HomeMy WebLinkAboutParcel Map 22863 Parcel 1 WQMPCity of Temecula
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP)
PROPOSED DRIVE-THRU BUILDINGS
PA23-0026, PA23-0027, PA23-0030, LD24-2285
29540 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD,
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
APN: 921-320-061
PREPARED BY:
VENTURA ENGINEERING INLAND, INC.
27393 YNEZ ROAD, SUITE 159
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92591
(951) 252-7632
wilfredo@venturaengineeringinland.com
PREPARED FOR:
FAIRWAY COLIMA CA SEVEN, LLC
ATTN: MEI CHAN LIANG, MANAGER
21700 COPLEY DRIVE, SUITE #320
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 91765
(909) 594-3388
DATE OF WQMP
Revision 4: December 5, 2024
Revision 3: November 13, 2024
Revision 2: September 20, 2024
Revision 1: August 9, 2024
Final Original Date: May 14, 2024
Preliminary Approval Date: October 5, 2023
APPROVED BY:
APPROVAL DATE:
APPROVED BY
CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC WORKS
david.pina 01/09/2025
01/09/2025 01/09/2025
01/09/20
WQMP 3
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Step 1: Source Control BMP Checklist
Source Control BMPs
All development projects must implement source control BMPs 4.2.1 through 4.2.6 where
applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4.2 and Appendix E of the City BMP Design Manual for
information to implement source control BMPs shown in this checklist.
Answer each category below pursuant to the following:
· "Yes" means the project will implement the source control BMP as described in Chapter
4.2 and/or Appendix E of the City BMP Design Manual. Discussion / justification must be
provided and show locations on the project plans. Select applicable Source Controls
in the Source Control BMP summary on the following page.
· "No" means the BMP is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement.
Discussion / justification must be provided.
· "N/A" means the BMP is not applicable at the project site because the project does not
include the feature that is addressed by the BMP (e.g., the project has no outdoor
materials storage areas). Discussion / justification must be provided.
Source Control Requirement Applied?
4.2.1 Prevention of Illicit Discharges into the MS4 ☒ Yes ☐No ☐N/A
Discussion / justification:
Project runoff is being routed through inline roof filters and collected with the other site areas
and being routed through the cistern and MWS adding the maximum extent practical to the
removal. Additional discussion for Source Controls that are applicable to the site is provided in
Section 4.2.6. for SC-F, SC-G, SC-N and SC-P
4.2.2 Storm Drain Stenciling or Signage ☒ Yes ☐No ☐N/A
Discussion / justification:
All storm drain catch basins will be stenciled with stenciling meeting current City Engineer’s
standards. The detailing will be added during the final engineering phase.
4.2.3 Protect Outdoor Materials Storage Areas from Rainfall,
Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
☐ Yes ☐No ☒ N/A
Discussion / justification:
No outdoor material storage areas are proposed as part of this project.
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 work areas are proposed as part of this project.
4.2.5 Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On,
Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
4 WQMP
Preparation Date: December 5, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
Discussion / justification:
The proposed trash enclosure shall be designed per the architectural plans to meet the
requirements of SC-G.
4.2.6 Additional BMPs Based on Potential Sources of Runoff
Pollutants
(see the checklist for Source Control BMP Summary)
☒Yes ☐No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification. Clearly identify which sources of runoff pollutants are discussed:
The following additional Source Control BMPs shall be used and implemented as follows:
SC-A: Onsite Storm Drain Inlets: The proposed on-site storm drain inlets will be maintained per
CASQA BMP SC-44: Drainage System Maintenance.
SC-B: Interior Floor Drains and Elevator Shaft Sump Pumps: The project site does not include
elevator shaft sump pumps; however, internal, on-site floor drains shall be maintained per
required plumbing and architectural recommendations to prevent blockage, clogs, and overflow.
In addition, a grease interceptor is proposed for each building.
SC-D1: Need for Future Indoor & Structural Pest Control: The project owner will establish a
proper vector control plan to handle anticipated pests.
SC-D2: Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use: The landscaping will be maintained in accordance
with CASQA BMP SC-41: Buildings and Grounds Maintenance.
SC-F: Food Service: This shall be met through all food service operations being limited to the
insides of the restaurants only.
SC-G: Refuse Areas: All trash enclosures shall be designed to meet CASQA BMP SC-34:
Waste Handling & Disposal and SD-32: Trash Enclosures
SC-N: Fire Sprinkler Test Water: Fire sprinkler test water shall be conducted in accordance with
CASQA BMP SC-41 Building and Grounds Maintenance
SC-P: Plazas, Sidewalks, and Parking Lots: The site’s sidewalks and parking areas shall be
maintained in accordance with CASQA BMP SC-43: Parking/Storage Area Maintenance and
SC-71: Plaza and Sidewalk Cleaning.
WQMP 5
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Source Control BMP Summary
Select all source control BMPs identified for your project in sections 4.2.1 through 4.2.6 above in
the column on the left below. Then select “yes” if the BMP has been implemented and shown
on the project plans, “No” if the BMP has not been implemented, or “N/A” if the BMP is not
applicable to your project.
☒ SC-A. On-site storm drain inlets ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☒ SC-B. Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump
pumps
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-C. Interior parking garages ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☒ SC-D1. Need for future indoor & structural pest control ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☒ SC-D2. Landscape/outdoor pesticide use ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-E. Pools, spas, ponds, fountains, and other water
features
☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☒ SC-F. Food service ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☒ SC-G. Refuse areas ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-H. Industrial processes ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-I. Outdoor storage of equipment or materials ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-J. Vehicle and equipment cleaning ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-K. Vehicle/equipment repair and maintenance ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-L. Fuel dispensing areas ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-M. Loading docks ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☒ SC-N. Fire sprinkler test water ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-O. Miscellaneous drain or wash water ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☒ SC-P. Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
☐ SC-Q. Large trash generating facilities ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-R. Animal facilities ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-S. Plant nurseries and garden centers ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
☐ SC-T. Automotive facilities ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
Note: Show all source control measures applied above on the plan sheets.
6 WQMP
Preparation Date: December 5, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
Step 2: Site Design BMP Checklist
Site Design BMPs
All development projects must implement site design BMPs SD-A through SD-H where
applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4.3 and Appendix E of the City BMP Design Manual for
information to implement site design BMPs shown in this checklist.
Answer each category below pursuant to the following:
· "Yes" means the project will implement the site design BMP as described in Chapter 4.3
and/or Appendix E of the City BMP Design Manual. Discussion / justification must be
provided and show locations on the project plans.
· "No" means the BMP is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement.
Discussion / justification must be provided.
· "N/A" means the BMP is not applicable at the project site because the project does not
include the feature that is addressed by the BMP (e.g., the project site has no existing
natural areas to conserve). Discussion / justification must be provided.
Site Design Requirement Applied?
4.3.1 Maintain Natural Drainage Pathways and Hydrologic
Features
☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. No natural drainage pathways are
present on the project site to maintain.
4.3.2 Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed commercial site. No native areas, soils, or
vegetation is present to conserve.
4.3.3 Minimize Impervious Area ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed commercial site. There are no
opportunities to apply the techniques presented in section 4.3.3. that area feasible.
4.3.4 Minimize Soil Compaction ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The project site is a remodel of an already developed site. There are no native topsoils to
maintain and re-utilize at this time.
4.3.5 Impervious Area Dispersion ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification
The project site currently already confluences all surface flows into a localized storm drain
system. There are no opportunities to disperse impervious areas as defined in the standards.
WQMP 7
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
4.3.6 Runoff Collection ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
The proposed landscaping is not sufficient to be utilized to convey storm water flows; however,
where feasible, landscaping is being used to locally collect the runoff in area drains.
4.3.7 Landscaping with Native or Drought Tolerant Species ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
Landscaping will meet the requirements and the landscaping plan. Refer to the landscape plans
for further information on landscaping species as Appendix E Fact Sheet PL has been
recommended to the landscape architect for inclusion.
4.3.8 Harvesting and Using Precipitation ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
Harvest and use of precipitation through the use of rain barrels is not feasible and the proposed
landscaping is not large enough to facilitate SD-E uses.
8 WQMP
Preparation Date: December 5, 2024 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
Step 3: Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist
☐ Check this box only for the Preliminary WQMP phase. Construction BMPs have not been
included at this time; however, the Construction BMPs and this checklist must be completed and
provided during the final engineering plan check process.
Minimum Required Standard Construction Stormwater BMPs
If you answer “Yes” to any of the questions below, your project is subject to Table 1 on the following page
(Minimum Required Standard Construction Stormwater BMPs). As noted in Table 1, please select at
least the minimum number of required 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 9
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
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 ☐
LD24-2285 PGP Sheet 10
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 ☒
LD24-2285 PGP Sheet 10 Sediment Desilting Basin (must
treat all site runoff)
SC-2 ☐
Mulch, straw, wood chips, soil
application
SS-6, SS-8 ☐
2 State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2003. Storm Water Quality Handbooks, Construction
Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual. March. Available online at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/construc/stormwater/manuals.htm.
3 If Vegetation Stabilization (Planting or Hydroseeding) is proposed for erosion control it may be installed between
May 1st and August 15th. Slope irrigation is in place and needs to be operable for slopes >3 feet. Vegetation
must be watered and established prior to October 1st. The owner must implement a contingency physical BMP
by August 15th if vegetation establishment does not occur by that date. If landscaping is proposed, erosion
control measures must also be used while landscaping is being established. Established vegetation must have a
subsurface mat of intertwined mature roots with a uniform vegetative coverage of 70 percent of the natural
vegetative coverage or more on all disturbed areas.
4 All slopes over three feet must have established vegetative cover prior to final permit approval.
10 WQMP
Preparation Date: December 5, 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 ☐ No outlets proposed
D. Select sediment control method for all disturbed areas (choose at least one)
Silt Fence SC-1 ☒
LD24-2285 PGP Sheet 10
Fiber Rolls (Straw Wattles) SC-5 ☐
Gravel & Sand Bags SC-6 & 8 ☒
Dewatering Filtration NS-2 ☐
Storm Drain Inlet Protection SC-10 ☒
Engineered Desilting Basin
(sized for 10-year flow)
SC-2 ☐
E. Select method for preventing offsite tracking of sediment (choose at least one)
Stabilized Construction Entrance TC-1 ☒
LD24-2285 PGP Sheet 10
Construction Road Stabilization TC-2 ☐
Entrance/Exit Tire Wash TC-3 ☒
Entrance/Exit Inspection &
Cleaning Facility
TC-1 ☐
Street Sweeping and Vacuuming SC-7 ☐
F. Select the general site management BMPs
F.1 Materials Management
Material Delivery & Storage WM-1 ☒ LD24-2285 PGP Sheet 10 Spill Prevention and Control WM-4 ☒
F.2 Waste Management6
Waste Management
Concrete Waste Management
WM-8 ☒
LD24-2285 PGP Sheet 10 Solid Waste Management WM-5 ☒
Sanitary Waste Management WM-9 ☒
Hazardous Waste Management WM-6 ☐
Note: The Construction General Permit (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ) also requires all projects
not subject to the BMP Design Manual to comply with runoff reduction requirements through the
implementation of post-construction BMPs as described in Section XIII of the order.
5 Regional Standard Drawing D-40 – Rip Rap Energy Dissipater is also acceptable for velocity reduction.
6 Not all projects will have every waste identified. The applicant is responsible for identifying wastes that will be
onsite and applying the appropriate BMP. For example, if concrete will be used, BMP WM-8 must be selected.
WQMP 11
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
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: 28,270 ft2
The total existing (pre-project) impervious area is: 31,041 ft2
The total area disturbed by the project is: 35,394 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: Disturbed < 1 acre, No WDID required.
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.
12 WQMP
Preparation Date: December 5, 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: 31,041 ft2 (A)
The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is 28,270 ft2 (B)
Percent impervious surface created or replaced (B/A)*100: 91.1%
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 13
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Step 4.1: Water Quality Management Plan requirements
Step Answer Progression
Is the project a Standard Project,
Priority Development Project (PDP), or
exception to PDP definitions?
To answer this item, complete Step 4
Project Type Determination Checklist,
and see PDP exemption information
below.
For further guidance, see Chapter 1.4
of the BMP Design Manual in its
entirety.
☐ Standard
Project
Standard Project requirements apply, STOP,
you have satisfied stormwater
requirements.
☒ PDP
Standard and PDP requirements apply.
Complete Exhibit A “PDP
Requirements.”
http://temeculaca.gov/wqmpa2
☐ PDP
Exemption
Go to Step 4.2 below.
Step 4.2: Exemption to PDP definitions
Is the project exempt from PDP definitions based on either of the following:
☐ Projects that are only new or retrofit paved sidewalks, bicycle
lanes, or trails that meet the following criteria:
(i) Designed and constructed to direct stormwater runoff to
adjacent vegetated areas, or other non-erodible permeable
areas; OR
(ii) Designed and constructed to be hydraulically disconnected
from paved streets or roads [i.e., runoff from the new
improvement does not drain directly onto paved streets or
roads]; OR
(iii) Designed and constructed with permeable pavements or
surfaces in accordance with City of Temecula Guidance on
Green Infrastructure;
If so:
Standard Project
requirements apply, AND
any additional requirements
specific to the type of
project. City concurrence
with the exemption is
required. Provide
discussion and list any
additional requirements
below in this form.
STOP, you have
satisfied stormwater
requirements.
☐ Projects that are only retrofitting or redeveloping existing paved
alleys, streets or roads that are designed and constructed in
accordance with the City of Temecula Guidance on Green
Infrastructure.
Complete Exhibit A
“PDP Requirements.”
Select Green Streets
Exemptions where
applicable.
Discussion / justification, and additional requirements for exceptions to PDP definitions, if applicable:
Project is not exempt from PDP requirements.
Exhibit A
City of Temecula
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
ii PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Preparer's Certification Page
Project Name: Proposed Drive-Thru Buildings
Permit Application Number: PA23-0026, PA-0027, PA23-0030, LD24-2285
PREPARER'S CERTIFICATION
I hereby declare that I am the Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of Stormwater best
management practices (BMPs) for this project, and that I have exercised responsible charge over
the design of the BMPs as defined in Section 6703 of the Business and Professions Code, and
that the design is consistent with the PDP requirements of the City of Temecula BMP Design
Manual, which is a design manual for compliance with local City of Temecula Stormwater and
Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls Ordinance (Chapter 8.28 et seq.) and
regional MS4 Permit (California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Order
No. R9-2013-0001 as amended by R9-2015-0001 and R9-2015-0100) requirements for
stormwater management.
I have read and understand that the City of Temecula has adopted minimum requirements for
managing urban runoff, including stormwater, from land development activities, as described in
the BMP Design Manual. I certify that this PDP WQMP has been completed to the best of my
ability and accurately reflects the project being proposed and the applicable BMPs proposed to
minimize the potentially negative impacts of this project's land development activities on water
quality. I understand and acknowledge that the plan check review of this PDP WQMP by City
staff is confined to a review and does not relieve me, as the Engineer in Responsible Charge of
design of stormwater BMPs for this project, of my responsibilities for project design.
Engineer of Work's Signature, PE Number & Expiration Date
Wilfredo Ventura
Print Name
Ventura Engineering Inland, Inc. (951) 240-5222
Company & Phone No.
_____________________________
Date
Engineer's Seal:
December 5, 2024
66532 6/20/26
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 3
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Step 1: Site Information Checklist
Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns
Project Watershed (Complete Hydrologic Unit,
Area, and Subarea Name with Numeric Identifier;
e.g., 902.52 Santa Margarita HU, Pechanga HA,
Wolf HSA)
902.32: Santa Margarita HU, Murrieta HA,
Murrieta HSA, Long Canyon Creek
Current Status of the Site (select all that apply):
☒ Existing development
☐ Previously graded but not built out
☐ Demolition completed without new construction
☐ Agricultural or other non-impervious use
☐ Vacant, undeveloped/natural
Description / Additional Information:
Project site is currently a restaurant with paved parking and minimal landscaping.
Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply and provide each area on site):
☒ Pervious Area: 0.100 Acres ( 4,353 Square Feet)
☒ Impervious Area: 0.658 Acres ( 31,041 Square Feet)
Description / Additional Information:
The project site is currently a commercial restaurant, paved parking areas, paved sidewalk
areas and some ornamental landscaping.
How is stormwater runoff conveyed from the site? At a minimum, this description should
answer:
(1) Whether existing drainage conveyance is natural or urban;
(2) Is runoff from offsite conveyed through the site? If yes, describe the offsite drainage areas,
design flows, and locations where offsite flows enter the project site, and summarize how such
flows are conveyed through the site;
(3) Provide details regarding existing project site drainage conveyance network, including any
existing storm drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, stormwater treatment
facilities, natural or constructed channels; and
(4) Identify all discharge locations from the existing project site along with a summary of
conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge locations. Provide summary of
the pre-project drainage areas and design flows to each of the existing runoff discharge
locations. Reference the Drainage report Attachment for detailed calculations.
