
6
Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without
increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability,
groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot
be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening
Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors
presented in Appendix C.2.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates.
The project site does not have any current site issues with geotechnical
hazards as defined in the standards section C.2. at this time.
X
X
NRCS value is estimated to be approximately 0.2 in/hr in hydrologic Soil Type C.
These factors combine for poor to no infiltration.
C-14 July 2018
Appendix C: Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Requirements
Worksheet C.4-1 Page 4 of 4
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
7
Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without
posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns
(shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)?
The response to this Screening Question must be based on a
comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates.
8
Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream water
rights? The response to this Screening Question must be based on a
comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates.
Part 2
Result*
If all answers from row 5-8 are yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible.
The feasibility screening category is Partial Infiltration.
If any answer from row 5-8 is no, then infiltration of any volume is considered to be
infeasible within the drainage area. The feasibility screening category is No Infiltration.
*To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in
the Regional MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by Agency/Jurisdictions to substantiate
findings.
No downstream impacts occur from the project site as there are not streams,
groundwater or surface waters to impact.
No issues at this time with soil contamination, groundwater, wells or other
contaminants listed in the standards.
X
X
Partial
Riverside County Parcel Report
APN(s):921680003
DISCLAIM ER
Maps, permit information and data are to be used for reference purposes only. Map features are approximate, and are not necessarily accurate to
surveying or engineering standards. The County of Riverside makes no warranty or guarantee as to the content (the source is often third party),
accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any of the data provided, and assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. Any use
of this product with respect to accuracy and precision shall be the sole responsibility of the user.
M APS/IM AGES
PARCEL
APN 921-680-003-7 Supervisorial District Boundaries for Districts 2, 4 and 5 will be updated in
January, 2023.
Boundaries for Districts 1 and 3 will be updated in
January, 2025.
CHUCK WASHINGTON, DISTRICT 3
Previous APN 921680003
921090008,921090029,921090030,921090031,92,
more
Township/Range T7SR3W SEC 35 RHO
Owner Name NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE Elevation 1080 ft
Address 921680003
41902 MOTOR CAR PKWY
TEMECULA CA 92591
Thomas Bros. Map
Page/Grid
PAGE: 958, GRID: H4
Mailing Address 921680003
1377 KETTERING DR
ONTARIO CA 91761
Indian Tribal Land NOT IN A TRIBAL LAND
Legal Description 921680003
Recorded Book/Page: PM 152/74
Subdivsion Name: PM 23354
Lot/Parcel: 3
Block:
Tract Number:
City Boundary TEMECULA
City Spheres of
influence
NOT IN A CITY SPHERE
page 1 of 5 6/12/2023 8:38:19 AM
Lot Size 921680003
Recorded lot size is 3.05 acres
March Joint Powers
Authority
NOT IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE MARCH JOINT
POWERS AUTHORITY
Property
Characteristcs
921680003
Year Constructed: 2006
Baths:
Bedrooms:
Construction Type: Concrete / Masonry Bearing
Walls (C)
Garage Type:
Property Area (sq ft):
Roof Type: Rock/Composite
Stories: 1
Pool: NO
Central Cool: YES
Central Heat: YES
County Service Area NOT IN A COUNTY SERVICE AREA
Annexation Date N/A LAFCO Case N/A
Proposals N/A
PLANNING more...
Specific Plans NOT IN A SPECIFIC PLAN Historic Preservation Districts NOT IN A HISTORIC PRESERVATION
DISTRICT
Land Use Designations CITY Agricultural Preserve NOT IN AN AGRICULTRAL
PRESERVE
General Plan Policy Overlays N/A
Area Plan (RCIP)Southwest Area Airport Influence Areas NOT IN AN AIRPORT INFLUENCE
AREA
General Plan Policy Areas NOT IN A GENERAL PLAN POLICY
AREA
Airport Compatibility Zones NOT IN AN AIRPORT COMPATIBLITY
AREA
Zoning Classifications (ORD. 348)CHECK WITH THE CITY FOR MORE
INFORMATION
Zoning Districts and Zoning Areas NOT IN A ZONING DISTRICT/AREA
Zoning Overlays NOT IN A ZONING OVERLAY Community Advisory Councils NOT IN A COMMUNITY ADVISORY
COUNCIL
Enviromental Justice Communities NOT IN AN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITY
Residential Permit Stats
N/A
ENVIRONMENTAL more...
