HomeMy WebLinkAboutLD21-2040Permit Number: LD21-2040
LD - Onsite Improvements/ Mass & Rough Grading
Issued: 02/06/2025
Expired: 10/27/2025
Job Address: Tract Map 37928
Legal Description:
City of Temecula - Land Development Division
41000 Main Street - Temecula, CA 92590
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Phone: (951) 308-6395 Fax: (951) 694-6475
ANY NOTICE OR NOTICES REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN PURSUANT TO THIS PERMIT SHALL BE SERVED
ON THE OTHER PARTY BY FIRST CLASS MAIL, POSTAGE PREPAID, AT THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS:
Decatur Advisors Llc
Po Box 2016
Carlsbad, CA 92018
(619) 851-5121
Applicant:
Contractor:
Description of Work: The City Engineer hereby authorizes the Property Owner and Applicant (if different from
Property Owner) (hereinafter collectively referred to a "Permittee") to do the following work including backfilling,
compaction, surfacing and/or as outlined in the description of work below:
Description:
Tract Map 37928 Rough Grading for Planning Area 33A (PA33A)
Separate permits required:
1. Haul route permit for the export of material
2. Encroachment permit for ALL work within the City right-of-way
3. Retaining wall permit
Earthwork includes 14,000 CY excavation/14,000 CY embankment/0 CY export. Maximum 2:1 slopes. All
grading and improvements shall be as specified on the approved plans and per the preliminary soils report.
Perform grading in accordance with approved Grading Plans dated . A pre-grading conference is required
48 hours (minimum) in advance of any work done under this permit with the grading contractor and
City Inspector. A pre-grade meeting is required 48 hours prior to any work. Permittee shall contact e-mail
LDinspections@TemeculaCA.gov to schedule a meeting. Any field changes to the plan shall be approved by
the City Engineer. All required permits and inspections by Building and Safety for walls, etc. shall be completed
prior to any releases and/or other permits issued or released. Traffic and dust control shall be reviewed and
approved by the inspector.
Permitee Date
City Engineer or Authorized Representative Date
02/06/2025
Page 1 of 1
City of Temecula
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP)
PROJECT NAME & PERMIT NO:
Wingsweep PA33A – Tract # 37928
Permit # PA20-0569
LD21-2040
PROJECT ADDRESS:
Nicolas Road and Butterfield Stage Road
PROJECT APN:
964-460-017
PREPARED BY:
Rick Engineering Company
5620 Friars Road
San Diego, California 92110
PREPARED FOR:
Wingsweep Corporation
38445 Overview Rd
Temecula, California 92592
DATE OF WQMP:
04/16/2021
Revised: 06/14/2021
APPROVED BY:
APPROVAL DATE:
APPROVED BY
CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC WORKS
valerie.ycong 08/04/2022
08/04/2022 08/04/2022
08/04/20
Michael Gentile 6/23/2022
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR
WINGSWEEP PLANNING AREA 33A
REVISION PAGE
JUNE 14, 2021
This Water Quality Management Plan presents a revision to the report titled
“Water Quality Management Plan for Wingsweep Planning Area 33A” dated April
16, 2021, pursuant to 1st plan check review comments and minor project design
changes. Redline review comments have been addressed and included on a
separate document.
WQMP 3
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: June ,14 2021
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 X Yes ☐No ☐N/A
Discussion / justification:
Several of the ultimate intended uses may result in non-stormwater discharges that are not to
enter the MS4. Source Control BMPs can be effective in preventing illicit discharges.
Source control BMPs include Stenciling On-Site Storm Drains indicating illicit discharges are
not permissible, adhering to plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots sweeping and washing
requirements, Maintaining Landscaping using minimum or no pesticides.
4.2.2 Storm Drain Stenciling or Signage X Yes ☐No ☐ N/A
Discussion / justification:
Posted notices that can prevent waste dumping will be employed.
4.2.3 Protect Outdoor Materials Storage Areas from Rainfall,
Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
☐ Yes ☐No X N/A
Discussion / justification:
There will be no outdoor materials storage areas associated with this project.
4.2.4 Protect Materials Stored in Outdoor Work Areas from
Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
☐Yes ☐No X N/A
Discussion / justification:
There will be no outdoor work areas associated with this project.
4.2.5 Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On,
Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
☐Yes ☐No X N/A
Discussion / justification:
There will be no trash storage areas associated with this project.
4.2.6 Additional BMPs Based on Potential Sources of Runoff
Pollutants
☐Yes ☐No X N/A
Discussion / justification. Clearly identify which sources of runoff pollutants are discussed:
4 WQMP
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
BH:JR:vs:k.files/Report/17883-J.003
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.
X SC-A. On-site storm drain inlets X Yes ☐No ☐N/A
☐ SC-B. Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump
pumps
☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-C. Interior parking garages ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-D1. Need for future indoor & structural pest control ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
X SC-D2. Landscape/outdoor pesticide use X Yes ☐No ☐N/A
☐ SC-E. Pools, spas, ponds, fountains, and other water
features
☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-F. Food service ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-G. Refuse areas ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-H. Industrial processes ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-I. Outdoor storage of equipment or materials ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-J. Vehicle and equipment cleaning ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-K. Vehicle/equipment repair and maintenance ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-L. Fuel dispensing areas ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-M. Loading docks ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-N. Fire sprinkler test water ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-O. Miscellaneous drain or wash water ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
X SC-P. Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots X Yes ☐No ☐N/A
☐ SC-Q. Large trash generating facilities ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-R. Animal facilities ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-S. Plant nurseries and garden centers ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
☐ SC-T. Automotive facilities ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
Note: Show all source control measures applied above on the plan sheets.