4 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Describe existing site drainage patterns:
(1) The project site currently sheet flows overland and from the existing roof areas through roof
drains to adjacent areas that then discharge into the existing curb and gutter adjacent to the
project site and eventually in the adjacent public storm drain inlet in the eastern portion of the
site. The western portion of the site is existing landscaping that naturally drains off the site to
the curb and gutter of rancho California road.
(2) There is no off-site runoff at this time.
(3) There is an existing storm drain inlet in the eastern parking areas that was previously designed
to accept all of the project site’s stormwater runoff. No stormwater retention or detention is
present at this time.
(4) The project site discharges to the existing storm drain inlet in the eastern parking area and
directly off-site to the west from the slope planting to Rancho California Road.
Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns
Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities:
The project proposes to redevelop the site by demolishing the current building and some of the
parking area and will construct two new buildings with drive-thru lanes, new ADA parking areas,
new associated paved sidewalk areas, a new ADA path from the shopping center to Rancho
California Road and new landscaping.
Proposed Land Cover Includes (select all that apply and provide each area on site):
Existing to Remain
☐ Pervious Area: 0 Acres ( 0 Square Feet)
☐ Impervious Areas 0 Acres ( 0 Square Feet)
Existing to Be Replaced
☐ Pervious Area: 0 Acres ( 0 Square Feet)
☐ Impervious Areas 0 Acres ( 0 Square Feet)
Newly Created
☒ Pervious Area: 0.149 Acres ( 7,123 Square Feet)
☒ Impervious Areas 0.526 Acres ( 28,270 Square Feet)
Total
☒ Pervious Area: 0.149 Acres ( 7,123 Square Feet)
☒ Impervious Areas 0.526 Acres ( 28,270 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):
Two new buildings, drive-thru lanes, parking areas, ADA pedestrian path to Rancho California
Road
List/describe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas):
Landscaping
Describe any grading or changes to site topography:
Minimal grading in support of the proposed structures and elements
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 5
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Provide details regarding the proposed project site drainage conveyance network, including
storm drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, stormwater treatment facilities,
natural or constructed channels, and the method for conveying offsite flows through or around
the proposed project site. Identify all discharge locations from the proposed project site along
with a summary of the conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge
locations. Provide a summary of pre- and post-project drainage areas and design flows to each
of the runoff discharge locations. Reference the drainage study for detailed calculations.
Describe proposed site drainage patterns:
Main Pad:
Roofs will drain to adjacent landscaping and paving that is then collected in the proposed on-
site private storm drains and conveyed to the proposed private cistern tanks, then through the
private MWS units and finally to the existing on-site storm drain system at the existing storm
drain inlet in the eastern portion of the parking area.
ADA Pedestrian Path To Rancho California Road:
Paved path to select areas drains or over the edges into the adjacent landscaping areas and
then overland into the curb and gutter of Rancho California Road.
6 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Description of Receiving Water(s) and Pollutants of Concern
Describe flow path of stormwater from the project site discharge location(s), through urban
storm conveyance systems as applicable, to receiving creeks, rivers, and lagoons as applicable,
and ultimate discharge to the Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable):
Local drainage is City of Temecula Storm Drains to Murrieta Creek to Temecula Creek to Santa
Margarita River to Margarita Lagoon to the Pacific Ocean
List any 303(d) impaired water bodies1 within the path of stormwater from the project site to the
Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable), identify the
pollutant(s)/stressor(s) causing impairment, and identify any TMDLs and/or Highest Priority
Pollutants from the WQIP for the impaired water bodies (see BMP Design Manual Appendix
B.6.1):
303(d) Impaired Water Body Pollutant(s)/Stressor(s)
TMDLs / WQIP Highest
Priority Pollutant
Long Canyon Not Listed Eutrophication
Murrieta Creek
Chlorpyrifos, Copper Indicator
Bacteria, Total Dissolved
Solids, Toxicity
Eutrophication
Temecula Creek
Chlorpyrifos, Copper Indicator
Bacteria, Total Dissolved
Solids, Toxicity
Eutrophication
Santa Margarita River Indicator Bacteria, Iron,
Manganese, Nitrogen Eutrophication
Identify pollutants expected from the project site based on all proposed use(s) of the site (see
BMP Design Manual Appendix B.6.):
Pollutant
Not Applicable to
the Project Site
Anticipated from the
Project Site
Also a Receiving
Water Pollutant of
Concern
Sediment ☐ ☒ ☐
Nutrients ☐ ☒ ☐
Heavy Metals ☐ ☒ ☐
Organic Compounds ☐ ☒ ☐
Trash & Debris ☐ ☒ ☐
Oxygen Demanding
Substances ☒ ☒ ☒
Oil & Grease ☐ ☒ ☐
Bacteria & Viruses ☐ ☒ ☐
Pesticides ☐ ☒ ☐
1 The current list of Section 303(d) impaired water bodies can be found at
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_quality_assessment/#impaired
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 7
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Site Requirements and Constraints
The following is for redevelopment PDPs only:
The area of existing (pre-project) impervious area at the project site is: 31,041 ft2 (A)
The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is 28,270 ft2 (B)
Percent impervious surface created or replaced (B/A)*100: 91.1 %
The percent impervious surface created or replaced is (select one based on the above calculation):
☐ less than or equal to fifty percent (50%) – only newly created or replaced impervious areas
are considered a PDP and subject to stormwater requirements
OR
☒ greater than fifty percent (50%) – the entire project site is considered a PDP and subject to
stormwater requirements
List applicable site requirements or constraints that will influence stormwater management
design, such as zoning requirements including setbacks and open space, or local codes
governing minimum street width, sidewalk construction, allowable pavement types, and
drainage requirements:
Limited space for on-grade BMPs. Underground BMPs will be necessary.
Optional Additional Information or Continuation of Previous Sections As Needed
This space provided for additional information or continuation of information from previous
sections as needed.
No additional space required.
8 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Step 2: Strategy for Meeting PDP Performance Requirements
PDPs must implement BMPs to control pollutants in stormwater that may be discharged from a
project (see Chapter 5). PDPs subject to hydromodification management requirements must
implement flow control BMPs to manage hydromodification (see Chapter 6). Both stormwater
pollutant control and flow control can be achieved within the same BMP(s). Projects triggering
the 50% rule must address stormwater requirements for the entire site.
Structural BMPs must be verified by the City at the completion of construction. This may include
requiring the project owner or project owner's representative and engineer of record to certify
construction of the structural BMPs (see Chapter 1.12). Structural BMPs must be maintained
into perpetuity, and the City must confirm the maintenance (see Chapter 7).
Provide a narrative description of the general strategy for pollutant control and flow control at
the project site in the box below. This information must describe how the steps for selecting and
designing stormwater pollutant control BMPs presented in Chapter 5.1 of the BMP Design
Manual were followed, and the results (type of BMPs selected). For projects requiring flow
control BMPs, indicate whether pollutant control and flow control BMPs are integrated or
separate. At the end of this discussion, provide a summary of all the BMPs within the project
including the type and number.
Describe the general strategy for BMP implementation at the site.
Due to site constraints and the intensity of the imperviousness, the project site must utilize a
cistern and compact biofiltration device (Modular Wetlands Unit).
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 9
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
STORMWATER POLLUTANT CONTROL BMP SELECTION
Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet:
Attachment
Sequence Contents Checklist
Special Considerations for
Redevelopment Projects (50% Rule)
see chapter 1.7 and Step 1.3
☐ Less than or equal to fifty
percent (50%)
☒ Greater than fifty percent (50%)
Refer to Figure 5-1: Stormwater Pollutant Control BMP Selection Flow Chart
Attachment 1a DMA Exhibit (Required)
See DMA Exhibit Checklist on the
back of this form.
See Chapter 3.3.3 for guidance
☒ Included
☐ Entire project is designed with
Self-Mitigating and De-Minimis
DMAs. The project is compliant
with Pollution Control BMP sizing
requirements. STOP *
Attachment 1b Figure B.1-1: 85th Percentile 24-hour
Isohyetal Map with project location
☒ Included
Attachment 1c Worksheet B.3-1 Structural BMP
Feasibility: Project-Scale BMP
Feasibility Analysis
☒ Included
Attachment 1d Worksheet B.2-1 DCV 2 ☒ Included
Attachment 1e Applicable Site Design BMP Fact
Sheet(s) from Appendix E
☒ Included
☐ Entire project is designed with
Self-Retaining DMAs. The project
is compliant with Pollution Control
BMP sizing requirements. STOP *
Attachment 1f Structural BMP Inventory ☐ Included
Attachment 1g Structural Pollutant Control BMP
Checklist for each Structural BMP
☒ Included
Attachment 1h Is Onsite Alternative Compliance
proposed?3
☒ No
☐ Yes - Include WQE worksheets
Attachment 1i Offsite Alternative Compliance
Participation Form - Pollutant Control
Refer to Figure 1-3:Pathways to
Participating in Offsite Alternative
Compliance Program
☒ Full Compliance Onsite
☐ Partial Compliance Onsite with
Offsite Alternative Compliance or
Full Offsite Alternative
Compliance. Document onsite
structural BMPs and complete
- Pollutant Control Offsite
Alternative Compliance
Participation Form, and
- WQE worksheets
* If this box is checked, the remainder of Attachment 1 does not need to be filled out.
2 All stormwater pollutant control worksheets have been automated and are available for download at:
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/dpw/watersheds/DevelopmentandConstruction/BMP_Design_Manual.
html
3 Water Quality Equivalency Guidance and automated worksheets for Region 9:
http://www.projectcleanwater.org/water-quality-equivalency-guidance/
10 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 1a: DMA Exhibit Checklist
See Chapter 3.3.3 for guidance
☒ Point(s) of Compliance
☒ Project Site Boundary
☒ Project Disturbed Area Footprint
☒ Drainage management area (DMA) boundaries, DMA ID numbers, DMA areas (square
footage or acreage), DMA land use and pollutants of concern, and DMA type (i.e., drains to
structural BMP, self-retaining, self-mitigating, or de-minimis) Note on exhibit de-minimis areas
and discuss reason they could not be included in Step 1.3 per section 5.2.2 of the manual.
Include offsite areas receiving treatment to mitigate Onsite Water Quality Equivalency.
☒ Include summary table of worksheet inputs for each DMA.
☒ Include description of self-mitigating areas.
☒ Potential pollutant source areas and corresponding required source control BMPs (see
Chapter 4, Appendix E.1, and Step 3.5)
☒ Proposed Site Design BMPs and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness.
Show sections, details, and dimensions of site design BMP’s per chapter 5.2.3 (tree wells,
dispersion areas, rain gardens, permeable pavement, rain barrels, green roofs, etc.)
☐ Proposed Harvest and Use BMPs
☒ Underlying hydrologic soil group (Web Soil Survey)
☒ Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands, pond, lake)
☒ Existing topography and impervious areas
☒ Proposed grading and impervious areas. If the project is a subdivision or spans multiple lots
show pervious and impervious totals for each lot.
☒ Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite
☐ Potable water wells, onsite wastewater treatment systems (septic), underground utilities
☒ Structural BMPs (identify location, structural BMP ID No., type of BMP, and size/detail)
☐ Approximate depth to groundwater at each structural BMP
☐ Approximate infiltration rate and feasibility (full retention, partial retention, biofiltration) at
each structural BMP
☐ Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected and or conveyed through the project
site, if applicable.
☐ Temporary Construction BMPs. Include protection of source control, site design and
structural BMPs during construction.
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SDSDSDSDSDSD
SD
SD
SD
SD
NO
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
NO
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
D
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SDSDSDSDSDSD
SD
SD
SD
SD
NO
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
NO
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
D
APPROX SITE LOCATION
85TH=0.96
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-9 July 2018
B.3 Structural BMP Feasibility
The purpose of this section is to determine the BMP types that are acceptable for implementation at
the project site. Through completion of Worksheet B.3-1 (see Appendix I), applicants will evaluate
the feasibility of harvest & use, full retention, and partial retention BMPs at their project site.
Worksheet B.3-1. Project-Scale BMP Feasibility Analysis
Category # Description Value Units
Capture &
Use Inputs
0 Design Capture Volume for Entire Project Site cubic-feet
1 Proposed Development Type unitless
2 Number of Residents or Employees at Proposed Development #
3 Total Planted Area within Development sq-ft
4 Water Use Category for Proposed Planted Areas unitless
Infiltration
Inputs
5 Is Average Site Infiltration Rate Less than 0.5 Inches per Hour? yes/no
6 Is Retention of the Full DCV Anticipated to Produce Negative Impacts? yes/no
7 Is Retention of Any Volume Anticipated to Produce Negative Impacts? yes/no
Calculations
8 36-Hour Toilet Use Per Resident or Employee cubic-feet
9 Subtotal: Anticipated 36 Hour Toilet Use cubic-feet
10 Anticipated 1 Acre Landscape Use Over 36 Hours cubic-feet
11 Subtotal: Anticipated Landscape Use Over 36 Hours cubic-feet
12 Total Anticipated Use Over 36 Hours cubic-feet
13 Total Anticipated Use / Design Capture Volume cubic-feet
14 Are Full Capture and Use Techniques Feasible for this Project? unitless
15 Is Full Retention Feasible for this Project? yes/no
16 Is Partial Retention Feasible for this Project? yes/no
Result 17 Feasibility Category 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Worksheet B.3-1 General Notes:
A. Applicants may use this optional worksheet to determine the feasibility of implementing capture and use techniques on their
project site. Applicants should provide inputs for yellow shaded cells and calculate appropriate values for unshaded cells.
Projects demonstrating feasibility or potential feasibility via this worksheet are encouraged to incorporate capture and use
features in their project. An automated version of this worksheet developed by the County of San Diego is included in
Appendix I.
B. Negative impacts associated with retention may include geotechnical, groundwater, water balance, or other issues identified
by a geotechnical engineer and substantiated through completion of Form I-8 included in Appendix A.2.
C. Feasibility Category 1: Applicant must implement capture & use, retention, and/or infiltration elements for the entire DCV.
D. Feasibility Category 2: Applicant must implement capture & use elements for the entire DCV.
E. Feasibility Category 3: Applicant must implement retention and/or infiltration elements for the entire DCV.
F. Feasibility Category 4: Applicant must implement partial retention BMPs.
G. Feasibility Category 5: Applicant must implement biofiltration BMPs.
H. PDPs participating in an offsite alternative compliance program are not held to the feasibility categories presented herein.
1,727
Food
15
3,213
Low
Yes
Yes
Yes
1.40
21
52.14
4
25
0.01
No
No
No
5
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-8 July 2018
Worksheet B.2-1. DCV
Design Capture Volume Worksheet B-2.1
1 85th percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= inches
2
Area tributary to BMP (s)
A=
acres
3
Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1.1
and B.2.1)
C=
unitless
4
Tree well volume reduction
TCV=
cubic-feet
5
Rain barrels volume reduction
RCV=
cubic-feet
6
Calculate DCV =
(3630 x C x d x A) – TCV - RCV
DCV=
cubic-feet
0.96
0.569
0.870
0
0
1,727
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-25 July 2018
Worksheet B.5-1: Sizing Biofiltration BMPs
Category # Description Value Units
BMP Inputs
0 Drainage Basin ID or Name unitless
1 Effective Tributary Area sq-ft
2 Minimum Biofiltration Footprint Sizing Factor ratio
3 Design Capture Volume Tributary to BMP cubic-feet
4 Provided Biofiltration Surface Area sq-ft
5 Provided Surface Ponding Depth inches
6 Provided Soil Media Thickness inches
7 Provided Gravel Storage Thickness inches
8 Hydromodification Orifice Diameter of Underdrain inches
Biofiltration
Calculations
9 Max Hydromod Flow Rate through Underdrain CFS
10 Max Soil Filtration Rate Allowed by Underdrain Orifice in/hr
11 Soil Media Filtration Rate 5.00 in/hr
12 Soil Media Filtration Rate to be used for Sizing in/hr
13 Depth Biofiltered Over 6 Hour Storm inches
14 Soil Media Pore Space 0.30 unitless
15 Gravel Pore Space 0.40 unitless
16 Effective Depth of Biofiltration Storage inches
17 Drawdown Time for Surface Ponding hours
18 Drawdown Time for Entire Biofiltration Basin hours
19 Total Depth Biofiltered inches
20 Option 1 - Biofilter 1.50 DCV: Target Volume cubic-feet
21 Option 1 - Provided Biofiltration Volume cubic-feet
22 Option 2 - Store 0.75 DCV: Target Volume cubic-feet
23 Option 2 - Provided Storage Volume cubic-feet
24 Percentage of Performance Requirement Satisfied ratio
Result 25 Deficit of Effectively Treated Stormwater cubic-feet
Worksheet B.5-1 General Notes:
A. Applicants may use this worksheet to size Lined Biofiltration BMPs (BF -1). Applicants must provide inputs for yellow
shaded cells and calculate appropriate values for unshaded cells. Notes corresponding with each line item are provided below.
An automated version of this worksheet is available for download at the County of San Diego Department of Public Works
website and is included in Appendix I.
