Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Tract Map 3883 Lot 312 WQMP
City of Temecula WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP) PROJECT NAME & PERMIT NO: Okpala Residence PROJECT ADDRESS: Parcel 235 of Tr 3883 PROJECT APN: 919-210-015 PREPARED BY: Name: Dino San Buenaventura, P.E. Address: 43460 Ridge Park Drive, Suite 200-T Temecula, CA 92590 Phone : (951) 440-570 Email: dino@dsbeng.com PREPARED FOR: Name: Peterchris and Sandra Okpala Address: 40530 Calle Fiesta Temecula, CA 92591 Phone: (714) 325-5215 DATE OF WQMP: November 8, 2024 APPROVED BY: APPROVAL DATE: APPROVED BY CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC WORKS david.pina 03/04/2025 03/04/2025 03/04/2025 03/04/20 ii WQMP Preparation Date: November 8, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Applicant's Certification Project Name: Okpala Residence Permit Number: LD22-4150 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: Dino San Buenaventura Print Name DSB Engineering Services 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. Exempt Project category 11/8/24 WQMP 3 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date:___________ 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: Drainage will be directed towards a proposed structural BMP before leaving the site to prevent any illicit discharges to downstream MS4 systems 4.2.2 Storm Drain Stenciling or Signage Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Discussion / justification: Language will be placed near inlets to prohibit any drainage, other then storm water. 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 is 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 material is proposed 4.2.5 Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal Yes ☐No ☐N/A Discussion / justification: Trash bin lid to be closed at all times, when located outside. 4.2.6 Additional BMPs Based on Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants ☐Yes ☐No N/A Discussion / justification. Clearly identify which sources of runoff pollutants are discussed: No other BMPs are proposed. Structural BMP downstream of improved drainage areas will Drain and discharge treated water and is sufficient to prevent downstream pollutants 4 WQMP Preparation Date: November 8, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 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 coulumn 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:___________ 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: Project will continue to drain south of the project site as in the existing condition 4.3.2 Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation Yes ☐No ☐N/A Discussion / justification: Only areas where the main residence and driveway approach is disturbed. All other areas will maintain existing 4.3.3 Minimize Impervious Area Yes ☐No ☐N/A Discussion / justification: Only impervious areas from the proposed dwy, bldg. residence are proposed to be impervious. 4.3.4 Minimize Soil Compaction Yes ☐No ☐N/A Discussion / justification: Only areas where construction of the BLDG and Dwy are compacted. All other areas withing the project boundary remain in its natural condition. 4.3.5 Impervious Area Dispersion Yes ☐No ☐N/A Discussion / justification: Roof Drains to local impervious areas or picked up directly by private SD system 4.3.6 Runoff Collection ☐Yes ☐No ☐N/A Discussion / justification: Runoff will collect in proposed inlets and drain to proposed structural BMPs for treatment 4.3.7 Landscaping with Native or Drought Tolerant Species Yes ☐No ☐N/A Discussion / justification: No Landscaping is proposed 4.3.8 Harvesting and Using Precipitation ☐Yes ☐No N/A Discussion / justification: Project does not have adequate demand for Harvesting storm water. 6 WQMP Preparation Date: November 8, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Step 3: Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist 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 BMPs1, 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). WQMP 7 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date:___________ Table 1. Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist Minimum Required Best Management Practices (BMPs) CALTRANS SW Handbook2 Detail a 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 Planting3 (Summer) SS-2, SS-4 ☐ Hydraulic Stabilization Hydroseeding2 (Summer) SS-4 ☐ Bonded Fiber Matrix or Stabilized Fiber Matrix4 (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 ☐ 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. 8 WQMP Preparation Date: November 8, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Table 1. Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist (continued) Minimum Required Best Management Practices (BMPs) CALTRANS SW Handbook Detail a 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 Protection5 SS-10 ☐ D. Select sediment control method for all disturbed areas (choose at least one) Silt Fence SC-1 ☐ 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 ☐ 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 ☐ Spill Prevention and Control WM-4 ☐ F.2 Waste Management6 Waste Management Concrete Waste Management WM-8 ☐ 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. SHEET 2 & 4 SHEET 2 & 4 SHEET 2 & 4 SHEET 2 & 4 SHEET 2 & 4 WQMP 9 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date:___________ 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 ☐ Redevelopment7 The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is: _____11,000_____ ft2 The total existing (pre-project) impervious area is: _______0________ ft2 The total area disturbed by the project is: ___19,166_______ 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: _______________ 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. 10 WQMP Preparation Date: November 8, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 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: _______________ ft2 (A) The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is _______________ ft2 (B) Percent impervious surface created or replaced (B/A)*100: _______________ % 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 WQMP 11 Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date:___________ 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: Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... i Attachments ................................................................................................................................ ii Preparer's Certification Page ..................................................................................................... iv Step 1: Site Information Checklist ........................................................................................... 6 Step 1.1: Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns ............................. 6 Step 1.2: Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns ..................... 7 Step 1.3: Other Site Requirements and Constraints ........................................................... 8 Step 2: Strategy for Meeting PDP Performance Requirements ............................................... 9 ATTACHMENT 1 ......................................................................................................................11 STORMWATER POLLUTANT CONTROL BMP SELECTION ...............................................11 Atachmnet 1a: DMA Exhibit Checklist ...................................................................................12 Attachment 1e: Structural Pollutant Control BMP Checklist ...................................................13 Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water and Pollutants of Concern ............................15 Attachment 1g: Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation Form - Pollutant Control (NOT APPLICABLE) .......................................................................................................................17 ATTACHMENT 2 ......................................................................................................................18 HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL MEASURES.................................................................18 Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas (Attachment 2c) .................................20 Hydromodification Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation Form ....................................21 ATTACHMENT 3 ......................................................................................................................22 Structural BMP Maintenance Information ..............................................................................22 ATTACHMENT 4 ......................................................................................................................24 City of Temecula PDP Structural BMP Verification for Permitted Land Development Projects ..............................................................................................................................................24 ATTACHMENT 5 ......................................................................................................................30 Copy of Plan Sheets Showing Permanent Stormwater BMPs, Source Control, and Site Design ...................................................................................................................................30 ATTACHMENT 6 ......................................................................................................................31 Copy of Project's Drainage Report ........................................................................................31 ATTACHMENT 7 ......................................................................................................................33 Copy of Project's Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Report .................................33 ii PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Attachments Attachment 1: Stormwater Pollutant Control BMP Selection Attachment 1a: DMA Exhibit Attachment 1b: 85th percentile 24-hour Isohyetal Map Attachment 1c: Worksheet B.1-1 DCV Attachment 1d: Structural Pollutant Control BMP Checklist(s) Attachment 1e: Attachment 1f: Attachment 2: Hydromodification Control Measures Attachment 2a: Applicability of HMP Requirements Attachment 2b: HMP Exhibit(s) Attachment 2c: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Attachment 2d: Flow Control Facility Design Attachment 2e: Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels (optional) Attachment 2f: Vector Control Plan (if applicable) Attachment 3: Structural BMP Maintenance Plan Attachment 3a: Structural BMP Maintenance Thresholds and Actions Attachment 3b: Maintenance Agreements / Notifications (when applicable) Attachment 3c: Individual Structural BMP DMA Map book Attachment 4: City of Temecula PDP Structural BMP Verification for DPW Permitted Land Development Projects Attachment 5: Copy of Plan Sheets Showing Permanent Stormwater BMPs Attachment 6: Copy of Project's Drainage Report Attachment 7: Copy of Project's Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Report PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS iii Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date:_January 30, 2024 This page was left intentionally blank. iv PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparer's Certification Page Project Name: Okpala Residence Permit Application Number: LD22-4150 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 Dino San Buenaventura Print Name DSB Engineering Services Company & Phone No. _January 30, 2024____________________________ Date Engineer's Seal: 77348 6/30/25 November 11, 2024 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS v Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date:_January 30, 2024 This page was left intentionally blank. 6 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Step 1: Site Information Checklist Step 1.1: 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) (180703020407),14,348 Acres, Long Canyon-Murrieta Creek (HSA) (1807030204), 141,871 Acres, Murrieta Creek (HA) (18070302), 474,279 Acres, Santa Margarita River (HU) 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: Existing condition of project area is undisturbed and vacant. There is no onsite infrastructure. Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply and provide each area on site): ☐Pervious Area 0.36 Acres (15,680 Square Feet) ☐ Impervious Areas 0 Acres (0 Square Feet) Description / Additional Information: Land cover is vacant with seasonal brush and grass vegetation. 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. Describe existing site drainage patterns: The existing drainage pattern is conveyed as sheet flow and is composed of natural, undisturbed land use with seasonal brush and grass cover. The project does not have any offsite flows that drain to the site or any existing drainage facilities within the project area. The discharge points for the existing drainage is on the south and west property boundary. Ultimately, further downstream from the project boundary, flows confluence and continue is natural drainage course south. PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 7 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Step 1.2: Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities: The proposed condition will construct a single-family home with a private concrete driveway that leads up to the main residence. Local drainage within the engineered pad will flow into 2 underground infiltration chambers to treat the 85th percentile storm and mitigate the 2-year up to the 10-year flows for the purpose of meeting the projects hydromodification criteria. Proposed Land Cover Includes (select all that apply and provide each area on site): Existing to Remain ☐Pervious Area _______ Acres (_______ Square Feet) ☐ Impervious Areas _______ Acres (_______ Square Feet) Existing to Be Replaced ☐Pervious Area _______ Acres (_______ Square Feet) ☐ Impervious Areas _______ Acres (_______ Square Feet) Newly Created ☐Pervious Area 0.13 Acres (5,663 Square Feet) ☐ Impervious Areas 0.23 Acres (10,193 Square Feet) Total ☐Pervious Area 0.13 Acres (5,663 Square Feet) ☐ Impervious Areas 0.23 Acres (10,193 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): - Roof Surface Area - Impervious Driveway (Concrete) List/describe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas): -No Landscape proposed at this time, but it assumed to be implemented at a future date Describe any grading or changes to site topography: Grading to create a level pad elevated at 1275 ft with engineered slopes that daylights south of the building footprint. 8 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 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: Referring to Existing Condition Hydrology Map in the hydrology report, the project drainage flow is split, draining east at an average slope is 20% and draining southwest towards Calle Fiesta, draining at an average slope of 5%. The drainage from these two areas ultimately meets downstream. There is no existing infrastructure on the property. Referring to the Developed Condition Hydrology map in the Hydrology report, the project will construct a single-family home with a private driveway entrance leading up to the main residence. The overall drainage pattern follows the existing condition, with drainage ultimately draining south. The onsite improvements that consist of impervious areas accounts for 65% of the developed pad area. In the developed condition, the project will include storm water facilities such as pipes, inlets and underground detention basins. Drainage from the imperious areas will be routed to the underground storm drain through surface inlets. The storm drain pipes will drain to 2 underground infiltration basin to be treated and routed for the purpose of hydromodification. An outlet pipe from the riser then drains to from the underground storage facility and is conveyed to the west of the project development, which ultimately drains south along the project’s natural drainage course. See the below list for a summary of the proposed drainage infrastructure. Underground basin size: Length = 200-ft, Diameter = 48-in, Min Surface Area = 800-sqft Storm drain pipe diameter (in): 12-inches Inlet size: 12x12 Box Step 1.3: Other Site Requirements and Constraints When applicable, list other 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. PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 9 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 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. 10 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Describe the general strategy for BMP implementation at the site. Based on the technical guidance document for Riverisde County, Santa Margarita Region, retention BMPs are the first type of BMPs that must be considered for priority development projects. This includes infiltration bmps and harvest and reuse strategies. Based on the projects soil type, infiltration BMPs are not deemed reasonable due to low infiltration rates. This was determined based on the projects hydrologic soil rating of D and a design infiltration rate of 0.77-in/hr per the percolation test conducted by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc.. Next consideration would be the use of harvest and reuse BMPs. This type of BMP however is not feasible due to the low use potential of the harvested rain water since there will be minimal landscaping that requires water usage and low potable uses for a single family residence. Next on the hierarchy is biofiltration BMPs, which filter water before being discharged from the project area. This BMP is technically feasible, but it is desired minimize the above ground surface BMPs. For that reason, despite the infiltration being low, infiltration is proposed and will employ a large surface area to drawdown within 48 hours. Once drainage leaves the underground infiltration basin, water will continue its natural drainage course, ultimately draining south of the project area. (Continue on following page as necessary.) PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 11 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 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 4 of Appendix A.1. ☐ 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.2-1 DCV 1 Included Attachment 1d 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 1e Structural Pollutant Control BMP Checklist(s) Included Attachment 1f Is Onsite Alternative Compliance proposed?2 No ☐ Yes - Include WQE worksheets Attachment 1g 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. 1 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 2 Water Quality Equivalency Guidance and automated worksheets for Region 9: http://www.projectcleanwater.org/water-quality-equivalency-guidance/ 12 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Atachmnet 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. INDEX RE V I E W E D : D S B DR A W N : D S B DS B P R O J E C T N O : DS B 2 1 - 0 6 1 P e t e r O k p a l a M e a d o w v i e w DA T E : 9/ 1 7 / 2 2 SHEET SC A L E : 1 " = 2 0 ' PR O J E C T N O : LD 2 2 - 4 1 5 0 WQ M P S I T E P L A N TR A C T M A P N O . 3 8 8 3 L O T 3 1 2 OK P A L A R E S I D E N C E ON S I T E L I D B M P S RE L E V A N T L I N K S ( C L I C K ) : 1 OF 3 - ST O R M T E C H D E S I G N M A N U A L - CI T Y O F T E M E C U L A B M P M A N U A L - DS B E N G I N E E R I N G S E R V I C E S W E B S I T E RE V I E W I N G A G E N C Y : CI T Y O F T E M E C U L A - RI V E R S I D E C O U N T Y B M P M A N U A L SELF-MITIGATING DMAS (ENGINEERED SLOPES): POINTS OF COMPLIANCE: SOURCE CONTROL BMPS: 6"DO W N P I P E 6"DO W N P I P E C F C F RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Isohyetal Map for the 85th Percentile 24 hour Storm Event July 2011 Rain Gage Locations D=0.80-in Category # Description i ii iii iv v vi vii viii ix x Units 0 Drainage Basin ID or Name 1A 2A SM-1 Total unitless 1 Basin Drains to the Following BMP Type Retention Retention n/a Retention unitless 2 85th Percentile 24-hr Storm Depth 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 inches 3 Design Infiltration Rate Recommended by Geotechnical Engineer 0.260 0.260 0.260 0.260 in/hr 4 Impervious Surfaces Not Directed to Dispersion Area (C=0.90) 7,421 1,392 8,813 sq-ft 5 Semi-Pervious Surfaces Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.30)sq-ft 6 Engineered Pervious Surfaces Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.10)sq-ft 7 Natural Type A Soil Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.10)sq-ft 8 Natural Type B Soil Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.14)sq-ft 9 Natural Type C Soil Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.23)sq-ft 10 Natural Type D Soil Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.30)3,978 4,100 3,202 8,078 sq-ft 11 Does Tributary Incorporate Dispersion, Tree Wells, and/or Rain Barrels?No No No No No No No No No No yes/no 12 Impervious Surfaces Directed to Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.90) sq-ft 13 Semi-Pervious Surfaces Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.30)sq-ft 14 Engineered Pervious Surfaces Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.10)sq-ft 15 Natural Type A Soil Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.10)sq-ft 16 Natural Type B Soil Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.14)sq-ft 17 Natural Type C Soil Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.23)sq-ft 18 Natural Type D Soil Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.30)sq-ft 19 Number of Tree Wells Proposed per SD-A # 20 Average Mature Tree Canopy Diameter ft 21 Number of Rain Barrels Proposed per SD-E # 22 Average Rain Barrel Size gal 23 Does BMP Overflow to Stormwater Features in Downstream Drainage?No No No No No No No No No No unitless 24 Identify Downstream Drainage Basin Providing Treatment in Series unitless 25 Percent of Upstream Flows Directed to Downstream Dispersion Areas percent 26 Upstream Impervious Surfaces Directed to Dispersion Area (Ci=0.90)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 27 Upstream Impervious Surfaces Not Directed to Dispersion Area (C=0.90)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 28 Total Tributary Area 11,399 5,492 3,202 16,891 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft 29 Initial Runoff Factor for Standard Drainage Areas 0.69 0.45 0.30 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless 30 Initial Runoff Factor for Dispersed & Dispersion Areas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless 31 Initial Weighted Runoff Factor 0.69 0.45 0.30 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless 32 Initial Design Capture Volume 524 165 64 687 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 33 Total Impervious Area Dispersed to Pervious Surface 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft 34 Total Pervious Dispersion Area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft 35 Ratio of Dispersed Impervious Area to Pervious Dispersion Area n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a ratio 36 Adjustment Factor for Dispersed & Dispersion Areas 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ratio 37 Runoff Factor After Dispersion Techniques 0.69 0.45 0.30 0.61 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a unitless 38 Design Capture Volume After Dispersion Techniques 524 165 64 687 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 39 Total Tree Well Volume Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 40 Total Rain Barrel Volume Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 41 Final Adjusted Runoff Factor 0.69 0.45 0.30 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless 42 Final Effective Tributary Area 7,865 2,471 961 10,304 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft 43 Initial Design Capture Volume Retained by Site Design Elements 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 44 Final Design Capture Volume Tributary to BMP 524 165 64 687 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet Worksheet B.1-1 General Notes: False False False Automated Worksheet B.1-1: Calculation of Design Capture Volume (V1.3) A. Applicants may use this worksheet to calculate design capture volumes for up to 10 drainage areas User input must be provided for yellow shaded cells, values for all other cells will be automatically generated, errors/notifications will be highlighted in red and summarized below. Upon completion of this worksheet, proceed to the appropriate BMP Sizing worksheet(s). Dispersion Area, Tree Well & Rain Barrel Inputs (Optional) Standard Drainage Basin Inputs Results Tree & Barrel Adjustments Initial Runoff Factor Calculation Dispersion Area Adjustments Treatment Train Inputs & Calculations False Total represents summation of area 1A and 2A. Category # Description Value Units 0 Design Capture Volume for Entire Project Site 753 cubic-feet 1 Proposed Development Type Residential unitless 2 Number of Residents or Employees at Proposed Development 2 # 3 Total Planted Area within Development 0 sq-ft 4 Water Use Category for Proposed Planted Areas Low unitless 5 Is Average Site Design Infiltration Rate ≤0.500 Inches per Hour?Yes yes/no 6 Is Average Site Design Infiltration Rate ≤0.010 Inches per Hour?No yes/no 7 Is Infiltration of the Full DCV Anticipated to Produce Negative Impacts?No yes/no 8 Is Infiltration of Any Volume Anticipated to Produce Negative Impacts?No yes/no 9 36-Hour Toilet Use Per Resident or Employee 1.86 cubic-feet 10 Subtotal: Anticipated 36 Hour Toilet Use 4 cubic-feet 11 Anticipated 1 Acre Landscape Use Over 36 Hours 52.14 cubic-feet 12 Subtotal: Anticipated Landscape Use Over 36 Hours 0 cubic-feet 13 Total Anticipated Use Over 36 Hours 4 cubic-feet 14 Total Anticipated Use / Design Capture Volume 0.00 cubic-feet 15 Are Full Capture and Use Techniques Feasible for this Project?No unitless 16 Is Full Retention Feasible for this Project?No yes/no 17 Is Partial Retention Feasible for this Project?Yes yes/no Result 18 Feasibility Category 4 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Worksheet B.3-1 General Notes: H. PDPs participating in an offsite alternative compliance program are not held to the feasibility categories presented herein. Capture & Use Inputs Automated Worksheet B.3-1: Project-Scale BMP Feasibility Analysis (V1.3) 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 all DMAs with Design Infiltration Rates greater than 0.50 in/hr. 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. Infiltration Inputs G. Feasibility Category 5: Applicant must implement standard lined biofiltration BMPs sized at ≥3% of the effective impervious tributary area for all DMAs with Design Infiltration Rates of 0.010 in/hr or less. Applicants may also be permitted to implement reduced size and/or specialized biofiltration BMPs provided additional criteria identified in "Supplemental Retention Criteria for Non-Standard Biofiltration BMPs" are satisfied. A. Applicants may use this worksheet to determine the types of structural BMPs that are acceptable for implementation at their project site (as required in Section 5 of the BMPDM). User input should be provided for yellow shaded cells, values for all other cells will be automatically generated. Projects demonstrating feasibility or potential feasibility via this worksheet are encouraged to incorporate capture and use features in their project. F. Feasibility Category 4: Applicant must implement standard unlined biofiltration BMPs sized at ≥3% of the effective impervious tributary area for all DMAs with Design Infiltration Rates of 0.011 to 0.50 in/hr. Applicants may be permitted to implement lined BMPs, reduced size BMPs, and/or specialized biofiltration BMPs provided additional criteria identified in "Supplemental Retention Criteria for Non-Standard Biofiltration BMPs" are satisfied. Calculations Note: While full retention/infiltration is not feasible, the project demonstrates the ability to treat/retain water while drawing down in 48 hours. Category # Description i ii iii iv v vi vii viii ix x Units 0 Drainage Basin ID or Name 1A 2A - Total - - - - - - unitless 1 Design Infiltration Rate Recommended by Geotechnical Engineer 0.260 0.260 - 0.260 - - - - - - in/hr 2 Design Capture Volume Tributary to BMP 524 165 - 687 - - - - - - cubic-feet 3 Is Retention BMP Vegetated or Non-Vegetated?Non-Vegetated Non-Vegetated Non-Vegetated unitless 4 Provided Surface Area 1,731 1,731 1,731 sq-ft 5 Provided Surface Ponding Depth 12 12 12 inches 6 Provided Soil Media Thickness 0 0 0 inches 7 Provided Gravel Storage Thickness 0 0 0 inches 8 Volume Infiltrated Over 6 Hour Storm 225 165 0 225 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 9 Soil Media Pore Space 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 unitless 10 Gravel Pore Space 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 unitless 11 Effective Depth of Retention Storage 12.0 12.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 inches 12 Drawdown Time for Surface Ponding (Post-Storm) 46 46 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 hours 13 Drawdown Time for Entire Basin (Including 6 Hour Storm) 52 52 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 hours 14 Volume Retained by BMP 1,956 1,896 0 1,956 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 15 Fraction of DCV Retained 3.00 3.00 0.00 2.