WQMP 5
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: June ,14 2021
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 X N/A
Discussion / justification:
Post-construction drainage pathways will closely mimic the pre-project conditions in that runoff
will generally flow southerly eventually discharging to Santa Gertrudis Creek.
However, the site has been previously mass graded and therefore no natural storage reservoirs
or natural drainage corridors currently occur.
4.3.2 Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
Discussion / justification:
The site has been previously mass graded over a decade ago and there is currently no
appreciable vegetation present on the site. Several steps have been taken to restore and mimic
the benefits provided by the natural vegetation, however.
The site will be developed so as to have landscaped areas that mimic the natural vegetation.
4.3.3 Minimize Impervious Area X Yes ☐No ☐N/A
Discussion / justification:
Impervious surfaces have been minimized per landscape design. Street widths have designed
to the minimum widths necessary.
4.3.4 Minimize Soil Compaction X Yes ☐No ☐
N/A
Discussion / justification:
As mentioned above, the site was previously mass-graded over a decade age and the soil has
been compacted. Several steps will be taken to restore and minimize additional soil compaction,
however.
Protected areas have been identified and will be left undisturbed by the development envelope.
The site will be developed so as to have landscaped areas that mimic the natural vegetation, with
landscaped areas to be re-tilled and un-compacted to the extent practicable to allow for plant
growth, also allowing for greater infiltrative capacity.
4.3.5 Impervious Area Dispersion X Yes ☐No ☐N/A
Discussion / justification:
The impervious areas will be interspersed by pervious landscaped areas. Where feasible, flow
from impervious areas will be routed through pervious areas.
6 WQMP
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
BH:JR:vs:k.files/Report/17883-J.003
As roadways will be crowned, the potential to use landscaped medians to collect impervious
areas is limited. Residential lots will be designed to sheet flow prior to collection by conveyance
systems.
4.3.6 Runoff Collection ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
Discussion / justification:
Rainwater harvest is not considered feasible for this project per worksheet B.3-1
4.3.7 Landscaping with Native or Drought Tolerant Species X Yes ☐No ☐N/A
Discussion / justification:
It is anticipated that right of way landscaped areas will use drought tolerant and native
species and are to be shown on landscape plans.
4.3.8 Harvesting and Using Precipitation ☐Yes ☐No X N/A
Discussion / justification:
Rainwater harvest is not considered feasible for this project per worksheet B.3-1
Step 3: Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist
Minimum Required Standard Construction Stormwater BMPs
If you answer “Yes” to any of the questions below, your project is subject to Table 1 on the following page
(Minimum Required Standard Construction Stormwater BMPs). As noted in Table 1, please select at least
the minimum number of required BMPs 1, or as many as are feasible for your project. If no BMP is selected,
an explanation must be given in the box provided. The following questions are intended to aid in
determining construction BMP requirements for your project.
Note: All selected BMPs below must be included on the BMP plan incorporated into the
construction plan sets.
1. Will there be soil disturbing activities that will result in exposed soil areas?
(This includes minor grading and trenching.)
Reference Table 1 Items A, B, D, and E
Note: Soil disturbances NOT considered significant include, but are not limited to,
change in use, mechanical/electrical/plumbing activities, signs, temporary trailers,
interior remodeling, and minor tenant improvement.
X Yes ☐No
2. Will there be asphalt paving, including patching?
Reference Table 1 Items D and F
X Yes ☐No
3. Will there be slurries from mortar mixing, coring, or concrete saw cutting?
Reference Table 1 Items D and F
X 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
X Yes ☐No
5. Will there be stockpiling (soil, compost, asphalt, concrete, solid waste) for over
24 hours?
Reference Table 1 Items D and F
X Yes ☐No
6. Will there be dewatering operations?
Reference Table 1 Items C and D
X Yes ☐No
1 Minimum required BMPs are those necessary to comply with the City of Temecula Erosion and Sediment Control
Ordinance (Chapter 18.18 et seq.) and the City of Temecula Engineering and Construction Manual (Chapter 18).
WQMP 7
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: June ,14 2021
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
X Yes ☐No
8. Will trash or solid waste product be generated from this project?
Reference Table 1 Item F
X Yes ☐No
9. Will construction equipment be stored on site (e.g.: fuels, oils, trucks, etc.?)
Reference Table 1 Item F ☐Yes X No
10. Will Portable Sanitary Services (“Porta-potty”) be used on the site?
Reference Table 1 Item F
X Yes ☐No
8 WQMP
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
BH:JR:vs:k.files/Report/17883-J.003
Table 1. Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist
Minimum Required
Best Management Practices
(BMPs)
CALTRANS
SW
Handbook 2
Detail
BMP
Selected
Reference sheet No.’s where each
selected BMP is shown on the
plans.
If no BMP is selected, an
explanation must be provided.