CVMSHCP (Coachella Valley Multi-Species
Habitat Conservation Plan) Plan Area
NOT IN A COACHELLA VALLEY
MSHCP FEE AREA
WRMSHCP (Western Riverside County Multi-
Species Habitat Conservation Plan) Cell
Group
NOT IN A CELL
GROUP
CVMSHCP (Coachella Valley Multi-Species
Habitat Conservation Plan) Conservation
Area
NOT COACHELLA VALLEY
CONSERVATION AREA
WRMSHCP Cell Number NOT IN A CELL
NUMBER
CVMSHCP Fluvial Sand Transport Special
Provision Areas
NOT IN A FLUVIAL SAND
TRANSPORT SPECIAL
PROVISION AREA
HANS/ERP (Habitat Acquisition and
Negotiation Strategy/Expedited Review
Process)
NOT IN A HANS/ERP
PROJECT
WRMSHCP (Western Riverside County Multi-
Species Habitat Conservation Plan) Plan
Area
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Vegetation (2005)URBAN OR
DEVELOPMENT
MAPPING UNIT
Fire
Fire Hazard Classification (Ord. 787)NOT IN A FIRE HAZARD ZONE Fire Responsibility Area NOT IN A FIRE RESPONSIBILITY AREA
page 2 of 5 6/12/2023 8:38:19 AM
DEVELOPMENT FEES
CVMSHCP (Coachella Valley Multi-Species Habitat
Conservation Plan) Fee Area (Ord 875)
NOT IN A COACHELLA
VALLEY MSHCP FEE AREA
RBBD (Road & Bridge Benefit
District)
NOT IN A ROAD BRIDGE
BENEFIT DISTRICT
WRMSHCP (Western Riverside County Multi-Species
Habitat Conservation Plan) Fee Area (Ord. 810)
WESTERN RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
DIF (Development Impact Fee
Area Ord. 659)
SOUTHWEST AREA,
AREA 19
Western TUMF (Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Ord. 824)
IN OR PARTIALLY WITHIN A
TUMF FEE AREA
SKR Fee Area (Stephen’s
Kagaroo Rat Ord. 663.10)
IN OR PARTIALLY WITHIN
THE SKR FEE AREA
Eastern TUMF (Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Ord. 673)
NOT IN THE EASTERN
TUMF FEE AREA
DA (Development Agreements)NOT IN A DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT
TRANSPORTATION more...
Circulation Element
Ultimate
Right-of-Way
NOT IN A CIRCULATION ELEMENT
RIGHT-OF-WAY
Road Book Page 128
Transportation Agreements NOT IN A TRANS
AGREEMENT
CETAP (Community and Environmental Transportation
Acceptability Process) Corridors
NOT IN A CETAP
CORRIDOR
HYDROLOGY
Flood Plan Review OUTSIDE FLOODPLAIN, REVIEW NOT REQUIRED Watershed SANTA MARGARITA
Water District EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
Flood Control District RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
GEOLOGIC
Fault Zone NOT IN A
FAULT ZONE
Paleontological
Sensitivity
HIGH SENSITIVITY (HIGH A): BASED ON GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS OR MAPPABLE ROCK UNITS
THAT ARE ROCKS THAT CONTAIN FOSSILIZED BODY ELEMENTS, AND TRACE FOSSILS SUCH AS
TRACKS, NESTS AND EGGS. THESE FOSSILS OCCUR ON OR BELOW THE SURFACE
Faults UNNAMED
FAULT IN
ELSINORE
FAULT ZONE
Liquefaction
Potential
MODERATE
Subsidence ACTIVE
MISCELLANEOUS
School District TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED
Communities TEMECULA
Lighting (Ord. 655)ZONE: B
Census Tract 432.16
Farmland URBAN-BUILT UP LAND
Special Notes NO SPECIAL NOTES
Tax Rate Areas 013083 - CITY OF TEMECULA
013083 - CITY OF TEMECULA INC DISPUTE
013083 - CO FREE LIBRARY
013083 - CO STRUCTURE FIRE PROTECTION
013083 - ELS MURRIETA ANZA RESOURCE CONS
013083 - ELSINORE AREA ELEM SCHOOL FUND
013083 - EMWD
013083 - EMWD IMP DIST B
013083 - EMWD IMP DIST U-8
013083 - FLOOD CONTROL ADMIN
013083 - FLOOD CONTROL ZN 7
page 3 of 5 6/12/2023 8:38:19 AM
013083 - GENERAL
013083 - GENERAL PURPOSE
013083 - MT SAN JACINTO JR COLLEGE
013083 - MWD EAST 1301999
013083 - RCWD JT WATER
013083 - RCWD R DIV DS
013083 - RDV TEMECULA PROJ 1-1988
013083 - RIVERSIDE CO OFC OF EDUCATION
013083 - SO. CALIF,JT(19,30,33,36,37,56)
013083 - TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES
013083 - TEMECULA PUBLIC CEMETERY
013083 - TEMECULA UNIFIED
013083 - TEMECULA UNIFIED B&I
013083 - TEMECULA ZN A
Department of Enviromental Health Permits
Se ptic Pe r mits
Record Id Application Date Plan Check Approved Date Final Inspection Date Approved Date
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
We ll Wate r Pe rmits
Record Id PE Permit Paid Date Permit Approved Date Well Finaled Date
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
PLUS PERMITS & CASES
Administr ativ e Case s
Case Case De scription Status
N/A N/A N/A
Building and Safe ty Case s
Case Case De scription Status
N/A N/A N/A
Code Case s
Case Case De scription Status
N/A N/A N/A
Fire Case s
Case Case De scription Status
N/A N/A N/A
Planning Case s
Case Case De scription Status
N/A N/A N/A
Sur v e y Case s
Case Case De scription Status
N/A N/A N/A
Tr ansportation Case s
page 4 of 5 6/12/2023 8:38:19 AM
Case Case De scription Status
N/A N/A N/A
page 5 of 5 6/12/2023 8:38:19 AM
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 15
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
ATTACHMENT 2
HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL MEASURES
Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet:
Attachment
Sequence Contents Checklist
Attachment 2a Do Hydromodification Management
Requirements apply? See Chapter
1.6 and Figure 1-2.