DMA1/2
24,796
0.03
1,727
48
0
48
0
3
0.116
5
100
600
48
0
6.42
1,727
2,591
2,680
1,295
2,680
1.6:1
0
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 11
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Attachment 1f: Structural BMP Inventory
Stormwater Structural Pollutant Control & Hydromodification Control BMPs*
(List all from WQMP)
Description/Type of
Structural BMP
Plan Sheet
#
BMP
ID# DMA ID No. Revisions
Underground Cistern PGP- 4 & 6 BMP1 DMA1 & DMA2
MWS Unit PGP- 4 & 6 BMP1 DMA1 & DMA2
12 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 1g: Structural Pollutant Control BMP Checklist
Provide the following items for each Structural BMP selected
Refer to Figure 5-2: Stormwater Pollutant Control Structural BMP Selection Flow Chart
☐ Not included because the entire project is designed with Self-Mitigating, De-Minimis, or Self-
Retaining DMAs. The project is compliant with Pollution Control BMP sizing requirements.
DMA ID No. DMA1 & DMA2 Structural BMP ID No. BMP1 Construction Plan Sheet No. PGP4
Geotechnical/ Soils Engineering Recommendations:
Worksheet C.4-1: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition
☐ Full Infiltration
☐ Partial Infiltration
☒ No Infiltration
Worksheet D.5-1: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate
Design Infiltration rate _________ (in/hr)
Structural BMP Selection and Design (Chapter 5.5) complete and include the applicable
worksheet(s) found in appendix B (color coded Green below) and design criteria checklists from
the associated fact sheets found in appendix E (color coded Orange below) for selected
Structural BMP(s):
☐ Worksheet B.6-1 - Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an
onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/description and indicate which onsite
retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below)
☐ Retention by harvest and use (HU-1)
☐ Continuous simulation Model
☐ Worksheet B.4-1
☐ Infiltration basin (INF-1)
☐ Bioretention (INF-2)
☐ Permeable pavement (INF-3)
☒ Worksheet B.5-1
☐ Biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1)
☐ Biofiltration (BF-1)
☐ Biofiltration with Nutrient Sensitive Media Design (BF-2)
☒ Proprietary Biofiltration (BF-3)
☒ Appendix F checklist
☒ Worksheet B.5-3 Minimum Footprint
☒ Worksheet B.5-4 Biofiltration + Storage
☐ Selected BMPs have been designed to address the entire DCV. The DMA is compliant with
Pollution Control BMP sizing requirements. STOP *
☒ Other (describe in discussion section below)
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 13
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
☒ Worksheet B.6-1 - Flow-thru treatment control with alternative compliance (provide BMP
type/description in discussion section below)
☒ Describe in discussion section below why the remaining BMP size could not fit on site.
☒ Selection of Flow-Thru Treatment Control BMPs with high or medium effectiveness
☐ Vegetated swales (FT-1)
☐ Media Filters (FT-2)
☐ Sand Filters (FT-3)
☐ Dry Extended Detention Basin (FT-4)
☒ Proprietary flow-thru treatment control (FT-5)
☐ Water Quality Equivalency Worksheets20
Purpose:
☐ Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP
☐ Pollutant control only
☒ Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control (see Attachment 2)
☐ Other (describe in discussion section below)
Who will certify construction of this BMP?
Provide name and contact information for the
party responsible to sign BMP verification
forms (See Chapter 1.12 of the BMP Design
Manual)
Wilfredo Ventura
Ventura Engineering Inland, Inc.
27393 Ynez Road, Suite 159
Temecula, California 92591
(951) 252-7632
Who will be the final owner of this BMP?
☐ HOA ☒ Property Owner ☐ City
☐ Other (describe)
Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity?
☐ HOA ☒ Property Owner ☐ City
☐ Other (describe)
Discussion (as needed):
Due to site constraints the project site will be utilizing an underground storage area and MWS
compact biofiltration unit that meets the requirements for a Proprietary Flow-Thru treatment
device.
* If this box is checked, Worksheet B.6-1 does not need to be filled out.
E-137 July 2018
BF-3 Proprietary Biofiltration Systems
E.20 BF-3 Proprietary Biofiltration Systems
The purpose of this fact sheet is to help explain the potential role of proprietary BMPs in meeting
biofiltration requirements, when full retention of the DCV is not feasible. The fact sheet does not
describe design criteria like the other fact sheets in this appendix because this information varies by
BMP product model.
A proprietary BMP may be acceptable as a “biofiltration BMP” under the following conditions:
(1) The BMP meets the minimum design criteria listed in Appendix F, including the
pollutant treatment performance standard in Appendix F.1;
(2) The BMP is designed and maintained in a manner consistent with its performance
certifications (See explanation in Appendix F.2); and
(3) The BMP is acceptable at the discretion of the City Engineer. In determining the
acceptability of a BMP, the City Engineer should consider, as applicable, (a) the data
submitted; (b) representativeness of the data submitted; (c) consistency of the BMP
performance claims with pollutant control objectives; certainty of the BMP performance
claims; (d) for projects within the public right of way and/or public projects: maintenance
requirements, cost of maintenance activities, relevant previous local experience with
operation and maintenance of the BMP type, ability to continue to operate the system in
event that the vending company is no longer operating as a business; and (e) other relevant
factors. If a proposed BMP is not accepted by the City Engineer, a written
explanation/reason will be provided to the applicant.
Proprietary biofiltration BMPs must meet the same sizing guidance as non-proprietary BMPs. Sizing
is typically based on capturing and treating 1.50 times the DCV not reliably retain ed. Guidance for
sizing biofiltration BMPs to comply with requirements of this manual is provided in Appendix F.2.
Refer to manufacturer for maintenance information.
Criteria for Use of a Proprietary BMP as a Biofiltration BMP
Guidance for Sizing a Proprietary BMP as a Biofiltration BMP
Maintenance Overview
July 2018 F-3
7. Biofiltration BMP must include operations and maintenance design features and planning
considerations to provide for continued effectiveness of pollutant and flow control
functions.
Biofiltration Criteria Checklist
The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with each criterion in this checklist as part
of the project submittal. The right column of this checklist identifies the submittal information that
is recommended to document compliance with each criterion. Biofiltration BMPs that substantially
meet all aspects of Fact Sheets PR-1 or BF-1 should still use this checklist; however additional
documentation (beyond what is already required for project submittal) should not be required.
1. Biofiltration BMPs shall be allowed to be used only as described in the BMP
selection process based on a documented feasibility analysis.
Intent: This manual defines a specific prioritization of pollutant treatment BMPs, where BMPs that
retain water (retained includes evapotranspired, infiltrated, and/or harvested and used) must be used
before considering BMPs that have a biofiltered discharge to the MS4 or surface waters. Use of a
biofiltration BMP in a manner in conflict with this prioritization (i.e., without a feasibility analysis
justifying its use) is not permitted, regardless of the adequacy of the sizing and design of the system.
□ The project applicant has demonstrated that it
is not technically feasible to retain the full DCV
onsite.
Document feasibility analysis and findings in
WQMP per Appendix C.
2. Biofiltration BMPs must be sized using acceptable sizing methods.
Intent: The MS4 Permit and this manual defines specific sizing methods that must be used to size
biofiltration BMPs. Sizing of biofiltration BMPs is a fundamental factor in the amount of storm
water that can be treated and also influences volume and pollutant retention processes.
□
The project applicant has demonstrated that
biofiltration BMPs are sized to meet one of the
biofiltration sizing options available (Appendix
B).
Submit sizing worksheets (Appendix B.5) or
other equivalent documentation with the
WQMP.
3. Biofiltration BMPs must be sited and designed to achieve maximum feasible
infiltration and evapotranspiration.
Intent: Various decisions about BMP placement and design influence how much water is retained via
infiltration and evapotranspiration. The MS4 Permit requires that biofiltration BMPs achieve
maximum feasible retention (evapotranspiration and infiltration) of storm water volume.
July 2018 F-4
□
The biofiltration BMP is sited to allow for
maximum infiltration of runoff volume based
on the feasibility factors considered in site
planning efforts. It is also designed to
maximize evapotranspiration through the use
of amended media and plants.
Document site planning and feasibility analyses
in WQMP per Section 5.4.
□ The biofiltration BMP meets the annual
retention target specified in Appendix B.
Included documentation that the annual
retention target is met.
4. Biofiltration BMPs must be designed with a hydraulic loading rate to maximize
pollutant retention, preserve pollutant control processes, and minimize potential for
pollutant washout.
Intent: Various decisions about biofiltration BMP design influence the degree to which pollutants are
retained. The Regional MS4 Permit requires that biofiltration BMPs achieve maximum feasible
retention of storm water pollutants.
□
□
Media selected for the biofiltration BMP meets
minimum quality and material specifications,
including the maximum allowable design
filtration rate and minimum thickness of media.
OR
Alternatively, for proprietary designs and
custom media mixes not meeting the media
specifications, field scale testing data are
provided to demonstrate that proposed media
meets the pollutant treatment performance
criteria in Section F.1 below.
Provide documentation that media meets the
specifications.
Provide documentation of performance
information as described in Section F.1.
□ To the extent practicable, filtration rates are
outlet controlled (e.g., via an underdrain and
orifice/weir) instead of controlled by the
infiltration rate of the media.
Include outlet control in designs or provide
documentation of why outlet control is not
practicable.
□
The water surface drains to at least 12 inches
below the media surface within 24 hours from
the end of storm event flow to preserve plant
health and promote healthy soil structure.
Include calculations to demonstrate that
drawdown rate is adequate.
Surface ponding drawdown time greater than
24-hours but less than 96 hours may be allowed
at the discretion of the City Engineer if
certified by a landscape architect or
agronomist.
July 2018 F-5
□
If nutrients are a pollutant of concern, design
of the biofiltration BMP follows nutrient-
sensitive design criteria.
Follow specifications for nutrient sensitive
design in Fact Sheet BF-2. Or provide
alternative documentation that nutrient
treatment is addressed and potential for
nutrient release is minimized.
□ Media gradation calculations or geotextile
selection calculations demonstrate that
migration of media between layers will be
prevented and permeability will be preserved.
Follow specification for choking layer or
geotextile in Fact Sheet PR-1 or BF-1. Or
include calculations to demonstrate that
choking layer is appropriately specified.
5. Biofiltration BMPs must be designed to promote appropriate biological activity to
support and maintain treatment processes.
Intent: Biological processes are an important element of biofiltration performance and longevity.
□ Plants have been selected to be tolerant of
project climate, design ponding depths and the
treatment media composition.
Provide documentation justifying plant
selection. Refer to the plant list in Appendix
E.26.
□ Plants have been selected to minimize irrigation
requirements.
Provide documentation describing irrigation
requirements for establishment and long term
operation.
□ Plant location and growth will not impede
expected long-term media filtration rates and
will enhance long term infiltration rates to the
extent possible.
Provide documentation justifying plant
selection. Refer to the plant list in Appendix
E.26.
6. Biofiltration BMPs must be designed with a hydraulic loading rate to prevent
erosion, scour, and channeling within the BMP.
Intent: Erosion, scour, and/or channeling can disrupt treatment processes and reduce biofiltration
effectiveness.
□ Scour protection has been provided for both
sheet flow and pipe inflows to the BMP, where
needed.
Provide documentation of scour protection as
described in Fact Sheets PR-1 or BF-1 or
approved equivalent.
□ Where scour protection has not been provided,
flows into and within the BMP are kept to non-
erosive velocities.
Provide documentation of design checks for
erosive velocities as described in Fact Sheets
PR-1 or BF-1 or approved equivalent.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
July 2018 F-6
□ For proprietary BMPs, the BMP is used in a
manner consistent with manufacturer
guidelines and conditions of its third-party
certification3 (i.e., maximum tributary area,
maximum inflow velocities, etc., as applicable).
Provide copy of manufacturer
recommendations and conditions of third-party
certification.
7. Biofiltration BMP must include operations and maintenance design features and
planning considerations for continued effectiveness of pollutant and flow control
functions.
Intent: Biofiltration BMPs require regular maintenance in order provide ongoing function as
intended. Additionally, it is not possible to foresee and avoid potential issues as part of design;
therefore plans must be in place to correct issues if they arise.
□ The biofiltration BMP O&M plan describes
specific inspection activities, regular/periodic
maintenance activities and specific corrective
actions relating to scour, erosion, channeling,
media clogging, vegetation health, and inflow
and outflow structures.
Include O&M plan with project submittal as
described in Chapter 7.
□ Adequate site area and features have been
provided for BMP inspection and maintenance
access.
Illustrate maintenance access routes, setbacks,
maintenance features as needed on project
water quality plans.
□
For proprietary biofiltration BMPs, the BMP
maintenance plan is consistent with
manufacturer guidelines and conditions of its
third-party certification (i.e., maintenance
activities, frequencies).
Provide copy of manufacturer
recommendations and conditions of third-party
certification.
3 Certifications or verifications issued by the Washington Technology Acceptance Protocol -Ecology program and the
New Jersey Corporation for Advanced Technology programs are typically accompanied by a set of guidelines regarding
appropriate design and maintenance conditions that would be consistent with the certification/verification
MWS Linear
Advanced Stormwater Biofiltration
Contents
1 Introduction
2 Applications
3 Configurations
4 Advantages
5 Operation
6 Orientations | Bypass
7 Performance | Approvals
8 Sizing
9 Installation | Maintenance | Plants
www.ModularWetlands.com
The Urban Impact
For hundreds of years natural wetlands surrounding our shores have played an integral role as
nature’s stormwater treatment system. But as our cities grow and develop, these natural wet-
lands have perished under countless roads, rooftops,
and parking lots.
Plant A Wetland
Without natural wetlands our cities are deprived of water purification, flood control, and land
stability. Modular Wetlands and the MWS Linear re-establish nature’s presence and rejuvenate
water ways in urban areas.
MWS Linear
The Modular Wetland System Linear represents a pioneering breakthrough in stormwater tech-
nology as the only biofiltration system to utilize patented horizontal flow, allowing for a smaller
footprint and higher treatment capacity. While most biofilters use little or no pre-treatment, the
MWS Linear incorporates an advanced pre-treatment chamber that includes separation and pre-
filter cartridges. In this chamber sediment and hydrocarbons are removed from runoff before it
enters the biofiltration chamber, in turn reducing maintenance costs and improving performance.
Parking Lots
Parking lots are designed to maximize space and
the MWS Linear’s 4 ft. standard planter width al-
lows for easy integration into parking lot islands
and other landscape medians.
Mixed Use
The MWS Linear can be installed as a raised plant-
er to treat runoff from rooftops or patios, making
it perfect for sustainable “live-work” spaces.
Industrial
Many states enforce strict regulations for dis-
charges from industrial sites. The MWS Linear has
helped various sites meet difficult EPA mandated
effluent limits for dissolved metals and other pol-
lutants.
Residential
Low to high density developments can benefit
from the versatile design of the MWS Linear. The
system can be used in both decentralized LID de-
sign and cost-effective end-of-the-line configura-
tions.
Streets
Street applications can be challenging due to
limited space. The MWS Linear is very adaptable,
and offers the smallest footprint to work around
the constraints of existing utilities on retrofit pro-
jects.
Commercial
Compared to bioretention systems, the MWS Lin-
ear can treat far more area in less space - meeting
treatment and volume control requirements.
Applications
The MWS Linear has been successfully used on numerous new construction and retrofit projects. The system’s
superior versatility makes it beneficial for a wide range of stormwater and waste water applications - treating
rooftops, streetscapes, parking lots, and industrial sites.
More applications are available on our website: www.ModularWetlands.com/Applications
• Agriculture
• Reuse
• Low Impact Development
• Waste Water
www.ModularWetlands.com
Configurations
The MWS Linear is the preferred biofiltration system of Civil Engineers across the country due to its versatile
design. This highly versatile system has available “pipe-in” options on most models, along with built-in curb or
grated inlets for simple integration into your stormdrain design.
Curb Type
The Curb Type configuration accepts sheet flow through a curb opening and is
commonly used along road ways and parking lots. It can be used in sump or
flow by conditions. Length of curb opening varies based on model and size.
Grate Type
The Grate Type configuration offers the same features and benefits as the Curb
Type but with a grated/drop inlet above the systems pre-treatment chamber.
It has the added benefit of allowing for pedestrian access over the inlet. ADA
compliant grates are available to assure easy and safe access. The Grate Type
can also be used in scenarios where runoff needs to be intercepted on both
sides of landscape islands.
Downspout Type
The Downspout Type is a variation of the Vault Type and is designed to accept a
vertical downspout pipe from roof top and podium areas. Some models have
the option of utilizing an internal bypass, simplifying the overall design. The
system can be installed as a raised planter and the exterior can be stuccoed or
covered with other finishes to match the look of adjacent buildings.
Vault Type
The system’s patented horizontal flow biofilter is able to accept inflow pipes
directly into the pre-treatment chamber, meaning the MWS Linear can be used
in end-of-the-line installations. This greatly improves feasibility over typical
decentralized designs that are required with other biofiltration/bioretention
systems. Another benefit of the “pipe in” design is the ability to install the
system downstream of underground detention systems to meet water quality
volume requirements.