A. Select Erosion Control Method for Disturbed Slopes (choose at least one for the appropriate
season)
Vegetation Stabilization
Planting 3 (Summer)
SS-2, SS-4 ☐
Plan sheet number will be
referenced when available Hydraulic Stabilization
Hydroseeding2 (Summer)
SS-4 X
Bonded Fiber Matrix or
Stabilized Fiber Matrix 4 (Winter)
SS-3 X
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 ☐
Plan sheet number will be
referenced when available Sediment Desilting Basin (must
treat all site runoff)
SC-2 X
Mulch, straw, wood chips, soil
application
SS-6, SS-8 ☐
2 State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2003. Storm Water Quality Handbooks, Construction
Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual. March. Available online at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/construc/stormwater/manuals.htm.
3 If Vegetation Stabilization (Planting or Hydroseeding) is proposed for erosion control it may be installed between
May 1st and August 15th. Slope irrigation is in place and needs to be operable for slopes >3 feet. Vegetation
must be watered and established prior to October 1st. The owner must implement a contingency physical BMP
by August 15th if vegetation establishment does not occur by that date. If landscaping is proposed, erosion
control measures must also be used while landscaping is being established. Established vegetation must have a
subsurface mat of intertwined mature roots with a uniform vegetative coverage of 70 percent of the natural
vegetative coverage or more on all disturbed areas.
4 All slopes over three feet must have established vegetative cover prior to final permit approval.
WQMP 9
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: June ,14 2021
Table 1. Construction Stormwater BMP Checklist (continued)
Minimum Required
Best Management Practices
(BMPs)
CALTRANS
SW Handbook
Detail
BMP
Selected
Reference sheet No.’s where each
selected BMP is shown on the
plans.
If no BMP is selected, an
explanation must be provided.
C. If runoff or dewatering operation is concentrated, velocity must be controlled using an energy
dissipater
Energy Dissipater Outlet
Protection 5
SS-10 X Plan sheet number will be
referenced when available
D. Select sediment control method for all disturbed areas (choose at least one)
Silt Fence SC-1 X
Plan sheet number will be
referenced when available
Fiber Rolls (Straw Wattles) SC-5 X
Gravel & Sand Bags SC-6 & 8 X
Dewatering Filtration NS-2 X
Storm Drain Inlet Protection SC-10 X
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 X
Plan sheet number will be
referenced when available
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 X Plan sheet number will be
referenced when available Spill Prevention and Control WM-4 ☐
F.2 Waste Management 6
Waste Management
Concrete Waste Management
WM-8 X
Plan sheet number will be
referenced when available Solid Waste Management WM-5 ☐
Sanitary Waste Management WM-9 X
Hazardous Waste Management WM-6 ☐
Note: The Construction General Permit (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ) also requires all projects
not subject to the BMP Design Manual to comply with runoff reduction requirements through the
implementation of post-construction BMPs as described in Section XIII of the order.
5 Regional Standard Drawing D-40 – Rip Rap Energy Dissipater is also acceptable for velocity reduction.
6 Not all projects will have every waste identified. The applicant is responsible for identifying wastes that will be
onsite and applying the appropriate BMP. For example, if concrete will be used, BMP WM-8 must be selected.
10 WQMP
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
BH:JR:vs:k.files/Report/17883-J.003
Step 4: Project type determination (Standard or Priority
Development Project)
Is the project part of another Priority Development Project (PDP)? X Yes ☐ No
If so, Standard and PDP requirements apply. Go to Step 4.1 and select “PDP”
The project is (select one): X New Development ☐ Redevelopment 7
The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is: 210,379 ft2
The total existing (pre-project) impervious area is: 0 ft2
The total area disturbed by the project is: 471,041 ft2
*This area includes DMAs considered self-treating and not draining to BMP, therefore this number will differ
from DMA/BMP DCV values.
If the total area disturbed by the project is 1 acre (43,560 sq. ft.) or more OR the project is part of a larger
common plan of development disturbing 1 acre or more, a Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number
must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board.
WDID: N/A Discretionary Project
Is the project in any of the following categories, (a) through (f)?8
Yes
X
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
X
(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
X
(c) New and redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of
impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site), and support one or more of
the following uses:
(i) Restaurants. This category is defined as a facility that sells prepared foods and
drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment
stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) code 5812).
(ii) Hillside development projects. This category includes development on any natural
slope that is twenty-five percent or greater.
(iii) Parking lots. This category is defined as a land area or facility for the temporary
parking or storage of motor vehicles used personally, for business, or for
commerce.
(iv) Streets, roads, highways, freeways, and driveways. This category is defined as
any paved impervious surface used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks,
motorcycles, and other vehicles.
7 Redevelopment is defined as: The creation and/or replacement of impervious surface on an already developed
site. Examples include the expansion of a building footprint, road widening, the addition to or replacement of a
structure, and creation or addition of impervious surfaces. Replacement of impervious surfaces includes any
activity that is not part of a routine maintenance activity where impervious material(s) are removed, exposing
underlying soil during construction. Redevelopment does not include routine maintenance activities, such as
trenching and resurfacing associated with utility work; pavement grinding; resurfacing existing roadways; new
sidewalks construction; pedestrian ramps; or bike lanes on existing roads; and routine replacement of damaged
pavement, such as pothole repair.