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio 16 Percentage of Performance Requirement Satisfied 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio 17 Fraction of DCV Retained (normalized to 36-hr drawdown) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio 18 This BMP Overflows to the Following Drainage Basin - - - - - - - - - - unitless Result 19 Deficit of Effectively Treated Stormwater 0 0 n/a 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a cubic-feet Worksheet B.4-1 General Notes: False Automated Worksheet B.4-1: Sizing Retention BMPs (V1.3) False False False A. Applicants may use this worksheet to size Infiltration, Bioretention, and/or Permeable Pavement BMPs (INF-1, INF-2, INF-3) for up to 10 basins. User input must be provided for yellow shaded cells, values for blue cells are automatically populated based on user inputs from previous worksheets, values for all other cells will be automatically generated, errors/notifications will be highlighted in red/orange and summarized below. BMPs fully satisfying the pollutant control performance standards will have a deficit treated volume of zero and be highlighted in green. False BMP Inputs Infiltration Calculations False False Total represents summation of areas 2A and 1A, since drainage basins are tributary to the underground basin. Project: Chamber Model - MC-3500 Units -Imperial Number of Chambers -30 Number of End Caps -0 Voids in the stone (porosity) - 40 % Base of Stone Elevation -100.00 ft Amount of Stone Above Chambers - 12 in Amount of Stone Below Chambers -9 in Area of system -1731 sf Min. Area - Height of System Incremental Single Chamber Incremental Single End Cap Incremental Chambers Incremental End Cap Incremental Stone Incremental Ch, EC and Stone Cumulative System Elevation (inches)(cubic feet)(cubic feet)(cubic feet)(cubic feet)(cubic feet)(cubic feet)(cubic feet)(feet) 66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5787.25 105.50 65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5729.55 105.42 64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5671.85 105.33 63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5614.15 105.25 62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5556.45 105.17 61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5498.75 105.08 60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5441.05 105.00 59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5383.35 104.92 58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5325.65 104.83 57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5267.95 104.75 56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5210.25 104.67 55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 5152.55 104.58 54 0.06 0.00 1.74 0.00 57.00 58.75 5094.85 104.50 53 0.19 0.02 5.82 0.00 55.37 61.19 5036.10 104.42 52 0.29 0.04 8.82 0.00 54.17 62.99 4974.91 104.33 51 0.40 0.05 12.11 0.00 52.86 64.97 4911.92 104.25 50 0.69 0.07 20.62 0.00 49.45 70.07 4846.95 104.17 49 1.03 0.09 30.85 0.00 45.36 76.21 4776.88 104.08 48 1.25 0.11 37.49 0.00 42.71 80.19 4700.67 104.00 47 1.42 0.13 42.67 0.00 40.63 83.30 4620.48 103.92 46 1.57 0.14 47.19 0.00 38.82 86.02 4537.18 103.83 45 1.71 0.16 51.21 0.00 37.21 88.43 4451.17 103.75 44 1.83 0.18 54.85 0.00 35.76 90.61 4362.74 103.67 43 1.94 0.20 58.13 0.00 34.45 92.58 4272.12 103.58 42 2.04 0.22 61.22 0.00 33.21 94.43 4179.54 103.50 41 2.13 0.23 64.04 0.00 32.08 96.12 4085.11 103.42 40 2.22 0.25 66.73 0.00 31.01 97.74 3988.99 103.33 39 2.31 0.27 69.20 0.00 30.02 99.22 3891.25 103.25 38 2.38 0.28 71.54 0.00 29.08 100.63 3792.03 103.17 37 2.46 0.29 73.77 0.00 28.19 101.96 3691.40 103.08 36 2.53 0.31 75.85 0.00 27.36 103.21 3589.44 103.00 35 2.59 0.32 77.81 0.00 26.58 104.39 3486.23 102.92 34 2.66 0.33 79.68 0.00 25.83 105.51 3381.84 102.83 33 2.72 0.35 81.45 0.00 25.12 106.57 3276.33 102.75 32 2.77 0.36 83.14 0.00 24.44 107.58 3169.76 102.67 31 2.82 0.37 84.74 0.00 23.80 108.54 3062.18 102.58 30 2.88 0.38 86.26 0.00 23.19 109.46 2953.64 102.50 29 2.92 0.40 87.72 0.00 22.61 110.33 2844.18 102.42 28 2.97 0.41 89.10 0.00 22.06 111.16 2733.84 102.33 27 3.01 0.42 90.37 0.00 21.55 111.92 2622.68 102.25 26 3.05 0.43 91.60 0.00 21.06 112.66 2510.76 102.17 25 3.09 0.44 92.83 0.00 20.57 113.40 2398.10 102.08 24 3.13 0.45 93.92 0.00 20.13 114.05 2284.70 102.00 23 3.17 0.46 94.97 0.00 19.71 114.68 2170.65 101.92 22 3.20 0.47 95.98 0.00 19.31 115.29 2055.97 101.83 21 3.23 0.48 96.93 0.00 18.93 115.86 1940.68 101.75 20 3.26 0.49 97.84 0.00 18.56 116.41 1824.82 101.67 19 3.29 0.50 98.71 0.00 18.22 116.92 1708.42 101.58 18 3.32 0.51 99.54 0.00 17.88 117.42 1591.49 101.50 17 3.34 0.51 100.32 0.00 17.57 117.89 1474.07 101.42 16 3.37 0.52 101.06 0.00 17.28 118.34 1356.18 101.33 15 3.39 0.53 101.78 0.00 16.99 118.77 1237.84 101.25 14 3.41 0.54 102.44 0.00 16.73 119.16 1119.08 101.17 13 3.44 0.54 103.11 0.00 16.46 119.57 999.91 101.08 12 3.46 0.55 103.73 0.00 16.21 119.94 880.35 101.00 11 3.48 0.56 104.36 0.00 15.96 120.32 760.41 100.92 10 3.51 0.59 105.15 0.00 15.64 120.79 640.09 100.83 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 519.30 100.75 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 461.60 100.67 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 403.90 100.58 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 346.20 100.50 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 288.50 100.42 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 230.80 100.33 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 173.10 100.25 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 115.40 100.17 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.70 57.70 57.70 100.08 1487 sf min. area StormTech MC-3500 Cumulative Storage Volumes Porchet Method (Percolation to Infiltration Rate Conversion) DeltaT (min)30 DT (in)12 Df(in)5.75 Radius (in)4 Do (in)4 Ho (in)8 Hf (in)6.25 Delta H (in)1.75 Havg (in)7.125 It (in/hr)0.77 Design It with FS of 3 (in/hr)0.26 Max Depth for 48 Hr Drawdown (ft)1.02 DCV: 721.00 P-1 (Percolation rate of 17.2 MPI) Source Control BMP Requirements E-4 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP Shall Consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in WQMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement SC-A. Onsite storm drain inlets Not Applicable Locations of inlets. Mark all inlets with the words “No Dumping! Drains to Waterways” or similar. Maintain and periodically repaint or replace inlet markings. Provide storm water pollution prevention information to new site owners, lessees, or operators. See applicable operational BMPs in Fact Sheet SC-44, “Drainage System Maintenance,” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. Include the following in lease agreements: “Tenant shall not allow anyone to discharge anything to storm drains or to store or deposit materials so as to create a potential discharge to storm drains.” x x x x Source Control BMP Requirements E-5 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-B. Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps Not Applicable State that interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps will be plumbed to sanitary sewer. State that interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps will be plumbed to sanitary sewer. Inspect and maintain drains to prevent blockages and overflow. SC-C. Interior parking garages Not Applicable State that parking garage floor drains will be plumbed to the sanitary sewer. State that parking garage floor drains will be plumbed to the sanitary sewer. Inspect and maintain drains to prevent blockages and overflow. SC-D1. Need for future indoor & structural pest control Not Applicable Note building design features that discourage entry of pests. Note building design features that discourage entry of pests. Provide Integrated Pest Management information to owners, lessees, and operators. Source Control BMP Requirements E-6 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-D2. Landscape/ Outdoor Pesticide Use Not Applicable Show locations of existing trees or areas of shrubs and ground cover to be undisturbed and retained. Show self-retaining landscape areas, if any. Show storm water treatment facilities. State that final landscape plans will accomplish all of the following. Preserve existing drought tolerant trees, shrubs, and ground cover to the maximum extent possible. Design landscaping to minimize irrigation and runoff, to promote surface infiltration where appropriate, and to minimize the use of fertilizers and pesticides that can contribute to storm water pollution. Where landscaped areas are used to retain or detain storm water, specify plants that are tolerant of periodic saturated soil conditions. Consider using pest-resistant plants, especially adjacent to hardscape. To ensure successful establishment, select plants appropriate to site soils, slopes, climate, sun, wind, rain, land use, air movement, ecological consistency, and plant interactions. Maintain landscaping using minimum or no pesticides. See applicable operational BMPs in Fact Sheet SC-41, “Building and Grounds Maintenance,” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. Provide IPM information to new owners, lessees and operators. x x x x x x x Source Control BMP Requirements E-7 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-E. Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features. Not Applicable Show location of water feature and a sanitary sewer cleanout in an accessible area within 10 feet. If the local municipality requires pools to be plumbed to the sanitary sewer, place a note on the plans and state in the narrative that this connection will be made according to local requirements. If the local municipality requires pools to be plumbed to the sanitary sewer, place a note on the plans and state in the narrative that this connection will be made according to local requirements. See applicable operational BMPs in Fact Sheet SC-72, “Fountain and Pool Maintenance,” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. SC-F. Food service Not Applicable For restaurants, grocery stores, and other food service operations, show location (indoors or in a covered area outdoors) of a floor sink or other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipment. On the drawing, show a note that this drain will be connected to a grease interceptor before discharging to the sanitary sewer. Describe the location and features of the designated cleaning area. Describe the items to be cleaned in this facility and how it has been sized to ensure that the largest items can be accommodated. x x x Source Control BMP Requirements E-8 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-G. Refuse areas Not Applicable Show where site refuse and recycled materials will be handled and stored for pickup. See local municipal requirements for sizes and other details of refuse areas. If dumpsters or other receptacles are outdoors, show how the designated area will be covered, graded, and paved to prevent run- on and show locations of berms to prevent runoff from the area. Also show how the designated area will be protected from wind dispersal. Any drains from dumpsters, compactors, and tallow bin areas shall be connected to a grease removal device before discharge to sanitary sewer. State how site refuse will be handled and provide supporting detail to what is shown on plans. State that signs will be posted on or near dumpsters with the words “Do not dump hazardous materials here” or similar. State how the following will be implemented: Provide adequate number of receptacles. Inspect receptacles regularly; repair or replace leaky receptacles. Keep receptacles covered. Prohibit/prevent dumping of liquid or hazardous wastes. Post “no hazardous materials” signs. Inspect and pick up litter daily and clean up spills immediately. Keep spill control materials available on- site. See Fact Sheet SC-34, “Waste Handling and Disposal” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. x Source Control BMP Requirements E-9 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative Table and Narrative SC-H. Industrial processes. Not Applicable Show process area. If industrial processes are to be located onsite, state: “All process activities to be performed indoors. No processes to drain to exterior or to storm drain system.” See Fact Sheet SC-10, “Non- Stormwater Discharges” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. SC-I. Outdoor storage of equipment or materials. (See rows J and K for source control measures for vehicle cleaning, repair, and maintenance.) Not Applicable Show any outdoor storage areas, including how materials will be covered. Show how areas will be graded and bermed to prevent run-on or runoff from area and protected from wind dispersal. Storage of non-hazardous liquids shall be covered by a roof and/or drain to the sanitary sewer system, and be contained by berms, dikes, liners, or vaults. Storage of hazardous materials and wastes must be in compliance with the local hazardous materials ordinance and a Hazardous Materials Management Plan for the site. Include a detailed description of materials to be stored, storage areas, and structural features to prevent pollutants from entering storm drains. Where appropriate, reference documentation of compliance with the requirements of local Hazardous Materials Programs for: Hazardous Waste Generation Hazardous Materials Release Response and Inventory California Accidental Release Prevention Program Aboveground Storage Tank Uniform Fire Code Article 80 Section 103(b) & (c) 1991 Underground Storage Tank See the Fact Sheets SC-31, “Outdoor Liquid Container Storage” and SC-33, “Outdoor Storage of Raw Materials” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. x x Source Control BMP Requirements E-10 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-J. Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning Not Applicable Show on drawings as appropriate: (1) Commercial/industrial facilities having vehicle /equipment cleaning needs shall either provide a covered, bermed area for washing activities or discourage vehicle/equipment washing by removing hose bibs and installing signs prohibiting such uses. (2) Multi-dwelling complexes shall have a paved, bermed, and covered car wash area (unless car washing is prohibited onsite and hoses are provided with an automatic shut- off to discourage such use). (3) Washing areas for cars, vehicles, and equipment shall be paved, designed to prevent run-on to or runoff from the area, and plumbed to drain to the sanitary sewer. (4) Commercial car wash facilities shall be designed such that no runoff from the facility is discharged to the storm drain system. Wastewater from the facility shall discharge to the sanitary sewer, or a wastewater reclamation system shall be installed. If a car wash area is not provided, describe measures taken to discourage onsite car washing and explain how these will be enforced. Describe operational measures to implement the following (if applicable): Washwater from vehicle and equipment washing operations shall not be discharged to the storm drain system. Car dealerships and similar may rinse cars with water only. See Fact Sheet SC-21, “Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning,” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com x Source Control BMP Requirements E-11 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-K. Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance Not Applicable Accommodate all vehicle equipment repair and maintenance indoors. Or designate an outdoor work area and design the area to protect from rainfall, run-on runoff, and wind dispersal. Show secondary containment for exterior work areas where motor oil, brake fluid, gasoline, diesel fuel, radiator fluid, acid- containing batteries or other hazardous materials or hazardous wastes are used or stored. Drains shall not be installed within the secondary containment areas. Add a note on the plans that states either (1) there are no floor drains, or (2) floor drains are connected to wastewater pretreatment systems prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer and an industrial waste discharge permit will be obtained. State that no vehicle repair or maintenance will be done outdoors, or else describe the required features of the outdoor work area. State that there are no floor drains or if there are floor drains, note the agency from which an industrial waste discharge permit will be obtained and that the design meets that agency’s requirements. State that there are no tanks, containers or sinks to be used for parts cleaning or rinsing or, if there are, note the agency from which an industrial waste discharge permit will be obtained and that the design meets that agency’s requirements. In the report, note that all of the following restrictions apply to use the site: No person shall dispose of, nor permit the disposal, directly or indirectly of vehicle fluids, hazardous materials, or rinsewater from parts cleaning into storm drains. No vehicle fluid removal shall be performed outside a building, nor on asphalt or ground surfaces, whether inside or outside a building, except in such a manner as to ensure that any spilled fluid will be in an area of secondary containment. Leaking vehicle fluids shall be contained or drained from the vehicle immediately. No person shall leave unattended drip parts or other open containers containing vehicle fluid, unless such containers are in use or in an area of secondary containment. x Source Control BMP Requirements E-12 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-L. Fuel Dispensing Areas Not Applicable Fueling areas1 shall have impermeable floors (i.e., portland cement concrete or equivalent smooth impervious surface) that are (1) graded at the minimum slope necessary to prevent ponding; and (2) separated from the rest of the site by a grade break that prevents run-on of storm water to the MEP. Fueling areas shall be covered by a canopy that extends a minimum of ten feet in each direction from each pump. [Alternative: The fueling area must be covered and the cover’s minimum dimensions must be equal to or greater than the area within the grade break or fuel dispensing area1.] The canopy [or cover] shall not drain onto the fueling area. The property owner shall dry sweep the fueling area routinely. See the Business Guide Sheet, “Automotive Service—Service Stations” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. 1. The fueling area shall be defined as the area extending a minimum of 6.5 feet from the corner of each fuel dispenser or the length at which the hose and nozzle assembly may be operated plus a minimum of one foot, whichever is greater. x Source Control BMP Requirements E-13 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-M. Loading Docks Not Applicable Show a preliminary design for the loading dock area, including roofing and drainage. Loading docks shall be covered and/or graded to minimize run-on to and runoff from the loading area. Roof downspouts shall be positioned to direct storm water away from the loading area. Water from loading dock areas should be drained to the sanitary sewer where feasible. Direct connections to storm drains from depressed loading docks are prohibited. Loading dock areas draining directly to the sanitary sewer shall be equipped with a spill control valve or equivalent device, which shall be kept closed during periods of operation. Provide a roof overhang over the loading area or install door skirts (cowling) at each bay that enclose the end of the trailer. Move loaded and unloaded items indoors as soon as possible. See Fact Sheet SC-30, “Outdoor Loading and Unloading,” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. x Source Control BMP Requirements E-14 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls— Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-N. Fire Sprinkler Test Water Not Applicable Provide a means to drain fire sprinkler test water to the sanitary sewer. See the note in Fact Sheet SC- 41, “Building and Grounds Maintenance,” in the CASQA Stormwater Quality Handbooks at www.cabmphandbooks.com. SC-O. Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water Boiler drain lines Condensate drain lines Rooftop equipment Drainage sumps Roofing, gutters, and trim Not Applicable Boiler drain lines shall be directly or indirectly connected to the sanitary sewer system and may not discharge to the storm drain system. Condensate drain lines may discharge to landscaped areas if the flow is small enough that runoff will not occur. Condensate drain lines may not discharge to the storm drain system. Rooftop mounted equipment with potential to produce pollutants shall be roofed and/or have secondary containment. Any drainage sumps onsite shall feature a sediment sump to reduce the quantity of sediment in pumped water. Avoid roofing, gutters, and trim made of copper or other unprotected metals that may leach into runoff. x x x Source Control BMP Requirements E-15 July 2018 If These Sources Will Be on the Project Site … … Then Your WQMP shall consider These Source Control BMPs 1 Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants 2 Permanent Controls—Show on Drawings 3 Permanent Controls—List in Table and Narrative 4 Operational BMPs—Include in Table and Narrative SC-P. Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots. Not Applicable Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots shall be swept regularly to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. Debris from pressure washing shall be collected to prevent entry into the storm drain system. Washwater containing any cleaning agent or degreaser shall be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer and not discharged to a storm drain. xx StormTech® MC-3500 Chamber Designed to meet the most stringent industry performance standards for superior structural integrity while providing designers with a cost-effective method to save valuable land and protect water resources. The StormTech system is designed primarily to be used under parking lots, thus maximizing land usage for private (commercial) and public applications. StormTech chambers can also be used in conjunction with Green Infrastructure, thus enhancing the performance and extending the service life of these practices. Nominal Chamber Specifications (not to scale) Size (L x W x H) 90” x 77” x 45” 2286 mm x 1956 mm x 1143 mm Chamber Storage 109.9 ft 3 (3.11 m 3) Min. Installed Storage* 175.0 ft 3 (4.96 m3) Weight 134 lbs (60.8 kg) Shipping 15 chambers/pallet 7 end caps/pallet 7 pallets/truck *Assumes a minimum of 12” (300 mm) of stone above, 9” (230 mm) of stone below chambers, 6” (150 mm) of stone between chambers/ end caps and 40% stone porosity. Nominal End Cap Specifications (not to scale) Size (L x W x H) 26.5” x 71” x 45.1” 673 mm x 1803 mm x 1145 mm End Cap Storage 14.9 ft 3 (0.42 m3) Min. Installed Storage* 45.1 ft 3 (1.28 m 3) Weight 49 lbs (22.2 kg) *Assumes a minimum of 12” (300 mm) of stone above, 9” (230 mm) of stone below, 6” (150 mm) of stone perimeter, 6” (150 mm) of stone between chambers/ end caps and 40% stone porosity. 45" (1140 mm) 18" (450 mm) MIN* 8' (2.4 m) MAX 12" (300 mm) TYP77" (1950 mm) 12" (300 mm) MIN 6" (150 mm) MIN DEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER 9" (230 mm) MIN6" (150 mm) MIN MC-3500 END CAP PERIMETER STONE EXCAVATION WALL (CAN BE SLOPED OR VERTICAL) PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNED BY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER) CHAMBERS SHALL BE BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS". GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, <35% FINES, COMPACT IN 12" (300 mm) MAX LIFTS TO 95% PROCTOR DENSITY. SEE THE TABLE OF ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS. ADS GEOSYTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE ALL AROUND CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR EMBEDMENT STONE CHAMBERS SHALL MEET ASTM F2418 "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPLENE (PP) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS". EMBEDMENT STONE SHALL BE A CLEAN, CRUSHED AND ANGULAR STONE WITH AN AASHTO M43 DESIGNATION BETWEEN #3 AND #4 SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING THE REQUIRED BEARING CAPACITY OF SOILS *MINIMUM COVER TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVED INSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR, INCREASE COVER TO 24" (600 mm). StormTech MC-3500 Specifications Storage Volume Per Chamber Note: Assumes 6” (150 mm) of separation between chamber rows and 24” (600 mm) of cover. The volume of excavation will vary as depth of cover increases. Note: Assumes 6” (150 mm) row spacing, 40% stone porosity, 12” (300 mm) stone above and includes the bare chamber/end cap volume. English Tons (yds 3) Stone Foundation Depth 9 in 12 in 15 in 18 in Chamber 8.5 (6.0)9.1 (6.5)9.7 (6.9)10.4 (7.4) End Cap 3.9 (2.8)4.1 (2.9)4.3 (3.1)4.5 (3.2) Metric Kilograms (m3)230 mm 300 mm 375 mm 450 mm Chamber 7711 (4.6)8255 (5.0)8800 (5.3)9435 (5.7) End Cap 3538 (2.1)3719 (2.2)3901 (2.4)4082 (2.5) Note: Assumes 12” (300 mm) of stone above and 6” (150 mm) row spacing and 6” (150 mm) of perimeter stone in front of end caps. Amount of Stone Per Chamber Stone Foundation Depth 9 in (230 mm)12 in (300 mm)15 in (375mm)18 in (450 mm) Chamber 11.9 (9.1)12.4 (9.5)12.8 (9.8)13.3 (10.2) End Cap 4.0 (3.1)4.1 (3.3)4.3 (3.3)4.4 (3.4) Volume Excavation Per Chamber yd3 (m 3) Bare Chamber Storage ft3 (m3) Chamber and Stone Foundation Depth in. (mm) 9 in (230 mm)12 in (300 mm)15 in (375 mm)18 in (450 mm) Chamber 109.9 (3.11)175.0 (4.96)179.9 (5.09)184.9 (5.24)189.9 (5.38) End Cap 14.9 (0.42)45.1 (1.28)46.6 (1.32)48.3 (1.37)49.9 (1.41) Working on a project? Visit us at adspipe.com/stormtech and utilize the Design Tool ADS StormTech products, manufactured in accordance with ASTM F2418 or ASTMF2922, comply with all requirements in the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act. adspipe.com 800-821-6710 ADS “Terms and Conditions of Sale” are available on the ADS website, www.ads-pipe.com The ADS logo and the Green Stripe are registered trademarks of Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. StormTech® is a registered trademark of StormTech, Inc. © 2022 Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. #S150909 12/22 CS PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 13 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Attachment 1e: 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 DMA ID No. 1A Structural BMP ID No. 1A 1H Construction Plan Sheet No. Sheet 2 ☐ Worksheet B.3-1 Structural BMP Feasibility: Project-Scale BMP Feasibility Analysis Worksheet C.4-1: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Refer to Appendices C and D to complete. ☐ Not included because the entire project will use harvest and use BMPs ☐ Worksheet D.5-1 Infiltration & partial retention Safety Factor Structural BMP Selection and Design (Chapter 5.5) complete an include the applicable worksheet(s) found in appendix B and design criteria checklists from the associated fact sheets found in appendix E 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) (Underground Infiltration) 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) ☐ Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water Pollutants of Concern ☐ Proprietary Biofiltration (BF-3) ☐ Appendix F checklist ☐ Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water Pollutants of Concern ☐ 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) ☐ 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. ☐ Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water Pollutants of Concern ☐ Selection of Flow-Thru Treatment Control BMPs with high or medium effectiveness ☐ FT-1 Vegetated swales ☐ FT-2 Media Filters ☐ FT-3 Sand Filters ☐ FT-4 Dry Extended Detention Basin ☐ FT-5 Proprietary flow-thru treatment control ☐ Pollutant Control Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation form ☐ Water Quality Equivalency Worksheets20 14 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 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) Dino San Buenaventura (951) 440-5703 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): (Continue on subsequent pages as necessary) * If this box is checked, Worksheet B.6-1 does not need to be filled out. PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 15 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water 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): The onsite drainage is split in 2 directions, with a small portion of the site draining west and the remaining draining south. The onsite drainage drains to local catch basins and into an underground storm drain, and into an underground storage facility for mitigation of 10% of the 2- year, up to the 10-year storm event. For the westerly drainage, water drains towards Calle Fiesta and then continues its drainage path along the street until it drains through the cul-de-sac properties and into an unidentified stream. Similarly, the drainage on the easterly side drains and into a system of channels the ultimately discharge to the same location of the easterly drainage, into this unidentified stream. Water then drains west until it reaches Murrieta Creek, which drains to the subsequent reaches until it reaches the Pacific Ocean. Reaches, from upstream to downstream: Unidentified reach ->Murrieta Creek ->Rainbow Creek ->Santa Margarita River (Upper) ->Santa Margarita River (Lower) ->Santa Margarita Lagoon ->Pacific Ocean List any 303(d) impaired water bodies3 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 Murrieta Creek Chlorpyrifos, Copper, Indicator Bacteria, Iron, Manganese, Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Toxicity, Toxicity, Indicator Bacteria, Iron, Manganese Rainbow Creek Nitrogen, Phosphorus TMDL none Santa Margarita River Upper Indicator Bacteria, Iron, Manganese, Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Toxicity Iron, Manganese, Santa Margarita River Lower Benthic Community Effects, Chlorpyrifos, Indicator Bacteria, Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Toxicity none Santa Margarita Lagoon Eutrophic Eutrophic Identification of Project Site Pollutants* *Identification of project site pollutants below is only required if flow-thru treatment BMPs are implemented onsite in lieu of retention or biofiltration BMPs. Note the project must also participate in an alternative compliance program (unless prior lawful approval to meet earlier PDP requirements is demonstrated). 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 ☐ ☐ 3 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 16 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Heavy Metals ☐ Organic Compounds ☐ ☐ Trash & Debris ☐ ☐ Oxygen Demanding Substances ☐ ☐ Oil & Grease ☐ Bacteria & Viruses ☐ Pesticides ☐ ☐ PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 17 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 5, 2022 Attachment 1g: Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation Form - Pollutant Control (NOT APPLICABLE) Refer to Chapter 1.8 Onsite Project Information Record ID: 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 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 4. ☐ Credit ☐ Debit 5. ☐ Credit ☐ Debit 6. ☐ 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. 18 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 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. Hydromodification management controls required. ☐ Green Streets Project (Exempt from hydromodification management requirements) STOP * ☐ Exempt from hydromodification management requirements Include Figure 1-2 and document any “NO” answer STOP * 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. PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 19 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 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) W IL D O M A R MURRI ETA CANYONLAKE LA K E EL S I N O R E TEMECULA PE R R I S HEMET M E NI F E E SAN JACI NTO D I A M O N D V A L L E YLAKE L A K ESKINNE R C A N Y O NLAKE L A K EELSINO R E LAKE SKINNER VA ILLAKE Sources: Esri, DeLorme, HERE, TomTom, Intermap, increment P C orp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, N PS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), sw isstopo, and the GIS U ser °0 1 2 3 4Miles Map 2 - C hannel Susceptibility & Areas E xem pted from H ydromodification R equirem entsMap 2 - C hannel Susceptibility & Areas E xem pted from H ydromodification R equirem ents LegendChannel TypePotentially Susceptib le Not Susceptib le (Over 20,000 cfs) Not Susceptib le Hydromodification RequirementsExemptArea Potentially Not Exempt Potentially Exempt Lakes/Reservoirs SMR Riverside Co unty Hydromodification Susceptibility Documentation Report and Mapping - Santa Margarita Region Hydromodification Management PlanSMR Copermittees Project Location Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Wildomar Menifee Temecula Murrieta Diamond Valley Reservoir Vail Lake Skinner Reservoir Lake Riverside Riverside County San Diego County Riverside County San Diego County 01230.5 Miles [ T e me c ula C ree k S a n t a M a r g a rita Riv e r Murrie t a C r e e k Tem e c u l a C r e e k Santa Marg arita R i v e r Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Area Santa Margarita River Watershed Boundary County Boundary Receiving Waters Major Hydrology Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas - Santa Magarita River Watershed 20 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: June 5, 2022 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas (Attachment 2c) 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 Project Location SMRHM PROJECT REPORT HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:34 PM Page 2 General Model Information Project Name:HCOC Analysis_V1 Site Name: Site Address: City: Report Date:1/30/2024 Gage:Temecula Valley Data Start:1974/10/01 Data End:2011/09/30 Timestep:15 Minute Precip Scale:1.000 Version Date:2021/06/14 POC Thresholds Low Flow Threshold for POC1:10 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC1:10 Year HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:34 PM Page 3 Landuse Basin Data Predeveloped Land Use DMA 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C D,Grass,Mod(5-10%)0.19 C D,Grass,Ste(10-20)0.2 Pervious Total 0.39 Impervious Land Use acre Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 0.39 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:34 PM Page 4 Mitigated Land Use DMA 1A Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C D,Urban,Flat(0-5%)0.08 C D,Urban,St(10-20%)0.01 Pervious Total 0.09 Impervious Land Use acre Roof Area 0.105 Driveways,St(10-20%)0.065 Impervious Total 0.17 Basin Total 0.26 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater BMP A BMP A HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:34 PM Page 5 DMA 2A Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C D,Urban,Flat(0-5%)0.029 Pervious Total 0.029 Impervious Land Use acre Roof Area 0.101 Impervious Total 0.101 Basin Total 0.13 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater BMP A BMP A HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:34 PM Page 6 Routing Elements Predeveloped Routing HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:34 PM Page 7 Mitigated Routing BMP A Depth:6.75 ft. Discharge Structure: 1 Riser Height:4 ft. Riser Diameter:24 in. Orifice 2 Diameter:0.5 in.Elevation:1.1 ft. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 SSD Table Hydraulic Table Stage Area Volume Outlet Infilt (feet) (ac.) (ac-ft.) Struct (cfs) NotUsed NotUsed NotUsed 0.000 0.034 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.083 0.034 0.001 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.167 0.034 0.002 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.034 0.003 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.333 0.034 0.005 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.417 0.034 0.006 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.034 0.007 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.583 0.034 0.008 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.667 0.034 0.009 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.750 0.034 0.010 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.833 0.034 0.013 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.917 0.034 0.015 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 0.034 0.018 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.083 0.034 0.021 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.167 0.034 0.023 0.002 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.250 0.034 0.026 0.003 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.333 0.034 0.028 0.003 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.417 0.034 0.031 0.004 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.500 0.034 0.033 0.004 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.583 0.034 0.036 0.005 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.667 0.034 0.038 0.005 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.750 0.034 0.041 0.005 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.833 0.034 0.043 0.006 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.917 0.034 0.046 0.006 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.000 0.034 0.048 0.006 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.083 0.034 0.050 0.007 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.167 0.034 0.053 0.007 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.250 0.034 0.055 0.007 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.333 0.034 0.058 0.008 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.417 0.034 0.060 0.008 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.500 0.034 0.062 0.008 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.583 0.034 0.065 0.008 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.667 0.034 0.067 0.008 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.750 0.034 0.069 0.009 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.833 0.034 0.071 0.009 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.917 0.034 0.073 0.009 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.000 0.034 0.076 0.009 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.083 0.034 0.078 0.010 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.167 0.034 0.080 0.010 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.250 0.034 0.082 0.010 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.333 0.034 0.084 0.010 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:34 PM Page 8 3.417 0.034 0.086 0.010 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.500 0.034 0.088 0.011 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.583 0.034 0.090 0.011 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.667 0.034 0.092 0.011 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.750 0.034 0.094 0.011 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.833 0.034 0.096 0.011 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.917 0.034 0.097 0.011 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.000 0.034 0.099 0.012 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.083 0.034 0.101 0.522 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.167 0.034 0.102 1.450 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.250 0.034 0.103 2.635 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.333 0.034 0.104 3.991 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.417 0.034 0.106 5.440 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.500 0.034 0.107 6.900 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.583 0.034 0.108 8.290 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.667 0.034 0.109 9.536 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.750 0.034 0.110 10.58 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.833 0.034 0.111 11.40 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.917 0.034 0.113 12.01 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.000 0.034 0.114 12.48 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.083 0.034 0.115 13.13 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.167 0.034 0.116 13.62 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.250 0.034 0.117 14.10 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.333 0.034 0.118 14.56 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.417 0.034 0.119 15.01 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.500 0.034 0.121 15.44 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:34 PM Page 9 Analysis Results POC 1 + Predeveloped x Mitigated Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.39 Total Impervious Area:0 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.119 Total Impervious Area:0.271 Flow Frequency Method:Cunnane Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.173818 5 year 0.285407 10 year 0.351869 25 year 0.465411 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.007962 5 year 0.111046 10 year 0.172246 25 year 0.337634 HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:53 PM Page 10 Duration Flows The Facility PASSED Flow(cfs)Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.0174 2333 301 12 Pass 0.0208 2013 271 13 Pass 0.0241 1740 259 14 Pass 0.0275 1592 240 15 Pass 0.0309 1453 226 15 Pass 0.0343 1306 210 16 Pass 0.0377 1203 202 16 Pass 0.0410 1074 185 17 Pass 0.0444 988 178 18 Pass 0.0478 915 172 18 Pass 0.0512 832 164 19 Pass 0.0545 783 160 20 Pass 0.0579 734 155 21 Pass 0.0613 666 145 21 Pass 0.0647 618 137 22 Pass 0.0681 570 120 21 Pass 0.0714 535 108 20 Pass 0.0748 509 97 19 Pass 0.0782 467 88 18 Pass 0.0816 436 83 19 Pass 0.0850 406 82 20 Pass 0.0883 374 78 20 Pass 0.0917 351 77 21 Pass 0.0951 327 73 22 Pass 0.0985 306 71 23 Pass 0.1018 287 66 22 Pass 0.1052 262 62 23 Pass 0.1086 241 55 22 Pass 0.1120 223 52 23 Pass 0.1154 207 52 25 Pass 0.1187 195 49 25 Pass 0.1221 182 48 26 Pass 0.1255 169 46 27 Pass 0.1289 163 39 23 Pass 0.1323 153 36 23 Pass 0.1356 150 34 22 Pass 0.1390 141 32 22 Pass 0.1424 135 31 22 Pass 0.1458 129 31 24 Pass 0.1491 122 30 24 Pass 0.1525 119 30 25 Pass 0.1559 114 28 24 Pass 0.1593 106 27 25 Pass 0.1627 103 27 26 Pass 0.1660 96 25 26 Pass 0.1694 91 21 23 Pass 0.1728 85 19 22 Pass 0.1762 74 17 22 Pass 0.1796 67 17 25 Pass 0.1829 64 17 26 Pass 0.1863 62 17 27 Pass 0.1897 58 17 29 Pass 0.1931 53 17 32 Pass HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:53 PM Page 11 0.1965 47 15 31 Pass 0.1998 45 14 31 Pass 0.2032 42 14 33 Pass 0.2066 40 14 35 Pass 0.2100 37 14 37 Pass 0.2133 32 13 40 Pass 0.2167 31 11 35 Pass 0.2201 31 9 29 Pass 0.2235 31 8 25 Pass 0.2269 29 7 24 Pass 0.2302 28 7 25 Pass 0.2336 25 6 24 Pass 0.2370 24 6 25 Pass 0.2404 23 5 21 Pass 0.2438 23 5 21 Pass 0.2471 22 5 22 Pass 0.2505 20 5 25 Pass 0.2539 19 5 26 Pass 0.2573 19 5 26 Pass 0.2606 17 5 29 Pass 0.2640 17 5 29 Pass 0.2674 16 5 31 Pass 0.2708 15 4 26 Pass 0.2742 14 4 28 Pass 0.2775 14 4 28 Pass 0.2809 14 4 28 Pass 0.2843 14 4 28 Pass 0.2877 13 4 30 Pass 0.2911 11 4 36 Pass 0.2944 10 4 40 Pass 0.2978 10 4 40 Pass 0.3012 10 4 40 Pass 0.3046 10 4 40 Pass 0.3079 10 4 40 Pass 0.3113 9 4 44 Pass 0.3147 9 4 44 Pass 0.3181 9 4 44 Pass 0.3215 9 4 44 Pass 0.3248 9 4 44 Pass 0.3282 9 4 44 Pass 0.3316 9 4 44 Pass 0.3350 8 4 50 Pass 0.3384 8 3 37 Pass 0.3417 7 3 42 Pass 0.3451 6 3 50 Pass 0.3485 6 3 50 Pass 0.3519 6 3 50 Pass HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:53 PM Page 12 Water Quality HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:53 PM Page 13 Rational Method Data for Rational Method is not available. HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:53 PM Page 14 Model Default Modifications Total of 0 changes have been made. PERLND Changes No PERLND changes have been made. IMPLND Changes No IMPLND changes have been made. HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:53 PM Page 15 Appendix Predeveloped Schematic HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:53 PM Page 16 Mitigated Schematic HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 17 Predeveloped UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1974 10 01 END 2011 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 HCOC Analysis_V1.wdm MESSU 25 PreHCOC Analysis_V1.MES 27 PreHCOC Analysis_V1.L61 28 PreHCOC Analysis_V1.L62 30 POCHCOC Analysis_V11.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 42 PERLND 43 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 DMA 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 42 C/D,Grass,Mod(5-10%) 1 1 1 1 27 0 43 C/D,Grass,Ste(10-20) 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 42 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 18 42 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 43 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 42 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 43 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 42 0 4.5 0.04 350 0.1 2 0.95 43 0 4.2 0.03 300 0.15 2 0.95 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 42 40 35 3 2 0.15 0.15 0 43 40 35 3 2 0.15 0.15 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 42 0 0.7 0.25 1.2 0.45 0 43 0 0.55 0.25 0.8 0.4 0 END PWAT-PARM4 MON-LZETPARM <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC *** 42 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.45 0.4 43 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.45 0.4 END MON-LZETPARM MON-INTERCEP <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC *** 42 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.12 43 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.12 END MON-INTERCEP PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 42 0 0 0.01 0 0.5 0.3 0.01 43 0 0 0.01 0 0.5 0.3 0.01 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* END PRINT-INFO HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 19 IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** DMA 1*** PERLND 42 0.19 COPY 501 12 PERLND 42 0.19 COPY 501 13 PERLND 43 0.2 COPY 501 12 PERLND 43 0.2 COPY 501 13 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 20 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 501 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 END MASS-LINK END RUN HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 21 Mitigated UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1974 10 01 END 2011 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 HCOC Analysis_V1.wdm MESSU 25 MitHCOC Analysis_V1.MES 27 MitHCOC Analysis_V1.L61 28 MitHCOC Analysis_V1.L62 30 POCHCOC Analysis_V11.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 45 PERLND 47 IMPLND 5 IMPLND 8 RCHRES 1 COPY 1 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 BMP A MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 45 C/D,Urban,Flat(0-5%) 1 1 1 1 27 0 47 C/D,Urban,St(10-20%) 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 45 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 22 PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 45 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 47 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 45 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 47 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 45 0 4.6 0.04 400 0.05 3 0.995 47 0 3.8 0.022 300 0.15 3 0.995 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 45 40 35 3 2 0.45 0.15 0 47 40 35 3 2 0.45 0.15 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 45 0 0.7 0.25 1 0.4 0 47 0 0.35 0.25 0.5 0.3 0 END PWAT-PARM4 MON-LZETPARM <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC *** 45 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.55 0.5 47 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.55 0.5 END MON-LZETPARM MON-INTERCEP <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC *** 45 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 47 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 END MON-INTERCEP PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 45 0 0 0.01 0 3.5 1.7 0.1 47 0 0 0.01 0 3.5 1.7 0.1 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 5 Roof Area 1 1 1 27 0 8 Driveways,St(10-20%) 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 23 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 8 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 5 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 5 100 0.05 0.1 0.1 8 100 0.15 0.1 0.08 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 5 0 0 8 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 5 0 0 8 0 0 END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** DMA 1A*** PERLND 45 0.08 RCHRES 1 2 PERLND 45 0.08 RCHRES 1 3 PERLND 47 0.01 RCHRES 1 2 PERLND 47 0.01 RCHRES 1 3 IMPLND 5 0.105 RCHRES 1 5 IMPLND 8 0.065 RCHRES 1 5 DMA 2A*** PERLND 45 0.029 RCHRES 1 2 PERLND 45 0.029 RCHRES 1 3 IMPLND 5 0.101 RCHRES 1 5 ******Routing****** PERLND 45 0.08 COPY 1 12 PERLND 47 0.01 COPY 1 12 IMPLND 5 0.105 COPY 1 15 IMPLND 8 0.065 COPY 1 15 PERLND 45 0.08 COPY 1 13 PERLND 47 0.01 COPY 1 13 PERLND 45 0.029 COPY 1 12 IMPLND 5 0.101 COPY 1 15 PERLND 45 0.029 COPY 1 13 RCHRES 1 1 COPY 501 17 END SCHEMATIC NETWORK HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 24 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** 1 BMP A 2 1 1 1 28 0 1 END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** 1 0 1 0 0 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** 1 1 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> 1 0 4.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES FTABLE 1 67 5 Depth Area Volume Outflow1 Outflow2 Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes)*** 0.000000 0.034136 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.083333 0.034136 0.001137 0.000000 0.008178 0.166666 0.034136 0.002275 0.000000 0.008178 0.250000 0.034136 0.003413 0.000000 0.008178 0.333333 0.034136 0.004551 0.000000 0.008178 0.416666 0.034136 0.005689 0.000000 0.008178 0.500000 0.034136 0.006827 0.000000 0.008178 0.583333 0.034136 0.007965 0.000000 0.008178 0.666666 0.034136 0.009103 0.000000 0.008178 0.750000 0.034136 0.010241 0.000000 0.008178 HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 25 0.833333 0.034136 0.012827 0.000000 0.008178 0.916666 0.034136 0.015402 0.000000 0.008178 1.000000 0.034136 0.017969 0.000000 0.008178 1.083333 0.034136 0.020527 0.000000 0.008178 1.166666 0.034136 0.023076 0.001752 0.008178 1.250000 0.034136 0.025616 0.002628 0.008178 1.333333 0.034136 0.028146 0.003277 0.008178 1.416666 0.034136 0.030665 0.003818 0.008178 1.500000 0.034136 0.033174 0.004291 0.008178 1.583333 0.034136 0.035672 0.004717 0.008178 1.666666 0.034136 0.038157 0.005107 0.008178 1.750000 0.034136 0.040630 0.005470 0.008178 1.833333 0.034136 0.043090 0.005810 0.008178 1.916666 0.034136 0.045536 0.006131 0.008178 2.000000 0.034136 0.047968 0.006436 0.008178 2.083333 0.034136 0.050385 0.006727 0.008178 2.166666 0.034136 0.052784 0.007007 0.008178 2.250000 0.034136 0.055167 0.007275 0.008178 2.333333 0.034136 0.057532 0.007534 0.008178 2.416666 0.034136 0.059878 0.007785 0.008178 2.500000 0.034136 0.062204 0.008027 0.008178 2.583333 0.034136 0.064509 0.008263 0.008178 2.666666 0.034136 0.066792 0.008492 0.008178 2.750000 0.034136 0.069052 0.008714 0.008178 2.833333 0.034136 0.071288 0.008932 0.008178 2.916666 0.034136 0.073497 0.009144 0.008178 3.000000 0.034136 0.075680 0.009351 0.008178 3.083333 0.034136 0.077834 0.009554 0.008178 3.166666 0.034136 0.079957 0.009753 0.008178 3.250000 0.034136 0.082048 0.009948 0.008178 3.333333 0.034136 0.084105 0.010139 0.008178 3.416666 0.034136 0.086125 0.010326 0.008178 3.500000 0.034136 0.088107 0.010510 0.008178 3.583333 0.034136 0.090045 0.010691 0.008178 3.666666 0.034136 0.091939 0.010869 0.008178 3.750000 0.034136 0.093782 0.011044 0.008178 3.833333 0.034136 0.095570 0.011216 0.008178 3.916666 0.034136 0.097296 0.011386 0.008178 4.000000 0.034136 0.098950 0.011553 0.008178 4.083333 0.034136 0.100513 0.521777 0.008178 4.166666 0.034136 0.101934 1.450364 0.008178 4.250000 0.034136 0.103239 2.635113 0.008178 4.333333 0.034136 0.104499 3.991405 0.008178 4.416666 0.034136 0.105717 5.440181 0.008178 4.500000 0.034136 0.106879 6.900041 0.008178 4.583333 0.034136 0.108016 8.289842 0.008178 4.666666 0.034136 0.109154 9.535936 0.008178 4.750000 0.034136 0.110292 10.58198 0.008178 4.833333 0.034136 0.111430 11.40083 0.008178 4.916666 0.034136 0.112568 12.00813 0.008178 5.000000 0.034136 0.113706 12.47734 0.008178 5.083333 0.034136 0.114844 13.12649 0.008178 5.166666 0.034136 0.115982 13.62163 0.008178 5.250000 0.034136 0.117120 14.09939 0.008178 5.333333 0.034136 0.118257 14.56147 0.008178 5.416666 0.034136 0.119395 15.00933 0.008178 5.500000 0.034136 0.120533 15.44420 0.008178 END FTABLE 1 END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 22 IRRG ENGL 0.7 SAME PERLND 45 EXTNL SURLI WDM 22 IRRG ENGL 0.7 SAME PERLND 47 EXTNL SURLI HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 26 END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** RCHRES 1 HYDR RO 1 1 1 WDM 1016 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 1 HYDR O 1 1 1 WDM 1017 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 1 HYDR O 2 1 1 WDM 1018 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 1 HYDR STAGE 1 1 1 WDM 1019 STAG ENGL REPL COPY 1 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 701 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 801 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 2 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 2 MASS-LINK 3 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 3 MASS-LINK 5 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 5 MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 MASS-LINK 15 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 15 MASS-LINK 17 RCHRES OFLOW OVOL 1 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 17 END MASS-LINK END RUN HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 27 Predeveloped HSPF Message File HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 28 Mitigated HSPF Message File HCOC Analysis_V1 1/30/2024 9:39:54 PM Page 29 Disclaimer Legal Notice This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by : Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2024; All Rights Reserved. Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 6200 Capitol Blvd. Ste F Olympia, WA. 98501 Toll Free 1(866)943-0304 Local (360)943-0304 www.clearcreeksolutions.com PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 21 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 5, 2022 Hydromodification Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation Form (Form is not applicable to this project) Refer to Chapter 1.8 Onsite Project Information Record ID: 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. 22 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 ATTACHMENT 3 Structural BMP Maintenance Information Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet: Maintenance Responsibility has been assigned to: Property Owner ☐ Special District ☐ City of Temecula ☐ Attachment 3 is not required because the project does not propose structural BMPs ☐ Not applicable at this time – Discretionary Project Attachment Sequence Contents Checklist Attachment 3 Standard Structural BMP Water Quality Management Plan Operation and Maintenance Agreement (BMP Design Manual Appendix A.3) Included ☐ Signed, Notarized, and Recorded* ☐ City Maintained – Do Not Record, must be reviewed & accepted by City Maintenance Dept. Exhibit A Legal Description Included Exhibit B Individual Structural BMP DMA Mapbook (WQMP Exhibits) Included Place each map on 8.5”x11” paper BMP Site layout – Clearly depict location of each BMP Legible construction details of each BMP. Exhibit C Structural BMP Maintenance Plan (Required) ☐ Included See Structural BMP Maintenance Information Checklist on the back of this Attachment cover sheet. Exhibit D Structural BMP Design Fact Sheets (Appendix E) Included Note* Do not notarize & record until City staff has reviewed and approved the final Water Quality Management Plan Operation and Maintenance Agreement. PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 25 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 This page was left intentionally blank. LOT 312 OF TRACT MAP 3883 MB 63 PGS. 1 APN: 919-210-015 CITY OF TEMECULA MAINTENANCE EXHIBIT 6"DO W N P I P E 6"DO W N P I P E C F C F Operation and Maintenance Manual Project: Okpala Residence Att: Peterchris and Sandra Okpala Prepared by: DSB Engineering 43460 Ridge Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 (951)-440-5703 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. Discussion................................................................................................... 1 2. Maintenance Frequency ........................................................................... 2 3. Inspection and Maintenance Log ............................................................ 3 1. Discussion 1 1. Discussion The long-term operation and maintenance of storm water management systems on the Okpala property is critical to BMP performance as its design and construction. Proper operation and maintenance practices are outlined in this plan and will ensure that the BMPs will continue to remove and reduce sources of pollutants effectively over the long- term, and therefore, improve water quality. Without proper maintenance, BMPs are likely to fail and no longer provide the necessary Storm water treatment. Common maintenance issues that are encountered include: · Maintenance that occurs too infrequently · Owners not understanding the long-term financial burden for the maintenance of a storm water system · Lack of the knowledge on the maintenance needs of the system and · Conflicts between municipalities and landowners on who is responsible for maintenance of a storm water system. To address these issues the following sections have been developed for the project owner Inspection and Maintenance Log The inspection and maintenance log provide a form to document inspections and maintenance. This form is a sample form and other forms can be used as long as they provide the minimum information outlined in this sample log. Maintenance Frequency Maintenance frequency is outlined in Table 1. This form clearly identifies required inspection activities, the maintenance schedule, and directs provider to use a log sheet to document inspections and maintenance activities. There is the potential that a City or Regional Board inspector could visit this site and request owner to provide Maintenance records. Maintenance Agreement The maintenance agreement clearly identifies the project owner as the entity responsible for BMP maintenance and associated costs. BMP Fact Sheets Refer to enclosed WQMP, Attachment 3, Structural BMP Maintenance BMP Exhibit Refer to enclosed WQMP, Attachment 3, Structural BMP Maintenance Exhibit B 2. Maintenance Frequency 2 2. Maintenance Frequency Table 1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance (use additional forms as necessary) BMP Reponsible Party(s) Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency of Activities Landscape Management Owner Landscaping to be maintained and any erosion stabilized. Inspection and maintenance will be performed by the same personal who are responsible for landscape maintenance. Inspect Monthly and at the start of the rainy season (October 1) Roadway and Parking Areas Owner Clear and remove accumulated sand and debris in parking lots and along roadway. Sweep pavement in lue of using hose or water spray. Ensure stormwater runoff is not impeded by deposit of debris and accumulated sediment. Inspection and maintenance to be performed by ground maintenance staff. Inspect after wind storm or minimum monthly. Also, inspect at the start of the rainy season (October 1) Underground & Above Ground Detention Basin Owner Clean when inspection reveals accumulated sediment or trash is clogging. Inspect during dry weather or after any major storm event Bioretention Basin/Biofiltra tion Basin Owner Irrigate plants during prolonged dry periods. Inspect flow entrance, ponding area and surface overflow areas periodically. Replace soil, plant material if erosion occurs. Prune and remove dead plants. Remove weeds. Clean stormwater planter if it does not drain within 96 hours. Eliminate planting water to prevent vector breeding. Repair structural deficiencies. After major storm event or visual evidence of required maintenance. Minimum of every 6 months. Also, Inspect at the start of the rainy season (October 1). Litter Control Owner Site to be inspected and all litter be collected and disposed of in trash containers. Inspection and maintenance to be performed by ground maintenance staff. Weekly and . inspect at the start of the rainy season (October 1) 3. Inspection and Maintenance Log 3 3. Inspection and Maintenance Log · Underground CMP Basin 4 Underground CMP Basin Inspections and Maintenance Checklist 48” Diameter System Location: 33°34'35.18"N, 117°13'48.81"W Date Depth of Sediment Accumulat ed Trash Maintenance Performed Maintenance Personnel Comments B I 5 Bioretention Inspections and Maintenance Checklist Site Name: Owner Change since last inspection? Y N Location: Owner Name: Address: Phone Number Site Status: Date: Time: Site conditions: Inspection Frequency Key: A=annual; M=monthly; S=after major storms. BOLD = recommended frequency Inspection Items In s p e c t i o n Fr e q u e n c y In s p e c t e d ? (Y e s / N o ) Ma i n t e n a n c e Ne e d e d ? (Y e s / N o ) Comments/Description Treatment Area Treatment area free of debris? A / M / S Inlets and Outlets unobstructed? A / M / S Is there standing water longer than 24 hours after a storm event? A / M / S Evidence of erosion? A / M / S Vegetation Surrounding area fully stabilized? (no evidence of material eroding into Bioretention area) A / M / S Grass height not more than 6 inches? A / M / S Plant height not less than design water depth? A / M / S Plant composition according to approved plan? A / M / S Vegetation overgrown? A / M / S Other Hazards Have there been complaints from A / M / 6 residents? S Public hazards noted? A / M / S Inspector Comments: ________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________ Overall Condition of Facility: : Acceptable Unacceptable If any of the above Inspection items are checked “Yes” for “Maintenance Needed”, list Maintenance actions and their completion dates below: Maintenance Action Needed Due Date The next routine inspection is scheduled for approximately: ___________________________ Inspected by: (signature) ______________________________________________________________________ Inspected by: (printed) ________________________________________________________________________ 7 Detention/infiltration Basin Inspections and Maintenance Checklist Site Name: Owner Change since last inspection? Y N Location: Owner Name: Address: Phone Number Site Status: Date: Time: Site conditions: Inspection Frequency Key: A=annual; M=monthly; S=after major storms. BOLD = recommended frequency. Inspection Items In s p e c t i o n Fr e q u e n c y In s p e c t e d ? (Y e s / N o ) Ma i n t e n a n c e Ne e d e d ? (Y e s / N o ) Comments/Description Embankment and Emergency Spillway Vegetation healthy? A / M / S Erosion on embankment? A / M / S Animal burrows in embankment? A / M / S Cracking, sliding, bulging of dam? A / M / S Drains blocked or not functioning? A / M / S Leaks or seeps on embankment? A / M / S Emergency spillway obstructed? A / M / S Slope protection failure functional? A / M / S Erosion in/around emergency spillway? A / M / S Other (describe) A / M / S Riser and Principal Spillway Low-flow orifice functional? A / M / S Trash rack (Debris removal needed? Corrosion noted?) A / M / S Sediment buildup in riser? A / M / 8 S Concrete/masonry condition (Cracks or displacement? Spalling?) A / M / S Metal pipe in good condition? A / M / S Control valve operation? A / M / S Pond drain valve operation? A / M / S Outfall channels function, not eroding? A / M / S Other (describe) A / M / S Sediment Forebays Sedimentation description Sediment cleanout needed (over 50% full)? A / M / S Inspection Items In s p e c t i o n Fr e q u e n c y In s p e c t e d ? (Y e s / N o ) Ma i n t e n a n c e Ne e d e d ? (Y e s / N o ) Comments/Description Permanent Pool Areas (if applicable) Undesirable vegetation growth? A / M / S Visible pollution? A / M / S Shoreline erosion? A / M / S Erosion at outfalls into pond? A / M / S Headwalls and endwalls in good condition? A / M / S Encroachment into pond or easement area by other activities? A / M / S Evidence of sediment accumulation? A / M / S Dry Pond Areas (if applicable) Vegetation adequate? A / M / S Undesirable vegetation or woody plant growth? A / M / S Excessive sedimentation? A / M / S Hazards Have there been complaints from residents? A / M / S Public hazards noted? A / M / 9 S Inspector Comments: ________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________ Overall Condition of Facility: : Acceptable Unacceptable If any of the above Inspection items are checked “Yes” for “Maintenance Needed”, list Maintenance actions and their completion dates below: Maintenance Action Needed Due Date The next routine inspection is scheduled for approximately: ___________________________ Inspected by: (signature) ______________________________________________________________________ Inspected by: (printed) ________________________________________________________________________ PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 23 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included in the Structural BMP Maintenance Plan Exhibit: Attachment 3 Exhibit C must identify: Purpose of the Operation and Maintenance Manual General description and function of all Structural BMPs implemented Inspection & Maintenance Documentation. Refer to Chapter 7.4 Inspection, Maintenance, & Reporting Frequency: Refer to Chapter 7.5 Measures to Control Maintenance Costs. Refer to Chapter 7.6 Maintenance indicators and actions for structural BMP(s). Refer to Chapter 7.7 Structural BMP Life Cycle Cost Analysis including Inspection, Maintenance, documentation, reporting, and replacement. 