☐ Green Streets Project (Exempt
from hydromodification
management requirements)
STOP *
☐ Exempt from hydromodification
management requirements.
Include Figure 1-2 and document
any “YES” answer STOP *
☒ Hydromodification management
controls required.
Attachment 2b HMP Exhibits (Required) See
Checklist on the back of this
Attachment cover sheet. see
Chapter 6.3.1
☒ Combined with DMA Exhibit
☐ Included
Attachment 2c Management of Critical Coarse
Sediment Yield Areas
See Chapter 6.2 and Appendix H of
the BMP Design Manual.
☒ Exhibit depicting onsite/ upstream
CCSYAs (Figure H.1-1) AND,
documentation that project avoids
CCSYA per Appendix H.1. OR
☐ Sediment Supply BMPs
implemented.
Attachment 2d Structural BMP Design Calculations,
Drawdown Calculations, & Overflow
Design. See Chapter 6 & Appendix
G of the BMP Design Manual
☒ Included
☐ Project is designed entirely with
De-Minimus, Self–Mitigating,
and/or qualifying Self-Retaining
Areas. STOP *
Attachment 2e Geomorphic Assessment of
Receiving Channels. See Chapter
6.3.4 of the BMP Design Manual.
☒ low flow threshold is 0.1Q2
☐ low flow threshold is 0.3Q2
☐ low flow threshold is 0.5Q2
Attachment 2f Vector Control Plan (Required when
structural BMPs will not drain in 96
hours)
☐ Included
☒ Not required because BMPs will
drain in less than 96 hours
Attachment 2g Hydromodification Offsite Alternative
Compliance form. Refer to Figure 1-
3: Pathways to Participating in
Offsite Alternative Compliance
Program
☒ Full Compliance Onsite
☐ Offsite ACP. Document onsite
structural BMPs and complete
Hydromodification Offsite Alternative
Compliance Participation Form, and
WQE worksheets
* If this box is checked, the remainder of Attachment 2 does not need to be filled out.
16 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 2a: Applicability of Hydromodification Management BMP
Requirements
NO
NO
YES
1. Is the project a PDP? YES
NO YES 2. Direct discharge to
Pacific Ocean?
NO
YES 3. Direct discharge to enclosed embayment, not within protected area?
YES
4. Direct discharge to water storage reservoir or lake, below spillway or normal operating level?
5. Direct discharge to an area identified in WMAA?
NO
Exempt from hydromodification management requirements Hydromodification management controls required
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 17
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Attachment 2b: DMA Exhibit Checklist
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the
Hydromodification Management Exhibit:
☒ Point(s) of Compliance with name or number
☒ Project Site Boundary
☒ Project Disturbed Area Footprint
☒ Drainage management area (DMA) boundaries, DMA ID numbers, DMA areas (square
footage or acreage), and DMA type (i.e., drains to structural BMP, self-retaining, self-
mitigating, or de-minimis) Note on exhibit De-minimis areas and reason they could not be
included. Include offsite areas receiving treatment to mitigate Onsite Water Quality
Equivalency.
☐ Potential pollutant source areas and corresponding required source control BMPs (see
Chapter 4, Appendix E.1, and Step 3.5)
☒ Proposed Site Design BMPs and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness.
Show sections, details, and dimensions of site design BMP’s (tree wells, dispersion areas,
rain gardens, permeable pavement, rain barrels, green roofs, etc.)
☐ Proposed Harvest and Use BMPs
☒ Underlying hydrologic soil group (Web Soil Survey)
☒ Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands, pond, lake)
☒ Existing topography and impervious areas
☒ Proposed grading and impervious areas. If the project is a subdivision or spans multiple lots
show pervious and impervious totals for each lot.
☒ Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite
☐ Potable water wells, onsite wastewater treatment systems (septic), underground utilities
☒ Structural BMPs (identify location, structural BMP ID No., type of BMP, and size/detail)
☐ Approximate depth to groundwater at each structural BMP
☐ Approximate infiltration rate and feasibility (full retention, partial retention, biofiltration) at
each structural BMP
☐ Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected and or conveyed through the project
site.
☐ Temporary Construction BMPs. Include protection of source control, site design and
structural BMPs during construction.