Page 3
Cartridge Housing
Pre-filter Cartridge
Curb Inlet
Individual Media Filters
Advantages & Operation
The MWS Linear is the most efficient and versatile biofiltration system on the market, and the only system with
horizontal flow which improves performance, reduces footprint, and minimizes maintenance. Figure-1 and
Figure-2 illustrate the invaluable benefits of horizontal flow and the multiple treatment stages.
• Horizontal Flow Biofiltration
• Greater Filter Surface Area
• Pre-Treatment Chamber
• Patented Perimeter Void Area
• Flow Control
• No Depressed Planter Area
Separation
• Trash, sediment, and debris are separated before
entering the pre-filter cartridges
• Designed for easy maintenance access
Pre-Filter Cartridges
• Over 25 ft2 of surface area per cartridge
• Utilizes BioMediaGREEN filter material
• Removes over 80% of TSS & 90% of hydrocarbons
• Prevents pollutants that cause clogging from
migrating to the biofiltration chamber
Pre-Treatment1
1
2
Drain-Down Line
1
2Vertical Underdrain
Manifold
Featured Advantages
www.ModularWetlands.com
Fig. 1
Horizontal Flow
• Less clogging than downward flow biofilters
• Water flow is subsurface
• Improves biological filtration
Patented Perimeter Void Area
• Vertically extends void area between the walls
and the WetlandMEDIA on all four sides.
• Maximizes surface area of the media for higher
treatment capacity
WetlandMEDIA
• Contains no organics and removes phosphorus
• Greater surface area and 48% void space
• Maximum evapotranspiration
• High ion exchange capacity and light weight
Flow Control
• Orifice plate controls flow of water through
WetlandMEDIA to a level lower than the
media’s capacity.
• Extends the life of the media and improves
performance
Drain-Down Filter
• The Drain-Down is an optional feature that
completely drains the pre-treatment
chamber
• Water that drains from the pre-treatment
chamber between storm events will be
treated
2x to 3x More Surface Area Than Traditional Downward Flow Bioretention Systems.Fig. 2 - Top View
Biofiltration2
Discharge3
Perimeter Voi
d
A
r
e
a
3
4
3Flow Control Riser
Drain-Down Line
Outlet Pipe Page 5
Orientations
Bypass
Internal Bypass Weir (Side-by-Side Only)
The Side-By-Side orientation places the pre-treat-
ment and discharge chambers adjacent to one an-
other allowing for integration of internal bypass.
The wall between these chambers can act as a by-
pass weir when flows exceed the system’s treatment
capacity, thus allowing bypass from the pre-treat-
ment chamber directly to the discharge chamber.
External Diversion Weir Structure
This traditional offline diversion method can be
used with the MWS Linear in scenarios where run-
off is being piped to the system. These simple and
effective structures are generally configured with
two outflow pipes. The first is a smaller pipe on the
upstream side of the diversion weir - to divert low
flows over to the MWS Linear for treatment. The
second is the main pipe that receives water once the
system has exceeded treatment capacity and water
flows over the weir.
Flow By Design
This method is one in which the system is placed
just upstream of a standard curb or grate inlet to
intercept the first flush. Higher flows simply pass by
the MWS Linear and into the standard inlet down-
stream.
End-To-End
The End-To-End orientation places the pre-treat-
ment and discharge chambers on opposite ends of
the biofiltration chamber therefore minimizing the
width of the system to 5 ft (outside dimension). This
orientation is perfect for linear projects and street
retrofits where existing utilities and sidewalks limit
the amount of space available for installation. One
limitation of this orientation is bypass must be ex-
ternal.
Side-By-Side
The Side-By-Side orientation places the pre-treat-
ment and discharge chamber adjacent to one an-
other with the biofiltration chamber running paral-
lel on either side. This minimizes the system length,
providing a highly compact footprint. It has been
proven useful in situations such as streets with di-
rectly adjacent sidewalks, as half of the system can
be placed under that sidewalk. This orientation also
offers internal bypass options as discussed below.
This simple yet innovative diversion trough can be
installed in existing or new curb and grate inlets to
divert the first flush to the MWS Linear via pipe. It
works similar to a rain gutter and is installed just
below the opening into the inlet. It captures the low
flows and channels them over to a connecting pipe
exiting out the wall of the inlet and leading to the
MWS Linear. The DVERT is perfect for retrofit and
green street applications that allows the MWS Lin-
ear to be installed anywhere space is available.
DVERT Low Flow Diversion
DVERT Trough
www.ModularWetlands.com
Rhode Island DEM Approved
Approved as an authorized BMP and noted to achieve the following minimum removal
efficiencies: 85% TSS, 60% Pathogens, 30% Total Phosphorus for discharges to freshwater
systems, and 30% Total Nitrogen for discharges to saltwater or tidal systems.
MASTEP Evaluation
The University of Massachusetts at Amherst – Water Resources Research Center, issued a
technical evaluation report noting removal rates up to 84% TSS, 70% Total Phosphorus,
68.5% Total Zinc, and more.
Washington State DOE Approved
The MWS Linear is approved for General Use Level Designation (GULD) for Basic, En-
hanced, and Phosphorus treatment at 1 gpm/ft2 loading rate. The highest performing BMP
on the market for all main pollutant categories.
Approvals
The MWS Linear has successfully met years of challenging technical reviews and testing from some of the most
prestigious and demanding agencies in the nation, and perhaps the world.
DEQ Assignment
The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality assigned the MWS Linear, the highest
phosphorus removal rating for manufactured treatment devices to meet the new Virginia
Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Technical Criteria.
VA
TSS Total
Phosphorus
Ortho
Phosphorus Nitrogen Dissolved Zinc Dissolved
Copper Total Zinc Total
Copper Motor Oil
85%64%67%45%66%38%69%50%95%
Performance
The MWS Linear continues to outperform other treatment methods with superior pollutant removal for TSS,
heavy metals, nutrients, hydrocarbons and bacteria. Since 2007 the MWS Linear has been field tested on nu-
merous sites across the country. With it’s advanced pre-treatment chamber and innovative horizontal flow
biofilter, the system is able to effectively remove pollutants through a combination of physical, chemical, and
biological filtration processes. With the same biological processes found in natural wetlands, the MWS Linear
harnesses natures ability to process, transform, and remove even the most harmful pollutants.
Page 7
Treatment Flow Sizing Table
Model #Dimensions WetlandMedia
Surface Area
Treatment Flow
Rate (cfs)
MWS-L-4-4 4’ x 4’23 ft2 0.052
MWS-L-4-6 4’ x 6’32 ft2 0.073
MWS-L-4-8 4’ x 8’50 ft2 0.115
MWS-L-4-13 4’ x 13’63 ft2 0.144
MWS-L-4-15 4’ x 15’76 ft2 0.175
MWS-L-4-17 4’ x 17’90 ft2 0.206
MWS-L-4-19 4’ x 19’103 ft2 0.237
MWS-L-4-21 4’ x 21’117 ft2 0.268
MWS-L-8-8 8’ x 8’100 ft2 0.230
MWS-L-8-12 8’ x 12’151 ft2 0.346
MWS-L-8-16 8’ x 16’201 ft2 0.462
Flow Based Sizing
The MWS Linear can be used in stand alone applica-
tions to meet treatment flow requirements. Since the
MWS Linear is the only biofiltration system that can ac-
cept inflow pipes several feet below the surface it can
be used not only in decentralized design applications
but also as a large central end-of-the-line application
for maximum feasibility.
Volume Based Sizing
Many states require treatment of a water quality volume and do not offer the option of flow based design. The
MWS Linear and its unique horizontal flow makes it the only biofilter that can be used in volume based design
installed downstream of ponds, detention basins, and underground storage systems.
Treatment Volume Sizing Table
Model #Treatment Capacity (cu. ft.)
@ 24-Hour Drain Down
Treatment Capacity (cu. ft.)
@ 48-Hour Drain Down
MWS-L-4-4 1140 2280
MWS-L-4-6 1600 3200
MWS-L-4-8 2518 5036
MWS-L-4-13 3131 6261
MWS-L-4-15 3811 7623
MWS-L-4-17 4492 8984
MWS-L-4-19 5172 10345
MWS-L-4-21 5853 11706
MWS-L-8-8 5036 10072
MWS-L-8-12 7554 15109
MWS-L-8-16 10073 20145
www.ModularWetlands.com
Installation
The MWS Linear is simple, easy to install, and has a space efficient design that offers lower excavation and in-
stallation costs compared to traditional tree-box type systems. The structure of the system resembles pre-cast
catch basin or utility vaults and is installed in a similar fashion.
The system is delivered fully assembled for quick in-
stallation. Generally, the structure can be unloaded
and set in place in 15 minutes. Our experienced
team of field technicians are available to supervise
installations and provide technical support.
Plant Selection
Abundant plants, trees, and grasses bring value and an aesthetic benefit to any urban setting, but those in the
MWS Linear do even more - they increase pollutant removal. What’s not seen, but very important, is that below
grade the stormwater runoff/flow is being subjected to nature’s secret weapon: a dynamic physical, chemi-
cal, and biological process working to break down and remove non-point source pollutants. The flow rate is
controlled in the MWS Linear, giving the plants more “contact time” so that pollutants are more successfully
decomposed, volatilized and incorporated into the biomass of The MWS
Linear’s micro/macro flora and fauna.
A wide range of plants are suitable for use in the MWS Linear, but selec-
tions vary by location and climate. View suitable plants by selecting the
list relative to your project location’s hardy zone.
Please visit www.ModularWetlands.com/Plants for more information
and various plant lists.
Maintenance
Reduce your maintenance costs, man hours, and materials with the MWS Linear. Unlike other biofiltration
systems that provide no pre-treatment, the MWS Linear is a self-contained treatment train which incorporates
simple and effective pre-treatment.
Maintenance requirements for the biofilter itself are almost completely
eliminated, as the pre-treatment chamber removes and isolates trash,
sediments, and hydrocarbons. What’s left is the simple maintenance
of an easily accessible pre-treatment chamber that can be cleaned by
hand or with a standard vac truck. Only periodic replacement of low-
cost media in the pre-filter cartridges is required for long term opera-
tion and there is absolutely no need to replace expensive biofiltration
media.
Page 9
www.ModularWetlands.com | (855) 5MOD-WET | info@ModularWetlands.com
MWS – Linear
Hybrid Stormwater Filtration System
SPECIFICATIONS
Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. www.modularwetlands.com
P.O. Box 869 P 760-433-7640
Oceanside, CA 92049 F 760-433-3179
MWS – Linear
Hybrid Stormwater Filtration System
Save valuable space with small
otprint for urban sites.
d tropical
ndscape plants.
er and
ss expensive maintenance
ystem
unoff is
in
d
ischarge chamber the rate of discharge is controlled by valves set to a desired rate”.
ested Pollutant Removal Efficiencies:
fo
Improve BMP aesthetics with
attractive native an
la
Reduce lifetime costs with saf
le
“The MWS – Linear hybrid stormwater
treatment system is described as a self contained treatment train. This system utilizes an
innovative combination of l treatment processes. Stormwater runoff flows into the s
via pipe or curb/grate type catch basin opening. Polluted runoff first encounters a
screening device to remove larger pollutants and then enters a hydrodynamic separation
chamber which settles out the sediments and larger suspended solids. Next the r
treated by a revolutionary filter media, BioMediaGREEN that removes fines and
associated pollutants, including bacteria. From there runoff enters of bioretention filter
the form of a subsurface flow vegetated gravel wetland. Within the wetland physical,
chemical, and biological mechanisms remove the remaining particulate and dissolve
pollutants. The purified runoff leaves the system via the discharge chamber. In the
d
T
Removal
Di d
Removal
D
Removal
TPH Removal Removal
TSS ssolve
Lead
issolved
Copper E. coli Turbidity
98% 81% 92% 99% 60.2% 92%
“Nature and Harmony Working Together in Perfect Harmony”
SPECIFICATIONS – MWS- LINEAR
gaged in the engineering design and
roduction of treatment systems for stormwater.
treat the entire water quality
olume when used with pre-storage and properly sized.
ls.
g
¾” x 1
nels are
g
ted of UV protected/marine grade
berglass and stainless steel hinge and mount.
uires
tails of this are provided in the installation section of the
WS-Linear Design Kit.
Track Record: The MWS- Linear Hybrid Stormwater Treatment System is
manufactured by a company whom is regularly en
p
Coverage: The MWS- Linear is designed to treat the water quality volume or water
quality flow. For flow based design, high flow bypass is internal, for volume based
design, high flow bypass is external and prior to pre-detention system. For offline
volume based designs the MWS - Linear has the ability to
v
Non-Corrosive Materials: The MWS – Linear is designed with non-corrosive materia
All internal piping is SD35 PVC. Catch basin filter components, including mountin
hardware, fasteners, support brackets, filtration material, and support frame are
constructed of non-corrosive materials (316 stainless steel, and UV protected/marine
grade fiberglass). Fasteners are stainless steel. Primary filter mesh is 316 stainless steel
welded screens. Filtration basket screens for coarse, medium and fine filtration is
¾“expanded, 10 x 10 mesh, and 35 x 35 mesh, respectively. No polypropylene,
monofilament netting or fabrics shall be used in this system. Media Protective Pa
constructed of UV protected/marine grade fiberglass. Mounts are constructed of
stainless steel. BioMediaGREEN is an inert rock substrate and is non-corrosive.
Perimeter filter structure is constructed of lightweight injection molded plastic. Mountin
brackets are constructed of SD40 PVC and are mounted with 3/8” diameter stainless
steel redheads. Drain down filter cover is construc
fi
Weight: Each complete unit weighs approximately 29,000 to 40,000 pounds and req
a boom crane to install. De
M
Transportation: The Modular Wetland System – Linear is designed to be transported
a standard flat bed t
on
ruck. The unit easily fits on a flat bed truck without the need of
pecial permitting.
d
noff can enter the system through a pipe, and/or a
uilt in curb or grate type opening.
etland System – Linear is completely passive and
quires no external energy sources.
he
tation. As a precaution a footing can
lso be built into the systems concrete structure.
re
o slippage, breaking, or tearing. All filters are warranted for a minimum of five (5) years.
e
hydrocarbon removal abilities. Within the wetland filter biological processes capture and
s
Alternative Technology Configurations: The Modular Wetland System – Linear is
modular is design. Each module will be up to 22 feet long and 5 feet wide. The system
can be made in lengths varying from 13 to 100s of feet long. For lengths longer than 22
feet the system will shipped in modules and assembled on site. The Modular Wetlan
System – Linear has many alternative configurations. This allows the system to be
adapted to many site conditions. Ru
b
Energy Requirements: The Modular W
re
Buoyancy Issues: Buoyancy is only a an issue when ground water levels rise above t
bottom of the Modular Wetland System – Linear’s concrete structure. With 8.5 cubic
yards of wetland media there is no concern of floa
a
Durability: The structure of the box will be precast concrete. The concrete will be 28 day
compressive strength fc = 5,000 psi. Steel reinforcing will be ASTM A – C857. Structu
will support an H20 loading as indicted by AASHTO. The joint between the concrete
sections will ship lap and joint sealed with ram-nek. Filter (excluding oil absorbent media)
and support structures are of proven durability. The filter and mounting structures are of
sufficient strength to support water, sediment, and debris loads when the filter is full, with
n
Oil Absorbent Media: The MWS – Linear utilizes both physical and biological
mechanisms to capture and filter oil and grease. A skimmer and boom system will b
positioned on the internal perimeter of the catch basin insert. The primary filtration
media, BioMediaGreen, utilized in the perimeter and drain down filters, has excellent
break down oil and grease. Much of the breakdown and transformation of oil and grease
performed by natural occurring bacteria.
n system. For
eak flows that exceed internal bypass capacity, external bypass is use.
for internally bypassed flows. External bypass will bypass of
eatment processes.
ze. Annual
een and quarter-scale
boratory tests on the MWS – Linear flow based system.
POLLUTANT FICIENCY
is
Overflow Protection: The grate and curb type MWS – Linear are designed with an
internal bypass consisting of two SD PVC pipes which direct high flows around the
perimeter and wetland filter, directly into the discharge chamber. For the volume based
vault type configuration, bypass should be located prior to the pre-detentio
p
Filter Bypass: Runoff will bypass filtration (BioMediaGREEN and wetland filter)
components of the MWS - Linear. The system will still provide screening and settling
during higher flow rates
tr
Pollutant Removal Efficiency: The MWS - Linear is capable of removing over 90% of the
net annual total suspended solids (TSS) load based on a 20-micron particle si
TSS removal efficiency models are based on documented removal efficiency
performance from full-scale laboratory tests on BioMediaGr
la
REMOVAL
EF
Trash & Litter 99%
TPH (mg/L) 99%
TSS (mg/L) 98%
E. Coli (MPN/100ml) 60%
Turbidity (NTU) 92%
Dissolved Metals (mg/L) 76%
Non-Scouring: During heavy storm events the runoff bypasses perimeter and wetland
lter components. The system will not re-suspend solids at design flows.
rticle
diameter = 19 microns
Sil-Co-Sil 106. Mean pa
fi
Uniqueness: The Modular Wetland System – Linear is a complete self contain
treatment train that incorporates capture, screening, sedimentation, filtration,
bioretention, high flow bypass, and flow control into a single modular structure. This
system provides four stages of treatment making it the only 4 stage treatment train
stormwater filtration system, therefore making it unique to the industry. Other s
not incorporate all the necessary attributes to make it a complete stormwater
management device as
ed
ystems do
with the Modular Wetland System – Linear. Therefore, no equal
xists for this system.
ter management system no external
retreatment of preconditioning is necessary.