24 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 ATTACHMENT 4 City of Temecula PDP Structural BMP Verification for Permitted Land Development Projects ☐ Not applicable at this time – Discretionary Project ☐ Attachment 4 is not required because the project does not propose structural BMPs 26 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: June 5, 2022 Template Date: September 26, 2019 City of Temecula Structural BMP Verification Form Project Summary Information Project Name Okpala Residence Record ID (e.g., grading/improvement plan number) Project Address 40530 Calle Fiesta Temecula, CA 92591 Assessor's Parcel Number(s) (APN(s)) 919-210-015 Project Watershed (Complete Hydrologic Unit, Area, and Subarea Name with Numeric Identifier) Responsible Party for Construction Phase Developer's Name PeterChris and Sandra Okpala Address 40530 Calle Fiesta Temecula, CA 92591 Email Address Phone Number (714 325-5215 Engineer of Work Dino San Buenaventura Engineer's Phone Number (951) 440-5703 Responsible Party for Ongoing Maintenance Owner's Name(s)* PeterChris and Sandra Okpala Address 40530 Calle Fiesta Temecula, CA 92591 Email Address Phone Number (714 325-5215 *Note: If a corporation or LLC, provide information for principal partner or Agent for Service of Process. If an HOA, provide information for the Board or property manager at time of project closeout. PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 27 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 5, 2022 City of Temecula Structural BMP Verification Form Page 2 of 4 Stormwater Structural Pollutant Control & Hydromodification Control BMPs* (List all from WQMP) Description/Type of Structural BMP Plan Sheet # STRUCT- URAL BMP ID# Maintenance Agreement Recorded Doc # Revisions Note: If this is a partial verification of Structural BMPs, provide a list and map denoting Structural BMPs that have already been submitted, those for this submission, and those anticipated in future submissions. 28 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: June 5, 2022 Template Date: September 26, 2019 City of Temecula Structural BMP Verification Form Page 3 of 4 Checklist for Applicant to submit to City inspector: ☐ Photograph of each completed Structural BMP. ☐ Photograph(s) of each Structural BMP during the construction process to illustrate proper construction as described in the Structural BMP Fact sheets. ☐ Certificates of compliance for materials as required in the Structural BMP Fact sheets. ☐ Infiltration Tests as required in the Structural BMP Fact sheets. By signing below, I certify that the Structural BMP(s) for this project have been constructed and all BMPs are in substantial conformance with the approved plans and applicable regulations. I understand the City reserves the right to inspect the above BMPs to verify compliance with the approved plans and City Ordinances. Should it be determined that the BMPs were not constructed to plan or code, corrective actions may be necessary before permits can be closed. Please sign your name and seal. Professional Engineer's Printed Name: Professional Engineer's Signed Name: Date: PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 29 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 5, 2022 City of Temecula Structural BMP Verification Form Page 4 of 4 City - OFFICIAL USE ONLY: For City Inspector: Verification Package #: __________ City Inspector: Date Project has/expects to close: Date verification received from EOW: By signing below, City Inspector concurs that every noted Structural BMP has been installed per plan. City Inspector’s Signature: _______________________________ Date: For Land Development Staff: Date Received from City Inspector: Land Development Submittal Reviewer: Land Development Reviewer concurs that the information provided for the following Structural BMPs is acceptable to enter into the Structural BMP Maintenance verification inventory: List acceptable Structural BMPs: Land Development Reviewer’s Signature: Date: 30 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 ATTACHMENT 5 Copy of 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. UP 364 S F SIT T I N G A R E A 142 S F BA R / B B Q 29 S F WO M E N 29 S F ME N 100 1 S F TE R R A C E CITY OF TEMECULA LOT 312 OF TM 3883 PRECISE GRADING PLANS CA L L E F I E S T A ’ ’ ’ ’ “” “” “” “” ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ “” “ ” “” “” “” *“ ” CONSTRUCTION NOTES AND QUANTITIES C F C C A A B B D D CONSTRUCTION NOTES CA L L E F I E S T A LL P A D = 1 2 6 5 . 5 0 PROP. SFR FF=1277.0 PAD=1275.0 GF F = 1 2 7 5 . 0 0 1s t L V L D e c k LEGEND 1750 C F C F UP 364 SF SITTING AREA 142 SF BAR/ BBQ 29 SF WOMEN29 SF MEN 1001 SF TERRACE SECTION B-B SECTION A-A SECTION A-A SECTION C-C SECTION D-D DETAIL "A" (LOWER LEVEL PAD) CONSTRUCTION NOTES LL PAD=1265.50 C F SILT FENCE DETAIL (SC-1) TYPICAL GRAVEL BAG DETAIL GRAVELBAG CHECKDAM (SC-6) ENTRENCHMENT DETAIL TYPICAL GRAVEL BAG DETAIL (SC-6) STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE (TC-1) TYPICAL FIBER ROLL INSTALLATION (SC-5)EROSION CONTROL PLAN CONSTRUCTION NOTES MATERIAL DELIVERY & STORAGE CONCRETE WASTE MANAGEMENT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT WM-8 WM-1 WM-5 SPILL PREVENTION AND CONTROLWM-4 ENERGY DISSIPATOR SILT FENCE FIBER ROLLS GRAVEL BAGS STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SC-1 SC-5 SC-6 SS-10 TC-1 SC-10 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION PRESERVATION OF EXISTINGSS-2 VEGETATION HYDROSEEDING (SUMMER)SS-4 SC-7 STREET SWEEPING AND VACUUMING SC-7 SC-7 SS-4 SC-5 SE-1 TC-1 WM-4 WM-5 WM-1 CA L L E F I E S T A SC-6 SC-5 SC-5 SC-5 SC-5 SC-5 SE-1 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 RIPRAP DETAIL (SS-10) EARTHEN BERM DETAIL FILL OVER NATURAL SLOPE DETAIL SS-4 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 DOWNDRAIN/V-DITCH DETAIL AIR INTAKE NAPOLEON DIRECT VENT GAS FIRE PLACE ( OR EQUIVALENT) SEALED COMBUSTION AREA W/ TEMPERED GLASS OR HIGH HEAT CERAMIC COVER COOL ROOM AIR INTAKE WARM AIR OUTLET EXTERIOR WALL EXHAUST AIR BLOWER (OPTIONAL) AIR INTAKE FIRE STOP Electric Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Detector* LEGEND Exhaust Fan capable of 50cfm, ENERGY STAR, w/ humidity control, and exhausted to outside. Window (See Window Schedule) Door Mark (See Door Schedule) FAN # # Electric Smoke and Detector* Electric Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Detector with Visual Signaling device* VS * All Detectors Shall be Interconnected with each other CO GENERAL NOTES 1. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS, WRITTEN DIMENSIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE JOB. 2. ALL WRITTEN NOTES ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THE MINIMUM STANDARD NOTES DETAILED ON THE LAST SHEET OF THESE DRAWING. 3. BUILDER TO APPROVE LOCATION OF HOUSE ON LOT, AND TO VERIFY ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS, ALL EASEMENTS, BUILDING AND SETBACK LINES, AND TO OBSERVE ALL DEED RESTRICTIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 4. ALL BEDROOM WINDOW SILLS TO BE A MAXIMUM OF 44" ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR MINIMUM OPENINGS ARE 24" HIGH, 20" WIDE AND MINIMUM OF 5.7 SQ.FT. OF NET CLEAR. 5. ALL PRE−FAB FIREPLACES TO BE BUILT AND INSTALLED PER 2012 IRC BCT 3102 AND BE UL AND I.C.B.O. APPROVED. A COPY OF THE MANUFACTURER INSTALLATION MANUAL WILL BE AVAILABLE IN SITE FOR INSPECTOR REVIEW. 6. STAIRWAYS SHALL COMPLY WITH 2018 IRC MINIMUM WIDTH BETWEEN HANDRAILS SHALL BE 30". 7. HANDRAILS TO BE 34 TO 38" ABOVE NOSING OF TREADS. 8. GUARDRAILS TO BE 42" ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR WITH BALUSTERS AT 4" O.C. MAX. NEWEL POST SHALL NOT BE LOCATED ABOVE FIRST TREAD. 9. HANDGRIPPING PORTION OF HANDRAIL SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 1 1/4" NOR MORE THAN 2" IN CROSS SECTION. 10. PROVIDE UNDERSIDE OF ALL STAIRWELLS WITH 5/8" TYPE "X" FIRE RATED GYPSUM WHEN UNDERSIDE CAN BE CLOSED OFF. 11. PROVIDE PLUMBING ACCESS PANEL AT ALL TUBS BY PLUMBING CODE CHAPTER 4 SECTIONS 405, 405.8. 12. ALL GLASS AT TUBS AND SHOWERS SHALL BE TEMPERED SAFETY GLASS. 13. PROVIDE VENTILATION AT ALL BATHS AND UTILITY ROOMS THROUGH NATURAL OR MECHANICAL MEANS. 14. CHIMNEYS TO BE MINIMUM 24" ABOVE ANY ROOF LINE. 15. THE GARAGE SHALL BE SEPARATED FROM THE RESIDENCE AND ITS ATTIC AREA BY NOT LESS THAN 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD APPLIED TO THE GARAGE SIDE AND 5/8" TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD WHERE THE SEPARATION IS A FLOOR CEILING/ ASSEMBLY 16. NOTIFY ARCHITECT WITH ANY DISCREPANCIES BEFORE WORKING. 17. INSTALL ELECTRICAL CIRCUIT BREAKER PANELS IN GARAGE U.N.O 18. ALL SWITCH PLATES AND OUTLET COVER TO HAVE CONCEALED FASTENERS. 19. PROVIDE POWER AS REQUIRED FOR THE EXTERIOR CONDENSING UNITS AND AIR HANDLING UNITS. A111 A8 A10 A9 1 1 1 42' - 0"75' - 0"13' - 0" 8' - 6 " 64 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 11 ' - 0 " 18 ' - 6 " 14' - 0"27' - 0"23' - 6"49' - 6"14' - 0" 5' - 6 " 11 2 ' - 6 " 1 A12 1 A12 1 A13 1 A13 2 A13 3 A13 R @ ±6 5/8"14 R @ ±6 5/8"14 R @ ±9 7/8"14 FD FD FD FD FD FD FD FD FD ROOF CONSTRUCTION: (TOP DOWN) • SINGLE PLY EPDM MEMBRANE • 1½" LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE • 30 LB ASPHALT FELT • FULLY-ADHERED MEMBRANE WATERPROOFING (SINGLE COURSE AT EAVE) • 5/8" SHEATHING • ROOF RAFTERS @16" O/C (OR AS REQ) WITH R40 INSULATION NB: PROVIDE MIN. 1.5% SLOPE TO DRAINAGE (GUTTER & FD) AS INDICATED 5"x6" CONTINUOUS GUTTER 5"x6" CONTINUOUS GUTTER 1 A17 3 A7 1/2" GYPSUM ON WALL & CEILING W/ VAPOR SEMI-PERMEABLE LATEX PAINT ROOF RAFTERS @16" O/C (PER S.E. RECOMENDATION) WITH R40 INSULATION 5/8" APA RATED SHEATHING 30 LB ASPHALT FELT FULLY-ADHERED MEMBRANE WATERPROOFING (SINGLE COURSE AT EAVE) 1½" LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE (OR PER S.E. RECOMENDATION) SINGLE PLY EPDM MEMBRANE 1/2" GYPSUM ON WALL & CEILING W/ VAPOR SEMI-PERMEABLE LATEX PAINT ROOF RAFTERS @16" O/C (PER S.E. RECOMENDATION) WITH R40 INSULATION 5/8" APA RATED SHEATHING 30 LB ASPHALT FELT FULLY-ADHERED MEMBRANE WATERPROOFING (SINGLE COURSE AT EAVE) 1½" LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE (OR PER S.E. RECOMENDATION) SINGLE PLY EPDM MEMBRANE TITAN POST ANCHOR PER S.E. DETAIL 2X BLOCKING 8" DIA TIMBER POST Project number: TAILORED HOME PLANS Paper Size: ARCH D Date: Drawn By: Checked By: Scale: WICHITA, KANSAS 11 / 0 6 / 2 0 2 1 2 0 : 1 2 : 4 3 As indicated A7 ROOF PLAN EP210025 PROPOSED RESIDENCE FOR PETERCHRIS AND SANDRA OKPALA 40530 CALLE FIESTA, TEMECULA, CA 92591 03/05/2021 Author Checker No. Description Date 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Roof Plan 3/4" = 1'-0" Flat Roof Assembly (Typ.) 1/2" = 1'-0"2 Fireplace Detail 1/2" = 1'-0"3 Post Anchorage UP DN DN DN DN Electric Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Detector* LEGEND Exhaust Fan capable of 50cfm, ENERGY STAR, w/ humidity control, and exhausted to outside. Window (See Window Schedule) Door Mark (See Door Schedule) FAN # # Electric Smoke and Detector* Electric Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Detector with Visual Signaling device* VS * All Detectors Shall be Interconnected with each other CO A111 A8 A10 A9 1 1 1 Elevato r 430 SF FOYER 1084 SF LIVING AREA 1084 SF LIVING AREA 126 SF HALLWAY 147 SF BAR 363 SF KITCHEN 223 SF DINING 81 SF PANTRY 538 SF LIVING AREA 90 SF HALLWAY 866 SF 3X GARAGE 158 SF FURNACE 277 SF CHAPEL 212 SF BEDROOM 45 SF BATH 347 SF LIBRARY POOL ELEVATOR 472 SF ENTRY PORCH 436 SF TERRACE 944 SF PATIO 9' - 0 " 11 ' - 9 " 11 ' - 6 " 4' - 9 " 14' - 10 1/2"14' - 10 1/2" 30' - 6"24' - 0"20' - 9"28' - 6"4' - 6" 30' - 6"6' - 0"12' - 0"6' - 0"20' - 9"28' - 6"4' - 6" 2' - 0"7' - 0"6' - 0"4' - 6"9' - 0"7' - 0"8' - 9"4' - 9" 108' - 3" 32 ' - 6 " 15 ' - 6 " 24 ' - 0 " 3' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 6' - 0 " 11 ' - 9 " 9' - 3 " 5' - 6 " 15 ' - 6 " 7' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 7' - 0 " 3' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 85 ' - 0 " 1' - 6"8' - 0"2' - 0"8' - 0"2' - 0"8' - 0"11' - 6" 41' - 0"13' - 0"11' - 10 1/2"8' - 7 1/2"29' - 0" 103' - 6" 2' - 9 " 4' - 3 " 13 ' - 0 " 2' - 6"8' - 6"2' - 0" 3' - 0 " 11 ' - 0 " 8' - 0 " 9' - 9 " 6' - 3 " 8' - 9 " 15 ' - 2 " 6' - 9 " 10 ' - 7 1 / 2 " 6' - 9 " 20 ' - 1 1 " 11 ' - 6 " 10 ' - 6 " 9' - 9 " 6' - 3 " 8' - 9 " 15 ' - 2 " 24 ' - 1 1 / 2 " 21 ' - 1 1 / 2 " 11 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 10 ' - 6 " 10 7 ' - 0 " R 4 ' - 9 " R 4 ' - 9 " 1' - 6"6' - 6"1' - 0"9' - 0"1' - 0"6' - 6"1' - 6" 7' - 10 1/2" 14' - 7 1/2"8' - 6"5' - 6" 4' - 0 " 12 ' - 0 " 4' - 6"4' - 6" 30' - 0"17' - 0" 6' - 6 " 10 ' - 0 " 6' - 6 " 2' - 3 " 6' - 6 " 8' - 1 0 " 6' - 6 " 15 ' - 0 " 8' - 0 " 7' - 6 " 15 ' - 6 " 16' - 5 1/2"6' - 6 1/2" 6' - 0"10' - 0"6' - 0" 6' - 6"15' - 0"5' - 0"7' - 6"5' - 0"7' - 0"8' - 6"11' - 0" FI R E P L A C E 15 ' - 6 " 5' - 0 " 20' - 0" 19' - 0" 6' - 0 " 21 ' - 0 " 11 ' - 6 " 20 ' - 6 " 26' - 6"6' - 0" 6' - 0 " 25 ' - 0 " 45 SF PWD RM. FAN VS VS VS VS VS VS VS VS VS VS FAN D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D3 W6 W5 W5 W2 W3 W4 W4 W11 W11 W11 W9 W11 W9 D4 W8W5W6 D4 W3 W3 W3 W5 W7 W5 D1 W6 W6 D5 D6 D7 D8 W4 W4 W4 1 A12 1 A12 1 A13 1 A13 3 A13 R @ ±6 5/8"18 R @ ±6"4 R @ ±6 5/8"14 R @ ±9 7/8"14 R @ ±6 5/8"14 6" DOWNPIPE 6" DOWNPIPE 1 A17 GENERAL NOTES 1. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS, WRITTEN DIMENSIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE JOB. 2. ALL WRITTEN NOTES ON THESE DRAWINGS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THE MINIMUM STANDARD NOTES DETAILED ON THE LAST SHEET OF THESE DRAWING. 3. BUILDER TO APPROVE LOCATION OF HOUSE ON LOT, AND TO VERIFY ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS, ALL EASEMENTS, BUILDING AND SETBACK LINES, AND TO OBSERVE ALL DEED RESTRICTIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 4. ALL BEDROOM WINDOW SILLS TO BE A MAXIMUM OF 44" ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR MINIMUM OPENINGS ARE 24" HIGH, 20" WIDE AND MINIMUM OF 5.7 SQ.FT. OF NET CLEAR. 5. ALL PRE−FAB FIREPLACES TO BE BUILT AND INSTALLED PER 2012 IRC BCT 3102 AND BE UL AND I.C.B.O. APPROVED. A COPY OF THE MANUFACTURER INSTALLATION MANUAL WILL BE AVAILABLE IN SITE FOR INSPECTOR REVIEW. 6. STAIRWAYS SHALL COMPLY WITH 2018 IRC MINIMUM WIDTH BETWEEN HANDRAILS SHALL BE 30". 7. HANDRAILS TO BE 34 TO 38" ABOVE NOSING OF TREADS. 8. GUARDRAILS TO BE 42" ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR WITH BALUSTERS AT 4" O.C. MAX. NEWEL POST SHALL NOT BE LOCATED ABOVE FIRST TREAD. 9. HANDGRIPPING PORTION OF HANDRAIL SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 1 1/4" NOR MORE THAN 2" IN CROSS SECTION. 10. PROVIDE UNDERSIDE OF ALL STAIRWELLS WITH 5/8" TYPE "X" FIRE RATED GYPSUM WHEN UNDERSIDE CAN BE CLOSED OFF. 11. PROVIDE PLUMBING ACCESS PANEL AT ALL TUBS BY PLUMBING CODE CHAPTER 4 SECTIONS 405, 405.8. 12. ALL GLASS AT TUBS AND SHOWERS SHALL BE TEMPERED SAFETY GLASS. 13. PROVIDE VENTILATION AT ALL BATHS AND UTILITY ROOMS THROUGH NATURAL OR MECHANICAL MEANS. 14. CHIMNEYS TO BE MINIMUM 24" ABOVE ANY ROOF LINE. 15. THE GARAGE SHALL BE SEPARATED FROM THE RESIDENCE AND ITS ATTIC AREA BY NOT LESS THAN 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD APPLIED TO THE GARAGE SIDE AND 5/8" TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD WHERE THE SEPARATION IS A FLOOR CEILING/ ASSEMBLY 16. NOTIFY ARCHITECT WITH ANY DISCREPANCIES BEFORE WORKING. 17. INSTALL ELECTRICAL CIRCUIT BREAKER PANELS IN GARAGE U.N.O 18. ALL SWITCH PLATES AND OUTLET COVER TO HAVE CONCEALED FASTENERS. 19. PROVIDE POWER AS REQUIRED FOR THE EXTERIOR CONDENSING UNITS AND AIR HANDLING UNITS. Project number: TAILORED HOME PLANS Paper Size: ARCH D Date: Drawn By: Checked By: Scale: WICHITA, KANSAS 11 / 0 6 / 2 0 2 1 2 0 : 1 1 : 4 1 As indicated A4 FIRST FLOOR PLAN EP210025 PROPOSED RESIDENCE FOR PETERCHRIS AND SANDRA OKPALA 40530 CALLE FIESTA, TEMECULA, CA 92591 03/05/2021 Author Checker No. Description Date 1/8" = 1'-0"1 First Floor Plan PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 31 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 ATTACHMENT 6 Copy of Project's Drainage Report Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the Drainage Report: The project is required to prepare and submit a CEQA Drainage Study in compliance with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Hydrology Manual: http://rcflood.org/downloads/Planning/Hydrology%20Manual%20-%20Complete.pdf In addition to the guideline, the study shall include the following but not limited to: The final CEQA Drainage report shall be signed, stamped and dated by the responsible Registered Civil Engineer. 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. 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, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Provide reasons and mitigations proposed. Discuss whether the proposed project would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Provide reasons and mitigations proposed. Discuss whether the proposed project would place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map, including County Floodplain Maps. Provide reasons and mitigations proposed. Discuss whether the proposed project would place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, which would impede or redirect flood flows. Discuss whether the proposed project would expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. 32 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 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 If hardcopy or CD is not attached, the following information should be provided: Title: Drainage Study for: Parcel 235 of Tr 3883 APN 919-210-015 Okpala Residence Prepared By: DSB Engineering Date: May 31, 2022 DRAINAGE STUDY FOR: Parcel 235 of Tr 3883 APN 919-210-015 Okpala Residence City of Temecula, CA PERMIT NO. LD22-4150 January 30, 2024 Prepared for: Peterchris and Sandra Okpala 40530 Calle Fiesta Temecula, CA 92591 (714) 325-5215 Prepared by: DSB Engineering 43460 Ridge Park Drive, Suite 200T Temecula, California 92590 (951) 440-5703 Dino San Buenaventura RCE 77348 Prepared by: DSB Registration Expires 06/30/22 Checked by: DSB TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3 II. EXISTING SITE CONDITION DRAINAGE .............................................................................................................. 4 III. DEVELOPED SITE CONDITION DRAINAGE ........................................................................................................ 5 IV. HYDROLOGIC METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................ 6 V. HYDRAULIC METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................ 7 VII. DISCUSSION AND RESULT ............................................................................................................................... 8 APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS ......................................................................................................... 9 o 100 Year Hydrology Analysis (Existing Area 1A and Proposed Area 1A) ...................................... 9 APPENDIX B: HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS........................................................................................................... 10 o 8” Onsite Storm Drain Hydraulics ............................................................................................... 10 APPENDIX C: REFERENCE .................................................................................................................................... 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-5.6 Impervious Cover for Developed Areas ......................... 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-4.3 2-Year 1-Hour Precipitation ........................................... 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-4.4 2-Year 1-Hour Precipitation ........................................... 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-4.6 Slope of Intensity-Duration Curve ................................. 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-5.5 Runoff Index for Pervious Areas .................................... 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate C-1.52 Soil Group Map for Bachelor Mtn. ............................... 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-3 Time of Concentration Nomograph .................................. 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-4.7 Intensity-Duration Curves Sheet .................................... 11 o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-5.7 Runoff Coefficient Data .................................................. 11 o Grading Plan Reference .............................................................................................................. 11 o USGS Contour Map Reference .................................................................................................... 11 MAP POCKET: EXISTING CONDITIONS EXHIBITS ................................................................................................. 12 o Existing Condition Hydrology Exhibit for Rational Method Study .............................................. 12 MAP POCKET: PROPOSED CONDITIONS EXHIBITS .............................................................................................. 13 o Proposed Condition Hydrology Exhibit for Rational Method Study ........................................... 13 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is a residential project that will develop the property to include a single-family home. The project will include the creation of one pad and private driveway entrance that leads to the residence. The project is located in the City of Temecula on the major intersection of Via Norte and Calle Fiesta, east of Interstate Freeway 15. The parcel measures approximately 0.83 Ac and is designated as Parcel 235 of Tr 3883 (APN 919-210-015) , referred thereafter as the Okpala Residence. The enclosed hydrology report analyzes the 100-year storm event hydrology for the existing and proposed condition. Project flow rates and time of concentration were determined and compared. Drainage facilities, were applicable, were analyzed for their hydraulic capacity and document in Appendix B. Please refer to Appendix E Proposed Condition Hydrology Map for an overview of the project drainage pattern. II. EXISTING SITE CONDITION DRAINAGE Referring to Existing Condition Hydrology Map in the map book section of this report, the local drainage generally flow is split, draining east at an average slope is 20% and draining southwest towards Calle Fiesta, draining at an average slope of 5%. The drainage from these two areas ultimately meets downstream. There is no existing infrastructure, other than a wooden corral that is located on the project’s westerly boundary. Review of the NRCS Soil Survey Report and excerpt Plate C-1.53, the project hydrologic soil classification is identified as Soil Class D, which is characterized as high runoff potential and a low infiltration capacity. The project area has little to no ground cover with brush along the existing flow line the traverses the site. The land cover is classified as Grass per the Riverside County Hydrology Manual. III. DEVELOPED SITE CONDITION DRAINAGE As mentioned in the introduction, the project will construct a single-family home with a private driveway entrance leading up to the residence. The overall drainage pattern follows the existing condition, with drainage being split and flowing both east and in the southwest direction. The onsite improvements that consist of impervious areas accounts for 75% of the developed pad area. For that reason, using Plate D-5.6, the land use is described as a Mobile Home Park, which is equally described with an average impervious fraction of 75%. Furthermore, given the pervious area runoff index for the developed site is described as Urban Cover - Residential Landscaping, which has a value of 75 for soil group type D for AMC II. Please refer to Appendix E Proposed Condition Hydrology Map, where the overall project drainage pattern is delineated. IV. HYDROLOGIC METHODOLOGY The overall drainage basin of study covers nearly 0.36 acres. A survey was done for the project area, where contours were generated and used for the design of the proposed project. The Riverside County Hydrology Manual’s Rational Method Procedure was the basis for the proposed condition 100-Year hydrologic analysis. The rational method input parameters used included an AMC of 3 and Land Use, which was modeled as Mobile Home Park and Undeveloped (Poor Cover) for undeveloped/grass areas. Physical characteristics such as the flow path and elevation difference were also used in calculating the time of concentration. Please refer to Appendix A for the full hydrology analysis. V. HYDRAULIC METHODOLOGY Due to the projects limited grading and the natural drainage of the site, there are no drainage facilities required to convey the onsite and offsite flow. Drainage will flow though the site with limited impacts on the site and downstream drainage course. VII. DISCUSSION AND RESULT Table 1: Rational Method Analysis Summary Table Condition Drainage Area ID Area (ac) Q100 (cfs) Existing Condition 1A 0.39 1.72 Proposed Condition 1A 0.39 1.77 Upon review of the hydrologic calculations and above summary table, the 100-year flow shows a decrease in peak flow rates. Although there is an increase in the impervious area of the site, projects existing condition has a lower time of concentration due to the steep grade condition and contributes to a higher peak flow rate for the existing condition. Please refer to the enclosed hydrology report with supporting conclusions hereon. APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS Rational Method Hydrology Analysis o 100 Year Hydrology Analysis (Existing Area 1A and Proposed Area 1A) Project Name: Project Location: Drainage Area (Acres) - 10 Acres Maximum Longest Watercourse (Ft) - 1,000' Maximum Upstream Elevation Of Watercourse (Ft) Downstream Elevation Of Watercourse (Ft) Existing Impervious Percentage (%) Grass Poor Cover Total=0.39 Ac.Weighted Average RI = 76 89 100-year Flowrate = 1.72 cfs Tc, Min=4.76 min 100yr Peak Intensity (for drainage area) = 4.96 in/hr Runoff Coefficient (100-year) = 0.89 Total Drainage Area (Acres) - 10 Acre Max Longest Watercourse (Ft) - 1,000' Max Upstream Elevation Of Watercourse (Ft) Downstream Elev. Of Watercourse (Ft) Proposed Impervious Percentage (%)Low Loss Rate (%) calc'd: 30.00 Over-ride: Urban Landscaping Good Cover Total= 0.39 Ac. Weighted Average RI = 57 75 100-year Flowrate = 1.77 cfs Q100Post = 1.77 cfs Tc100Post = 4.34 min Tc, Min=4.34 min Q100Pre = 1.72 cfs Tc100Pre = 4.76 min 100yr Peak Intensity (for drainage area) = 5.22 in/hr Delta = 0.05 cfs Delta = -0.42 min Runoff Coefficient (100-year) = 0.87 Riverside County Rational Method Hydrology - 100-Year Design Storm Calculation Based on Riverside County Hydrology Manual, April 1978 Pre-Development - Hydrology Information Hydrology Manual Reference Values AMC 3 88.0 Sub Area A1 - Post Condition Summary 100-Year Project Comparison 0 0 0 0 0 0 Area ID Subarea Acreage Cover Type Vegetative Cover Soil A % Soil B % Soil C % Soil D % 0.75 0.1Q2 0.39 110 1271 Impervious Percentage (%, Plate D-5.6)75% Mobile Home Park Sub Area A1 - Post-Development - Soils Information RI Index AMC I RI Index AMC II RI Index AMC III 1A 0.39 Ac.100 57 75 88 Sub Area A1 - Post-Development - Hydrology Information 0 0 0 Soil B % 0.1Q2 2-Year, 1-Hour Intensity (In/Hr) - Plate D-4.3 96 Soil D %Cover TypeSubarea Acreage RI Index AMC I RI Index AMC III RI Index AMC II Slope Of The Intensity Duration - Plate D-4.6 100-Year, 1-Hour Intensity (In/Hr) - Plate D-4.1 0 0.5 1.2 96.0 Pre-Development - Soils Information 0.39 Ac.A1 Calculated Input Vegetative Cover 89 Soil A % Soil C %Area ID 76 Okpala Residence City of Temecula 0 100 0 0.56 0.39 115 1281 1255 0 0% Undeveloped - Poor Cover Impervious Percentage (%, Plate D-5.6) Existing Condition Summary 1274.7 1 of 1 APPENDIX B: HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS o 8” Onsite Storm Drain Hydraulics Onsite Storm Drain Capacity Calculations Project:Okapala Residence Location: City of Temecula By: DSB Date: ID:Date:mdo version 12.8.00 Mannings Formula Q=(1.486/n)ARh 2/3S1/2 R=A/P A=cross sectional area P=wetted perimeter V=(1.49/n)Rh 2/3S1/2 S=slope of channel Q=V x A n=Manning's roughness coefficient Storm Drain ID Diameter, D (in) Depth, d (In) Mannings n q Slope, S (ft/ft)Area,ft2 Wetted Perimeter, ft Hydraulic Radius, ft velocity ft/s flow, cfs Onsite SD 8 8 0.012 0 1%0.35 2.09 0.17 2.65 0.93 1/30/2024 1/30/2024 d q D Clear Data Entry Cells d q D Clear Data Entry Cells APPENDIX C: REFERENCE o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-5.6 Impervious Cover for Developed Areas o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-4.3 2-Year 1-Hour Precipitation o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-4.4 2-Year 1-Hour Precipitation o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-4.6 Slope of Intensity-Duration Curve o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-5.5 Runoff Index for Pervious Areas o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate C-1.52 Soil Group Map for Bachelor Mtn. o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-3 Time of Concentration Nomograph o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-4.7 Intensity-Duration Curves Sheet o Riverside County Excerpt: Plate D-5.7 Runoff Coefficient Data o Grading Plan Reference o USGS Contour Map Reference 0.75 % Project Location i=0.50" Project Location i=1.20" Project Location slope=.56 4,973'-1 1/2" Project Location Existing Area 1A Prop Area 1A ~3.55 in ~4.96 in/hr UP 364 S F SIT T I N G A R E A 142 S F BA R / B B Q 29 S F WO M E N 29 S F ME N 100 1 S F TE R R A C E CITY OF TEMECULA LOT 312 OF TM 3883 PRECISE GRADING PLANS CA L L E F I E S T A ’ ’ ’ ’ “” “” “” “” ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ “” “ ” “” “” “” *“ ” CONSTRUCTION NOTES AND QUANTITIES C F C C A A B B D D CONSTRUCTION NOTES CA L L E F I E S T A LL P A D = 1 2 6 5 . 5 0 PROP. SFR FF=1277.0 PAD=1275.0 GF F = 1 2 7 5 . 