☐ Onsite and Offsite Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected
☒ Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness
☒ Existing and proposed drainage boundary and drainage area to each POC (when
necessary, create separate exhibits for pre-development and post-project conditions)
☒ Structural BMPs for hydromodification management (identify location, type of BMP, and
size/detail)
18 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 2c: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas
Document the findings of Site-specific Critical Coarse Sediment Analysis below. Include any
calculations, and additional documentation completed as part of the analysis. Refer to Chapter
6.2 and Appendix H of the City of Temecula BMP Design Manual for additional guidance.
The project effectively manages Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas (CCSYAs) using the
following methodology:
☒ Step A. A Site-Specific Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Analysis was performed:
☒ Step A.1. Determine whether the project site is a significant source of critical coarse
sediment to the channel receiving runoff (refer to CCSYA mapping in Appendix H):
☐ The project site is a significant source of Bed Sediment Supply. All channels on the
project site are preserved or bypassed within the site plan. (Complete Step A.2, below)
☐ The project site is a source of Bed Sediment Supply. Channels identified as verified
critical coarse sediment yield areas are preserved. (Complete Step A.2, below)
☒ The Project site is not a significant source of Bed Sediment Supply. (STOP,
supporting information provided with this checklist)
☐ Impacts to verified CCSYAs cannot be avoided. (Complete Step B, below)
☐ Step A.2. Project site design avoids CCSYAs and maintains sediment supply pathways,
documentation is provided following this checklist. (STOP, include supporting
documentation with this checklist)
☐ Step B. Sediment Supply BMPs are implemented onsite to mitigate impacts of development
in CCSYAs, documentation is provided following this checklist. (STOP, include supporting
documentation with this checklist)
S a n t a M arg arita River
0 1 2
Miles
$
June 20, 2018
Pa
t
h
:
D
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
\
S
o
C
a
l
\
D
e
l
i
v
e
r
a
b
l
e
\
M
A
P
S
\
S
a
n
t
a
M
a
r
g
a
r
i
t
a
W
a
t
e
r
S
h
e
d
_
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
C
o
a
r
s
e
_
1
1
x
1
7
_
S
u
b
S
h
e
d
s
_
S
a
n
d
G
r
a
v
e
l
D
e
p
o
s
i
t
s
_
p
k
g
_
v
2
.
m
x
d
Santa Margarita River Watershed Boundary
Protected Lands
Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Area
Potential Sediment Source Area
!!?Sand and Gravel Deposits
Riverside Co.
San Diego Co.
Santa Margarita
Eco Reserve
SANTA MARGARITA RIVER WATERSHED
POTENTIAL CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS AND POTENTIAL SEDIMENT SOURCE AREASExhibit G-1
APROX SITE
LOCATION
Development Project Number(s):Rain Gauge
Latitude (decimal format):BMP Type (per WQMP):
Longitude (decimal format): BMP Number (Sequential):
DRAINAGE AREA (ACRES) - 10 acre max1 2-YEAR, 1-HOUR INTENSITY (IN/HR) - Plate D-4.3
LONGEST WATERCOURSE (FT) - 1,000' max 1 10-YEAR, 1-HOUR INTENSITY (IN/HR) - Plate D-4.1 or D-4.5
UPSTREAM ELEVATION OF WATERCOURSE (FT) SLOPE OF THE INTENSITY DURATION - Plate D-4.6
DOWNSTREAM ELEV. OF WATERCOURSE (FT) CLOSEST IMPERVIOUS PERCENTAGE (%)
EXISTING IMPERVIOUS PERCENTAGE (%)calc'd: 18.00 Over-ride:
Use 10% of Q2 to avoid Field Screening requirements
*Attach Field Screen report with photos, and field measurements. SCCWRP Field Screening Tool available at: http://www.sccwrp.org/Data/DataTools/HydromodScreening.aspx
*SCCWRP Tech. Report #606 for Field Screening available at: CCWRP Field Screening Tool available at: http://www.sccwrp.org/Data/DataTools/HydromodScreening.aspx
**Calculator output shall be attached. Calculator can be found at: http://www.projectcleanwater.org/attachments/article/137/Channel%20Vulnerability%20Calculator.xlsx?1361c1
0.48 Ac.Weighted Average RI Numbers = 50.0 69.0
Per Dr. Luis Parra, the AMC condition is based on the rainfall record. Applying NEH-4 (1964) for the non-freezing conditions in Riverside County the AMC conditions are:
AMC-I for less than 0.5" of rain the previous 5 days; AMC-II for between 0.5" to 1.1" of rain the previous 5 days; or AMC-III for more than 1.1" for the previous 5 days.
Ex. 10-year Flowrate1 =1.351 cfs Flowrate1 = cfs
Ex. 10-year Flowrate (Attach Study) =cfs Ex. 2-year Flowrate (Attach Study) =cfs
1The equations used to determine the 10-year and 10% of the 2-yr are limited to 10-acres and 1,000'. Flowrates from a separate study can be used to over-ride the calculated values
so that larger areas (up to 20 acres) and longer watercourse lengths can be used. All values still need to be filled out, even when there is a user-defined discharge value entered.