PECIFICATIONS – BioMediaGREEN
se
nd is also biodegradable. It is stable with no
nown adverse environmental effects.
injection) studies have
hown that the products disappear very rapidly from the lung.
dies that show no relation between inhalation exposure
nd the development of tumors.
e
Pretreatment & Preconditioning: Since the Modular Wetland System – Linear is a
complete capture and treatment train stormwa
p
S
BioMediaGREEN is a proprietary engineered filter media. Made of a unique combination
of the inert naturally occurring material this product is non-combustible and do not po
a fire hazard, stable and non-reactive, a
k
This product has been tested in long-term carcinogenicity studies [inhalation and
intraperitoneal injection (i.p.)] with no significant increase in lung tumors or abdominal
tumors. Short-term biopersistent (inhalation and intra-tracheal
s
In October 2001, IARC classified this product as Group 3, "not classifiable as to its
carcinogenicity to humans". The 2001 decision was based on the latest epidemiological
studies and animal inhalation stu
a
The product can typically be disposed of in an ordinary landfill (local regulations may
apply). If you are unsure of the regulations, contact your local Public Health Department
r the local office of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
nt
REEN
ut
ut filters, catch basin inserts,
ater polishing units, and hydrodynamic separators.
ve Materials: The BioMediaGreen material is made of non-corrosive
aterials.
MediaGREEN material has been tested through
gorous flow and loading conditions.
has been proven to capture and
tain hydrocarbons.
and
liage, sediments, TSS, particulate and dissolved
etals, nutrients, and bacteria.
le
o
Coverage: When properly installed BioMediaGREEN Filter Blocks provide sufficie
contact time, at rated flows, of passing contaminate water. The BioMediaG
material will capture and retain most pollutants that pass through it. The
BioMediaGREEN material is made of a proprietary blend of inert substances. The
BioMediaGREEN Filter Blocks can be used in different treatment devices, including b
not limited to flume filters, trench drain filters, downspo
w
Non-Corrosi
m
Durability: The BioMediaGREEN material has been chosen for its proven durability, with
an expected life of 2 plus years. The BioMediaGREEN material is of sufficient strength to
support water, sediment, and debris loads when the media is at maximum flow; with no
slippage, breaking, or tearing. The Bio
ri
Oil Absorbent Media: The BioMediaGREEN material
re
Pollutant Removal Efficiency: The BioMediaGREEN Filter Blocks are designed to
capture high levels of Hydrocarbons including but not limited to oils & grease, gasoline,
diesel, and PAHs. BioMediaGREEN Filter Blocks have the physical ability to block
filter trash and litter, grass and fo
m
BioMediaGREEN technology is based on a proprietary blend of synthetic inert natural
substances aimed at removal of various stormwater pollutants. BioMediaGREEN was
created to have a very porous structure capable of selectively removing pollutants whi
allowing high flow through rates for water. As pollutants are captured by its structure,
ioMediaGREEN captures most pollutants and maintains porosity and filtering
rge percentage of TSS, hydrocarbons, nutrients, and heavy metals. Microbial reduction
ary depending on colony size, flow rates and site specific conditions.
REMOVAL
EFFICIENCY
B
capabilities.
Field and laboratory tests have confirmed the BioMediaGREEN capability to capture
la
efficiency will v
POLLUTANT
Oil & Grease (mg/L) 90%
TPH (mg/L) 99%
TSS (mg/L) 85%
Turbidity (NTU) 99%
Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 69.6%
Dissolved Metals (mg/L) 75.6%
Replacement: Removal and replacement of the blocks is simple. Remove blocks from
ltration system. Replace with new block of equal size.
Sil-Co-Sil 106. Mean particle
diameter = 19 microns
fi
MWS – Linear
Hybrid Stormwater Filtration System
PERFORMANCE
Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. www.modularwetlands.com
P.O. Box 869 P 760-433-7640
Oceanside, CA 92049 F 760-433-3179
PERFORMANCE TESTING
Following are the summaries of laboratory testing for both BioMediaGreen and the MWS
– LINEAR utilizing BioMediaGreen. For a full copy of the test reports, including the
laboratory results please contact a Modular Wetland System, Inc. representative.
Note: Metals are in dissolved form. Removal of particulate metals will be significantly
higher. The TSS used in these lab tests is Sil-Co-Sil 106 which has a mean particle size
of 19 microns and contains 80% silt.
Test Run
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
1 7.07 7.21 73 17 0.584 0.48 0.951 0.34
2 7.13 9.49 52 15 3.81 0.46 0.503 0.01 0.906 0.009
3 7.13 9.53 52 13 3.81 0.39 0.503 0.006 0.906 0.005
4 8.65 8.65 100 3 10.4 8.29 1.37 0.68 3.98 3.13 0.302 0.192 0.354 0.115
5 8.65 8.7 100 5 10.4 8.64 1.37 0.75 3.98 2.15 0.302 0.193 0.354 0.119
6 8.65 8.69 100 1 10.4 10.9 1.37 0.72 3.98 2.2 0.302 0.206 0.354 0.13
7 8.65 8.69 100 6 10.4 10.1 1.37 0.69 3.98 2.11 0.302 0.203 0.354 0.11
8 8.65 8.69 100 2 10.4 7.4 1.37 0.7 3.98 2.04 0.302 0.193 0.354 0.117
Averages 8.0725 8.70625 84.63 12.40 10.40 9.07 2.07 0.63 3.98 2.33 0.39 0.19 0.57 0.12
Average Removal Efficiency (%)
Using Sil-Co-Sil 106
Test Run
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
1 0.201 0.015 1.33 0.93 0.009 0.002 360 11
2 0.192 0.005 1.32 0.05 0.006 0.002 67 1
3 0.192 0.005 1.32 0.05 0.006 0.002 67 1
4 0.492 0.008 0.4 0.06 n/d n/d 13 7 1.4 0 36 0.2
5 0.492 0.007 0.4 0.06 n/d n/d 13 3 1.4 0 36 0.5
6 0.492 0.005 0.4 0.05 n/d n/d 13 7 1.4 0 36 0.2
7 0.492 0.005 0.4 0.05 n/d n/d 13 10 1.4 0 36 0.5
8 0.492 0.005 0.4 0.05 n/d n/d 13 12 1.4 0 36 0.2
Averages 0.38 0.01 0.75 0.16 0.01 0.00 69.88 6.50 1.40 0.00 36.00 0.32
Average Removal Efficiency (%)
Test Run
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
1 1600000 1600000 1250000 500000 17697 17329 15163 15531
2 1600000 500000 1250000 300000 17697 15531 15163 12033
3 1600000 500000 1250000 300000 17697 19863 15163 15531
4 1600000 900000 1250000 500000 17697 17329 15163 6867
Averages 1600000 875000 1250000 400000 17697 17513 15163 12491
Average Removal Efficiency (%)
Enterococci
(MPN/100 mL)
45.31% 68.00%1.04% 17.63%
Total Coliform
(MPN/100 mL)
Fecal Coliform
(MPN/100 mL)
E. coli (MPN/100
mL)
98.19%
Dissolved
Phosphorus
(mg/L)
Dissolved
Cadmium (mg/L)
Dissolved
Copper (mg/L)
Dissolved Lead
(mg/L)
Ortho
Phosphorus
(mg/L)
41.56% 79.15%
pH TSS (mg/L)TKN (mg/L)
52.16%
Dissolved Zinc
(mg/L)
Dissolved
Mercury (mg/L)
Oil & Grease
(mg/L) TPH (mg/L)
85.35% 69.66%
78.22%
12.83%
Distributed Exclusively by Bio Clean Environmental Services, Inc. 760-433-7640 www.biocleanenvironmental.net
Pollutant Removal Performance Summary
Bio Media-Green
*Laboratory Testing - Average Removal Efficiencies. Tested at Flow Rate of 3 GPM Per Square Foot Media Surface Area & Minimum Head.
Mean particle size = 19
microns
Turbidity (NTU)
99.11%71.43% 90.70% 100.00%
Test Run
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
1 7.26 7.68 270 6 0.68 0.12 0.61 0.02 0.757 0.028 0.543 0.1 0.018 0.002
2 7.26 7.43 270 3 0.68 0.65 0.61 0.07 0.757 0.055 0.543 0.1 0.018 0.002
3 7.26 7.35 270 2 0.68 0.77 0.61 0.2 0.757 0.066 0.543 0.1 0.018 0.002
4 7.26 7.36 270 1 0.68 0.58 0.61 0.33 0.757 0.072 0.543 0.1 0.018 0.002
5
6
7
8
Averages 7.26 7.455 270 3 0.68 0.53 0.61 0.155 0.757 0.05525 0.543 0.1 0.018 0.002
Average Removal Efficiency (%)
Using Sil-Co-Sil 106
Test Run
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
1 0.37 0.01 0.95 0.05 10 1 19 0 21 0.5
2 0.37 0.25 0.95 0.05 10 1 19 0 21 1.5
3 0.37 0.3 0.95 0.21 10 2.5 19 0 21 1.5
4 0.37 0.34 0.95 0.43 10 2 19 0 21 2.8
5
6 1600 170 1600 110
7
8 1600 900 1600 900
1600 900
Averages 0.37 0.225 0.95 0.185 10 1.625 19 0 21 1.575 1600 535 1600 636.66667
Average Removal Efficiency (%)
Pollutant Removal Performance Summary
MWS - LINEAR
Testing of Quarter Scale Model - at Flow Rate of 1.9 GPM. This flow rate is equal to 121.6 GPM for full size system.
Dissolved
Cadmium (mg/L)
Dissolved
Copper (mg/L)
Dissolved Lead
(mg/L)
74.59% 92.70% 81.58%
E.Coli (MPN/100
mL)
92.50%83.75% 100.00%
22.06%
Dissolved
Nickel (mg/L)
Dissolved Zinc
(mg/L)
Mean particle size = 19
microns
Turbidity (NTU)
Oil & Grease
(mg/L)
88.89%98.89%
39.19% 80.53%
pH TSS (mg/L)
Modular Wetland System - Linear is manufactured by Modular Wetland Sytems, Inc. 760-433-7640 www.modularwetlands.com
Dissolved
Phosphorus
(mg/L)
TPH (mg/L)
Dissolved
Mercury (mg/L)
Fecal Coliform
(MPN/100 mL)
66.56% 60.21%
Red text indicates concentrations are greater
than testing limits of 1600 MPN/100mL
MWS – Linear
Hybrid Stormwater Filtration System
SYSTEM HYDRAULICS
Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. www.modularwetlands.com
P.O. Box 869 P 760-433-7640
Oceanside, CA 92049 F 760-433-3179
HYDRAULIC OPERATION
urb, Grate, and Vault Type – Flow based design.
Flows -
• VAULT TYPE “please consult manufacturer; varies with available head”
Dimension -
• O.D Dimensions = 22’ x 5’ x 4.8’
Hydraulic F l
t)
• Vault Type Minimum Fall Required = “varies, please consult manufacturer”
Capacity –
• Storage Capacity = 1000 Lbs (settling chamber storage)
C
• Primary Treatment Peak Flow Rate (all types) = 120 gpm or .27 cfs
• GRATE TYPE Internal Bypass Peak Flow Rate = 1926 gpm or 4.28 cfs
• CURB TYPE Internal Bypass Peak Flow Rate = 904.5 gpm or 2.01 cfs
s
• I.D Dimensions = 21’ x 4’ x 4’
al Required –
• Curb Type Minimum Fall Required = 3.57’ (bottom of curb to invert ou
• Grate Type Minimum Fall Required = 4.13’ (top of grate to invert out)
Vault Type – Volume based design
Volume -
• Prim r 00 Cubic Feet
o 10 gpm discharge rate & 48-hour drain down time.