8 Applicants should note that any development project that will create and/or replace 10,000 square feet or more of
impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site) is considered a new development.
WQMP 11
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: June ,14 2021
12 WQMP
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: October 31st, 2018
BH:JR:vs:k.files/Report/17883-J.003
Project type determination (continued)
Yes
☐
No
X
(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
X
(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
X
(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).
X Yes – the project is a Priority Development Project (PDP).
Further guidance may be found in Chapter 1 and Table 1-2 of the BMP Design Manual.
The following is for redevelopment PDPs only:
The area of existing (pre-project) impervious area at the project site is: ________________ ft2 (A)
The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is _______________ ft2 (B)
Percent impervious surface created or replaced (B/A)*100: _______________ %
The percent impervious surface created or replaced is (select one based on the above calculation):
☐ less than or equal to fifty percent (50%) – only newly created or replaced impervious areas are
considered a PDP and subject to stormwater requirements
OR
☐ greater than fifty percent (50%) – the entire project site is considered a PDP and subject to
stormwater requirements
WQMP 13
Template Date: October 31st, 2018 Preparation Date: June ,14 2021
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.
X 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:
Exhibit A
City of Temecula
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
ii PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: September 26, 2019
This page was left intentionally blank.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS iii
Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 14, 2021
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... iii
Attachments ............................................................................................................................... iii
Preparer's Certification Page ...................................................................................................... v
Step 1: Site Information Checklist ......................................................................................... 7
Step 1.1: Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns ............................ 7
Step 1.2: Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns ................... 8
Step 1.3: Other Site Requirements and Constraints ......................................................... 9
Step 2: Strategy for Meeting PDP Performance Requirements ............................................11
Attachments
Attachment 1: Stormwater Pollutant Control BMP Selection
Attachment 1a: DMA Exhibit
Attachment 1b: 85th percentile 24-hour Isohyetal Map
Attachment 1c: Worksheet B.1-1 DCV
Attachment 1d: Structural Pollutant Control BMP Checklist(s)
Attachment 1e:
Attachment 1f:
Attachment 2: Hydromodification Control Measures
Attachment 2a: Applicability of HMP Requirements
Attachment 2b: HMP Exhibit(s)
Attachment 2c: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas
Attachment 2d: Flow Control Facility Design
Attachment 2e: Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels (optional)
Attachment 2f: Vector Control Plan (if applicable)
Attachment 3: Structural BMP Maintenance Plan
Attachment 3a: Structural BMP Maintenance Thresholds and Actions
Attachment 3b: Maintenance Agreements / Notifications (when applicable)
Attachment 3c: Individual Structural BMP DMA Map book
Attachment 4: City of Temecula PDP Structural BMP Verification for DPW Permitted Land
Development Projects
Attachment 5: Copy of Plan Sheets Showing Permanent Stormwater BMPs
Attachment 6: Copy of Project's Drainage Report
Attachment 7: Copy of Project's Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Report
iv PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: September 26, 2019
This page was left intentionally blank.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS v
Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 14, 2021
Preparer's Certification Page
Project Name: Wingsweep PA33A
Permit Application Number: PA20-0569 LD21-2040
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
Print Name
Rick Engineering Company 619-291-0707
Company & Phone No.
______________________
Date
Engineer's Seal:
Brendan Hastie
3-3-22
#65809, Exp. 9/23
vi PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: September 26, 2019
This page was left intentionally blank.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 7
Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 14, 2021
Step 1: Site Information Checklist
Step 1.1: Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns
Project Watershed (Complete Hydrologic Unit,
Area, and Subarea Name with Numeric Identifier;
e.g., 902.52 Santa Margarita HU, Pechanga HA,
Wolf HSA)
902.00 Santa Margarita HU, 902.40 Auld HA,
2.43 Gertrudis HSA
Current Status of the Site (select all that apply):
Existing development
X Previously graded but not built out
Demolition completed without new construction
Agricultural or other non-impervious use
Vacant, undeveloped/natural
Description / Additional Information:
The site has been previously mass graded by others. An existing sediment basin is found in the
southwest corner of the site. The majority of the runoff from the site flows southwest before being
collected in the sediment basin and discharged to Santa Gertrudis creek.
Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply and provide each area on site):
X Pervious Area 10.7 Acres (471,088 Square Feet)
☐ Impervious Areas 0 Acres (0 Square Feet)
Description / Additional Information:
How is stormwater runoff conveyed from the site? At a minimum, this description should answer:
(1) Whether existing drainage conveyance is natural or urban;
(2) Is runoff from offsite conveyed through the site? If yes, describe the offsite drainage areas,
design flows, and locations where offsite flows enter the project site, and summarize how such
flows are conveyed through the site;
(3) Provide details regarding existing project site drainage conveyance network, including any
existing storm drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, stormwater treatment
facilities, natural or constructed channels; and
(4) Identify all discharge locations from the existing project site along with a summary of
conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge locations. Provide summary of
the pre-project drainage areas and design flows to each of the existing runoff discharge locations.
Reference the Drainage report Attachment for detailed calculations.