0 0 1s t L V L D e c k LEGEND 1750 C F C F UP 364 SF SITTING AREA 142 SF BAR/ BBQ 29 SF WOMEN29 SF MEN 1001 SF TERRACE SECTION B-B SECTION A-A SECTION A-A SECTION C-C SECTION D-D DETAIL "A" (LOWER LEVEL PAD) CONSTRUCTION NOTES LL PAD=1265.50 C F SILT FENCE DETAIL (SC-1) TYPICAL GRAVEL BAG DETAIL GRAVELBAG CHECKDAM (SC-6) ENTRENCHMENT DETAIL TYPICAL GRAVEL BAG DETAIL (SC-6) STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE (TC-1) TYPICAL FIBER ROLL INSTALLATION (SC-5)EROSION CONTROL PLAN CONSTRUCTION NOTES MATERIAL DELIVERY & STORAGE CONCRETE WASTE MANAGEMENT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT WM-8 WM-1 WM-5 SPILL PREVENTION AND CONTROLWM-4 ENERGY DISSIPATOR SILT FENCE FIBER ROLLS GRAVEL BAGS STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SC-1 SC-5 SC-6 SS-10 TC-1 SC-10 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION PRESERVATION OF EXISTINGSS-2 VEGETATION HYDROSEEDING (SUMMER)SS-4 SC-7 STREET SWEEPING AND VACUUMING SC-7 SC-7 SS-4 SC-5 SE-1 TC-1 WM-4 WM-5 WM-1 CA L L E F I E S T A SC-6 SC-5 SC-5 SC-5 SC-5 SC-5 SE-1 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 RIPRAP DETAIL (SS-10) EARTHEN BERM DETAIL FILL OVER NATURAL SLOPE DETAIL SS-4 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 SC-6 DOWNDRAIN/V-DITCH DETAIL Project Location MAP POCKET: EXISTING CONDITIONS EXHIBITS o Existing Condition Hydrology Exhibit for Rational Method Study INDEX RE V I E W E D : D S B DR A W N : D S B DS B P R O J E C T N O : D S B 2 1 - 0 6 1 P e t e r O k p a l a M e a d o w v i e w DA T E : 9/ 1 7 / 2 2 SHEET SC A L E : 1 " = 2 0 ' PR O J E C T N O : L D 2 2 - 4 1 5 0 HY D R O L O G Y E X H I B I T TR A C T M A P N O . 3 8 8 3 L O T 3 1 2 OK P A L A R E S I D E N C E PR O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N RE L E V A N T L I N K S ( C L I C K ) : 1 OF 3 - ST O R M T E C H D E S I G N M A N U A L - CI T Y O F T E M E C U L A B M P M A N U A L - DS B E N G I N E E R I N G S E R V I C E S W E B S I T E RE V I E W I N G A G E N C Y : C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A - RI V E R S I D E C O U N T Y B M P M A N U A L MAP POCKET: PROPOSED CONDITIONS EXHIBITS o Proposed Condition Hydrology Exhibit for Rational Method Study INDEX RE V I E W E D : D S B DR A W N : D S B DS B P R O J E C T N O : DS B 2 1 - 0 6 1 P e t e r O k p a l a M e a d o w v i e w DA T E : 9/ 1 7 / 2 2 SHEET SC A L E : 1 " = 2 0 ' PR O J E C T N O : LD 2 2 - 4 1 5 0 HY D R O L O G Y E X H I B I T TR A C T M A P N O . 3 8 8 3 L O T 3 1 2 OK P A L A R E S I D E N C E PR O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N RE L E V A N T L I N K S ( C L I C K ) : 1 OF 3 - ST O R M T E C H D E S I G N M A N U A L - CI T Y O F T E M E C U L A B M P M A N U A L - DS B E N G I N E E R I N G S E R V I C E S W E B S I T E RE V I E W I N G A G E N C Y : CI T Y O F T E M E C U L A - RI V E R S I D E C O U N T Y B M P M A N U A L 6"DO W N P I P E 6"DO W N P I P E C F C F PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 33 Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 ATTACHMENT 7 Copy of Project's Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Report ☐ This attachment is empty because a geotechnical and groundwater report is not required. If hardcopy or CD is not attached, the following information should be provided: Title: Prepared By: Date: The geotechnical and groundwater investigation 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 (see Appendix I). 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. Use Worksheet D.5-1 (see Appendix I). 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. 34 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS Preparation Date: January 30, 2024 Template Date: September 26, 2019 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. United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Western Riverside Area, CaliforniaNatural Resources Conservation Service September 10, 2021 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Western Riverside Area, California.................................................................13 AtD2—Arlington and Greenfield fine sandy loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded......................................................................................13 HcD2—Hanford coarse sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded.........14 RuF—Rough broken land............................................................................16 References............................................................................................................17 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 37 1 0 2 1 0 37 1 0 2 3 0 37 1 0 2 5 0 37 1 0 2 7 0 37 1 0 2 9 0 37 1 0 3 1 0 37 1 0 3 3 0 37 1 0 3 5 0 37 1 0 3 7 0 37 1 0 2 1 0 37 1 0 2 3 0 37 1 0 2 5 0 37 1 0 2 7 0 37 1 0 2 9 0 37 1 0 3 1 0 37 1 0 3 3 0 37 1 0 3 5 0 37 1 0 3 7 0 488790 488810 488830 488850 488870 488890 488910 488930 488950 488970 488990 489010 489030 489050 488790 488810 488830 488850 488870 488890 488910 488930 488950 488970 488990 489010 489030 489050 33° 31' 58'' N 11 7 ° 7 ' 1 4 ' ' W 33° 31' 58'' N 11 7 ° 7 ' 4 ' ' W 33° 31' 52'' N 11 7 ° 7 ' 1 4 ' ' W 33° 31' 52'' N 11 7 ° 7 ' 4 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 15 30 60 90 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,240 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:15,800. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Western Riverside Area, California Survey Area Data: Version 13, May 27, 2020 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jan 7, 2021—Jan 14, 2021 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 10 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI AtD2 Arlington and Greenfield fine sandy loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded 0.6 8.0% HcD2 Hanford coarse sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded 0.6 7.3% RuF Rough broken land 6.6 84.6% Totals for Area of Interest 7.8 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or Custom Soil Resource Report 11 landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 12 Western Riverside Area, California AtD2—Arlington and Greenfield fine sandy loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: hcr6 Elevation: 100 to 3,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F Frost-free period: 200 to 320 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Arlington and similar soils:40 percent Greenfield and similar soils:30 percent Minor components:30 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Arlington Setting Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Convex Parent material:Alluvium derived from granite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 11 inches: fine sandy loam H2 - 11 to 24 inches: sandy loam H3 - 24 to 36 inches: cemented H4 - 36 to 47 inches: coarse sandy loam, loamy coarse sand H4 - 36 to 47 inches: Properties and qualities Slope:8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature:24 to 40 inches to duripan Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R019XD029CA Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Description of Greenfield Setting Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Convex Parent material:Alluvium derived from granite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 26 inches: fine sandy loam H2 - 26 to 43 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 43 to 60 inches: loam H4 - 60 to 70 inches: stratified loamy sand to sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope:8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R019XD029CA Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed, severely eroded Percent of map unit:20 percent Hydric soil rating: No Greenfield Percent of map unit:10 percent Hydric soil rating: No HcD2—Hanford coarse sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: hcw3 Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Elevation: 150 to 900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 63 to 64 degrees F Frost-free period: 250 to 280 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Hanford and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hanford Setting Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium derived from granite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 8 inches: coarse sandy loam H2 - 8 to 40 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 40 to 60 inches: stratified loamy sand to coarse sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope:8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Somewhat excessively drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R020XD012CA - SANDY Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Greenfield Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Ramona Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Tujunga Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 15 RuF—Rough broken land Map Unit Composition Rough broken land:100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Rough Broken Land Setting Down-slope shape:Concave Across-slope shape:Convex Parent material:Residuum derived from mixed sources Typical profile H1 - 0 to 60 inches: unweathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope:30 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature:0 to 3 inches to paralithic bedrock Runoff class: Very high Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 16 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 17 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 18 4,973'-1 1/2" Project Location December 3, 2021 Project No. 213842-14A Confirmation No. PR 6864 Mr. David Debate Stonecrest Custom Homes 33108 Harmony Ln Temecula, CA 92592 Subject: Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Report and Design for Onsite Water Treatment Utilizing an Advanced Treatment Unit (ATU), Proposed Single Family Residence, Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 919-210-015, Located at 40530 Calle Fiesta, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California Reference: County of Riverside, Community Health Agency, Department of Environmental Health, Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems, Technical Guidance Manual, Version A, undated. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. is pleased to present this onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS) report for the proposed single-family residential development referenced above, located at 40530 Calle Fiesta, Temecula Area, Riverside County, California. The purpose of our feasibility study was to determine the percolation rates and physical characteristics of the subsurface earth materials within the vicinity of the proposed leach lines . We have provided guidelines for the design of an onsite wastewater treatment system, where applicable. This evaluation is intended to provide adequate data to satisfy the County of Riverside, Community Health Agency, Department of Environmental Health guidelines for single- family dwelling approval. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION The subject property is located at 40530 Calle Fiesta in the Temecula Area of Riverside County, California, see Figure 1. The subject property consists of an undeveloped parcel of land with relatively flat terrain. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Based on information provided by you, the proposed deve lopment includes a 10-bedroom single family residence, complete with an onsite wastewater treatment system utilizing an advanced treatment unit (ATU). County of Riverside, Community Health Agency, Department of Environmental Health, Local Agency Management Program for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems, 2016. 42184 Remington Avenue, TEMECULA, CA 92590 951-461-4028, ESGSINC.COM EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 2 December 3, 2021 Project Number 213842-14A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND PERCOLATION TESTING SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Subsurface exploration of the subject site consisted of one (1) deep exploratory test hole to a depth of 20 feet, conducted on August 26, 2021. The deep exploratory test hole was excavated to interpret whether groundwater or impermeable soil layers were present . Earth materials encountered within the deep exploratory test hole were classified and logged using the guidelines of ASTM 2487 . The approximate location of the deep exploratory test hole is shown on the attached Percolation Location Map, Plate 1 . The exploratory log has been included within Appendix A. PERCOLATION TESTING A total of six (6) percolation tests were conducted on November 5, 2021, to evaluate the feasibility of utilizing Geoflow drip fields for advanced treatment systems . The percolation tests were performed in general accordance with the referenced guidelines . The percolation tests were performed at the bottom of 1 foot deep, 8- inch diameter tests holes. The locations of the percolation test holes are indicated on the attached Percolation Location Map, Plate 1 . The percolation test holes were located by property boundary measurements and by using geographic features. Percolation testing was performed per the referenced Riverside County Local Agency Management Program guidelines. The final percolation test reading is summarized in the following table and the te st data recorded in the field is included in Appendix B. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 3 December 3, 2021 Project Number 213842-14A PERCOLATION TEST SUMMARY TEST NUMBER PERCOLATION HOLE DIAMETER (IN.) HOLE DEPTH (FT.) FINAL PERCOLATION RATE (MPI) EARTH MATERIAL DESCRIPTION P-1 8 1 17.2 Silty SAND P-2 8 1 15.0 Silty SAND P-3 8 1 20.0 Silty SAND P-4 8 1 15.0 Silty SAND P-5 8 1 30.0 Silty SAND P-6 8 1 24.0 Silty SAND FINDINGS EARTH MATERIALS A general description of the earth materials observed on site is provided below: Topsoil: Residual topsoil, encountered in the upper 6 inches, blankets the site and the underlying Pauba Formation. These materials were noted to be generally light brown si lty sands which were very porous, dry and in a loose state. Quaternary Pauba Formation (Qps): Pauba Formation bedrock was generally encountered below the topsoil and alluvial materials to the full depth of our exploration . These materials primarily consisted of light brown, fine to coarse silty sand . These materials were generally noted to be dry to moist, and in a medium dense to very dense state. Typically, the upper 1 to 3 feet of this unit is slightly more weathered and not as hard with occasional lenses of less indurated rock . GROUNDWATER Groundwater was not observed within the deep exploratory hol e (MW-1) excavated to a depth of 20 feet. PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS The final measured percolation test design rate is 30 minutes per inch (mpi). A hydraulic rate of 0.533 gal/sq. ft/ day will be used for the design. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 4 December 3, 2021 Project Number 213842-14A CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on the data presented in this report and using the recommendations set forth, it is the judgment of this professional that there is sufficient area on each lot to support a to support a Jet Model J-1500 GPD advanced treatment sewage disposal system in those areas with test results that will meet the current standards of the Department of Environmental Health and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The design system shall be located in natur al undisturbed soil at the depth of the tests performed. The natural occurring body of minerals and organic matter at the proposed wastewater disposal area contains earthen materials having more than 50% of its volume composed of particles smaller than 0.08 inches (2mm) in size. Based on the data presented in this report and the testing information accumulated, it is the judgment of this professional that the groundwater table will not encroach within the current allowable limit set forth by County and State requirements. SEWAGE DISPOSAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed sewage disposal system should consist of a Jet Model J-1500 GPD. The area for a primary system is required along with the expansion area and is outlined on Plate 1. Descriptions of the general design and construction of sewage disposal systems is provided below. Septic Tank Capacity: The minimum septic tank capacity for the advanced treatment unit is determined, in accordance with Riverside County Department of Environmental Health Guidelines, by the total number of bedrooms/bedroom equivalent or fixture counts, whichever is greater, within the proposed design. The proposed layout shows 10 bedrooms and a total of 85 fixture counts. Allowable Design Percolation Rate: To determine the approximate square footage of each Geoflow drip, the individual percolation and loading rates for each area that meets the requirements of Riverside County Department of Environmental Health Guidelines and the proposed septic tank capacity, may be used as a guideline. Primary System: Primary system consist of a 1,500-gallon pretreatment tank, Jet Wastewater Treatment System, Model J-1,500 GPD, a 1,000-gallon pump chamber, and a drip field disposal area. The drip lines are constructed within trenches excavated into native materials. The minimum leach field absorption area is based upon the proposed daily flow and the percolation (soil loading) rate of the near surface soils. The design of the Jet Model J-1,500 GPD for the proposed site is based upon the guidelines provided by Jet. The details for the treatment system standard detail is included in Appendix D, Jet Model J- 1500 GPD Standard Details. The calculations for dripline dispersal and pump size are presen ted in Appendix C. The calculations indicate the pump size should be ½ horsepower. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 5 December 3, 2021 Project Number 213842-14A The drip field is designed per the Geoflow Design Manual Recommendations. The details of the Geoflow Drip Area are specified in the attached Appendix C. The Design Sheets include the proposed daily effluent, loading rates, type of drip lines, values, spacing of lines, emitters, friction losses, etc. A pump chamber for the pressurized system should be installed close to the drip field . The pump chamber should have a capacity of 1,000 gallons. The tank should be located at an elevation such that the return lines can flow back into the tank by gravity. An annual maintenance contract needs to be established between the property owner and an approved contractor. The Jet Model J-1500 GPD system can be programmed to alert the maintenance contractor when a problem has occurred . This option should be implemented. Expansion System: The expansion system is identical to the primary system and will follow the same guidelines if needed in the future. GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. David Debate and their authorized representative. It likely does not contain sufficient information for other parties or other uses. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. should be engaged to review the final design plans and specifications prior to construction. This is to verify that the recommendations contained in this report have been properly incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Should Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. not be accorded the opportunity to review the project plans and specifications, we are not responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. We recommend that Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. be retained to provide geologic and geotechnical engineering services during grading and foundation excavation phases of the work . In order to allow for design changes in the event that the subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to construction. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. should review any changes in the project and modify and approve in writing the conclusions and recommendations of this report . This report and the drawings contained within are intended for design input purposes only and are not intended to act as construction drawings or specifications. In the event that conditions encountered during grading or construction operations appear to be different than those indicated in this report, this office should be notifi ed immediately, as revisions may be required. REPORT LIMITATIONS Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists, practicing at the time and lo cation this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. APPENDIX A REFERENCES APPENDIX A References County of Riverside, Community Health Agency, Department of Environmental Health, Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems, Technical Guidance Manual, Version A, undated. County of Riverside, Department of Environmental Health, Environmental Protection and Oversight Division, Land Use and Water Resources Program, 2016, Local Agency Management Program for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems, dated October 5. Geoflow Subsurface Drip Systems, 2007, Design Installation and Maintenance Guidelines, Version 2, October. Jet, Inc., 2008-2009, Product Catalog, Volume 2. APPENDIX B PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS PROJECT NAME:PROJECT NO.:TEST TYPE (SP)(LL)(ATU) DATE TESTED:TRACT:LOT NO.: TESTED BY: Test No.P-1 Depth 1 Test No.P-2 Depth 1 Time Time Interval Initial Final Drop MPI Time Time Interval Initial Final Drop MPI 10:45 10:46 11:15 11:16 11:16 11:17 11:46 11:47 11:49 11:50 12:19 12:20 12:20 12:21 12:50 12:51 12:51 12:52 13:21 13:22 13:22 13:23 13:52 13:53 13:53 13:54 14:23 14:24 14:24 14:25 14:54 14:55 14:55 14:56 15:25 15:26 15:26 15:27 15:56 15:57 15:57 15:58 16:27 16:28 16:28 16:29 16:58 16:59 Test No.P-3 Depth 1 Test No.P-4 Depth 1 Time Time Interval Initial Final Drop MPI Time Time Interval Initial Final Drop MPI 10:47 10:48 11:17 11:18 11:18 11:19 11:48 11:49 11:51 11:52 12:21 12:22 12:22 12:23 12:52 12:53 12:53 12:54 13:23 13:24 13:24 13:25 13:54 13:55 13:55 13:56 14:25 14:26 14:26 14:27 14:56 14:57 14:57 14:58 15:27 15:28 15:28 15:29 15:58 15:59 15:59 16:00 16:29 16:30 16:30 16:31 17:00 17:01 7.5 3.5 8.6307.5 2.8 11.0 30 4.5 7.5 3.0 10.0 30 4.75 8.25 3.5 8.6 7.25 2.3 13.4305.5 7 1.5 20.0 30 5 30 6.5 9 2.5 12.0 30 4 30 4 6.5 2.5 12.0 30 4 4.75 30 4 6.5 2.5 12.0 9 3.5 8.65.5 30 5 8.25 3.3 9.3 30 30 5 7.25 2.3 13.4 30 4 6.25 2.3 13.4 30 4 6 2.0 15.0 30 4 6.25 2.3 13.4 30 4 5.75 1.8 17.2 30 4 5.75 1.8 17.2 15.0 30 8 11 3.0 10.0 30 5 7 2.0 15.0 7.25 3.3 9.3 30 4 7 3.0 10.0 30 5 7.5 2.5 12.0 30 4 5.75 1.8 17.2 30 5 30 5.5 30 4.5 30 6 30 4.5 6.25 1.8 17.2 30 6 9 3.0 8 3.0 10.010.0 30 6.5 9.5 3.0 10.0 8.5 3.0 10.0 30 4.75 6.75 2.0 3.0 10.0 8.5 2.5 12.0 30 5 7.5 30 4 6.25 2.3 13.4 7.25 2.8 11.0 30 5 8 3.0 10.0 30 4 6.25 2.3 30 4 7 30 4 5.5 1.5 20.0 30 5 7.5 2.5 12.0 2.5 12.0 30 5.75 7.5 1.8 17.2 30 4 6 2.0 15.0 13.4 30 4 6 2.0 15.0 30 4 6 2.0 15.0 30 5 6.5 1.5 20.0 30 4 5.5 1.5 20.0 30 5 7.25 2.3 13.4305.5 7 1.5 20.0 Calle Fiesta 11/5/2021 213842-14A JMR2 30 4 6 2.0 15.0 30 4 6.25 2.3 13.4 PROJECT NAME:PROJECT NO.:TEST TYPE (SP)(LL)(ATU) DATE TESTED:TRACT:LOT NO.: TESTED BY: Test No.P-5 Depth 1 Test No.P-6 Depth 1 Time Time Interval Initial Final Drop MPI Time Time Interval Initial Final Drop MPI 10:49 10:50 11:19 11:20 11:20 11:21 11:50 11:51 11:53 11:54 12:23 12:24 12:24 12:25 12:54 12:55 12:55 12:56 13:25 13:26 13:26 13:27 13:56 13:57 13:57 13:58 14:27 14:28 14:28 14:29 14:58 14:59 14:59 15:00 15:29 15:30 15:30 15:31 16:00 16:01 16:01 16:02 16:31 16:32 16:32 16:33 17:02 17:03 Test No.Depth Test No.Depth Time Time Interval Initial Final Drop MPI Time Time Interval Initial Final Drop MPI 9 3.0 10.0 Calle Fiesta 213842-14A 11/5/2021 JMR2 30 5 8 3.0 10.0 30 5 30 5 7.5 2.5 12.0306 15.030583.0 10.0 7 2.0 15.0 2.0 15.0 30 4 6 2.0 15.0 30 5 7.25 2.3 13.4 30 4.5 6.5 30 4 6 2.0 30 6 8 2.0 15.0 30 30 4 5.75 1.8 17.2 30 4 5.5 1.5 20.0 30 4 5.5 3.75 5.25 1.5 20.0 1.5 20.0 1.5 20.0 30 4 5 1.0 30.0 30 5.5 6.75 1.3 24.0 30 5.5 7 30 5 6 1.0 30.0 30 30 4 5.5 1.5 20.0 30 4 5 1.0 30.0 30 4 5.5 4 5.5 1.5 20.0 1.5 20.0 1.3 24.030451.0 30.0 30 4 5.25 APPENDIX C GEOFLOW DRIPFIELD CALCULATIONS Job Description: Contact: Prepared by: Date: This spreadsheet serves as a guide, and is not a complete hydraulic design. Worksheet 1- Field Flow 1,500 gallons / day 0.533 gallons / sq.ft. / day Minimum Dispersal Field Area 2,814 square ft. 2,814 square ft. Flow per zone 3 zone(s) Dispersal area per zone 938 square ft. 2 ft. 2 ft. 469 ft. per zone 235 emitters per zone 35 psi 80.85 ft. 0.53 gph 2.07 gpm Note: A few States or Counties require additional flow for flushing. Please check your local regulations. Flush velocity calculation below is for PC dripline. Classic dripline requires less flow to flush than PC. Please refer to Geoflow's spreadsheet "Design Flow and Flush Curves" at www.geoflow.com or call 800-828 If required, choose flush velocity 0.5 ft/sec How many lines of WASTEFLOW per zone?6 lines Fill in the actual length of longest dripline lateral 78 ft. Flush flow required at the end of each dripline 0.37 gpm Total Flow required to achieve flushing velocity 2.22 gpm Total Flow per zone- worst case scenario 4.29 gpm Select Filters and zone valves Select Filter Type BioDisc Filter Recommended Filter (item no.)BioDisc-150 1.5" Disc Filter 0-30gpm Select Zone Valve Type Electric Solenoid - Recommended Zone Valve (item no.)SVLVB-100 1-in. Solenoid valve- Dosing Number of doses per day / zone:12 doses Timer ON. Pump run time per dose/zone:20.07 mins:secs Timer OFF. Pump off time between doses 1:39 hrs:mins Per Zone - Pump run time per day/zone:4:01 hrs:mins All Zones - Number of doses per day / all zones 36 doses / day Dose flow per zone 213842-14A GADALLA GADALLA JOSHUA GADALLA 29-Nov-21 What is the flow rate per emitter in gph? Pressure at the beginning of the dripfield Feet of Head at the beginning of the dripfield Please fill in the shaded areas and drop down menus: Number of Zones FIELD FLOW Total number of emitters per zone Select Wasteflow dripline (16mm) Total Quantity of effluent to be disposed per day Hydraulic loading rate Choose emitter spacing between WASTEFLOW emitters Choose line spacing between WASTEFLOW lines Total field driplineWasteflow PC - 1/2gph Total linear ft.per zone (minimum required) Total Dispersal Field Area Field Flow Geoflow, Inc. Wasteflow Design Spreadsheet V.2003H 11/29/2021 Job Description:213842-14A Contact:GADALLA GADALLA Prepared by:JOSHUA GADALLA 11/29/2021 Pressure losses may be grossly overstated, particularly if designing with WASTEFLOW Classic The letters on the diagram(right) match the letters in section 2 below. Section 1 - Summary from Worksheet 1 Flow required to dose field 2.07 gpm 2.22 gpm 4.29 gpm Filter BioDisc-150 No. of Zones 3 zones Zone valve SVLVB-100 Dripline Wasteflow PC - 1/2gph Dripline longest lateral 78.17 ft. Section 2 Ft of head Pressure A. Flush line - Losses through return line Size of flush line in inches .5 inch Length of return line 200 ft. Equivalent length of fittings 5 ft. Elevation change. (if downhill enter 0)0 ft. Pressure loss in 100 ft of pipe 14.26 ft.6.18 psi Total pressure loss from end of dripline to return tank 29.2 ft.12.66 psi B. Dripline - Losses through Wasteflow dripline Length of longest dripline lateral 78 ft. Minimum dosing pressure required at end of dripline 23.10 ft.10.00 psi Loss through dripline during flushing 2.59 ft.1.12 psi Total minimum required dripline pressure 25.69 ft.1.12 psi A+B. Minimum Pressure required at beginning of dripfield CALCULATED pressure required at beginning of dripfield 54.93 ft.23.78 psi SPECIFIED pressure at beginning of dripfield (from worksht 1)80.9 ft.35.00 psi Great! SPECIFIED Pressure is greater than CALCULATED Pressure requirement. Go to next step C. Drip components - Losses through headworks Filter 4.6 ft.2.00 psi Zone valve pressure loss (not in diagram)0.69 ft.0.30 psi Flow meter pressure loss (not in diagram)ft.- psi Other pressure losses ft.- psi Total loss through drip components 5.31 ft.2.30 psi D. Supply line - Minimum Pressure head required to get from pump tank to top of dripfield .75 inch Length of supply line 0 ft. Equivalent length of fittings 5 ft. Height from pump to tank outlet 5 ft. Elevation change. (if downhill enter 0)0 ft. 6.72 ft.2.91 psi Total gain or loss from pump to field 5.3 ft.2.31 psi 91.5 ft.39.61 psi 4.3 gpm Pump Model Number Voltz / Hp / phase *Note: Pump capacity flow assumes flow in dripline does not change during a dose cycle. With Wasteflow For more accurate flows please see Geoflow's Flushing worksheet. If you need assistance designing for this additional flow, please a. See Geoflow flushing worksheet or b. Contact Geoflow at 800-828-3388. Size of supply line in inches Pressure loss/gain in 100 ft. of pipe Total dynamic head Pump capacity * PUMP SIZING Worksheet - Pump Sizing Date: Flow required to flush field Flow required to dose & flush field Pump Size Geoflow, Inc. Pump Selection Worksheet, V.2003H 11/29/2021 APPENDIX D JET MODEL J-1500 GPD STANDARD DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS A A A A A A 1 9 10 4 3 8 12 12 7 6 5 11 2A 2B NOTES: ADVANCED TREATMENT SYSTEM JET INC. MODEL J-1500 GPD ·PROPOSED 10 BEDROOM RESIDENCE, TOTAL EFFLUENT 1500 GPD ·PRIMARY: LOADING FACTOR = 0.533 GAL/SQ FT/DAY TOTAL AREA REQUIRED IS 2814 SQUARE FEET 3 - ZONES, 938 SQ FT / ZONE. 6 LINES @ 78 LONG / ZONE 0.6 INCHES IN DIAMETER AND 2 FEET APART ·100% EXPANSION: LOADING FACTOR = 0.533 GAL/SQ FT/DAY TOTAL AREA REQUIRED IS 2814 SQUARE FEET 3 - ZONES, 938 SQ FT / ZONE. 6 LINES @ 78 LONG / ZONE 0.6 INCHES IN DIAMETER AND 2 FEET APART -Percolation Test Location LEGEND Locations are Approximate Symbols 1.AIR VACUUM RELIEF VALVE 2.DRIP LINES AREA 2814 SQUARE FEET, (2A) PRIMARY, (2B) EXPANSION 3.SUPPLY MANIFOLD 4.RETURN MANIFOLD 5.CONTROL PANEL 6.1500 GALLON PRE-TREATMENT TANK 7.1500 GALLON ADVANCED TREATMENT SYSTEM 8.2000 GALLON PUMP CHAMBER 9.HEADWORKS 10.INDEX VALVE 11.CHECK VALVE 12.CLEAN OUT EVERY 100' MINIMUM -Limits of Report P-4 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 250 200 150 100 50TO T A L H E A D I N F E E T CAPACITY GALLONS PER MINUTE Pump Size: HB105 OUTLET SECTION A-A 4" DIA. PLASTIC 4" DIA. PLASTIC ~~ INLET FROM BUILDING INLET TEE TITLE: DRAWN BY:DATE: DATE: MATERIAL: SCALE: UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: ALL DIMENSIONS IN INCHES DECIMAL: FRACTION: DEGREE: DRAWING NUMBER: ± .005 ± 1/64 ± 1° USED ON: ITEM REQ'D PART NO.DESCRIPTION REV. EN NO. DATE ABCDEFGHI R APPROVED BY: C c 200_ Jet, Inc. All Rights Reserved Confidential and Proprietary Property of Jet, Inc. - No part of this drawing may be published, reproduced, copied, or used in any form, without the prior written permission of Jet, Inc. GEW 01-26-07 J-1500 38 1/2 41 3/4 70 1/4 46 3/16 62 1/2 91.5° TYP 7 16 5/8 9 15/16 3 1 1/2 TYP SETTLING 30 1/8 60 1/4 54 1/4 16 15/16 DETAIL 1 DETAIL 1 8/24/07 TREATMENT 120 7/16 3 1/2 12 3/4 145.8° 4 9/16 LID ASSEMBLY 24 7/8 22 7/8 15 47 1/8 10 1/2 20 1/2 CONTINUOUS OPERATION. SHOULD BE DEVELOPED TO GRADE OR TO 6"-12" CONCRETE COVERS, OR PLASTIC COVERS SECURED COVERED RISERS ARE REQUIRED HERE. RISERS 3.) IF AERATOR MOUNTING CASTING HAS A RISER(S), RISERS ARE NOT REQUIRED HERE. REMOVABLE 2.) IF AERATOR MOUNTING CASTING HAS NO RISER, 1.) AERATOR MODEL 700LL MUST BE USED IN BELOW GRADE. NOTES: WITH TAMPER RESISTANT FASTENERS ARE REQUIRED. 