o Pre – Storage Required
Dimension -
• I.D Dimensions = 21’ x 4’ x 4’
ns = 22’ x 5’ x 5.6’
ydraulic Fall Required –
Vault Type Minimum Fall Required = 4.13’’ (finish grade to invert out)
apacity –
• Storage Capacity = 1000 Lbs (settling chamber storage)
a y Treatment Volume = 40
s
• O.D Dimensio
H
•
C
Enter and/or Verify Parameters in Units as Specified:
Sedimentation and Media Filter Chamber
Interior Dimensions of Chamber Length: 48 Inches
Width: 48 Inches
Height: 41 Inches
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Cubic Feet: 55 CuFt
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Gallons: 409 Gallons
Wetlands Chamber
Interior Dimensions of Wetlands Chamber Length: 166 Inches
Width: 48 Inches
Height: 48 Inches
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Cubic Feet: 221 CuFt
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Gallons: 1656 Gallons
Discharge Chamber
Interior Dimensions of Discharge Chamber Length: 30 Inches
Width: 48 Inches
Height: 48 Inches
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Cubic Feet: 40 CuFt
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Gallons: 299 Gallons
Media Filter
Width of Transverse Media Panels: 30 Inches
Number of Transverse Media Panels (1 or 2): 2 quantity
Width of Longitudinal Media Panels 30 Inches
Number of Longitudinal Media Panels (2): 2 quantity
Height of Media Filter Panels: 24 Inches
Calculated Surface Area of Media Filter: 20.0 Sq Ft
Test Sample Width: 24.00 Inches
Test Sample Height: 6.00 Inches
Test Sample Flow Rate at Utilized Thickness in gpm: 5.0 gpm
Calculated Flow Rate for Media Filter at Utilized Thickness: 20 gpm/SqFt/Ft
Dynamic Viscosity of Water: 2.0E-05 lb-s/SqFt
Grain Diameter Equivalent or d30 of Media Material: 20 microns
Reynolds Number for Specified Flow Rate (Darcian if less than one.): 3.E-01 none
Wetlands Filter
Void Volume Percentage of Wetlands Media 30% Percent
Interconnection Pipes
Height of Invert of Inlet Pipe to Wetlands Chamber: 6.00 Inches
Height of Invert of Lower Outlet Pipe from Wetlands Chamber: 6.00 Inches
Height of Invert of Upper Outlet Pipe from Wetlands Chamber: 21.00 Inches
Diameter of Above Inlet and Outlet Pipes: 4.00 Inches
Bypass Pipes
Invert Height of Inlet to Bypass Pipe: 28.50 Inches
Invert Height of Outlet to Bypass Pipe: 25.90 Inches
Length of Bypass Pipe: 174 Inches
Diameter of Bypass Pipe: 8.00 Inches
Number of Bypass Pipes: 2 quantity
Manning's loss coefficient for Bypass Pipe: 0.0090 (metric)
Calculated Slope of Bypass Pipe 0.0149 Ft/Ft
Drain-Down Pipe
Diameter of Drain-Down Pipe 0.50 Inches
Modular Wetlands Hydraulics Calculator
Page One: Basic Parameters
Modular Wetland System - Linear - GRATE TYPE
Depths Used in the Following Calculations
Minimum Wetlands Depth: 6.00 Inches
Media Filter Overflow Depth: 24.00 Inches
Minimum Bypass Depth: 28.50 Inches
Hydraulic Depth (Depth to Top of Inlet Grate or Bottom of Curb): 48.00 Inches
Sedimentation Chamber
Sedimentation Chamber Footprint Area: 6.3 SqFt
Sedimentation Chamber Volume at Minimum Wetlands Depth: 3 CuFt
at Media Filter Overflow Depth: 13 CuFt
at Minimum Bypass Depth: 15 CuFt
Enter Test Flow Rate in gpm for Resident Time Calculation: 90 gpm
Resident Time Calculations at Minimum Wetlands Depth:16 seconds
at Media Filter Overflow Depth:63 seconds
at Minimum Bypass Depth:74 seconds
Wetlands Chamber
Wetlands Chamber Footprint Area: 55 SqFt
Void Volume Percentage of Wetlands Media (from page 1): 30% Percent
Wetlands Chamber Volume at Minimum Wetlands Depth: 8 CuFt
at Media Filter Overflow Depth: 33 CuFt
at Minimum Bypass Depth: 39 CuFt
Enter Test Flow Rate in gpm for Resident Time Calculation: 90 gpm
Resident Time Calculations at Minimum Wetlands Depth:42 seconds
at Media Filter Overflow Depth:166 seconds
at Minimum Bypass Depth:197 seconds
Flow Rate Calculations for Drain-Down Pipe
Pipe Diameter (from page 1): 0.50 Inches
Pipe Cross-Sectional Area in Square Inches: 0.196 SqIn
Contraction Loss Coefficient: 0.50 none
Pipe Entrance Velocities at Minimum Wetlands Depth: 4.6 fps
at Media Filter Overflow Depth: 9.3 fps
at Minimum Bypass Depth: 10.1 fps
at Depth Equal to Top of Grate: 13.1 fps
Pipe Flow rates at Minimum Wetlands Depth: 2.84 gpm
at Media Filter Overflow Depth: 5.68 gpm
at Minimum Bypass Depth: 6.19 gpm
at Depth Equal to Top of Grate: 8.04 gpm
Drain-Down Time from Minimum Wetlands Depth: 42.2 minutes
Modular Wetlands Hydraulics Calculator
Page Two: Basic Calculations
Maximum Bypass Flow Rate Calculations
Invert Height of Inlet to Bypass Pipe: 28.50 Inches
Invert Height of Outlet to Bypass Pipe: 25.90 Inches
Length of Bypass Pipe: 174 Inches
Diameter of Bypass Pipe: 8.00 Inches
Number of Bypass Pipes: 2 quantity
Manning's loss coefficient for Bypass Pipe: 0.0090 (metric)
Calculated Slope of Bypass Pipe 0.0149 Ft/Ft
Maximum Bypass Head (Pipe Crown to Top of Grate Inlet): 11.50 Inches
Enter Entrance Contraction Loss Coefficient: 0.50 none
If Required, Enter Error Correction from Below for Insufficient Pipe Slope: 0.200 none
Bypass Flow Rate for Above Head in cfs:4.44 4.44 cfs
Bypass Flow Rate for Above Head in gpm:1997 1997 gpm
Slope Required by Manning's Equation: 0.0161 Ft/Ft
Error Correction for Insufficient Pipe Slope (Re-enter above until equal.): 0.20 Inches
Is Above Error Correction Correctly Entered: Yes
Maximum Flow Rate through Upper Wetlands Outlet
Height of Invert of Upper Outlet Pipe from Wetlands Chamber: 21.00 Inches
Invert Height of Inlet to Bypass Pipe: 28.50 Inches
Diameter of Outlet Pipe: 4.00 Inches
Differential Head Driving Flow through Upper Outlet Pipe: 3.50 Inches
Enter Estimated Loss Coefficient: 2.00 none
Flow Rate for Head Equal to Minimum Bypass Depth in cfs: 0.22 cfs
Flow Rate for Head Equal to Minimum Bypass Depth in gpm: 98 gpm
Maximum Flow Rate through Lower Wetlands Outlet
Height of Invert of Lower Outlet Pipe from Wetlands Chamber: 6.00 Inches
Invert Height of Inlet to Bypass Pipe: 28.50 Inches
Diameter of Outlet Pipe: 4.00 Inches
Differential Head Driving Flow through Lower Outlet Pipe: 18.50 Inches
Enter Estimated Loss Coefficient: 2.00 none
Flow Rate for Head Equal to Minimum Bypass Depth in cfs: 0.50 cfs
Flow Rate for Head Equal to Minimum Bypass Depth in gpm: 226 gpm
Maximum Flow Rates through Filter Media
Calculated Surface Area of Media Filter: 20.0 Sq Ft
Calculated Flow Rate for Media Filter from Test Sample: 20.0 gpm/SqFt/Ft
Dynamic Viscosity of Water: 2.0E-05 lb-s/SqFt
Grain Diameter Equivalent or d30 of Media Material: 20 microns
Reynolds Number for Specified Flow Rate (Darcian if less than one.): 3.E-01 none
Media Filter Overflow Depth: 24.00 Inches
Maximum Flow Rates for Depth Just Below Media Filter Overflow Depth:
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 6.00 375.00 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 9.00 343.75 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 12.00 300.00 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 15.00 243.75 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 18.00 175.00 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 21.00 93.75 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 24.00 0.00 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 27.00 NA gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 30.00 NA gpm
Modular Wetlands Hydraulics Calculator
Page Three: Maximum Flow Rate Calculations
Enter and/or Verify Parameters in Units as Specified:
Sedimentation and Media Filter Chamber
Interior Dimensions of Chamber Length: 48 Inches
Width: 48 Inches
Height: 41 Inches
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Cubic Feet: 55 CuFt
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Gallons: 409 Gallons
Wetlands Chamber
Interior Dimensions of Wetlands Chamber Length: 166 Inches
Width: 48 Inches
Height: 48 Inches
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Cubic Feet: 221 CuFt
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Gallons: 1656 Gallons
Discharge Chamber
Interior Dimensions of Discharge Chamber Length: 30 Inches
Width: 48 Inches
Height: 48 Inches
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Cubic Feet: 40 CuFt
Approximate Maximum Chamber Volume in Gallons: 299 Gallons
Media Filter
Width of Transverse Media Panels: 30 Inches
Number of Transverse Media Panels (1 or 2): 2 quantity
Width of Longitudinal Media Panels 30 Inches
Number of Longitudinal Media Panels (2): 2 quantity
Height of Media Filter Panels: 24 Inches
Calculated Surface Area of Media Filter: 20.0 Sq Ft
Test Sample Width: 24.00 Inches
Test Sample Height: 6.00 Inches
Test Sample Flow Rate at Utilized Thickness in gpm: 5.0 gpm
Calculated Flow Rate for Media Filter at Utilized Thickness: 20 gpm/SqFt/Ft
Dynamic Viscosity of Water: 2.0E-05 lb-s/SqFt
Grain Diameter Equivalent or d30 of Media Material: 20 microns
Reynolds Number for Specified Flow Rate (Darcian if less than one.): 3.E-01 none
Wetlands Filter
Void Volume Percentage of Wetlands Media 30% Percent
Interconnection Pipes
Height of Invert of Inlet Pipe to Wetlands Chamber: 6.00 Inches
Height of Invert of Lower Outlet Pipe from Wetlands Chamber: 6.00 Inches
Height of Invert of Upper Outlet Pipe from Wetlands Chamber: 21.00 Inches
Diameter of Above Inlet and Outlet Pipes: 4.00 Inches
Bypass Pipes
Invert Height of Inlet to Bypass Pipe: 28.50 Inches
Invert Height of Outlet to Bypass Pipe: 25.90 Inches
Length of Bypass Pipe: 174 Inches
Diameter of Bypass Pipe: 8.00 Inches
Number of Bypass Pipes: 2 quantity
Manning's loss coefficient for Bypass Pipe: 0.0090 (metric)
Calculated Slope of Bypass Pipe 0.0149 Ft/Ft
Drain-Down Pipe
Diameter of Drain-Down Pipe 0.50 Inches
Modular Wetlands Hydraulics Calculator
Page One: Basic Parameters
Modular Wetland System - Linear - CURB TYPE
Depths Used in the Following Calculations
Minimum Wetlands Depth: 6.00 Inches
Media Filter Overflow Depth: 24.00 Inches
Minimum Bypass Depth: 28.50 Inches
Hydraulic Depth (Depth to Top of Inlet Grate or Bottom of Curb): 40.00 Inches
Sedimentation Chamber
Sedimentation Chamber Footprint Area: 6.3 SqFt
Sedimentation Chamber Volume at Minimum Wetlands Depth: 3 CuFt
at Media Filter Overflow Depth: 13 CuFt
at Minimum Bypass Depth: 15 CuFt
Enter Test Flow Rate in gpm for Resident Time Calculation: 90 gpm
Resident Time Calculations at Minimum Wetlands Depth:16 seconds
at Media Filter Overflow Depth:63 seconds
at Minimum Bypass Depth:74 seconds
Wetlands Chamber
Wetlands Chamber Footprint Area: 55 SqFt
Void Volume Percentage of Wetlands Media (from page 1): 30% Percent
Wetlands Chamber Volume at Minimum Wetlands Depth: 8 CuFt
at Media Filter Overflow Depth: 33 CuFt
at Minimum Bypass Depth: 39 CuFt
Enter Test Flow Rate in gpm for Resident Time Calculation: 90 gpm
Resident Time Calculations at Minimum Wetlands Depth:42 seconds
at Media Filter Overflow Depth:166 seconds
at Minimum Bypass Depth:197 seconds
Flow Rate Calculations for Drain-Down Pipe
Pipe Diameter (from page 1): 0.50 Inches
Pipe Cross-Sectional Area in Square Inches: 0.196 SqIn
Contraction Loss Coefficient: 0.50 none
Pipe Entrance Velocities at Minimum Wetlands Depth: 4.6 fps
at Media Filter Overflow Depth: 9.3 fps
at Minimum Bypass Depth: 10.1 fps
at Depth Equal to Top of Grate: 12.0 fps
Pipe Flow rates at Minimum Wetlands Depth: 2.84 gpm
at Media Filter Overflow Depth: 5.68 gpm
at Minimum Bypass Depth: 6.19 gpm
at Depth Equal to Top of Grate: 7.34 gpm
Drain-Down Time from Minimum Wetlands Depth: 42.2 minutes
Modular Wetlands Hydraulics Calculator
Page Two: Basic Calculations
Maximum Bypass Flow Rate Calculations
Invert Height of Inlet to Bypass Pipe: 28.50 Inches
Invert Height of Outlet to Bypass Pipe: 25.90 Inches
Length of Bypass Pipe: 174 Inches
Diameter of Bypass Pipe: 8.00 Inches
Number of Bypass Pipes: 2 quantity
Manning's loss coefficient for Bypass Pipe: 0.0090 (metric)
Calculated Slope of Bypass Pipe 0.0149 Ft/Ft
Maximum Bypass Head (Pipe Crown to Top of Grate Inlet): 3.50 Inches
Enter Entrance Contraction Loss Coefficient: 0.50 none
If Required, Enter Error Correction from Below for Insufficient Pipe Slope: 0.000 none
Bypass Flow Rate for Above Head in cfs:2.47 2.47 cfs
Bypass Flow Rate for Above Head in gpm:1111 1111 gpm
Slope Required by Manning's Equation: 0.0050 Ft/Ft
Error Correction for Insufficient Pipe Slope (Re-enter above until equal.): 0.00 Inches
Is Above Error Correction Correctly Entered: Yes
Maximum Flow Rate through Upper Wetlands Outlet
Height of Invert of Upper Outlet Pipe from Wetlands Chamber: 21.00 Inches
Invert Height of Inlet to Bypass Pipe: 28.50 Inches
Diameter of Outlet Pipe: 4.00 Inches
Differential Head Driving Flow through Upper Outlet Pipe: 3.50 Inches
Enter Estimated Loss Coefficient: 2.00 none
Flow Rate for Head Equal to Minimum Bypass Depth in cfs: 0.22 cfs
Flow Rate for Head Equal to Minimum Bypass Depth in gpm: 98 gpm
Maximum Flow Rate through Lower Wetlands Outlet
Height of Invert of Lower Outlet Pipe from Wetlands Chamber: 6.00 Inches
Invert Height of Inlet to Bypass Pipe: 28.50 Inches
Diameter of Outlet Pipe: 4.00 Inches
Differential Head Driving Flow through Lower Outlet Pipe: 18.50 Inches
Enter Estimated Loss Coefficient: 2.00 none
Flow Rate for Head Equal to Minimum Bypass Depth in cfs: 0.50 cfs
Flow Rate for Head Equal to Minimum Bypass Depth in gpm: 226 gpm
Maximum Flow Rates through Filter Media
Calculated Surface Area of Media Filter: 20.0 Sq Ft
Calculated Flow Rate for Media Filter from Test Sample: 20.0 gpm/SqFt/Ft
Dynamic Viscosity of Water: 2.0E-05 lb-s/SqFt
Grain Diameter Equivalent or d30 of Media Material: 20 microns
Reynolds Number for Specified Flow Rate (Darcian if less than one.): 3.E-01 none
Media Filter Overflow Depth: 24.00 Inches
Maximum Flow Rates for Depth Just Below Media Filter Overflow Depth:
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 6.00 375.00 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 9.00 343.75 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 12.00 300.00 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 15.00 243.75 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 18.00 175.00 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 21.00 93.75 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 24.00 0.00 gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 27.00 NA gpm
Wetlands Depth in Inches: 30.00 NA gpm
Modular Wetlands Hydraulics Calculator
Page Three: Maximum Flow Rate Calculations
July 2017
GENERAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATION FOR BASIC, ENHANCED, AND
PHOSPHORUS TREATMENT
For the
MWS-Linear Modular Wetland
Ecology’s Decision:
Based on Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. application submissions, including the Technical
Evaluation Report, dated April 1, 2014, Ecology hereby issues the following use level
designation:
1. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater
Treatment System for Basic treatment
Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of
wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density
residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high
loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of
cartridge surface area.
2. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater
Treatment System for Phosphorus treatment
Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of
wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density
residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high
loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of
cartridge surface area.
3. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater
Treatment System for Enhanced treatment
Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of
wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density
residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high
loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of
cartridge surface area.
4. Ecology approves the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units
for Basic, Phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment at the hydraulic loading rate listed above.
Designers shall calculate the water quality design flow rates using the following procedures:
Western Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the
water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using the
latest version of the Western Washington Hydrology Model or other Ecology-approved
continuous runoff model.
Eastern Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the
water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using one of
the three methods described in Chapter 2.2.5 of the Stormwater Management Manual
for Eastern Washington (SWMMEW) or local manual.
Entire State: For treatment installed downstream of detention, the water quality design
flow rate is the full 2-year release rate of the detention facility.
5. These use level designations have no expiration date but may be revoked or amended by
Ecology, and are subject to the conditions specified below.
Ecology’s Conditions of Use:
Applicants shall comply with the following conditions:
1. Design, assemble, install, operate, and maintain the MWS – Linear Modular Wetland
Stormwater Treatment System units, in accordance with Modular Wetland Systems, Inc.
applicable manuals and documents and the Ecology Decision.
2. Each site plan must undergo Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. review and approval before
site installation. This ensures that site grading and slope are appropriate for use of a MWS
– Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System unit.
3. MWS – Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System media shall conform to the
specifications submitted to, and approved by, Ecology.
4. The applicant tested the MWS – Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System
with an external bypass weir. This weir limited the depth of water flowing through the
media, and therefore the active treatment area, to below the root zone of the plants. This
GULD applies to MWS – Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment Systems whether
plants are included in the final product or not.
5. Maintenance: The required maintenance interval for stormwater treatment devices is often
dependent upon the degree of pollutant loading from a particular drainage basin. Therefore,
Ecology does not endorse or recommend a “one size fits all” maintenance cycle for a
particular model/size of manufactured filter treatment device.
Typically, Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. designs MWS - Linear Modular Wetland
systems for a target prefilter media life of 6 to 12 months.
Indications of the need for maintenance include effluent flow decreasing to below the
design flow rate or decrease in treatment below required levels.
Owners/operators must inspect MWS - Linear Modular Wetland systems for a minimum
of twelve months from the start of post-construction operation to determine site-specific
maintenance schedules and requirements. You must conduct inspections monthly during
the wet season, and every other month during the dry season. (According to the
SWMMWW, the wet season in western Washington is October 1 to April 30. According
to SWMMEW, the wet season in eastern Washington is October 1 to June 30). After the
first year of operation, owners/operators must conduct inspections based on the findings
during the first year of inspections.
Conduct inspections by qualified personnel, follow manufacturer’s guidelines, and use
methods capable of determining either a decrease in treated effluent flowrate and/or a
decrease in pollutant removal ability.
When inspections are performed, the following findings typically serve as maintenance
triggers:
Standing water remains in the vault between rain events, or
Bypass occurs during storms smaller than the design storm.
If excessive floatables (trash and debris) are present (but no standing water or
excessive sedimentation), perform a minor maintenance consisting of gross solids
removal, not prefilter media replacement.
Additional data collection will be used to create a correlation between pretreatment
chamber sediment depth and pre-filter clogging (see Issues to be Addressed by the
Company section below)
6. Discharges from the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units
shall not cause or contribute to water quality standards violations in receiving waters.
Applicant: Modular Wetland Systems, Inc.
Applicant's Address: PO. Box 869
Oceanside, CA 92054
Application Documents:
Original Application for Conditional Use Level Designation, Modular Wetland System,
Linear Stormwater Filtration System Modular Wetland Systems, Inc., January 2011
Quality Assurance Project Plan: Modular Wetland system – Linear Treatment System
performance Monitoring Project, draft, January 2011.
Revised Application for Conditional Use Level Designation, Modular Wetland System,
Linear Stormwater Filtration System Modular Wetland Systems, Inc., May 2011
Memorandum: Modular Wetland System-Linear GULD Application Supplementary Data,
April 2014
Technical Evaluation Report: Modular Wetland System Stormwater Treatment System
Performance Monitoring, April 2014.
Applicant's Use Level Request:
General use level designation as a Basic, Enhanced, and Phosphorus treatment device in
accordance with Ecology’s Guidance for Evaluating Emerging Stormwater Treatment
Technologies Technology Assessment Protocol – Ecology (TAPE) January 2011 Revision.
Applicant's Performance Claims:
The MWS – Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 80-percent
of TSS from stormwater with influent concentrations between 100 and 200 mg/l.
The MWS – Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 50-percent
of Total Phosphorus from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.1 and 0.5
mg/l.
The MWS – Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 30-percent
of dissolved Copper from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.005 and
0.020 mg/l.
The MWS – Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 60-percent
of dissolved Zinc from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.02 and 0.30
mg/l.