DRAINAGE AREA (ACRES)
LONGEST WATERCOURSE (FT)
DIFFERENCE IN ELEV (FT) - along watercourse
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS PERCENTAGE (%)
0.48 Ac.Weighted Average RI Numbers = 50.0 69.0
Per Dr. Luis Parra, the AMC condition is based on the rainfall record. Applying NEH-4 (1964) for the non-freezing conditions in Riverside County the AMC conditions are:
AMC-I for less than 0.5" of rain the previous 5 days; AMC-II for between 0.5" to 1.1" of rain the previous 5 days; or AMC-III for more than 1.1" for the previous 5 days.
--- ---
Responsible-in-charge:Date:
Signature:Spreadsheet Developed by: Benjie Cho, P.E.
---
---
Yes, this is acceptable
Yes, this is acceptable
---
Hydromod Ponded depth
Hydromod Drain Time (unclogged)
Is the HydroMod BMP properly sized?
(Co-Permitte Approval is required) User-Defined Discharge Values with accompanying Hydrology Study1
Mitigated Q < 110% of Pre-Dev. Q?
Mitigated Duration < 110% of Pre-Dev?*
Vegetative Cover Soil A %
22 0.479 Ac.
Po
s
t
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
84
PA23-0382
33.51649
-117.15369
0.079
0
Cover Type # Subarea Acreage Cover Type
22 0.479 Ac.
0.55
No
0.479
245
1079
1073.5
90
0.1Q2No
100 84
Soil D %
CoverGood
Cover Type
Urban Landscaping
Subarea Acreage
RI Index
AMC I
RI Index
AMC III
Santa Margarita Region - County HydroMod Iterative Spreadsheet Model
Only for use the unincorporated portions of Riverside County, unless otherwise approved by the Co-Permittee
Pre-Development - Hydrology Information
YesPr
e
-
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Pr
e
-
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Pr
e
-
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Calculated Upper Flow-rate limit Calculated Lower Flow-rate limit
90% Commercial
It is expressly agreed and understood by the USER of this Excel Spreadsheet file (file) released hereby (whether released in digital or hard copy form) that Riverside County (County) makes no representation as to its accuracy. Further, it is the intent of the parties hereto that the USER shall
review and verify calculations, analyze results, and/or independently determine the accuracy thereof prior to placing any reliance whatsoever on the information. Further, the USER shall hold the County, together with the officers, agents and employees of each, free and harmless from any
liability whatsoever, including wrongful death, based or asserted upon any act or omission of the District or County, their officers, agents, employees or subcontractors, relating to or in any way connected with the unauthorized use of these files or information; and USER agrees to protect and
defend, including all attorney fees and other expenses, each of the foregoing bodies and persons in any legal action based or asserted upon any such acts or omissions. USER also agrees not to sell, reproduce or release these files to others for any purpose whatsoever, except those incidental
uses for which the files were acquired, verified and combined with USER’S own work product. Reasonable effort was made to fully comply with the San Diego MS4 Permit requirements using the methods found in the Riverside County Hydrology Manual. If the user finds an error in any
way, please contact the County so that the error can be corrected. Any direct tampering of the equations in this spreadsheet would be considered extremely inappropriate, and potentially fraudulent.
0 0 0
Temecula Valley
0
0.525
0.88
Biofiltration w/Partial Infiltration
DMA1-BMP1
84.0
Pre-Development - Soils Information
Yes, this is acceptable
Proposed
0 0
14.14 hours
---
Requirement
---
---
---
0 0
84.0
Issue @ Stage =
Issue @ Stage =
0
See below for the Height
in the Basin (Stage) that is
causing a non-compliant result
1.00 feet
0
Ex. 10% of the 2-year
Soil D %
RI Index
AMC I
RI Index
AMC II
Urban Landscaping CoverGood
Post-Project - Hydrograph Information
Post-Project - Soils Information
First result out of compliance in the rainfall record
Pre-Development - Calculated Range of Flow Rates analyzed for Hydromod (Suceptible Range of Flows)
Soil B %
0
Vegetative Cover
RI Index
AMC II
69
Soil A % Soil C %Cover Type #
50
Wilfredo Ventura
Go to "BMP Design" tab to design your BMP, then check results below.
Print both this "HydroMod" Sheet and the "BMP Design" sheet for your submittal.
No
No
Po
s
t
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
245
5.5
96.2
0.479
7/31/2024
100 50 69
Soil B % Soil C %
RI Index
AMC III
Re
s
u
l
t
s
---
---
---
---
---
Att 2d1 - Exhibit B.7 - HydroMod Spreadsheet (Temecula) v.10 FD3B
BMP Design Fill in blue shaded areas
feet, Stage Intervals Larger Stage Intervals may incr. the Q at the bottom stg.