Describe existing site drainage patterns:
The site has been previously mass graded by others. An existing sediment basin is found in the
southwest corner of the site, with no current engineered outworks. The majority of the runoff from
the site sheet flows southwest before being collected in the sediment basin and discharged to
Santa Gertrudis creek.
8 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: September 26, 2019
Step 1.2: Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns
Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities:
Planning Area 33A (PA33A) provides for the development of 15 single family residential dwelling
units, and one street. The drainage pattern will mimic existing conditions drainage, flowing
generally southwest before being collected in a Biofiltration BMP and discharged to Santa
Gertrudis Creek.
Proposed Land Cover Includes (select all that apply and provide each area on site):
Existing to Remain
X Pervious Area 1.5 Acres (67,411 Square Feet)
☐ Impervious Areas _______ Acres (_______ Square Feet)
Existing to Be Replaced
☐ Pervious Area _______ Acres (_______ Square Feet)
☐ Impervious Areas _______ Acres (_______ Square Feet)
Newly Created
X Pervious Area 4.4 Acres 193,298 Square Feet)
X Impervious Areas 4.8 Acres 210,379 Square Feet)
Total
X Pervious Area 5.9 Acres (260,709 Square Feet)
X Impervious Areas 4.8 Acres (210,379 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):
The proposed site will consist of one street with curbs and 15 detached residential units.
List/describe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas):
The proposed site will consist of 15 detached residential units with landscaped yard areas, and
one (1) Biofiltration BMP area.
Describe any grading or changes to site topography:
Proposed grading changes will mimic drainage patterns of existing conditions.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 9
Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 14, 2021
Provide details regarding the proposed project site drainage conveyance network, including storm
drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, stormwater treatment facilities, natural or
constructed channels, and the method for conveying offsite flows through or around the proposed
project site. Identify all discharge locations from the proposed project site along with a summary
of the conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge locations. Provide a
summary of pre- and post-project drainage areas and design flows to each of the runoff discharge
locations. Reference the drainage study for detailed calculations.
Describe proposed site drainage patterns:
The proposed project site drainage will consist of curb and gutter conveyance directing flow to
the Biofiltration basin located in the southwest corner of the project site. The Biofiltration basis
will be sized for water quality treatment, hydromodification management, detention requirements.
Since there is an existing graded sediment basin, the proposed biofiltration basin will occupy the
same space, therefore preserving the point of discharge to Santa Gertrudis Creek.
Step 1.3: Other Site Requirements and Constraints
When applicable, list other site requirements or constraints that will influence stormwater
management design, such as zoning requirements including setbacks and open space, or local
codes governing minimum street width, sidewalk construction, allowable pavement types, and
drainage requirements.
10 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: September 26, 2019
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.
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 11
Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 14, 2021
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.
12 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: September 26, 2019
Describe the general strategy for BMP implementation at the site.
Following direction from the City of Temecula BMP Design Manual, one (1) Biofiltration basin is
proposed for the pollutant control requirements of the project. The DCV was calculated using the
County of San Diego Automated Stormwater Pollutant Control Worksheet (Version 1.3). The
worksheets show the proposed design satisfy the Annual Retention Requirements and effectively
treats captured stormwater. The Biofiltration basin will be sized to address Hydromodification
management as well as Detention requirements.
There is one (1) proposed Biofiltration basin; BMP 33.
In addition, three (3) site design BMPs have been implemented on-site.
1. 4.3.3 Minimize directly connected impervious area
In order to minimize the impervious footprint of the project, site streets and sidewalks have been
designed to the minimum widths necessary.
2. 4.3.5 Disperse impervious areas
In order to disconnect impervious surfaces, roof runoff will be directed to pervious areas before
discharging to storm drain conveyance where feasible.
3. 4.3.7 Landscape with native or drought tolerant species
It is anticipated that right of way landscaped areas will use drought tolerant and other native species
and are to be shown on landscape plans.
(Continue on following page as necessary.)
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 13
Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 14, 2021
Description of structural BMP strategy continued
(Page reserved for continuation of description of general strategy for structural BMP
implementation at the site)
(Continued from previous page)
14 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: September 26, 2019
ATTACHMENT 1
STORMWATER POLLUTANT CONTROL BMP SELECTION
Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet:
Attachment
Sequence Contents Checklist
Special Considerations for
Redevelopment Projects (50% Rule)
see chapter 1.7 and Step 4 of
Appendix A.1.
☐ Less than or equal to fifty
percent (50%)
☐ Greater than fifty percent (50%)
Refer to Figure 5-1: Stormwater Pollutant Control BMP Selection Flow Chart
Attachment 1a DMA Exhibit (Required)
See DMA Exhibit Checklist on the
back of this form.
See Chapter 3.3.3 for guidance
X 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 X Included
Attachment 1c Worksheet B.2-1 DCV 1
X Included
Attachment 1d Applicable Site Design BMP Fact
Sheet(s) from Appendix E
X Included
☐ Entire project is designed with
Self-Retaining DMAs. The project
is compliant with Pollution Control
BMP sizing requirements. STOP *
Attachment 1e Structural Pollutant Control BMP
Checklist(s)
X Included
Attachment 1f Is Onsite Alternative Compliance
proposed?2
X No
☐ Yes - Include WQE worksheets
Attachment 1g Offsite Alternative Compliance
Participation Form - Pollutant Control
Refer to Figure 1-3:Pathways to
Participating in Offsite Alternative
Compliance Program
X Full Compliance Onsite
☐ Partial Compliance Onsite with
Offsite Alternative Compliance or
Full Offsite Alternative
Compliance. Document onsite
structural BMPs and complete
- Pollutant Control Offsite
Alternative Compliance
Participation Form, and
- WQE worksheets
* If this box is checked, the remainder of Attachment 1 does not need to be filled out.