Ecology Recommendations:
Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. has shown Ecology, through laboratory and field-
testing, that the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System filter
system is capable of attaining Ecology's Basic, Total phosphorus, and Enhanced
treatment goals.
Findings of Fact:
Laboratory Testing
The MWS-Linear Modular wetland has the:
Capability to remove 99 percent of total suspended solids (using Sil-Co-Sil 106) in a
quarter-scale model with influent concentrations of 270 mg/L.
Capability to remove 91 percent of total suspended solids (using Sil-Co-Sil 106) in
laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 84.6 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0
gpm per square foot of media.
Capability to remove 93 percent of dissolved Copper in a quarter-scale model with
influent concentrations of 0.757 mg/L.
Capability to remove 79 percent of dissolved Copper in laboratory conditions with
influent concentrations of 0.567 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of
media.
Capability to remove 80.5-percent of dissolved Zinc in a quarter-scale model with
influent concentrations of 0.95 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media.
Capability to remove 78-percent of dissolved Zinc in laboratory conditions with influent
concentrations of 0.75 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media.
Field Testing
Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. conducted monitoring of an MWS-Linear (Model
# MWS-L-4-13) from April 2012 through May 2013, at a transportation maintenance
facility in Portland, Oregon. The manufacturer collected flow-weighted composite
samples of the system’s influent and effluent during 28 separate storm events. The
system treated approximately 75 percent of the runoff from 53.5 inches of rainfall
during the monitoring period. The applicant sized the system at 1 gpm/sq ft. (wetland
media) and 3gpm/sq ft. (prefilter).
Influent TSS concentrations for qualifying sampled storm events ranged from 20 to 339
mg/L. Average TSS removal for influent concentrations greater than 100 mg/L (n=7)
averaged 85 percent. For influent concentrations in the range of 20-100 mg/L (n=18),
the upper 95 percent confidence interval about the mean effluent concentration was
12.8 mg/L.
Total phosphorus removal for 17 events with influent TP concentrations in the range of
0.1 to 0.5 mg/L averaged 65 percent. A bootstrap estimate of the lower 95 percent
confidence limit (LCL95) of the mean total phosphorus reduction was 58 percent.
The lower 95 percent confidence limit of the mean percent removal was 60.5 percent for
dissolved zinc for influent concentrations in the range of 0.02 to 0.3 mg/L (n=11).
The lower 95 percent confidence limit of the mean percent removal was 32.5 percent for
dissolved copper for influent concentrations in the range of 0.005 to 0.02 mg/L (n=14)
at flow rates up to 28 gpm (design flow rate 41 gpm). Laboratory test data augmented
the data set, showing dissolved copper removal at the design flow rate of 41 gpm (93
percent reduction in influent dissolved copper of 0.757 mg/L).
Issues to be addressed by the Company:
1. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should collect maintenance and inspection data for the
first year on all installations in the Northwest in order to assess standard maintenance
requirements for various land uses in the region. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should
use these data to establish required maintenance cycles.
2. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should collect pre-treatment chamber sediment depth
data for the first year of operation for all installations in the Northwest. Modular
Wetland Systems, Inc. will use these data to create a correlation between sediment depth
and pre-filter clogging.
Technology Description:
Download at http://www.modularwetlands.com/
Contact Information:
Applicant: Zach Kent
BioClean A Forterra Company.
398 Vi9a El Centro
Oceanside, CA 92058
zach.kent@forterrabp.com
Applicant website: http://www.modularwetlands.com/
Ecology web link: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wg/stormwater/newtech/index.html
Ecology: Douglas C. Howie, P.E.
Department of Ecology
Water Quality Program
(360) 407-6444
douglas.howie@ecy.wa.gov
Revision History
Date Revision
June 2011 Original use-level-designation document
September 2012 Revised dates for TER and expiration
January 2013 Modified Design Storm Description, added Revision Table, added
maintenance discussion, modified format in accordance with Ecology
standard
December 2013 Updated name of Applicant
April 2014 Approved GULD designation for Basic, Phosphorus, and Enhanced
treatment
December 2015 Updated GULD to document the acceptance of MWS-Linear
Modular Wetland installations with or without the inclusion of plants
July 2017 Revised Manufacturer Contact Information (name, address, and
email)
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-33 July 2018
Worksheet B.5-3: Alternate Minimum Biofiltration Footprint Ratio
Category # Description Value Units
Drainage
Basin Inputs
(Optional)
0 Drainage Basin ID or Name unitless
1 Total Tributary Area sq-ft
2 Final Adjusted Runoff Factor unitless
3 Average Annual Precipitation inches
4 Load to Clog (default =2.0) lb/sq-ft
5 Allowable Period to Accumulate Clogging Load (default =10) years
6 Pretreatment Measures Included? yes/no
7 Commercial: TSS=128 mg/L, C= 0.80 sq-ft
8 Education: TSS=132 mg/L, C= 0.50 sq-ft
9 Industrial: TSS=125 mg/L, C= 0.90 sq-ft
10 Low Traffic Areas: TSS=50 mg/L, C= 0.50 sq-ft
11 Multi-Family Residential: TSS=40 mg/L, C= 0.60 sq-ft
12 Roof Areas: TSS=14 mg/L, C= 0.90 sq-ft
13 Single Family Residential: TSS=123 mg/L, C= 0.40 sq-ft
14 Transportation: TSS=78 mg/L, C= 0.90 sq-ft
15 Vacant/Open Space: TSS=216 mg/L, C= 0.10 sq-ft
Minimum
Footprint
Calculations
16 Effective-Area Based on Specified Land Use Coefficients sq-ft
17 Average TSS Concentration for Tributary mg/L
18 Effective Tributary Area sq-ft
19 Average Annual Runoff cubic-feet
20 Average Annual TSS Load lb/yr
21 Average Annual TSS Load After Pretreatment Measures lb/yr
Result 22 Minimum Allowable Biofiltration Footprint Ratio ratio
Worksheet B.5-3 General Notes:
A. Applicants may use this worksheet to calculate Alternate Minimum Biofiltration Footprint Ratio. Applicants must provide
inputs for yellow shaded cells and calculate appropriate values for unshaded cells. Notes corresponding with each line item a re
provided on the following page. An automated version of this worksheet is available for download at the County of San Diego
Department of Public Works website and in Appendix I.
DMA1
24,796
0.870
12
2.0
10
YES
16,971
0
0
0
0
4,611
0
0
3,213
19,475
103
19,745
20,649
133
100
0.03
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-38 July 2018
Worksheet B.5-5: Optimized Biofiltration BMP Footprint when Downstream of a Storage Unit
Optimized Biofiltration BMP Footprint when
Downstream of a Storage Unit
Worksheet B.5-4
1 Area draining to the storage unit and biofiltration BMP sq-ft
2 Adjusted runoff factor for drainage area (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2)
3 Effective impervious area draining to the storage unit and biofiltration BMP
[Line 1 x Line 2]
sq-ft
4 Remaining DCV after implementing retention BMPs cubic-feet
5 Infiltration rate from Worksheet D.5-1 if partial infiltration is feasible ft/hr.
6 Media Thickness [1.5 feet minimum], also add mulch layer thickness to this
line for sizing calculations
ft
7 Media filtration rate to be used for sizing (0.42 ft/hr. with no outlet control;
if the filtration rate is controlled by the outlet use the outlet controlled rate)
ft/hr
8 Media retained pore storage 0.1 ft/ft
Storage Unit Requirement
9 Drawdown time of the storage unit, minimum(from the elevation that
bypasses the biofiltration BMP, overflow elevation)
hours
10 Storage required to achieve greater than 92 percent capture (see Table B.5-4) fraction
11 Storage required in cubic feet (Line 4 x Line 10) cubic-feet
12 Storage provided in the design, minimum(from the elevation that bypasses
the biofiltration BMP, overflow elevation)
cubic-feet
13 Is Line 12 ≥ Line 11. If no increase storage provided until this criteria is met □ Yes ☐ No
Criteria 1: BMP Footprint Biofiltration Capacity
14 Peak flow from the storage unit to the biofiltration BMP (using the elevation
used to evaluate the percent capture)
cfs
15 Required biofiltration footprint [(3,600 x Line 14)/Line 7] sq-ft
Criteria 2: Alternative Minimum Sizing Factor (Clogging)
16 Alternative Minimum Footprint Sizing Factor [Worksheet B.5-3] Fraction
17 Required biofiltration footprint [Line 3 x Line 16] sq-ft
Optimized Biofiltration Footprint
18 Optimized biofiltration footprint, maximum(Line 15, Line 17) sq-ft
Note: Biofiltration BMP smaller than the alternative minimum footprint sizing (Line 17) is considered compact
biofiltration BMP and may be allowed at the discretion of County staff if the BMP meets the requirements in Appendix
F and Option 1 or Option 2 sizing in Worksheet B.5-1 (see Appendix I).
24,796
0.870
21,583
1,727
0
4
100
6.42
0.85
1,468
2,680
0.116
4.2
0.03
647
660
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
B-49 July 2018
B.6.3 Sizing Flow-Thru Treatment Control BMPs
Flow-thru treatment control BMPs shall be sized to filter or treat the maximum flow rate of runoff
produced from a rainfall intensity of 0.2 inch of rainfall per hour, for each hour of every storm
event. The required flow-thru treatment rate should be adjusted for the portion of the DCV already
retained or biofiltered onsite as described in Worksheet B.6-1. The following hydrologic method
shall be used to calculate the flow rate to be filtered or treated:
= × ×
Where:
Q = Design flow rate in cubic feet per second
C = Runoff factor, area-weighted estimate using Table B.1-1.
i = Rainfall intensity of 0.2 in/hr.
A = Tributary area (acres) which includes the total area draining to the BMP, including any
offsite or onsite areas that comingle with project runoff and drain to the BMP. Refer to
Section 3.3.3 for additional guidance. Street projects consult Section 1.4.3.
Worksheet B.6-1: Flow-Thru Design Flows
Flow-thru Design Flows Worksheet B.6-1
1 DCV DCV cubic-feet
2 DCV retained DCVretained cubic-feet
3 DCV biofiltered DCVbiofiltered cubic-feet
4 DCV requiring flow-thru
(Line 1 – Line 2 – 0.67*Line 3) DCVflow-thru
cubic-feet
5 Adjustment factor (Line 4 / Line 1)* AF= unitless
6 Design rainfall intensity i= 0.20 in/hr
7 Area tributary to BMP (s) A= acres
8 Area-weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix
B.2) C= unitless
9 Calculate Flow Rate = AF x (C x i x A) Q= cfs
1) Adjustment factor shall be estimated considering only retention and biofiltration BMPs located upstream
of flow-thru BMPs. That is, if the flow-thru BMP is upstream of the project's retention and biofiltration
BMPs then the flow-thru BMP shall be sized using an adjustment factor of 1.
2) Volume based (e.g., dry extended detention basin) flow-thru treatment control BMPs shall be sized to the
volume in Line 4 and flow based (e.g., vegetated swales) shall be sized to flow rate in Line 9. Sand filter
and media filter can be designed either by volume in Line 4 or flow rate in Line 9.
3) Proprietary BMPs, if used, shall provide certified treatment capacity equal to or greater than the
calculated flow rate in Line 9; certified treatment capacity per unit shall be consistent with third party
certifications.
1,727
0
0
1,727
1
0.569
0.870
0.099
FT-5 Proprietary Flow-Thru Treatment Control BMPs
E-174 July 2018
E.25 FT-5 Proprietary Flow-Thru Treatment Control
BMPs
The purpose of this fact sheet is to help explain the potential role of proprietary BMPs in meeting
flow thru treatment control BMP requirements. The fact sheet does not describe design criteria like
the other fact sheets in this appendix because this information varies by BMP product model.
A proprietary BMP may be acceptable as a “flow-thru treatment control BMP” under the following
conditions:
(1) The BMP is selected and sized consistent with the method and criteria described in
Appendix B.6;
(2) The BMP is designed and maintained in a manner consistent with its performance
certifications (See explanation in Appendix B.6); and
(3) The BMP is acceptable at the discretion of the City Engineer. In determining the
acceptability of a BMP, the City Engineer should consider, as applicable, (a) the data
submitted; (b) representativeness of the data submitted; (c) consistency of the BMP
performance claims with pollutant control objectives; certainty of the BMP performance
claims; (d) for projects within the public right of way and/or public projects: maintenance
requirements, cost of maintenance activities, relevant previous local experience with
operation and maintenance of the BMP type, ability to continue to operate the system in
event that the vending company is no longer operating as a business; and (e) other relevant
factors. If a proposed BMP is not accepted by the City Engineer, a written
explanation/reason will be provided to the applicant.
Proprietary flow-thru BMPs must meet the same sizing guidance as other flow-thru treatment
control BMPs. Guidance for sizing flow-thru BMPs to comply with requirements of this manual is
provided in Appendix B.6.
Refer to manufacturer for maintenance information.
Maintenance Overview
Criteria for Use of a Proprietary BMP as a Flow-Thru Treatment Control BMP
Guidance for Sizing Proprietary BMPs
14 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 1i: Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation Form -
Pollutant Control
Refer to Chapter 1.8
Onsite Project Information
Record ID: Not Applicable
Assessor's Parcel Number(s) [APN(s)]
Quantity of Pollutant Control Debits or Credits (cubic feet)
☐ Debits
☐ Credits
*See Attachment 1 of the PDP WQMP
Land Use Designation
Agriculture Rural Residential
Commercial Single Family Residential
Education Transportation
Industrial Vacant / Open Space
Multi Family Residential Water
Orchard Total
Offsite Project Information – Projects providing or receiving credits (add rows as needed)
Record ID: APN(s) Project Owner/Address Credit/Debit Quantity (cubic
feet)
1. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
2. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
3. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
Total sum of Credits and Debits (∑Credits -∑Debits) (cubic feet)
Additional Information
Are offsite project(s) in the same credit trading area as the onsite project? ☐ Yes
☐ No
Will projects providing credits be completed prior to completion of projects
receiving credits?
☐ Yes
☐ No
Are all deficits accounted for?
If No, onsite and offsite projects must be redesigned to account for all deficits.
☐ Yes
☐ No
Provide Alternative Compliance In-Lieu Fee Agreement and supporting WQE calculations
as part of this attachment.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 15
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
ATTACHMENT 2
HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL MEASURES
Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet:
Attachment
Sequence Contents Checklist
Attachment 2a Do Hydromodification Management
Requirements apply? See Chapter
1.6 and Figure 1-2.
☐ Green Streets Project (Exempt
from hydromodification
management requirements)
STOP *
☐ Exempt from hydromodification
management requirements.
Include Figure 1-2 and document
any “YES” answer STOP *
☒ Hydromodification management
controls required.
Attachment 2b HMP Exhibits (Required) See
Checklist on the back of this
Attachment cover sheet. see
Chapter 6.3.1
☒ Combined with DMA Exhibit
☐ Included
Attachment 2c Management of Critical Coarse
Sediment Yield Areas
See Chapter 6.2 and Appendix H of
the BMP Design Manual.
☒ Exhibit depicting onsite/ upstream
CCSYAs (Figure H.1-1) AND,
documentation that project avoids
CCSYA per Appendix H.1. OR
☐ Sediment Supply BMPs
implemented.
Attachment 2d Structural BMP Design Calculations,
Drawdown Calculations, & Overflow
Design. See Chapter 6 & Appendix
G of the BMP Design Manual
☒ Included
☐ Project is designed entirely with
De-Minimus, Self–Mitigating,
and/or qualifying Self-Retaining
Areas. STOP *
Attachment 2e Geomorphic Assessment of
Receiving Channels. See Chapter
6.3.4 of the BMP Design Manual.
☒ low flow threshold is 0.1Q2
☐ low flow threshold is 0.3Q2
☐ low flow threshold is 0.5Q2
Attachment 2f Vector Control Plan (Required when
structural BMPs will not drain in 96
hours)
☐ Included
☒ Not required because BMPs will
drain in less than 96 hours
Attachment 2g Hydromodification Offsite Alternative
Compliance form. Refer to Figure 1-
3: Pathways to Participating in
Offsite Alternative Compliance
Program
☒ Full Compliance Onsite
☐ Offsite ACP. Document onsite
structural BMPs and complete
Hydromodification Offsite Alternative
Compliance Participation Form, and
WQE worksheets
* If this box is checked, the remainder of Attachment 2 does not need to be filled out.
16 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 2a: Applicability of Hydromodification Management BMP
Requirements
NO
NO
YES
1. Is the project a PDP? YES
NO
YES 2. Direct discharge to
Pacific Ocean?
NO
YES 3. Direct discharge to
enclosed embayment,
not within protected
area?
YES
4. Direct discharge
to water storage
reservoir or lake,
below spillway or
normal operating
level?
NO
5. Direct discharge to an
area identified in WMAA?