STEP1: Size the BMP, so that the Total Volume > Max HydroMod Vol. (Deeper is ok, it will be refined in the Design Geometry)
Is the BMP a Tank shape?2 1 for yes; 2 for no. 0000
Is the BMP Arched shape?2 1 for yes; 2 for no. 0.10 0.002 80 0.01
If circular, is the tank vertical?2 1 for yes; 2 for no. 0.20 0.004 159 0.01
How many cells together?1 0.30 0.005 239 0.01
Diameter (Hortz. for arch) = 42 IN 0.40 0.007 318 0.02
Length = 140 FT 0.50 0.009 398 0.02
0.60 0.011 478 0.02
Bottom Stage H= 2.0' SS= 0 :1 0.70 0.013 557 0.02
0.80 0.015 637 0.02
Width 11.21 FT 0.90 0.016 716 0.03
Length 71 FT 1.00 0.018 796 0.03
area = area = 795.91 1.10 0.020 876 0.03
1.20 0.022 955 0.03
Top Stage H=SS=:1 1.30 0.024 1035 0.03
Top Area 1.40 0.026 1114 0.03
Width FT 1.50 0.027 1194 0.03
Length FT 1.60 0.029 1273 0.03
area = area = 0 1.70 0.031 1353 0.03
1.80 0.033 1433 0.04
FT3 1.90 0.035 1512 0.04
FT3 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
FT3 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
FT3 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
FT2 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
FT 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
1Does not include forebay, or low flow trench 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
2Does not account for freeboard or access roads 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
3Does not consider Increased Runoff 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
STEP2: Delete outlets, then propose the largest lowest orifice that does not, exceed the ex. Q or Duration. If the Q is 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
acceptable, but the duration is exceeded, try decreasing orifice, then adding a weir slightly below the stage that has an issue. 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
OUTLETS (for Stage-Discharge)Hydromod Depth = 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
+ 1' Freeboard =2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
Top Surface Area 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
0 1.00 Based on HydroMod Depth +1' of Freeboard 2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
2.00 0.037 1592 0.04
FT 2.00 0.037 1,592
FT
1.00
FT
FT
STEP3: Complete an increased runoff analysis, if the project can impact downstream properties. Incorporate these designs into the WQMP site plan.
Add emergency overflow weir, for flows that exceed the Hydromod volumes, sized to the 100-year peak flow rate. Add access roads (< 10% longitudnal slope)
with enough width & turn around access for equipment that would be needed to scarify the bottom or remove Bioretention soil media.
Yes Consider Infiltration, Bioretention, or Biofiltration (Yes or No)? FT3/sec, Unfactored Infiltration (over entire bottom)
0.2 Infiltration/Biofiltration rate thru the finish surface of the BMP (in/hr)3 FT3/sec, Infiltration / Factor of Safety
3 Factor of Safety3 FT3, Vol. Infiltrated, over representative time
300 mins, Time represented by Infil. Tests or Biofiltraton Routing Time4 FT3/sec, Low-Loss after representative time
3Measured Infiltration Rate per the LID Manual, Appendix A for Infiltration/BioRetention. For BioFiltration use a rate thru the media of 2.5 in/hr (long term design rate).
4Time that infiltration rate is being applied for Hydromod analysis for Infiltration/BioRention. Use 300 minutes (5hrs) for BioFiltration. Pore space is not accounted for at this time.
0.0002
Ad
d
I
n
f
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
BM
P
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
&
D
e
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
C
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
Diameter
(inches)
Invert Height
(ft)
71
Stage
(FT)
Storage (AC-
FT)
Q
(CFS)
Basin Shaped BMP (Bottom Stage 1st)
Length
Prop. Top Stg. Vol. =
1.00
Circular
Tank BMP
-
1,592
3.81%
730
Bottom Area
Width
Length
0
0
795.91
0
796
Enter information from actual infiltration tests or design BSM rate
Prop Bottom Stg Vol =
Max HydroMod Depth3 =
MINIMUM DESIGN GEOMETRY
Length
PROPOSED BMP DIMENSIONS
0.1
Storage
(FT3)
Stage-Storage-Discharge*
Total Surface Area2 =
Top Area
11.21
It is expressly agreed and understood by the USER of this Excel Spreadsheet file (file) released hereby (whether released in digital or hard copy form) that Riverside County (County) makes no representation as to its accuracy. Further, it is the intent of the parties
hereto that the USER shall review and verify calculations, analyze results, and/or independently determine the accuracy thereof prior to placing any reliance whatsoever on the information. Further, the USER shall hold the County, together with the officers, agents and
employees of each, free and harmless from any liability whatsoever, including wrongful death, based or asserted upon any act or omission of the District or County, their officers, agents, employees or subcontractors, relating to or in any way connected with the
unauthorized use of these files or information; and USER agrees to protect and defend, including all attorney fees and other expenses, each of the foregoing bodies and persons in any legal action based or asserted upon any such acts or omissions. USER also agrees
not to sell, reproduce or release these files to others for any purpose whatsoever, except those incidental uses for which the files were acquired, verified and combined with USER’S own work product. Reasonable effort was made to fully comply with the San Diego
MS4 Permit requirements using the methods found in the Riverside County Hydrology Manual. If the user finds an error in any way, please contact the County so that the error can be corrected. Any direct tampering of the equations in this spreadsheet would be
considered extremely inappropriate, and potentially fraudulent.