1 All stormwater pollutant control worksheets have been automated and are available for download at:
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/dpw/watersheds/DevelopmentandConstruction/BMP_Design_Manual.
html
2 Water Quality Equivalency Guidance and automated worksheets for Region 9:
http://www.projectcleanwater.org/water-quality-equivalency-guidance/
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 15
Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 14, 2021
Attachment 1a: DMA Exhibit Checklist
See Chapter 3.3.3 for guidance
X Point(s) of Compliance
X Project Site Boundary
X Project Disturbed Area Footprint
X 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.
X Include summary table of worksheet inputs for each DMA.
X Include description of self-mitigating areas.
X Potential pollutant source areas and corresponding required source control BMPs (see
Chapter 4, Appendix E.1, and Step 3.5)
X 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.)
N/A Proposed Harvest and Use BMPs
X Underlying hydrologic soil group (Web Soil Survey)
X Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands, pond, lake)
X Existing topography and impervious areas
X Proposed grading and impervious areas. If the project is a subdivision or spans multiple lots
show pervious and impervious totals for each lot.
X Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite
X Potable water wells, onsite wastewater treatment systems (septic), underground utilities
X Structural BMPs (identify location, structural BMP ID No., type of BMP, and size/detail)
X Approximate depth to groundwater at each structural BMP
X Approximate infiltration rate and feasibility (full retention, partial retention, biofiltration) at
each structural BMP
N/A Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected and or conveyed through the project
site, if applicable.
X Temporary Construction BMPs. Include protection of source control, site design and
structural BMPs during construction.
PA 33A
32
33116210
11
1
1
9
0
1
1
9
0
1
1
9
0
X
X
X
1180
X
1185
1185
1
1
8
5
CONC
X
X
X
1190
119
0
1190
1190
1190
1190
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
SHADOW
X
DENSE
TREES
X
1195
1195
119
5
119
5
1195
1195
1195
1195
DENSE
TREES
X
X
DENSE
TREES
X
X
X
MHX
12
0
0
1200
1200
1200
1
2
0
0
12
0
0
1200
1200
1200
1200
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1205
12
0
5
1205
1205
1205
1
2
0
5
1205
1205
1205
1205
1205
1205
1205
X
X
X
X
X
X
ASPH
1206
12
0
6
MHX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
P
BX
X
MHX
X
X
DENSE
TREES
ASPH
1208
12
0
8
X
X
MHX
X
PB
X
X
PBX
X
X
MHX
1210
1210
1210
1210
12
10
1210
12
10
12
10
1
2
10
X
PBX
X
MHX
X
12
12
MHX
PBX
X
X
X
PBX
X
X
X
X
X
X
MHX
X
X
MHX
X
CONC
X
X
X
X
MHX
MHX
X
MHX
X
X
P
B
X
X
X
P
B
X
X
X
X
X
X
PB
X
X
X
CONC
12
15
X
X
X
X
X
X
MHX
X
CONC
X
X
X
X
1215
1215
12
15
1215
12
15
12
15
X
PB
X
MHX
X
X
X
X
X
PB
X
X
X
X
ASPH
X
X
12
16
X
12
16
X
X
12
2
0
X
1225
1210
1215
1220
PA 33A
DAYLIGHT LINE
DAYLIGHT LINE
EXIST LOT LINE
SEPARATE PLAN
EX 48" SD PER
EXIST LOT LINE
DAYLIGHT LINE
DAYLIGHT LINE
DAYLIGHT LINE
EXIST LOT LINE
SEPARATE PLAN
EX 48" SD PER
EXIST LOT LINE
DAYLIGHT LINE
50'
50'