NO
Exempt from hydromodification
management requirements
Hydromodification management
controls required
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 17
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Attachment 2b: DMA Exhibit Checklist
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the
Hydromodification Management Exhibit:
☒ Point(s) of Compliance with name or number
☒ Project Site Boundary
☒ Project Disturbed Area Footprint
☒ Drainage management area (DMA) boundaries, DMA ID numbers, DMA areas (square
footage or acreage), and DMA type (i.e., drains to structural BMP, self-retaining, self-
mitigating, or de-minimis) Note on exhibit De-minimis areas and reason they could not be
included. Include offsite areas receiving treatment to mitigate Onsite Water Quality
Equivalency.
☐ Potential pollutant source areas and corresponding required source control BMPs (see
Chapter 4, Appendix E.1, and Step 3.5)
☒ Proposed Site Design BMPs and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness.
Show sections, details, and dimensions of site design BMP’s (tree wells, dispersion areas,
rain gardens, permeable pavement, rain barrels, green roofs, etc.)
☐ Proposed Harvest and Use BMPs
☒ Underlying hydrologic soil group (Web Soil Survey)
☒ Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands, pond, lake)
☒ Existing topography and impervious areas
☒ Proposed grading and impervious areas. If the project is a subdivision or spans multiple lots
show pervious and impervious totals for each lot.
☒ Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite
☐ Potable water wells, onsite wastewater treatment systems (septic), underground utilities
☒ Structural BMPs (identify location, structural BMP ID No., type of BMP, and size/detail)
☐ Approximate depth to groundwater at each structural BMP
☐ Approximate infiltration rate and feasibility (full retention, partial retention, biofiltration) at
each structural BMP
☐ Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected and or conveyed through the project
site.
☐ Temporary Construction BMPs. Include protection of source control, site design and
structural BMPs during construction.
☐ Onsite and Offsite Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected
☒ Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness
☒ Existing and proposed drainage boundary and drainage area to each POC (when
necessary, create separate exhibits for pre-development and post-project conditions)
☒ Structural BMPs for hydromodification management (identify location, type of BMP, and
size/detail)
18 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
Attachment 2c: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas
Document the findings of Site-specific Critical Coarse Sediment Analysis below. Include any
calculations, and additional documentation completed as part of the analysis. Refer to Chapter
6.2 and Appendix H of the City of Temecula BMP Design Manual for additional guidance.
The project effectively manages Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas (CCSYAs) using the
following methodology:
☒ Step A. A Site-Specific Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Analysis was performed:
☒ Step A.1. Determine whether the project site is a significant source of critical coarse
sediment to the channel receiving runoff (refer to CCSYA mapping in Appendix H):
☐ The project site is a significant source of Bed Sediment Supply. All channels on the
project site are preserved or bypassed within the site plan. (Complete Step A.2, below)
☐ The project site is a source of Bed Sediment Supply. Channels identified as verified
critical coarse sediment yield areas are preserved. (Complete Step A.2, below)
☒ The Project site is not a significant source of Bed Sediment Supply. (STOP,
supporting information provided with this checklist)
☐ Impacts to verified CCSYAs cannot be avoided. (Complete Step B, below)
☐ Step A.2. Project site design avoids CCSYAs and maintains sediment supply pathways,
documentation is provided following this checklist. (STOP, include supporting
documentation with this checklist)
☐ Step B. Sediment Supply BMPs are implemented onsite to mitigate impacts of development
in CCSYAs, documentation is provided following this checklist. (STOP, include supporting
documentation with this checklist)
Appendix H: Guidance for Investigation Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas
Appendix H: Guidance for Investigation Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas
July 2018 H-7
Appendix H: Guidance for Investigation Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas
Figure H.2-1: Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas and Potential Sediment Source Areas
APROX SITE
LOCATION
Project Name:Proposed Drive-Thru Buildings
Project Applicant:Ono Hawaiian BBQ
Jurisdiction:City of Temecula
Parcel (APN):921-320-061
Hydrologic Unit:902.32
Rain Gauge:Lake Wohlford
Total Project Area (sf):24,796
Channel Susceptibility:High
BMP Sizing Spreadsheet V3.0
Project Name: Hydrologic Unit:
Project Applicant: Rain Gauge:
Jurisdiction: Total Project Area:
Parcel (APN): Low Flow Threshold:
BMP Name: BMP Type:
BMP Native Soil Type:BMP Infiltration Rate (in/hr):
HMP Sizing Factors Minimum BMP Size
DMA
Name Area (sf)
Pre Project Soil
Type Pre-Project Slope
Post Project
Surface Type
Area Weighted Runoff
Factor
(Table G.2-1)1 Volume Volume (CF)
DMA1: R1 2,840 D Flat Roofs 1.0 0.12 341
DMA1: IMP1 8,362 D Flat Concrete 1.0 0.12 1003
DMA1: LS1 1,093 D Flat Landscape 0.1 0.12 13
0 0
DMA2: R2 1,771 D Flat Roofs 1.0 0.12 213
DMA2: IMP2 8,610 D Flat Concrete 1.0 0.12 1033
DMA2: LS2 2,120 D Flat Landscape 0.1 0.12 25
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
BMP Tributary Area 24,796 Minimum BMP Size 2629
Proposed BMP Size*2680 * Assumes standard configuration
3.5 ft
3.5 ft
751 CF
Notes:
1. Runoff factors which are used for hydromodification management flow control (Table G.2-1) are different from the runoff factors used for pollutant control BMP sizing (Table B.1-1). Table references are taken from the San Diego Region Model BMP Design Manual, April 2018.
This BMP Sizing Spreadsheet has been updated in conformance with the San Diego Region Model BMP Design Manual, April 2018. For questions or concerns please contact the jurisdiction in which your project is located.
Describe the BMP's in sufficient detail in your PDP SWQMP to demonstrate the area, volume, and other criteria can be met within the constraints of the site.
BMP's must be adapted and applied to the conditions specific to the development project such as unstable slopes or the lack of available head.
Designated Staff have final review and approval authority over the project design.
Standard Cistern Depth (Overflow Elevation)
Provided Cistern Depth (Overflow Elevation)
Minimum Required Cistern Footprint)
Areas Draining to BMP
City of Temecula
921-320-061
N/A - Impervious Liner
BMP Sizing Spreadsheet V3.0
NA
Cistern
0.1Q2
24,796
Lake Wohlford
902.32
CISTERN and MWS
Proposed Drive-Thru Buildings
Ono Hawaiian BBQ
Project Name:Hydrologic Unit:
Project Applicant:Rain Gauge:
Jurisdiction:Total Project Area:
Parcel (APN):Low Flow Threshold:
BMP Name BMP Type:
Rain Gauge Unit Runoff Ratio DMA Area (ac)
Orifice Flow - %Q2 Orifice Area
Soil Type Slope (cfs/ac) (cfs)
(in2)
DMA1: R1 Lake Wohlford D Flat 0.548 0.065 0.004 0.05
DMA1: IMP1 Lake Wohlford D Flat 0.548 0.192 0.011 0.16
DMA1: LS1 Lake Wohlford D Flat 0.548 0.025 0.001 0.02
DMA2: R2 Lake Wohlford D Flat 0.548 0.041 0.002 0.03
DMA2: IMP2 Lake Wohlford D Flat 0.548 0.198 0.011 0.16
DMA2: LS2 Lake Wohlford D Flat 0.548 0.049 0.003 0.04
3.50 0.031 0.46 0.77
Max Orifice Head Max Tot. Allowable
Orifice Flow
Max Tot. Allowable
Orifice Area
Max Orifice
Diameter
(feet)(cfs)(in2)(in)
Provide Hand Calc.0.030 0.44 0.750
Average outflow during
surface drawdown Max Orifice Outflow Actual Orifice Area
Selected
Orifice Diameter
(cfs) (cfs)
(in2)(in)
Drawdown (Hrs)Provide Hand
Calculation
CISTERN and MWS
Pre-developed Condition
No Orifice Required for
Infiltration Facilities
DMA
Name
902.32
BMP Sizing Spreadsheet V3.0
City of Temecula
921-320-061
Proposed Drive-Thru Buildings
Ono Hawaiian BBQ
0.1Q2
24,796
Lake Wohlford
Cistern
Drawdown time exceeds 96 Hrs. Project must
implement a vector control program.
DRAWDOWN CALCUALTIONS:
BMP VOLUME VOL = 2,680 CU-FT
MAXIMUM ORIFCE VELOCITY = 0.030 CFS
DRAWDOWN = BMP VOLUME / MAXIMUM ORIFCE VELOCITY
= 2,680 CU/FT / 0.03 CFS
= 89,333.33 SEC
= 1,488.89 MINS
= 24.8 HOURS
24.8 HOURS < 72 HOURS = SUCCIFIENT OUT OF TANK.
DOWNSTREAM MWS UNIT TREATMENT VOLUME IS 0.116
CFS > 0.03 CFS MEANING THE ORIFICE FLOW IS THE
LIMITING DRAWNDOWN VELOCITY.
EXTERIOR VIEW
TOP VIEWBOLT HOLE DETAIL
EXTERIOR VIEW
TOP VIEW
URBANPOND
PRECAST CONCRETE STORMWATER DETENTION
SINGLE MODULE - EXTERIOR WALL PANEL
ELEVATION VIEW BELEVATION VIEW A ELEVATION VIEW CTOP VIEW
URBANPOND
PRECAST CONCRETE STORMWATER DETENTION
SINGLE MODULE - INTERIOR
ELEVATION VIEW BELEVATION VIEW A ELEVATION VIEW CTOP VIEW
URBANPOND
PRECAST CONCRETE STORMWATER DETENTION
SINGLE MODULE - PERIMETER
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 19
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
Hydromodification Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation Form
Refer to Chapter 1.8
Onsite Project Information
Record ID: Not Applicable
Assessor's Parcel Number(s) [APN(s)]
Quantity of Hydromodification Debits or Credits (DCIA)
☐ Debits
☐ Credits
*See Attachment 1 of the PDP WQMP
Offsite Project Information – Projects providing or receiving credits (add rows as needed)
Record ID: APN(s) Project Owner/Address Credit/Debit Quantity (DCIA)
1. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
2. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
3. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
4. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
5. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
6. ☐ Credit
☐ Debit
Total sum of Credits and Debits (∑Credits -∑Debits) (DCIA)
Additional Information
Are offsite projects in the same credit trading area as the onsite project? ☐ Yes
☐ No
Do offsite projects discharge directly to the same susceptible stream reach as
the onsite project? (required for certain hydromodification scenarios)
☐ Yes
☐ No
Will projects providing credits be completed prior to completion of projects
receiving credits?
☐ Yes
☐ No
Are all deficits accounted for?
If No, onsite and offsite projects must be redesigned to account for all deficits.
☐ Yes
☐ No
Provide supporting WQE calculations as part of this attachment.
20 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
CHECKLIST 1
Checklist of Items to Include on Plan Sheets Showing Permanent
Stormwater BMPs, Source Control, and Site Design
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the plans:
The plans must identify:
☒ Structural BMP(s) with ID numbers
☒ The grading and drainage design shown on the plans must be consistent with the
delineation of DMAs shown on the DMA exhibit
☐ Improvements within City Public Right-of-Way have been designed in accordance with
Appendix K: Guidance on Green Infrastructure.
☒ Details and specifications for construction of structural BMP(s).
☒ Manufacturer and part number for proprietary parts of structural BMP(s) when applicable.
☐ Signage indicating the location and boundary of source control, site design, and structural
BMP(s) as required by City staff.
☐ How to access the structural BMP(s) to inspect and perform maintenance.
☒ Features that are provided to facilitate inspection (e.g., observation ports, cleanouts, silt
posts, benchmarks or other features that allow the inspector to view necessary components
of the structural BMP and compare to maintenance thresholds)
☐ Include landscaping plan sheets showing vegetation and amended soil requirements for
vegetated structural BMP(s), amended soil areas, dispersion areas, tree-wells, and self-
mitigating areas
☒ All BMPs must be fully dimensioned on the plans
☐ Include all Construction stormwater, source control, and site design measures described in
the WQMP. Can be included as separate plan sheets as necessary.
☒ When proprietary BMPs are used, site-specific cross section with outflow, inflow, and model
number must be provided. Photocopies of general brochures are not acceptable.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 21
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
CHECKLIST 2
Checklist for Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the
Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis :
☒ The project is subject to the requirements of City of Temecula Construction, Grading, and
Encroachment Ordinance Section 18.06.020 and requires a grading permit and Hydrology
Hydraulic Analysis. Prepare Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis and include all elements of
checklist below.
☐ The project is exempt from grading permit requirements of City of Temecula Construction,
Grading, and Encroachment Ordinance per Section 18.06.060. Document the project
exempt category and justification and STOP.
Grading Exemption Category (A-O):_____
Discussion/Justification of Exemption:
Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis. The engineer of record shall prepare and submit studies and
data regarding hydrology/hydraulic analysis and calculations for ten (10) and one hundred
(100) year storm events per Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District
Hydrology Manual. Drainage area maps shall also be submitted to determine the quantity of
runoff generated by or tributary to the site, and its effects on the site or upon upstream or
downstream properties.
the study shall include the following but not limited to:
☒ In the narrative of the report please provide a summary table of pre- and post-
development C, Tc, I, A, V100, Q100 without mitigation and Q100 with mitigation for each
area (or point) where drainage discharges from the project. Peak runoff rates (cfs),
velocities (fps) and identification of all erosive velocities (at all points of discharge)
calculations for pre-development and post-development. The comparisons should be made
about the same discharge points for each drainage basin affecting the site and adjacent
properties.
☒ Summary/Conclusion: Please discuss whether the proposed project would substantially
alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-
or off-site? Provide reasons and mitigations proposed.☐ Provide existing and proposed
Hydrology Maps for each phase. The maps shall show existing and proposed culverts,
discharge point with A & Q, flow path direction for each drainage basin. Show existing FEMA
floodplain/floodway which flow through the property. A minimum map size is 11"x17".
☒ Provide Hydrologic Soil Group Map.
☒ Provide Rainfall Isopluvials for 100 Year Rainfall Event - 6 Hours and 24 Hours Maps.
☒ The report should have numbered pages and a corresponding Table of Contents.
☐ Improvements within City Public Right-of-Way have been designed in accordance with
Appendix K: Guidance on Green Infrastructure.
☒ BMP’s have been designed to safely convey the 100-year flood
☐ Limits of Inundation. Said limits on the property, during specified storm frequencies, shall be
delineated on the plans; supporting calculations shall also be required.
22 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation December 5, 2024 Template Date: August 14th, 2022
☒ Flood Protection. The engineer of record responsible for plan preparation shall ensure:
a. That the building pads to be created through any proposed grading are free from
inundation from runoff from specified storms; and
b. That floodplain/floodway elevations and widths, sheet flow depths and any other data
required by the City Engineer (or by any applicable County, State or Federal flood
protection insurance program/requirements) are delineated on the plans.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 23
Template Date: August 14th, 2022 Preparation Date: December 5, 2024
CHECKLIST 3
Checklist for Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Report
The report must address the following key elements, and where appropriate, mitigation
recommendations must be provided.
☒ Identify areas of the project site where infiltration is likely to be feasible and provide
justifications for selection of those areas based on soil types, slopes, proximity to existing
features, etc. Include completed and signed Worksheet C.4-1.
Investigate, evaluate and estimate the vertical infiltration rates and capacities in accordance
with the guidance provided in Appendix D which describes infiltration testing and appropriate
factor of safety to be applied for infiltration testing results. The site may be broken into sub-basins,
each of which has different infiltration rates or capacities.
Describe the infiltration/ percolation test results and correlation with published infiltration/
percolation rates based on soil parameters or classification. Recommend providing design
infiltration/percolation rate(s) at the sub-basins. Include completed and signed Worksheet D.5-1.
Investigate the subsurface geological conditions and geotechnical conditions that would affect
infiltration or migration of water toward structures, slopes, utilities, or other features. Describe the
anticipated flow path of infiltrated water. Indicate if the water will flow into pavement sections,
utility trench bedding, wall drains, foundation drains, or other permeable improvements.
Investigate depth to groundwater and the nature of the groundwater. Include an estimate of the
high seasonal groundwater elevations.
☒ Evaluate proposed use of the site (industrial use, residential use, etc.), soil and groundwater
data and provide a concluding opinion whether proposed storm water infiltration could cause
adverse impacts to groundwater quality and if it does cause impacts whether the impacts could
be reasonably mitigated or not.
Estimate the maximum allowable infiltration rates and volumes that could occur at the site that
would avoid damage to existing and proposed structures, utilities, slopes, or other features. In
addition the report must indicate if the recommended infiltration rate is appropriate based on the
conditions exposed during construction.
Provide a concluding opinion regarding whether or not the proposed onsite storm water
infiltration/percolation BMP will result in soil piping, daylight water seepage, slope instability, or
ground settlement.
Recommend measures to substantially mitigate or avoid any potentially detrimental effects of
the storm water infiltration BMPs or associated soil response on existing or proposed
improvements or structures, utilities, slopes or other features within and adjacent to the site. For
example, minimize soil compaction.
Provide guidance for the selection and location of infiltration BMPs, including the minimum
separations between such infiltration BMPs and structures, streets, utilities, manufactured and
existing slopes, engineered fills, utilities or other features. Include guidance for measures that
could be used to reduce the minimum separations or to mitigate the potential impacts of
infiltration BMPs.