30 1/8 SDZ 02-15-08 JET ONE PIECE CONCRETE TANK A A LOCATION OPTIONAL INLET INLET FLOW LINE 090521-05 12 PLAN 16 3/16 7 3/4 26 6 3 6 7 UNDERGROUND CABLE TO CONTROL PANEL OUTLET TEE 4" DIA. PLASTIC TRANSFER TEE 7/13/09 NTS B SET 24 51 13/16 16 15/16 16 1/4 16 1/4 16 1/8 18 13/16 40 D SET ~ TREATMENT 88 7 3/4 17 3/4 7 3/16 4.) 1000 GALLON MINIMUM PRETREATMENT TANK MUST PRECEDE THE J1500. OUTLET AERATOR MOUNTING CASTING 2 & 3 RISER CASTING SEE NOTES MULTIPLE ZONE LOOPED SYSTEM SCHEMATIC 09-02 GEOFLOW © A A A A A A 1 9 10 4 3 8 12 12 7 6 5 11 2A PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. SCALE DATE DRAWN BY DWG XREFS REVISION PLATE PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE MR. DAVID DEBATE 213842-14A NOVEMBER 2021 1:20 1 OF 1 ATU MAP LOCATED AT 40530 CALLE FIESTA TEMECULA AREA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA APN 919-210-015 JDG Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants www.ESGSINC.com (951) 397-8315 Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. 0 10 20 40 SCALE: 1" = 20' NORTH EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Page i September 14, 2021 Project No. 213842-10A TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1 SITE DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING ............................................................................................ 1 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING .................................................................................. 3 Field Exploration ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Laboratory Testing .................................................................................................................................... 3 FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Regional Geology ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Local Geology .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Faulting........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Landslides ................................................................................................................................................... 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................. 6 General ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 Earthwork ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Earthwork and Grading ......................................................................................................................... 6 Clearing and Grubbing........................................................................................................................... 6 Excavation Characteristics.................................................................................................................... 6 Groundwater ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Ground Preparation for Fill Areas ....................................................................................................... 7 Oversize Rock ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Compacted Fill Placement..................................................................................................................... 7 Import Earth Materials .......................................................................................................................... 8 Cut/Fill Transitions ............................................................................................................................... 9 Cut Areas ................................................................................................................................................. 9 Shrinkage, Bulking and Subsidence .................................................................................................... 9 Geotechnical Observations ................................................................................................................. 10 Post Grading Considerations .................................................................................................................. 10 Slope Landscaping and Maintenance ................................................................................................ 10 Site Drainage ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Utility Trenches .................................................................................................................................... 10 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................... 11 Ground Motions ........................................................................................................................................ 11 Secondary Seismic Hazards .................................................................................................................... 12 Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading ...................................................................................................... 12 General ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Allowable Bearing Values ....................................................................................................................... 13 Settlement ................................................................................................................................................. 13 Lateral Resistance .................................................................................................................................... 13 Structural Setbacks and Building Clearance ........................................................................................ 14 Foundation Observations ....................................................................................................................... 15 Expansive Soil Considerations ............................................................................................................... 15 Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) .................................................................... 15 Footings ……………………………………………………………………………………………………15 Building Floor Slabs ............................................................................................................................. 16 EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Page ii September 14, 2021 Project No. 213842-10A Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations............................................................ 16 Corrosivity ................................................................................................................................................ 18 RETAINING WALLS ....................................................................................................................................... 19 Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures ....................................................................................................... 19 Subdrain System ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Temporary Excavations .......................................................................................................................... 20 Retaining Wall Backfill ............................................................................................................................ 20 CONCRETE FLATWORK ............................................................................................................................... 20 Thickness and Joint Spacing ................................................................................................................... 20 Subgrade Preparation ............................................................................................................................. 21 GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ...................................................................... 21 REPORT LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 22 Attachments: Figure 1 – Vicinity Map (Page 2) Figure 2 – Regional Geologic Map (Page 5) APPENDIX A – References (Rear of Text) APPENDIX B – Exploratory Logs (Rear of Text) APPENDIX C – Laboratory Procedures and Test Results (Rear of Text) APPENDIX D – Seismicity (Rear of Text) APPENDIX E – General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Rear of Text) Plate 1 – Geotechnical Map (Rear of Text) EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 1 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A INTRODUCTION Earth Strata Geotechnical Services is pleased to present our preliminary geotechnical interpretive report for the proposed development. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the nature, distribution, engineering properties, and geologic strata underlying the site with respect to the proposed development, and then provide preliminary grading and foundation design recommendations based on the plans you provided. The general location of the subject property is indicated on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The plans you provided were used as the base map to show geologic conditions within the subject site, see Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is located at 40530 Calle Fiesta in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. The approximate location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The subject property is comprised of approximately 0.83-acres of undeveloped land. The site has not been graded. Topographic relief at the subject property is relatively moderate with the terrain being generally flat to sloping. Elevations at the site range from approximately 1,240 to 1,285 feet above mean sea level (msl), for a difference of about 45± feet across the entire site. Drainage within the subject property generally flows to the southeast. The site is currently bordered by residential development, as well as Calle Fiesta located immediately west of the site. Most of the vegetation on the site consists of sparse amounts of annual weeds/grasses, along with large trees bordering the northwestern and southwestern boundary of the subject site. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING The proposed residential development is expected to consist of concrete, wood or steel framed one- and/or two-story structures utilizing slab on grade construction with associated streets, landscape areas, and utilities. The current development plans include one (1) building pad positioned on the site. The plans provided by you were utilized in our exploration and form the base for our Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. N PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 213842-10A VICINITY MAP SEP 2021 FIGURE 1 SEE BAR SCALE Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants www.ESGSINC.com (951) 397-8315 Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. 213842-10A APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 3 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Field Exploration Subsurface exploration within the subject site was performed on August 26, 2021 for the exploratory excavations. A truck mounted hollow-stem-auger drill rig was utilized to drill two (2) borings throughout the site to a maximum depth of 20 feet. An underground utilities clearance was obtained from Underground Service Alert of Southern California, prior to the subsurface exploration. Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing, exploratory logs and sample descriptions may have been reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487. Associated with the subsurface exploration was the collection of bulk (disturbed) samples and relatively undisturbed samples of earth materials for laboratory testing and analysis. The relatively undisturbed samples were obtained with a 3 inch outside diameter modified California split-spoon sampler lined with 1-inch-high brass rings. Samples obtained using a hollow stem auger drill rig, were mechanically driven with successive 30 inch drops of a 140-pound automatic trip safety hammer. The blow count per one-foot increment was recorded in the boring logs. The central portions of the driven samples were placed in sealed containers and transported to our laboratory for testing and analysis. The approximate exploratory locations are shown on Plate 1 and descriptive logs are presented in Appendix B. Laboratory Testing Maximum dry density/optimum moisture content, expansion potential, pH, resistivity, sulfate content, chloride content, and in-situ density/moisture content were determined for selected undisturbed and bulk samples of earth materials, considered representative of those encountered. An evaluation of the test data is reflected throughout the Conclusions and Recommendations section of this report. A brief description of laboratory test criteria and summaries of test data are presented in Appendix C. FINDINGS Regional Geology Regionally, the site is located in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. The Peninsular Ranges are characterized by northwest trending steep mountain ranges separated by sediment filled elongated valleys. The dominant structural geologic features reflect the northwest trend of the province. Associated with and subparallel to the San Andreas Fault are the San Jacinto Fault, Newport-Inglewood, and the Whittier-Elsinore Fault. The Santa Ana Mountains abut the west side of the Elsinore Fault while the Perris Block forms the other side of the fault zone to the east. The Perris Block is bounded to the east by the San Jacinto Fault. The northern perimeter of the Los Angeles basin forms part of a northerly dipping blind thrust fault at the boundary between the Peninsular Ranges Province and the Transverse Range Province. The mountainous regions within the Peninsular Ranges Province are comprised of Pre-Cretaceous, metasedimentary, and metavolcanic rocks along with Cretaceous plutonic rocks of the Southern California EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 4 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Batholith. The low lying areas are primarily comprised of Tertiary and Quaternary non-marine alluvial sediments consisting of alluvial deposits, sandstones, claystones, siltstones, conglomerates, and occasional volcanic units. A map illustrating the regional geology is presented on the Regional Geologic Map, Figure 2. Local Geology The earth materials on the site are primarily comprised of topsoil and Quaternary Pauba Formation. A general description of the dominant earth materials observed on the site is provided below: • Topsoil (no map symbol): Residual topsoil, encountered in the upper 6 inches, blankets the site and the underlying Pauba Formation. These materials were noted to be generally light brown silty sands which were very porous, dry and in a loose state. • Quaternary Pauba Formation (map symbol Qps): Pauba Formation bedrock was generally encountered below the topsoil and alluvial materials to the full depth of our exploration. These materials primarily consisted of light brown, fine to coarse silty sand. These materials were generally noted to be dry to moist, and in a medium dense to very dense state. Typically, the upper 1 to 3 feet of this unit is slightly more weathered and not as hard with occasional lenses of less indurated rock. Faulting The project is located in a seismically active region and as a result, significant ground shaking will likely impact the site within the design life of the proposed project. The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas Fault system, which accommodates for most of the right lateral movement associated with the relative motion between the Pacific and North American tectonic plates. Known active faults within this system include the Newport-Inglewood, Whittier-Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. No active faults are known to project through the site and the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, established by the State of California to restrict the construction of new habitable structures across identifiable traces of known active faults. An active fault is defined by the State of California as having surface displacement within the past 11,000 years or during the Holocene geologic time period. Based on our mapping of the subject site, review of current and historical aerial imagery, lack of lineaments indicative of active faulting, and the data compiled during the preparation of this report, it is our interpretation that the potential for surface rupture to adversely impact the proposed structures is very low to remote. Based on our review of regional geologic maps and applicable computer programs (USGS Seismic Design Maps, Caltrans ARS online, and USGS Earthquake Hazard Programs), the Elsinore Fault with an approximate source to site distance of 4.09 kilometers is the closest known active fault anticipated to produce the highest ground accelerations, with an anticipated maximum modal magnitude of 7.64. A list of faults as well as a list of significant historical seismic events within a 100km radius of the subject site are included in Appendix D. N REFERNCES: Morton, D.M. and Miller, F.K., 2006, Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California, U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report OF-2006-1217, 1:100,000. PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 213842-10A REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP SEP 2021 FIGURE 2 SCALE 1:40,625 LEGEND Qps -Quaternary Pauba Formation Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants www.ESGSINC.com (951) 397-8315 Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc. 213842-10A - APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 6 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Landslides Landslide debris was not observed during our subsurface exploration and no ancient landslides are known to exist on the site. No landslides are known to exist, or have been mapped, in the vicinity of the site. Geologic mapping of the site conducted during our investigation, and review of aerial imagery of the site, reveal no geomorphic expressions indicative of landsliding. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General From geotechnical and engineering geologic points of view, the subject property is considered suitable for the proposed development, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the plans and are implemented during construction. Earthwork Earthwork and Grading The provisions of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC), including the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications in the last Appendix of this report, should be applied to all earthwork and grading operations, as well as in accordance with all applicable grading codes and requirements of the appropriate reviewing agency. Unless specifically revised or amended herein, grading operations should also be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of our General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report. Clearing and Grubbing Vegetation including trees, grasses, weeds, brush, shrubs, or any other debris should be stripped from the areas to be graded and properly disposed of offsite. In addition, laborers should be utilized to remove any roots, branches, or other deleterious materials during grading operations. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services should be notified at the appropriate times to provide observation and testing services during Clearing and Grubbing operations. Any buried structures or unanticipated conditions should be brought to our immediate attention. Excavation Characteristics Based on the results of our exploration and experience with similar projects in similar settings, the near surface earth materials, will be readily excavated with conventional earth moving equipment. Groundwater Groundwater was not observed during our subsurface exploration. It should be noted that localized groundwater could be encountered during grading due to the limited number of exploratory locations or other factors. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 7 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Subdrain systems should be installed in all canyon areas, buttresses, fill over cut slopes, and/or stabilization fills. The subdrain systems should be installed with a minimum of 10 feet of cover. All subdrain systems should be constructed per the specific guidelines provided within the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications found in the last appendix of this report. Ground Preparation for Fill Areas For each area to receive compacted fill, the removal of low density, compressible earth materials, such as topsoil, should continue until firm competent Pauba Formation is encountered. Removal excavations are subject to verification by the project engineer, geologist or their representative. Prior to placing compacted fills, the exposed bottom in each removal area should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches or more, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. The intent of remedial grading is to diminish the potential for hydro-consolidation, slope instability, and/or settlement. Remedial grading should extend beyond the perimeter of the proposed structures a horizontal distance equal to the depth of excavation or a minimum of 5 feet, whichever is greater. For cursory purposes the anticipated removal depths are shown on the enclosed Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. In general, the anticipated removal depths should vary from 3 to 5 feet below existing grade. Wet Removals Wet alluvial materials will probably not be encountered within the low lying areas of the site. If removals of wet alluvial materials are required, special grading equipment and procedures can greatly reduce overall costs. Careful planning by an experienced grading contractor can reduce the need for special equipment, such as swamp cats, draglines, excavators, pumps, and top loading earthmovers. Possible solutions may include the placement of imported angular rock and/or geotextile ground reinforcement. More specific recommendations can be provided based on the actual conditions encountered. Drying or mixing of wet materials with dry materials will be needed to bring the wet materials to near optimum moisture prior to placing wet materials into compacted fills. Oversize Rock Oversize rock is not expected to be encountered during grading. Oversize rock that is encountered (i.e., rock exceeding a maximum dimension of 12 inches) should be disposed of offsite or stockpiled onsite and crushed for future use. The disposal of oversize rock is discussed in greater detail in General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report. Compacted Fill Placement Compacted fill materials should be placed in 6 to 8 inch maximum (uncompacted) lifts, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve uniform near optimum moisture content and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 8 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Import Earth Materials Should import earth materials be needed to achieve final design grades, all potential import materials should be free of deleterious/oversize materials, non-expansive, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to delivery onsite. Fill Slopes When properly constructed, fill slopes up to 10 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter are considered to be grossly stable. Keyways are required at the toe of all fill slopes higher than 5 feet and steeper than 5:1 (h:v). Keyways should be a minimum of 10 feet wide and 2 feet into Pauba Formation, as measured on the downhill side. In order to establish keyway removals, backcuts should be cut no steeper than 1:1 or as recommended by the geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist. Compacted fill should be benched into competent earth materials. Cut Slopes When properly constructed, cut slopes into competent earth material up to 10 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter are considered grossly stable. Cut slopes should be observed by the engineering geologist or his representative during grading, but are anticipated to be stable. Stabilization Fills Currently, stabilization fills will not be required for cut slopes in the Pauba Formation. Our engineering geologist or his representative should be called to evaluate all slopes during grading. In the event that unfavorable geologic conditions are encountered, recommendations for stabilization fills or flatter slopes will be provided. Fill Over Cut Slopes The fill portion of fill over cut slopes should not be constructed until the cut portion of the slope has been cut to finish grade. The earth materials and geologic structure exposed along the cut slope should be evaluated with regard to suitability for compacted fills or foundations and for stability. If the cut materials are determined to be competent, then the construction of the keyway and subdrain system may commence or additional remedial recommendations will be provided. Temporary Backcuts It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to follow all Cal-OSHA requirements with regard to excavation safety. Where existing developments are upslope, adequate slope stability to protect those developments must be maintained. Temporary backcuts will be required to accomplish removals of unsuitable materials and possibly, to perform canyon removals, stabilization fills, and/or keyways. Backcuts should be excavated at a gradient of 1:1 (h:v) or flatter. Flatter backcuts may be required where geologic structure or earth materials are unfavorable. It is imperative that grading schedules minimize the exposure time of the unsupported excavations. All excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 9 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Cut/Fill Transitions Cut/fill transitions should be eliminated from all building areas where the depth of fill placed within the “fill” portion exceeds proposed footing depths. This is to diminish distress to structures resulting from excessive differential settlement. The entire foundation of each structure should be founded on a uniform bearing material. This should be accomplished by overexcavating the “cut” portion and replacing the excavated materials as properly compacted fill. Refer to the following table for recommended depths of overexcavation. DEPTH OF FILL (“fill” portion) DEPTH OF OVEREXCAVATION (“cut” portion) Up to 5 feet Equal Depth 5 to 10 feet 5 feet Greater than 10 feet One-half the thickness of fill placed on the “fill” portion (10 feet maximum) Overexcavation of the “cut” portion should extend beyond the building perimeter a horizontal distance equal to the depth of overexcavation or a minimum of 5 feet, whichever is greater. Cut Areas In cut areas, an area a minimum of 5 feet beyond the footprint of the proposed structures should overexcavated until; competent bottoms are achieved; to a minimum 3 feet below the proposed foundations; or per the Overexcavation Table above; (whichever is greater) and replaced with compacted fill. Final determination of areas that require overexcavation should be determined in the field by a representative of Earth Strata Geotechnical Services. Shrinkage, Bulking and Subsidence Volumetric changes in earth material quantities will occur when poorly consolidated earth materials are replaced with properly compacted fill. Estimates of the percent shrinkage/bulking factors for the various geologic units observed on the subject property are based on in-place densities and on the estimated average percent of relative compaction achieved during grading. GEOLOGIC UNIT SHRINKAGE (%) Topsoil 10 to 15 Quaternary Pauba Formation 5 to 10 Subsidence from scarification and recompaction of exposed bottom surfaces is expected to be negligible to approximately 0.01 foot. The estimates of shrinkage/bulking and subsidence are intended as an aid for project engineers in determining earthwork quantities. Since many variables can affect the accuracy of these estimates, they should be used with caution and contingency plans should be in place for balancing the project. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 10 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Geotechnical Observations Clearing operations, removal of unsuitable materials, and general grading procedures should be observed by the project geotechnical consultant or his representative. No compacted fill should be placed without observations by the geotechnical consultant or his representative to verify the adequacy of the removals. The project geotechnical consultant or his representative should be present to observe grading operations and to check that minimum compaction requirements and proper lift thicknesses are being met, as well as to verify compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. Post Grading Considerations Slope Landscaping and Maintenance Adequate slope and building pad drainage is essential for the long term performance of the subject site. The gross stability of graded slopes should not be adversely affected, provided all drainage provisions are properly constructed and maintained. Engineered slopes should be landscaped with deep rooted, drought tolerant maintenance free plant species, as recommended by the project landscape architect. Site Drainage Control of site drainage is important for the performance of the proposed project. Roof gutters are recommended for the proposed structures. Pad and roof drainage should be collected and transferred to driveways, adjacent streets, storm-drain facilities, or other locations approved by the building official in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond on the pad or against any foundation or retaining wall. Drainage should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over any descending slope. Planters located within retaining wall backfill should be sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the backfill. Planters located next to structures should be sealed to the depth of the footings. Drainage control devices require periodic cleaning, testing and maintenance to remain effective. At a minimum, pad drainage should be designed at the minimum gradients required by the CBC. To divert water away from foundations, the ground surface adjacent to foundations should also be graded at the minimum gradients required per the CBC. Utility Trenches All utility trench backfill should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. For utility trench backfill within pavement areas the upper 6 inches of subgrade materials should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. This includes within the street right-of-ways, utility easements, under footings, sidewalks, driveways and building floor slabs, as well as within or adjacent to any slopes. Backfill should be placed in approximately 6 to 8 inch maximum loose lifts and then mechanically compacted with a hydro-hammer, rolling with a sheepsfoot, pneumatic EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 11 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A tampers, or similar equipment. The utility trenches should be tested by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative to verify minimum compaction requirements are obtained. In order to minimize the penetration of moisture below building slabs, all utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill, lean concrete or concrete slurry where they undercut the perimeter foundation. Utility trenches that are proposed parallel to any building footings (interior and/or exterior trenches), should not be located within a 1:1 (h:v) plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the footing. SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Ground Motions Structures are required to be designed and constructed to resist the effects of seismic ground motions as provided in the 2019 California Building Code Section 1613. The design is dependent on the site class, occupancy category I, II, III, or IV, mapped spectral accelerations for short periods (Ss), and mapped spectral acceleration for a 1-second period (S1). In order for structural design to comply with the 2019 CBC, the USGS “US Seismic Design Maps” online tool was used to compile spectral accelerations for the subject property based on data and maps jointly compiled by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS). The data found in the following table is based on the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) with 5% damped ground motions having a 2% probability of being exceeded in 50 years (2,475 year return period). The seismic design coefficients were determined by a combination of the site class, mapped spectral accelerations, and occupancy category. The following seismic design coefficients should be implemented during design of the proposed structures. Summaries of the Seismic Hazard Deaggregation graphs and test data are presented in Appendix D. 2019 CBC FACTOR (ASCE 7-16) Site Location Latitude: 33.532223˚ (North) Longitude: -117.119388˚(West) Site Class D – Default Mapped Spectral Accelerations for short periods, Ss 1.508 Mapped Spectral Accelerations for 1-Second Period, S1 0.561 Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Periods, Sms 1.81 Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second Period, Sm1 Null – See Section 11.4.8* Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Periods, SDS 1.207 Design Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second Period, SD1 Null – See Section 11.4.8* Seismic Design Category D Importance Factor Based on Occupancy Category II * 2019 CBC EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 12 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A We performed the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the site in accordance with the 2019 CBC, Section 1803.5.11 and 1803.5.12. The probabilistic seismic hazard maps and data files were jointly prepared by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS) and can be found at the CGS Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page. Actual ground shaking intensities at the site may be substantially higher or lower based on complex variables such as the near source directivity effects, depth and consistency of earth materials, topography, geologic structure, direction of fault rupture, and seismic wave reflection, refraction, and attenuation rates. The mean peak ground acceleration was calculated to be 0.799g. Secondary Seismic Hazards Secondary effects of seismic shaking considered as potential hazards include several types of ground failure as well as induced flooding. Different types of ground failure, which could occur as a consequence of severe ground shaking at the site, include landslides, ground lurching, shallow ground rupture, and liquefaction/lateral spreading. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the earthquake, distance from faults, topography, the state of subsurface earth materials, groundwater conditions, and other factors. Based on our experience, subsurface exploration, and laboratory testing, all of the above secondary effects of seismic activity are considered unlikely. Seismically induced flooding is normally a consequence of a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche (i.e., a wave-like oscillation of surface water in an enclosed basin that may be initiated by a strong earthquake) or failure of a major reservoir or retention system up gradient of the site. Since the site is at an elevation of more than 1,200 feet above mean sea level and is located more than 20 miles inland from the nearest coastline of the Pacific Ocean, the potential for seismically induced flooding due to a tsunami is considered nonexistent. Since no enclosed bodies of water lie adjacent to or up gradient of the site, the likelihood for induced flooding due to a dam failure or a seiche overcoming the dam’s freeboard is considered nonexistent. Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading Liquefaction occurs as a result of a substantial loss of shear strength or shearing resistance in loose, saturated, cohesionless earth materials subjected to earthquake induced ground shaking. Potential impacts from liquefaction include loss of bearing capacity, liquefaction related settlement, lateral movements, and surface manifestation such as sand boils. Seismically induced settlement occurs when loose sandy soils become denser when subjected to shaking during an earthquake. The three factors determining whether a site is likely to be subject to liquefaction include seismic shaking, type and consistency of earth materials, and groundwater level. The proposed structures will be supported by compacted fill and competent Pauba Formation, with groundwater at a depth greater than 20 feet below ground surface. As such, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction and lateral spreading beneath the proposed structures is considered very low to remote due to the recommended compacted fill, relatively low groundwater level, and the dense nature of the deeper onsite earth materials. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 13 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A TENTATIVE FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General Provided grading is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, shallow foundations are considered feasible for support of the proposed structures. Tentative foundation recommendations are provided herein and graphic presentations of relevant recommendations may also be included on the enclosed map. Allowable Bearing Values An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is recommended for design of 24-inch square pad footings and 12-inch-wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1-foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf. Recommended allowable bearing values include both dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. Settlement Based on the settlement characteristics of the earth materials that underlie the building sites and the anticipated loading, we estimate that the maximum total settlement of the footings will be less than approximately ¾ inch. Differential settlement is expected to be about ½ inch over a horizontal distance of approximately 20 feet, for an angular distortion ratio of 1:480. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during construction or shortly after the initial application of loading. The above settlement estimates are based on the assumption that the grading and construction are performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and that the project geotechnical consultant will observe or test the earth material conditions in the footing excavations. Lateral Resistance Passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf may be used to establish lateral bearing resistance for footings. For areas coved with hardscape, passive earth pressure may be taken from the surface. For areas without hardscape, the upper 12 inches of the soil profile must be neglected when calculating passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.36 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting earth materials to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one third. In no case shall the lateral sliding resistance exceed one-half the dead load for clay, sandy clay, sandy silty clay, silty clay, and clayey silt. The above lateral resistance values are based on footings for an entire structure being placed directly against either compacted fill or competent Pauba Formation. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 14 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Structural Setbacks and Building Clearance Structural setbacks are required per the 2019 California Building Code (CBC). Additional structural setbacks are not required due to geologic or geotechnical conditions within the site. Improvements constructed in close proximity to natural or properly engineered and compacted slopes can, over time, be affected by natural processes including gravity forces, weathering, and long term secondary settlement. As a result, the CBC requires that buildings and structures be setback or footings deepened to resist the influence of these processes. For structures that are planned near ascending and descending slopes, the footings should be embedded to satisfy the requirements presented in the CBC, Section 1808.7 as illustrated in the following Foundation Clearances from Slopes diagram. FOUNDATION CLEARANCES FROM SLOPES When determining the required clearance from ascending slopes with a retaining wall at the toe, the height of the slope shall be measured from the top of the wall to the top of the slope. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 15 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Foundation Observations In accordance with the 2019 CBC and prior to the placement of forms, concrete, or steel, all foundation excavations should be observed by the geologist, engineer, or his representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing materials. The excavations should be per the approved plans, moistened, cleaned of all loose materials, trimmed neat, level, and square. Any moisture softened earth materials should be removed prior to steel or concrete placement. Earth materials from foundation excavations should not be placed in slab on grade areas unless the materials are tested for expansion potential and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Expansive Soil Considerations Preliminary laboratory test results indicate onsite earth materials exhibit an expansion potential of LOW as classified in accordance with 2019 CBC Section 1803.5.3 and ASTM D 4829. Additional, testing for expansive soil conditions should be conducted upon completion of rough grading. The following recommendations should be considered the very minimum requirements, for the earth materials tested. It is common practice for the project architect or structural engineer to require additional slab thickness, footing sizes, and/or reinforcement. Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials onsite exhibit a LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 2019 CBC Section 1803.5.3 and ASTM D 4829. Accordingly, the CBC specifies that slab on ground foundations (floor slabs) resting on earth materials with expansion indices greater than 20, require special design considerations in accordance with 2019 CBC Sections 1808.6.1 and 1808.6.2. The design procedures are based on the thickness and plasticity index of the various earth materials within the upper 15 feet of the proposed structure. For preliminary design purposes, we have assumed an effective plasticity index of 12. Footings • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest adjacent final grade (i.e. 12-inch minimum depth for one-story, 18-inch minimum depth for two-story, and 24-inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous footings for one-, two-, and three-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12, 15, and 18 inches, for one-, two-, and three-story structures, respectively, and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with a minimum of No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way, and should be placed near the bottom-third of the footings. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 16 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Building Floor Slabs • The project architect or structural engineer should evaluate minimum floor slab thickness and reinforcement in accordance with 2019 CBC Section 1808.6.2 based on an assumed effective plasticity index of 12. Building floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way. All floor slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement at mid-depth. • Interior floor slabs, within living or moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain by a minimum 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 318-05. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used. Ultimately, the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, taking into consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner. • Garage floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living area floor slabs. Garage floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with ⅜ inch minimum felt expansion joint materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12-inch-wide turn down founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn down should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • The subgrade earth materials below all floor slabs should be pre-watered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal or slightly greater than optimum moisture content, prior to placing concrete. This moisture content should penetrate a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade earth materials. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services during construction. Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations In lieu of the proceeding foundation recommendations, post tensioned slabs may be used to support the proposed structures. We recommend that the foundation engineer design the foundation system using the Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design table below. These parameters have been provided in general accordance with Post Tensioned Design. Alternate designs addressing the effects of expansive earth materials are allowed per 2019 CBC Section 1808.6.2. When utilizing these parameters, the foundation engineer should design the foundation system in accordance with the allowable deflection criteria of applicable codes and per the requirements of the structural engineer/architect. It should be noted that the post tensioned design methodology is partially based on the assumption that soil moisture changes around and underneath post tensioned slabs, are influenced only by climate conditions. Soil moisture change below slabs is the major factor in foundation damages relating to EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 17 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A expansive soil. However, the design methodology has no consideration for presaturation, owner irrigation, or other non-climate related influences on the moisture content of subgrade earth materials. In recognition of these factors, we modified the geotechnical parameters determined from this methodology to account for reasonable irrigation practices and proper homeowner maintenance. Additionally, we recommend that prior to excavating footings, slab subgrades be presoaked to a depth of 12 inches and maintained at above optimum moisture until placing concrete. Furthermore, we recommend that the moisture content of the earth materials around the immediate perimeter and below the slab be presaturated to at least 1% above optimum moisture content just prior to placing concrete. The pre-watering should be verified and tested by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services during construction. The following geotechnical parameters assume that areas adjacent to the foundations, which are planted and irrigated, will be designed with proper drainage to prevent water from ponding. Water ponding near the foundation causes significant moisture change below the foundation. Our recommendations do not account for excessive irrigation and/or incorrect landscape design. Planters placed adjacent to the foundation, should be designed with an effective drainage system or liners, to prevent moisture infiltration below the foundation. Some lifting of the perimeter foundation beam should be expected even with properly constructed planters. Based on our experience monitoring sites with similar earth materials, elevated moisture contents below the foundation perimeter due to incorrect landscaping irrigation or maintenance, can result in uplift at the perimeter foundation relative to the central portion of the slab. Future owners should be informed and educated of the importance in maintaining a consistent level of moisture within the earth materials around the structures. Future owners should also be informed of the potential negative consequences of either excessive watering, or allowing expansive earth materials to become too dry. Earth materials will shrink as they dry, followed by swelling during the rainy winter season, or when irrigation is resumed. This will cause distress to site improvements and structures. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 18 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design PARAMETER VALUE Expansion Index Low1 Percent Finer than 0.002 mm in the Fraction Passing the No. 200 Sieve < 20 percent (assumed) Type of Clay Mineral Montmorillonite (assumed) Thornthwaite Moisture Index +20 Depth to Constant Soil Suction 7 feet Constant Soil Suction P.F. 3.6 Moisture Velocity 0.7 inches/month Center Lift Edge moisture variation distance, em Center lift, ym 5.5 feet 2.0 inches Edge Lift Edge moisture variation distance, em Edge lift, ym 3.0 feet 0.8 inches Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mixtures in Contact with Earth Materials Negligible Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (assuming presaturation as indicated below) 200 pci Minimum Perimeter Foundation Embedment 18 Perimeter Foundation Reinforcement -- Under Slab Moisture/Vapor Barrier and Sand Layer 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier meeting the requirements of a ASTM E 1745 Class A material 1. Obtained by laboratory testing. 2. Recommendations for foundation reinforcement are ultimately the purview of the foundation/structural engineer based upon the geotechnical criteria presented in this report, and structural engineering considerations. Corrosivity Corrosion is defined by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) as “a deterioration of a substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment.” From a geotechnical viewpoint, the “substances” are the reinforced concrete foundations or buried metallic elements (not surrounded by concrete) and the “environment” is the prevailing earth materials in contact with them. Many factors can contribute to corrosivity, including the presence of chlorides, sulfates, salts, organic materials, different oxygen levels, poor drainage, different soil types, and moisture content. It is not considered practical or realistic to test for all of the factors which may contribute to corrosivity. The potential for concrete exposure to chlorides is based upon the recognized Caltrans reference standard “Bridge Design Specifications”, under Subsection 8.22.1 of that document, Caltrans has determined that “Corrosive water or soil contains more than 500 parts per million (ppm) of chlorides”. Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials have chloride contents less than 500 ppm. As such, specific requirements resulting from elevated chloride contents are not required. Specific guidelines for concrete mix design are provided in 2019 CBC Section 1904.1 and ACI 318, Section 4.3 Table 4.3.1 when the soluble sulfate content of earth materials exceeds 0.1 percent by weight. Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials are classified in accordance with Table 4.3.1 as having a negligible sulfate exposure condition. Therefore, structural concrete in contact with onsite earth materials should utilize Type I or II. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 19 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Based on our laboratory testing of resistivity, the onsite earth materials in contact with buried steel should be considered corrosive. Additionally, pH values below 5.6 and above 9.1 are recognized as being corrosive to many common metallic components. The pH values for the earth materials tested were lower than 9.1 and higher than 5.6. If building slabs are to be post tensioned, the post tensioning cables should be encased in concrete and/or encapsulated in accordance with the Post Tensioning Institute Guide Specifications. Post tensioning cable end plate anchors and nuts also need to be protected if exposed. If the anchor plates and nuts are in a recess in the edge of the concrete slab, the recess should be filled in with a non-shrink, non-porous, moisture-insensitive epoxy grout so that the anchorage assembly and the end of the cable are completely encased and isolated from the soil. A standard non-shrink, non-metallic cementitious grout may be used only when the post tension anchoring assembly is polyethylene encapsulated similar to that offered by Hayes Industries, LTD or O’Strand, Inc. The preliminary test results for corrosivity are based on limited samples, and the initiation of grading may blend various earth materials together. This blending or imported material could alter and increase the detrimental properties of the onsite earth materials. Accordingly, additional testing for chlorides and sulfates along with testing for pH and resistivity should be performed upon completion of grading. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. RETAINING WALLS Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures Foundations may be designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Tentative Foundation Design Recommendation section of this report. The following table provides the minimum recommended equivalent fluid pressures for design of retaining walls a maximum of 8 feet high. The active earth pressure should be used for design of unrestrained retaining walls, which are free to tilt slightly. The at-rest earth pressure should be used for design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top, such as basement walls, curved walls with no joints, or walls restrained at corners. For curved walls, active pressure may be used if tilting is acceptable and construction joints are provided at each angle point and at a minimum of 15 foot intervals along the curved segments. MINIMUM STATIC EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURES (pcf) PRESSURE TYPE BACKSLOPE CONDITION LEVEL 2:1 (h:v) Active Earth Pressure 40 63 At-Rest Earth Pressure 60 95 The retaining wall parameters provided do not account for hydrostatic pressure behind the retaining walls. Therefore, the subdrain system is a very important part of the design. All retaining walls should be designed to resist surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls, structures, or vehicles should be added to the above earth pressures, if the additional loads are being applied within a 1.5:1 (h:v) plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. As a way of minimizing surcharge loads and the settlement potential of nearby buildings, the footings for the building can be deepened below the 1.5:1 (h:v)plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 20 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Upon request and under a separate scope of work, more detailed analyses can be performed to address equivalent fluid pressures with regard to stepped retaining walls, actual retaining wall heights, actual backfill inclinations, specific backfill materials, higher retaining walls requiring earthquake design motions, etc. Subdrain System We recommend a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system be provided behind all proposed retaining walls to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. The perforated pipe should consist of 4-inch minimum diameter Schedule 40 PVC or ABS SDR-35, placed with the perforations facing down. The pipe should be surrounded by 1 cubic foot per foot of ¾- or 1½ inch open graded gravel wrapped in filter fabric. The filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the subdrain system. In lieu of a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system, weep holes or open vertical masonry joints may be provided in the lowest row of block exposed to the air to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. Weep holes should be a minimum of 3 inches in diameter and provided at intervals at least every 6 feet along the wall. Open vertical masonry joints should be provided at a minimum of 32 inch intervals. A continuous gravel fill, a minimum of 1 cubic foot per foot, should be placed behind the weep holes or open masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. The retaining walls should be adequately coated on the backfilled side of the walls with a proven waterproofing compound by an experienced professional to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. Temporary Excavations All excavations should be made in accordance with Cal-OSHA requirements. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services is not responsible for job site safety. Retaining Wall Backfill Retaining wall backfill materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative prior to placement as compacted fill. Retaining wall backfill should be placed in lifts no greater than 6 to 8 inches, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture contents. All retaining wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Retaining wall backfill should be capped with a paved surface drain. CONCRETE FLATWORK Thickness and Joint Spacing Concrete sidewalks and patio type slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 6 feet or less, to reduce the potential for excessive cracking. Concrete driveway slabs should be at least 5 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 10 feet or less. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 21 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A Subgrade Preparation In order to reduce the potential for unsightly cracking, subgrade earth materials underlying concrete flatwork should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557 and then moistened to optimum or slightly above optimum moisture content. This moisture should extend to a depth of 12 inches below subgrade and be maintained prior to placement of concrete. Pre-watering of the earth materials prior to placing concrete will promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. The project geotechnical engineer or his representative should verify the density and moisture content of the earth materials and the depth of moisture penetration prior to placing concrete. Cracking within concrete flatwork is often a result of factors such as the use of too high a water to cement ratio and/or inadequate steps taken to prevent moisture loss during the curing of the concrete. Concrete distress can be reduced by proper concrete mix design and proper placement and curing of the concrete. Minor cracking within concrete flatwork is normal and should be expected. GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of MR. DAVID DEBATE and their authorized representative. It likely does not contain sufficient information for other parties or other uses. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services should be engaged to review the final design plans and specifications prior to construction. This is to verify that the recommendations contained in this report have been properly incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Should Earth Strata Geotechnical Services not be accorded the opportunity to review the project plans and specifications, we are not responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. We recommend that Earth Strata Geotechnical Services be retained to provide geologic and geotechnical engineering services during grading and foundation excavation phases of the work. In order to allow for design changes in the event that the subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to construction. Earth Strata Geotechnical Services should review any changes in the project and modify and approve in writing the conclusions and recommendations of this report. This report and the drawings contained within are intended for design input purposes only and are not intended to act as construction drawings or specifications. In the event that conditions encountered during grading or construction operations appear to be different than those indicated in this report, this office should be notified immediately, as revisions may be required. EARTH STRATA GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 22 September 14, 2021 Project Number 213842-10A REPORT LIMITATIONS Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists, practicing at the time and location this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. Earth materials vary in type, strength, and other geotechnical properties between points of observation and exploration. Groundwater and moisture conditions can also vary due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. As a result, we do not and cannot have complete knowledge of the subsurface conditions beneath the subject property. No practical study can completely eliminate uncertainty with regard to the anticipated geotechnical conditions in connection with a subject property. The conclusions and recommendations within this report are based upon the findings at the points of observation and are subject to confirmation by Earth Strata Geotechnical Services based on the conditions revealed during grading and construction. This report was prepared with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or their representative, to ensure that the conclusions and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the other project consultants and are incorporated into the plans and specifications. The owners’ contractor should properly implement the conclusions and recommendations during grading and construction, and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe or unsuitable. APPENDIX A REFERENCES APPENDIX A References California Building Standards Commission, 2019, 2019 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on 2018 International Building Code. California Corrosion Guidelines DeLorme, 2004, (www.delorme.com) Topo USA®. Hart, Earl W. and Bryant, William A., 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, CDMG Special Publication 42, revised 2003. Jenkins, Olaf P., 1978, Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet; CDMG, Scale 1:250,000. Kennedy, M.P., S.S. Tan, 2005, Geologic Map of the San Diego 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California, U.S. Geological Survey, Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Riverside. Morton, D.M., Hauser, Rachel M., and Ruppert, Kelly R., 2004, Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Southern California, Version 2.0: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0172. National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, Corrosion Basics An Introduction, page 191. Per A.B. Chance® Recommendations, 2003 Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California, March. APPENDIX B EXPLORATORY LOGS Project Name: Calle Fiesta, Temecula Logged By: JMR Type of Rig: B-61 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map 2.5' Topsoil No Groundwater Total Depth: 5.5 feet Practical Refusal at 5.5 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND; light brown, very dense, fine to coarse sand Quaternary Pauba Formation (Qps) Silty SAND; light brown, dry, loose, medium to coarse sand 30 25 20 15 10 5.35'5 50/4"108.2 90/10"127.7 2.9 SM 0-5' SM Page: 1 of 1 Project Number: 213842-10A Drilling Company: Drilling It Drive Weight (lbs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): See Map D e p t h ( f t ) B l o w C o u n t P e r Fo o t S a m p l e D e p t h D r y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) 42184 Remington Avenue, Temecula, CA 92590 Geotechnical Boring Log B-1 Date: August 26, 2021 M o i s t u r e ( % ) C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Sy m b o l 0 Project Name: Calle Fiesta, Temecula Logged By: JMR Type of Rig: B-61 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map Geotechnical Boring Log B-2 Date: August 26, 2021 Page: 1 of 1 Project Number: 213842-10A Drilling Company: Drilling It Drive Weight (lbs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): See Map D e p t h ( f t ) B l o w C o u n t P e r Fo o t S a m p l e D e p t h D r y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) M o i s t u r e ( % ) C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Sy m b o l MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 Topsoil SM Silty SAND; light brown, dry, loose, medium to coarse sand 2.5'37 Quaternary Pauba Formation (Qps) SM Silty SAND; light brown, very dense, fine to coarse sand 5 77 Becomes olive brown below 6 feet 7.5'50/5" 10 10'50/5" Becomes slightly moist below 12 feet 15 Becomes moist at 17 feet 20 Total Depth: 20 feet No Groundwater 25 42184 Remington Avenue, Temecula, CA 92590 5' 30 APPENDIX C LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS APPENDIX C Laboratory Procedures and Test Results Laboratory testing provided quantitative and qualitative data involving the relevant engineering properties of the representative earth materials selected for testing. The representative samples were tested in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedures and/or California Test Methods (CTM). Soil Classification: Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing, exploratory logs and sample descriptions were reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487. Moisture and Density Tests: For select samples moisture content was determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 2216 and dry density determinations were made using the guidelines of ASTM D 2937. These tests were performed on relatively undisturbed samples and the test results are presented on the exploratory logs. Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of representative samples were determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (pcf) OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (%) B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 129.0 7.5 Expansion Index: The expansion potential of representative samples was evaluated using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION POTENTIAL B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 40 Low Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH Tests of select samples were performed using the guidelines of CTM 643. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION pH MINIMUM RESISTIVITY (ohm-cm) B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 7.4 1,202 Soluble Sulfate: The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 417. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SULFATE CONTENT (% by weight) SULFATE EXPOSURE B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 0.001 Negligible Chloride Content: Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 422. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION CHLORIDE CONTENT (ppm) B-1 @ 0-5 feet Silty SAND 50 APPENDIX D SEISMICITY ARS Online V3.0.2 Using the tool: Specify latitude and longitude in decimal degrees in the input boxes below. Alternatively, Google Maps can be used to find the site location. Specify the time- averaged shear-wave velocity in the upper 30m (Vs30) in the input box. After submitting the data, the USGS 2014 hazard data for a 975-year return period will be reported along with adjustment factors required by Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (SDC) V2.0. Latitude: 33.532223 Longitude: -117.119388 Vs30 (m/s): 270 Submit Caltrans Design Spectrum (5% damping) Period(s)Sa2008(g)Sa2014(g)Basin2008 Basin2014 Near Fault Amp Design Sa2008(g) Design Sa2014(g) PGA 0.56 0.53 1 1 1 0.56 0.53 0.10 0.95 0.92 1 1 1 0.95 0.92 0.20 1.18 1.23 1 1 1 1.18 1.23 0.30 1.18 1.34 1 1 1 1.18 1.34 0.50 1.06 1.22 1 1 1 1.06 1.22 0.75 0.9 0.97 1 1 1.07 0.96 1.04 1.0 0.74 0.78 1 1 1.14 0.85 0.89 2.0 0.43 0.4 1 1 1.14 0.49 0.46 3.0 0.28 0.26 1 1 1.14 0.32 0.3 4.0 0.2 0.19 1 1 1.14 0.23 0.22 5.0 0.17 0.14 1 1 1.14 0.19 0.16 Copy table Deaggregation (based on 2014 hazard) mean magnitude (for PGA)6.86 mean site-source distance (km, for Sa at 1s)18 Option: recalculate Near Fault amplification with user specified distance Site-source distance (km): 18 Update 2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps - Source Parameters New Search Distance in Kilometers Name State Pref Slip Rate (mm/yr) Dip (degrees) Dip Dir Slip Sense Rupture Top (km) Rupture Bottom (km) Length (km) 4.09 Elsinore;GI+T+J+CM CA n/a 86 NE strike slip 0 16 195 4.09 Elsinore;GI+T CA 5 90 V strike slip 0 14 78 4.09 Elsinore;T CA 5 90 V strike slip 0 14 52 4.09 Elsinore;W+GI+T+J+CM CA n/a 84 NE strike slip 0 16 241 4.09 Elsinore;W+GI+T+J CA n/a 84 NE strike slip 0 16 199 4.09 Elsinore;W+GI+T CA n/a 84 NE strike slip 0 14 124 4.09 Elsinore;T+J+CM CA n/a 85 NE strike slip 0 16 169 4.09 Elsinore;T+J CA n/a 86 NE strike slip 0 17 127 4.09 Elsinore;GI+T+J CA n/a 86 NE strike slip 0 17 153 17.86 Elsinore;GI CA 5 90 V strike slip 0 13 37 17.86 Elsinore;W+GI CA n/a 81 NE strike slip 0 14 83 23.57 Elsinore;J CA 3 84 NE strike slip 0 19 75 23.57 Elsinore;J+CM CA 3 84 NE strike slip 0 17 118 29.28 San Jacinto;A+CC CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 16 118 29.28 San Jacinto;A+CC+B CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 15 152 29.28 San Jacinto;A+C CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 17 118 29.28 San Jacinto;A CA 9 90 V strike slip 0 17 71 29.28 San Jacinto;A+CC+B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike 0.1 15 178 U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program slip 29.54 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+A+CC CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 16 181 29.54 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+A CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 16 134 29.54 San Jacinto;SJV+A+CC+B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 15 196 29.54 San Jacinto;SJV+A+CC+B CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 15 170 29.54 San Jacinto;SJV+A+CC CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 16 136 29.54 San Jacinto;SJV+A+C CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 17 136 29.54 San Jacinto;SJV+A CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 17 89 29.54 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+A+CC+B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 15 241 29.54 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+A+CC+B CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 15 215 29.54 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+A+C CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 17 181 31.85 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 16 88 31.85 San Jacinto;SJV CA 18 90 V strike slip 0 16 43 49.02 Newport Inglewood Connected alt 1 CA 1.3 89 strike slip 0 11 208 49.02 Newport Inglewood Connected alt 2 CA 1.3 90 V strike slip 0 11 208 49.02 Newport-Inglewood (O shore)CA 1.5 90 V strike slip 0 10 66 52.08 San Joaquin Hills CA 0.5 23 SW thrust 2 13 27 52.62 Chino, alt 2 CA 1 65 SW strike slip 0 14 29 53.56 Rose Canyon CA 1.5 90 V strike slip 0 8 70 53.94 San Jacinto;CC+B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.2 14 103 53.94 San Jacinto;CC+B CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.2 14 77 53.94 San Jacinto;CC CA 4 90 V strike slip 0 16 43 54.73 Elsinore;W CA 2.5 75 NE strike 0 14 46 slip 54.85 S. San Andreas;SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 77 strike slip 0.2 12 170 54.85 S. San Andreas;NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 13 213 54.85 S. San Andreas;BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 85 strike slip 0.1 13 390 54.85 S. San Andreas;CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 86 strike slip 0.1 13 512 54.85 S. San Andreas;BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 84 strike slip 0 14 321 54.85 S. San Andreas;SSB+BG CA n/a 71 strike slip 0 13 101 54.85 S. San Andreas;NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 79 strike slip 0.2 12 206 54.85 S. San Andreas;BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 263 54.85 S. San Andreas;SSB CA 16 90 V strike slip 0 13 43 54.85 S. San Andreas;SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 83 strike slip 0.1 13 303 54.85 S. San Andreas;SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 81 strike slip 0 13 234 54.85 S. San Andreas;SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 13 176 54.85 S. San Andreas;PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 86 strike slip 0.1 13 548 54.85 S. San Andreas;PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 86 strike slip 0.1 13 479 54.85 S. San Andreas;PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 13 421 54.85 S. San Andreas;NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 75 strike slip 0 14 136 54.85 S. San Andreas;NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 13 79 54.85 S. San Andreas;NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 84 strike slip 0.1 13 340 54.85 S. San Andreas;NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 83 strike slip 0 14 271 54.85 S. San Andreas;CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 322 54.85 S. San Andreas;CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 85 strike slip 0 14 380 54.85 S. San Andreas;CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA n/a 86 strike slip 0.1 13 449 54.85 S. San Andreas;CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 384 54.85 S. San Andreas;CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG CA n/a 86 strike slip 0 14 442 54.89 San Jacinto;SBV CA 6 90 V strike slip 0 16 45 54.90 S. San Andreas;BG+CO CA n/a 72 strike slip 0.3 12 125 54.90 S. San Andreas;BG CA n/a 58 strike slip 0 13 56 56.43 San Jacinto;C CA 14 90 V strike slip 0 17 47 56.79 Chino, alt 1 CA 1 50 SW strike slip 0 9 24 63.08 Earthquake Valley CA 2 90 V strike slip 0 19 20 68.70 Pinto Mtn CA 2.5 90 V strike slip 0 16 74 69.20 S. San Andreas;NSB CA 22 90 V strike slip 0 13 35 69.20 S. San Andreas;PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 13 377 69.20 S. San Andreas;CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 341 69.20 S. San Andreas;SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 13 133 69.20 S. San Andreas;BB+NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 220 69.20 S. San Andreas;NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 13 170 69.20 S. San Andreas;CC+BB+NM+SM+NSB CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 279 75.99 Coronado Bank CA 3 90 V strike slip 0 9 186 75.99 Palos Verdes Connected CA 3 90 V strike slip 0 10 285 76.23 Newport-Inglewood, alt 1 CA 1 88 strike slip 0 15 65 77.61 Cucamonga CA 5 45 N thrust 0 8 28 79.37 Palos Verdes CA 3 90 V strike slip 0 14 99 80.38 Puente Hills (Coyote Hills)CA 0.7 26 N thrust 2.8 15 17 80.91 Burnt Mtn CA 0.6 67 W strike slip 0 16 21 83.33 Cleghorn CA 3 90 V strike slip 0 16 25 83.42 San Jose CA 0.5 74 NW strike slip 0 15 20 85.75 S. San Andreas;CO CA 20 90 V strike slip 0.6 11 69 86.24 Eureka Peak CA 0.6 90 V strike slip 0 15 19 87.21 Sierra Madre Connected CA 2 51 reverse 0 14 76 87.21 Sierra Madre CA 2 53 N reverse 0 14 57 88.16 North Frontal (West)CA 1 49 S reverse 0 16 50 92.29 Helendale-So Lockhart CA 0.6 90 V strike slip 0 13 114 92.36 San Jacinto;B CA 4 90 V strike slip 0.7 13 34 92.36 San Jacinto;B+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.4 12 61 94.00 North Frontal (East)CA 0.5 41 S thrust 0 16 27 94.36 Puente Hills (Santa Fe Springs)CA 0.7 29 N thrust 2.8 15 11 95.55 Elsinore;CM CA 3 82 NE strike slip 0 13 39 95.63 Landers CA 0.6 90 V strike slip 0 15 95 95.65 S. San Andreas;NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 134 95.65 S. San Andreas;PK+CH+CC+BB+NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0.1 13 342 95.65 S. San Andreas;BB+NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 184 95.65 S. San Andreas;SM CA 29 90 V strike slip 0 13 98 95.65 S. San Andreas;CH+CC+BB+NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 306 95.65 S. San Andreas;CC+BB+NM+SM CA n/a 90 V strike slip 0 14 243 + − 3000 km 2000 mi 30.565°S : 152.578°E Lea et | Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user commu… 99 06 8 :5 :3 (U C)0. 17km NNE of Thousand Pal… 1992-04-23 04:50:23 (UTC)11.6 km6.1 6km SSW of Morongo Valley, … 1986-07-08 09:20:44 (UTC)9.5 km6.0 12km W of Salton City, CA 1954-03-19 09:54:27 (UTC)6.0 km6.4 16km E of Desert Hot Spring… 1948-12-04 23:43:16 (UTC)6.0 km6.0 16km WSW of Oasis, CA 1937-03-25 16:49:02 (UTC)6.0 km6.0 Long Beach, California Earth… 1933-03-11 01:54:09 (UTC)6.0 km6.4 2 km W of Hemet, California 1918-04-21 22:32:25 (UTC)km6.8 4 km WNW of San Jacinto, C… 1899-12-25 12:25:00 (UTC)km6.8 4 km N of Lytle Creek, Califor… 1899-07-22 20:32:00 (UTC)km6.4 East of San Diego, California 1894-10-23 23:03:00 (UTC)km6.1 Northwest of San Bernardino… 1894-07-30 05:12:00 (UTC)km6.2 Near Borrego Springs, Califo… 1892-05-28 11:15:00 (UTC)km6.5 Northeastern San Diego Cou… 1890-02-09 12:06:00 (UTC)km6.8 Hazards by Location Search Information Coordinates:33.532223, -117.119388 Elevation:1279 ft Timestamp:2021-08-31T22:17:11.394Z Hazard Type:Seismic Reference Document: ASCE7-16 Risk Category:II Site Class:D-default Basic Parameters Name Value Description SS 1.508 MCER ground motion (period=0.2s) S1 0.561 MCER ground motion (period=1.0s) SMS 1.81 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SM1 * null Site-modified spectral acceleration value SDS 1.207 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2s SA SD1 * null Numeric seismic design value at 1.0s SA * See Section 11.4.8 Additional Information Name Value Description SDC * null Seismic design category Fa 1.2 Site amplification factor at 0.2s Fv * null Site amplification factor at 1.0s CRS 0.901 Coefficient of risk (0.2s) CR1 0.9 Coefficient of risk (1.0s) PGA 0.666 MCEG peak ground acceleration FPGA 1.2 Site amplification factor at PGA PGAM 0.799 Site modified peak ground acceleration TL 8 Long-period transition period (s) 1279 ft Report a map errorMap data ©2021 Google, INEGI SsRT 1.508 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion (0.2s) SsUH 1.674 Factored uniform-hazard spectral acceleration (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) SsD 2.048 Factored deterministic acceleration value (0.2s) S1RT 0.561 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion (1.0s) S1UH 0.623 Factored uniform-hazard spectral acceleration (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) S1D 0.808 Factored deterministic acceleration value (1.0s) PGAd 0.864 Factored deterministic acceleration value (PGA) * See Section 11.4.8 The results indicated here DO NOT reflect any state or local amendments to the values or any delineation lines made during the building code adoption process. Users should confirm any output obtained from this tool with the local Authority Having Jurisdiction before proceeding with design. Disclaimer Hazard loads are provided by the U.S. Geological Survey Seismic Design Web Services. While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, ATC and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in the report should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. ATC does not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the report provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the report. APPENDIX E GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS EARTHSTRATA General Earthwork and Grading Specifications General Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are intended to be the minimum requirements for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications should be considered a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical repor t(s) and if they are in conflict with the geotechnical report(s), the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general specifications. Observations made during earthwork ope rations by the project Geotechnical Consultant may result in new or revised recommendations that may supersede these specifications and/or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: The Owner shall employ a qualified Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant), pr ior to commencement of grading or construction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s ) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading or construction. Prior to commencement of grading or construction, the Owner shall coordinate with the Geotechnical Consultant, and Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) to schedule sufficient personnel for the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. During earthwork and grading operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface conditions to confirm assumptions made during the geotechnical design phase of the pr oject. Should the observed conditions differ significantly from the interpret ive assumptions made during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall recommend appropriate changes to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the reviewing agency where required. The Geotechnical Consultant sha ll observe the moisture conditioning and processing of the excavations and fill materials. The Geotechn ical Consultant should perform periodic relative density testing of fill materials to verify that the attained level of compaction is being accomplished as specified. The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of earth materials to receive compacted fill, moisture‐ conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall be provided with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s) for his review and acceptance of responsibilities, prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the g rading in accordance with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s). Prior to commencement of grading, the Contractor shall prepare and submit to the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of “equipment” of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site. The Contractor shall inform the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of work schedule changes and revisions to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate personnel will be available for observation and testing. No assumptions shall be made by the Contractor wi th regard to whether the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. It is the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork operations in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). At the sole discretion of the Geotechnical Consultant, any unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable earth materials, improper moisture conditioning, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress keyway size, adverse weather conditions, etc., resulting in a quality of work less than required in the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s), the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the Owner that grading be stopped until conditions are corrected. Preparation of Areas for Compacted Fill Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed in a method acceptable to the Owner, Geotechnical Consultant, and governing agencies. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals on a site by site basis. Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall not contain more than 1 percent organic materials (by volume). No compacted fill lift shall contain more than 10 percent organic matter. Should potentially hazardous materials be encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous materials specialist shall immediately be consulted to evaluate the potentially hazardous materials, prior to continuing to work in that area. It is our understanding that the State of California defines most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, c oolant, etc.) as hazardous waste. As such, indiscriminate dumping or spillage o f these fluids may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or impris onment, and shall be prohibited. The contractor is responsible for all haz ardous waste related to his operations. The Geotechnical Consultant does not have expertise in this area. If hazardous waste is a concern, then the Owner should contract the services of a qualified environmental assessor. Processing: Exposed earth materials that have been observed to be satisfactory for support of compacted fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Exposed earth materials that are not observed to be satisfactory shall be removed or alternative recommendations may be provided by the Geotechnical Consultant. Scarification shall continue until the exposed earth materials are broken down and free of oversize material and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform co mpaction. The earth materials should be moistened or air dried to near optimu m moisture content, prior to compaction. Overexcavation: The Cut Lot Typical Detail and Cut/Fill Transition Lot Typical Detail, included herein p rovides a graphic illustration that depicts typical overexcavation recommendations made in the approved geotechnical report(s) and/or grading plan(s). Keyways and Benching: Where fills are to be placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be thoroughly benched as compacted fill is placed. Please see the three Keyway and Benc hing Typical Details with subtitles Cut Over Fill Slope, Fill Over Cut Slope , and Fill Slope for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or smallest keyway shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide (or ½ the proposed slope height) and at least 2 feet into competent earth materials as advised by the Geotechnical Consultant. Typical benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent earth materials or as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 should be thoroughly benched or otherwise excavated to provide a flat subgrade for the compacted fill. Evaluation/Acceptance of Bottom Excavations: All areas to receive compacted fill (bottom excavations), including removal excavations, processed areas, keyways, and benching, shall be observed, mapped, general elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive compacted fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing compacted fill. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of bottom excavations, processed areas, keyways, and Fill Materials benching. The Geotechnical Consultant is not responsible for erroneously located, fills, subdrain systems, or excavations. General: Earth material to be used as compacted fill should to a large extent be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances as e valuated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Oversize: Oversize material is rock that does not break down into smaller pieces and has a maximum diameter greater than 12 inches. Oversize rock shall not be included within compacted fill unless specific methods and guidelines acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant are followed. For ex amples of methods and guidelines of oversize rock placement see the enclosed Oversize Rock Disposal Detail. The inclusion of oversize materials in the compacted fill shall only be acceptable if the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted fill or thoroughly jetted granular materials. No oversize material shall be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of proposed utilities or underground improvements. Import: Should imported earth materials be required, the proposed imp ort materials shall meet the requirements of the Geotechnical Consultant. Well graded, very low expansion potential earth materials free of organic matter and other deleterious substances are usually sought after as im port materials. However, it is generally in the Owners best interest that potential import earth materials are provided to the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their suitability for the intended purpose. At least 48 hours should be allotted for the appropriate laboratory testing to be performed, prior to starting the import operations. Fill Placement and Compaction Procedures Fill Layers: Fill materials shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in nearly horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickn ess. Thicker layers may be accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant, provided field density testing indicates that the grading procedures can adequately co mpact the thicker layers. Each layer of fill shall be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to obtain uniformity within the earth materials and consistent moisture throughout the fill. Moisture Conditioning of Fill: Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall be watered, dried, blended, and/or mixed, as needed to obtain relatively uniform moisture contents that are at or slightly above optimum. The maximum density and optimum moisture content tests should be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM test method D1557‐00). Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture‐conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM test method D1557‐00. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for compaction of earth materials or be p roven to consistently achieve the required level of compaction. Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, additional effort to obtain compaction on slopes is needed. This may be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers as the fill is being placed, by overbuilding the fill slopes, or by other methods producing results that are satisfactory to the Geotechnical Con sultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill and the slope face shall be a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM test method D1557‐ 00. Compaction Testing of Fill: Field tests for moisture content and relative density of the compacted fill earth materials shall be periodically performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. The location and frequency of tests shall be at the Geotechnical Consultant's discretion based on field observations. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be random. The test locations may or may not be selected to verify minimum compaction requirements in areas that are typically prone to inadequate compaction, such as close to slope faces and near benching. Frequency of Compaction Testing: Compaction tests shall be taken at minimum intervals of every 2 vertical feet and/or per 1,000 cubic yards of compacted materials placed. Additionally, as a guideline, at least one (1) test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slo pe face and/or for each 10 vertical feet of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill placement is such that the testing schedule described herein can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork operations to a safe level so that these minimum standards can be obtained. Compaction Test Locations: The approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location shall be documented by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall coordinate with the Surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established. This will provide the Geotechnical Consultant with sufficient accuracy to determine the approximate test locations and elevations. The Geotechnical Consultant can not be responsible for staking erroneously located by the Surveyor or Contractor. A minimum of two grade stakes should be provided at a maximum horizontal dis tance of 100 feet and vertical difference of less than 5 feet. Subdrain System Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the approved grading plan, and the typical details provided herein. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrain systems and/or changes to the subdrain systems described herein, with regard t o the extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading or other factors. All subdrain systems shall be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor (except for retaining wall subdrain systems) to verify line and grade a fter installation and prior to burial. Adequate time should be allowed by the Contractor to complete these surveys. Excavation All excavations and over‐excavations for remedial purposes sha ll be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading operations. Remedial removal depths indicated on the geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual removal depths and extent shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading operations. Where fill over cut slopes are planned, the cut portion of the slope shall be excavated, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of t he fill portion of the proposed slope, unless specifically addressed by the Geotechnic al Consultant. Typical details for cut over fill slopes and fill over cut slopes are provided herein. Trench Backfill 1)The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for trench excavation safety. 2)Bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding materials shall have a Sand Equivalency more than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the conduit and thoroughly jetting to provide densification. Backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density, from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 3)Jetting of the bedding materials around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 4)The Geotechnical Consultant shall test trench backfill for the minimum compaction requirements recommen ded herein. At least one test should be conducted for every 300 linear feet of trench and for each 2 ve rtical feet of backfill. 5)For trench backfill the lift thicknesses shall not exceed thos e allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction, unless th e Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment or method. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B-2 T.D. = 20' NO G.W. B-1 T.D. = 5.5' NO G.W. Qps 3-5' LEGEND Locations are Approximate Geologic Units Symbols -Recommended Removal Depths -Boring Location Including Total Depth and Depth to Groundwater 3-5' B-2 T.D. = 20' NO G.W. -Limits of Report North Qps -Quaternary Pauba Formation PROJECT CLIENT PROJECT NO. SCALE DATE DRAWN BY DWG XREFS REVISION PLATE PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE MR. DAVID DEBATE 213842-10A SEPTEMBER 2021 1" = 30' 1 OF 1 GEOTECHNICAL MAP LOCATED AT 40530 CALLE FIESTA TEMECULA AREA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA APN 919-210-015 JDG Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants www.ESGSINC.com (951) 397-8315 Earth Strata Geotechnical Services, Inc.