Bottom Area
Width
Bottom Stage
Total Prop. Volume1 =
0.0012
Crest
Width
(ft)
Crest
Height
(ft)
1,592
No. of
Weirs
0.0037
11.21Width
Weir Outlets
22.11
Max HydroMod Volume =
BMP % of Site =
71
Width
Length
1.00 FT
2.00 FT
No. of Orifices
Orifice Outlets
1
Resize with Hydromod Depth +1' Freeboard
Top Stage
"Tank Shaped""Basin Shaped"
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
St
a
g
e
(f
t
.
)
Storage (ac‐ft.)
Stage‐Storage Curve
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
St
a
g
e
(f
t
.
)
Outlet Discharge (cfs)
Stage‐Discharge Curve
APPROX SITE
LOCATION
0.525
APPROX SITE
LOCATION
0.55
HM
P
D
E
T
A
I
L
A
NT
S
HMP DETAIL B
NTS
HMP DETAIL C
NTS
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 19
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
Hydromodification Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation Form
Refer to Chapter 1.8
Onsite Project Information
Record ID: Not Applicable
Assessor's Parcel Number(s) [APN(s)]
Quantity of Hydromodification Debits or Credits (DCIA)
☐ Debits
☐ Credits
*See Attachment 1 of the PDP WQMP
Offsite Project Information – Projects providing or receiving credits (add rows as needed)
Record ID: APN(s) Project Owner/Address Credit/Debit Quantity (DCIA)
1. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
2. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
3. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
4. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
5. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
6. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
Total sum of Credits and Debits (∑Credits -∑Debits) (DCIA)
Additional Information
Are offsite projects in the same credit trading area as the onsite project? ☐ Yes
☐ No
Do offsite projects discharge directly to the same susceptible stream reach as
the onsite project? (required for certain hydromodification scenarios)
☐ Yes
☐ No
Will projects providing credits be completed prior to completion of projects
receiving credits?
☐ Yes
☐ No
Are all deficits accounted for?
If No, onsite and offsite projects must be redesigned to account for all deficits.
☐ Yes
☐ No
Provide supporting WQE calculations as part of this attachment.
20 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
CHECKLIST 1
Checklist of Items to Include on Plan Sheets Showing Permanent
Stormwater BMPs, Source Control, and Site Design
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the plans:
The plans must identify:
☒ Structural BMP(s) with ID numbers
☒ The grading and drainage design shown on the plans must be consistent with the
delineation of DMAs shown on the DMA exhibit
☒ Improvements within City Public Right-of-Way have been designed in accordance with
Appendix K: Guidance on Green Infrastructure.
☒ Details and specifications for construction of structural BMP(s).
☒ Manufacturer and part number for proprietary parts of structural BMP(s) when applicable.
☒ Signage indicating the location and boundary of source control, site design, and structural
BMP(s) as required by City staff.
☒ How to access the structural BMP(s) to inspect and perform maintenance.
☒ Features that are provided to facilitate inspection (e.g., observation ports, cleanouts, silt
posts, benchmarks or other features that allow the inspector to view necessary components
of the structural BMP and compare to maintenance thresholds)
☒ Include landscaping plan sheets showing vegetation and amended soil requirements for
vegetated structural BMP(s), amended soil areas, dispersion areas, tree-wells, and self-
mitigating areas
☒ All BMPs must be fully dimensioned on the plans
☒ Include all Construction stormwater, source control, and site design measures described in
the WQMP. Can be included as separate plan sheets as necessary.
☒ When proprietary BMPs are used, site-specific cross section with outflow, inflow, and model
number must be provided. Photocopies of general brochures are not acceptable.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 21
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
CHECKLIST 2
Checklist for Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the
Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis :
☒ The project is subject to the requirements of City of Temecula Construction, Grading, and
Encroachment Ordinance Section 18.06.020 and requires a grading permit and Hydrology
Hydraulic Analysis. Prepare Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis and include all elements of
checklist below.
☐ The project is exempt from grading permit requirements of City of Temecula Construction,
Grading, and Encroachment Ordinance per Section 18.06.060. Document the project
exempt category and justification and STOP.
Grading Exemption Category (A-O):_____
Discussion/Justification of Exemption:
Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis. The engineer of record shall prepare and submit studies and
data regarding hydrology/hydraulic analysis and calculations for ten (10) and one hundred
(100) year storm events per Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District
Hydrology Manual. Drainage area maps shall also be submitted to determine the quantity of
runoff generated by or tributary to the site, and its effects on the site or upon upstream or
downstream properties.
the study shall include the following but not limited to:
☒ In the narrative of the report please provide a summary table of pre- and post-
development C, Tc, I, A, V100, Q100 without mitigation and Q100 with mitigation for each
area (or point) where drainage discharges from the project. Peak runoff rates (cfs),
velocities (fps) and identification of all erosive velocities (at all points of discharge)
calculations for pre-development and post-development. The comparisons should be made
about the same discharge points for each drainage basin affecting the site and adjacent
properties.
☒ Summary/Conclusion: Please discuss whether the proposed project would substantially
alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-
or off-site? Provide reasons and mitigations proposed.☐ Provide existing and proposed
Hydrology Maps for each phase. The maps shall show existing and proposed culverts,
discharge point with A & Q, flow path direction for each drainage basin. Show existing FEMA
floodplain/floodway which flow through the property. A minimum map size is 11"x17".
☐ Provide Hydrologic Soil Group Map.
☐ Provide Rainfall Isopluvials for 100 Year Rainfall Event - 6 Hours and 24 Hours Maps.
☐ The report should have numbered pages and a corresponding Table of Contents.
☐ Improvements within City Public Right-of-Way have been designed in accordance with
Appendix K: Guidance on Green Infrastructure.
☐ BMP’s have been designed to safely convey the 100-year flood
☐ Limits of Inundation. Said limits on the property, during specified storm frequencies, shall be
delineated on the plans; supporting calculations shall also be required.
22 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation July 31, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
☒ Flood Protection. The engineer of record responsible for plan preparation shall ensure:
a. That the building pads to be created through any proposed grading are free from
inundation from runoff from specified storms; and
b. That floodplain/floodway elevations and widths, sheet flow depths and any other data
required by the City Engineer (or by any applicable County, State or Federal flood
protection insurance program/requirements) are delineated on the plans.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 23
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
CHECKLIST 3
Checklist for Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Report
The report must address the following key elements, and where appropriate, mitigation
recommendations must be provided.
☒ Identify areas of the project site where infiltration is likely to be feasible and provide
justifications for selection of those areas based on soil types, slopes, proximity to existing
features, etc. Include completed and signed Worksheet C.4-1.
☒ Investigate, evaluate and estimate the vertical infiltration rates and capacities in accordance
with the guidance provided in Appendix D which describes infiltration testing and appropriate
factor of safety to be applied for infiltration testing results. The site may be broken into sub-basins,
each of which has different infiltration rates or capacities.
☒ Describe the infiltration/ percolation test results and correlation with published infiltration/
percolation rates based on soil parameters or classification. Recommend providing design
infiltration/percolation rate(s) at the sub-basins. Include completed and signed Worksheet D.5-1.
Investigate the subsurface geological conditions and geotechnical conditions that would affect
infiltration or migration of water toward structures, slopes, utilities, or other features. Describe the
anticipated flow path of infiltrated water. Indicate if the water will flow into pavement sections,
utility trench bedding, wall drains, foundation drains, or other permeable improvements.
☒ Investigate depth to groundwater and the nature of the groundwater. Include an estimate of
the high seasonal groundwater elevations.
☐ Evaluate proposed use of the site (industrial use, residential use, etc.), soil and groundwater
data and provide a concluding opinion whether proposed storm water infiltration could cause
adverse impacts to groundwater quality and if it does cause impacts whether the impacts could
be reasonably mitigated or not.
Estimate the maximum allowable infiltration rates and volumes that could occur at the site that
would avoid damage to existing and proposed structures, utilities, slopes, or other features. In
addition the report must indicate if the recommended infiltration rate is appropriate based on the
conditions exposed during construction.
☒ Provide a concluding opinion regarding whether or not the proposed onsite storm water
infiltration/percolation BMP will result in soil piping, daylight water seepage, slope instability, or
ground settlement.
☒ Recommend measures to substantially mitigate or avoid any potentially detrimental effects of
the storm water infiltration BMPs or associated soil response on existing or proposed
improvements or structures, utilities, slopes or other features within and adjacent to the site. For
example, minimize soil compaction.
☒ Provide guidance for the selection and location of infiltration BMPs, including the minimum
separations between such infiltration BMPs and structures, streets, utilities, manufactured and
existing slopes, engineered fills, utilities or other features. Include guidance for measures that
could be used to reduce the minimum separations or to mitigate the potential impacts of
infiltration BMPs.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 24
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: July 31, 2024
ATTACHMENT 3
BMP AGREEMENT AND OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE PLAN
This attachment contains a copy of the project site’s BMP agreement and Operations &
Maintenance Plan for reference.
TEMECULA VALLEY TOYOTA
TEMECULA VALLEY TOYOTA
26631 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
TEMECULA VALLEY TOYOTA
41892 MOTOR CAR PARKWAY, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP 23354 M.B. 152/74-76
TEMECULA VALLEY TOYOTA
26631 YNEZ ROAD, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
41902 MOTOR CAR PARKWAY, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
921-680-003-7
TEMECULA VALLEY TOYOTA
TEMECULA VALLEY TOYOTA
EXHIBIT B (PAGE 1 OF 5)
NTS
EXHIBIT B (PAGE 2 OF 4)
NTS
EXHIBIT B (PAGE 3 OF 4)
NTS
EXHIBIT B (PAGE 4 OF 4)
NTS