REC. 4-21-2006
DOC. NO. 2006-0290814
OF DEDICATION PER
IRREVOCABLE OFFER
REC. 5-17-2006
DOC. NO. 2006-0359397
OF DEDICATION PER
IRREVOCABLE OFFER
DMA 33
SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK
NICOLAS ROAD
DMA 33-1
DMA 33-2
DMA 33-3
10.7 AC
4.7 AC.
3.1 AC.
0.8 AC.
SC-A
1206.51205.81204.9
1208.2
1208.0
1207.7
1207.0
1206.21205.31204.4
7
9
8
10
111213
1203.4
14
15
1202.5
1
1202.80 2
1203.2
3
1204.1
4 5 6
EX
EASEMENT
1206.51205.81204.9
1208.2
1208.0
1207.7
1207.0
1206.21205.31204.4
7
9
8
10
111213
1203.4
14
15
1202.5
1
1202.80 2
1203.2
3
1204.1
4 5 6
EX
EASEMENT
SC-P
DMA 33-6
DMA 33-9
DMA 33-7
0.5 AC
0.8 AC.
SC-D2
SC-D2
#33
SC-D2
DMA 33-4.1
SC-D2
0.1 AC.
0.1 AC.
DMA 33-8
SC-P
DMA 33-5
POC 1
0.8 AC.
0.3 AC.
DMA 33-4.2
0.3 AC1295
1
1
9
5
119
5
1200
1200
1200
1
2
0
0
1
1
9
5
120
0
1
2
0
0
1205
1205
1205
1205
1205
1205
1205
1
2
0
5
1205
1205
1210
1
2
1
0
1210
12
10
12
10
12
10
12
10
12
10
1210
1210
1215
1215
12
15
1215
1215
1220
1215
SUMMARY DMA PA33AWINGSWEEP
DMA
(SF)
AREA
(AC)
AREA
TYPESLANDUSE/SURFACE %IMPERVIOUS
(SF)
BMPTO
DRAINING
AREAS
IMPERVIOU
(AC)
BMPTO
DRAINING
AREAS
IMPERVIOU
(SF)
BMPTO
DRAINING
AREA
PERVIOUS
(AC)
BMPTO
GDRAININ
AREA
PERVIOUS
(AC)
BMPTO
GDRAININ
AREA
33-1 135439 3.1 RESIDENTIALDETACHED 47%63,656 1.5 71,783 1.6 3.1
33-2 35903 0.8 SURFACE/SIDEWALKROAD 100%35,903 0.8 0 0.0 0.8
33-3 203517 4.7 RESIDENTIALDETACHED 47%95,653 2.2 107,864 2.5 4.7
33-4.1 15167 0.3 BMP WQ PONDING SURFACE 100%15,167 0.3 0 0.0 0.3
33-4.2 13651 0.3 SLOPEVEGETATED 0%0 0.0 13,651 0.3 0.3
33-5 34279 0.8 SLOPEVEGETATED SELF-MITIGATING -----
33-6 23650 0.5 SLOPEVEGETATED SELF-MITIGATING -----
33-7 5449 0.1 SLOPEVEGETATED SELF-MITIGATING -----
33-8 4033 0.1 SLOPEVEGETATED SELF-MITIGATING -----
33-9 AREA) TOTALIN
INCLUDED(NOT
SLOPEVEGETATED SELF-TREATING
R9-2013-0076
NO. CERTIFICATION QUALITY WATER 401SECTION
ACT WATER CLEAN PER IMPROVEMENTSCHANNEL
=Totals 471088 10.7 52%210,379 4.8 193,298 4.4 9.2
SUMMARY BMP DESIGN SITEIMPLEMENTED
DESCRIPTION LOCATIONSTYPICAL
4.3.3 AREA
IMPERVIOUSMINIMIZE
TRAILS DG STREET,PRIVATE
ALONG AREASSIDEWALK
4.3.5 DISPERSION
AREAIMPERVIOUS
LOTSRESIDENTIAL
4.3.7 SPECIESTOLERANT
DROUGHT ORNATIVE
WITHLANDSCAPING
PLANSLANDSCAPING
PER SLOPES,VEGETATED
LOTS,RESIDENTIAL
INFORMATION
ADDITIONAL FOR WQMP THE OF 2 STEP TO REFERNOTE:
# 7
NOTES
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT BMP LEGEND
0
2
-
M
A
R
-
2
0
2
2
1
3
:
0
1
C
:
\
R
I
C
K
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
C
_
R
I
V
_
G
\
1
7
8
8
3
\
1
7
8
8
3
-
J
_
P
A
3
3
A
\
Wa
t
e
r
R
e
s
\
S
D
C
o
r
p
S
t
d
s
2
0
0
5
.
d
s
c
r
i
p
t
C
:
\
R
I
C
K
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
C
_
R
I
V
_
G
\
1
7
8
8
3
\
1
7
8
8
3
-
J
_
P
A
3
3
A
\
Wa
t
e
r
R
e
s
\
1
7
8
8
3
J
_
P
A
3
3
A
w
q
m
p
0
1
.
d
g
n
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - EXHIBIT FOR WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN ONLY
DMA 2
BMP
LOCATION OF PROPOSED BIOFILTRATION
27.6 AC DMA AREA
BOUNDARY
DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA (DMA)
DMA ID
BMP ID
1SHT OF 1
PLANNING AREA PER SPECIFIC PLAN
c
2
0
2
0
Ric
k
E
n
g
in
e
e
rin
g
C
o
m
p
a
n
y
J-17883-E
POC 1
POINT OF COMPLIANCE
FLOWPATH
PLANNING AREA 33A
WINGSWEEP PROPERTY
FOR
PLAN EXHIBIT
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Revised: March 2, 2022
Revised: June 14, 2021
Date: April 16, 2021
60 0 60
SCALE: 1" = 60'
120
NOT ENCOUNTER GROUNDWATER.
6. GEOTECHNICAL BORING TO A DEPTH OF 51.5' DID
SEDIMETN YIELD AREA.
5. SITE LOCATION IS OUTSIDE OF CRITICAL COARSE
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT INDICATES 0.03 IN/HR.
4. APPROXIMATE INFILTRATION RATE AT BMP PER
CALCULATING RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS
3. HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPE "D" USED FOR
PROPERTY PLANNING AREA 33A.
2. THIS WQMP EXHIBIT COVERS THE WINGSWEEP
DESIGN MANUAL.
QUALITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA BMP
THIS EXHIBIT ADDRESSES THE PERMANENT STORM WATER
1. SIZES OF THE POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPs SHOWN ON
WQMP SUMBITTAL LD20-1160
ADDRESSED BY A SEPARATE
NOTE: NICOLAS ROAD PHASE
STREETS ELEMENTS
BY NICOLAS ROAD GREEN
NOTE: DRIVEWAY TREATED
July 2018 B-3
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods
Figure B.1-1: 85th Percentile 24-hour Isohyetal Map
Approximate Project Location
Category # Description i ii iii iv v vi vii viii ix x Units
0 Drainage Basin ID or Name DMA 33 unitless
1 Basin Drains to the Following BMP Type Biofiltration unitless
2 85th Percentile 24-hr Storm Depth 0.70 inches
3 Design Infiltration Rate Recommended by Geotechnical Engineer 0.024 in/hr
4 Impervious Surfaces Not Directed to Dispersion Area (C=0.90) 210,379 sq-ft
5 Semi-Pervious Surfaces Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.30)sq-ft
6 Engineered Pervious Surfaces Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.10)sq-ft
7 Natural Type A Soil Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.10)sq-ft
8 Natural Type B Soil Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.14)sq-ft
9 Natural Type C Soil Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.23)sq-ft
10 Natural Type D Soil Not Serving as Dispersion Area (C=0.30) 193,298 sq-ft
11 Does Tributary Incorporate Dispersion, Tree Wells, and/or Rain Barrels? No No No No No No No yes/no
12 Impervious Surfaces Directed to Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.90) sq-ft
13 Semi-Pervious Surfaces Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.30)sq-ft
14 Engineered Pervious Surfaces Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.10)sq-ft
15 Natural Type A Soil Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.10)sq-ft
16 Natural Type B Soil Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.14)sq-ft
17 Natural Type C Soil Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.23)sq-ft
18 Natural Type D Soil Serving as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.30)sq-ft
19 Number of Tree Wells Proposed per SD-A #
20 Average Mature Tree Canopy Diameter ft
21 Number of Rain Barrels Proposed per SD-E #
22 Average Rain Barrel Size gal
23 Does BMP Overflow to Stormwater Features in Downstream Drainage? No No No No No No No No No No unitless
24 Identify Downstream Drainage Basin Providing Treatment in Series unitless
25 Percent of Upstream Flows Directed to Downstream Dispersion Areas percent
26 Upstream Impervious Surfaces Directed to Dispersion Area (Ci=0.90) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
27 Upstream Impervious Surfaces Not Directed to Dispersion Area (C=0.90) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
28 Total Tributary Area 403,677 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft
29 Initial Runoff Factor for Standard Drainage Areas 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless
30 Initial Runoff Factor for Dispersed & Dispersion Areas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless
31 Initial Weighted Runoff Factor 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless
32 Initial Design Capture Volume 14,364 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
33 Total Impervious Area Dispersed to Pervious Surface 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft
34 Total Pervious Dispersion Area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft
35 Ratio of Dispersed Impervious Area to Pervious Dispersion Area n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a ratio
36 Adjustment Factor for Dispersed & Dispersion Areas 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ratio
37 Runoff Factor After Dispersion Techniques 0.61 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a unitless
38 Design Capture Volume After Dispersion Techniques 14,364 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
39 Total Tree Well Volume Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
40 Total Rain Barrel Volume Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
41 Final Adjusted Runoff Factor 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless
42 Final Effective Tributary Area 246,243 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft
43 Initial Design Capture Volume Retained by Site Design Elements 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
44 Final Design Capture Volume Tributary to BMP 14,364 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
Worksheet B.1-1 General Notes:
False
False
False
Automated Worksheet B.1-1: Calculation of Design Capture Volume (V1.3)
A. Applicants may use this worksheet to calculate design capture volumes for up to 10 drainage areas User input must be provided for yellow shaded cells, values for all other cells will be automatically generated, errors/notifications will be highlighted in red and summarized below.
Upon completion of this worksheet, proceed to the appropriate BMP Sizing worksheet(s).
Dispersion
Area, Tree Well
& Rain Barrel
Inputs
(Optional)
Standard
Drainage Basin
Inputs
Results
Tree & Barrel
Adjustments
Initial Runoff
Factor
Calculation
Dispersion
Area
Adjustments
Treatment
Train Inputs &
Calculations
False
16 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS
Preparation Date: June 14, 2021 Template Date: September 26, 2019
Attachment 1e: Structural Pollutant Control BMP Checklist
Provide the following items for each Structural BMP selected
Refer to Figure 5-2: Stormwater Pollutant Control Structural BMP Selection Flow Chart
DMA ID No. 33 Structural BMP ID No. 33 Construction Plan Sheet No. TBD
X Worksheet B.3-1 Structural BMP Feasibility: Project-Scale BMP Feasibility Analysis
X Worksheet C.4-1: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Refer to Appendices C
and D to complete.
☐ Not included because the entire project will use harvest and use BMPs
X Worksheet D.5-1 Infiltration & partial retention Safety Factor
Structural BMP Selection and Design (Chapter 5.5) complete an include the applicable
worksheet(s) found in appendix B and design criteria checklists from the associated fact sheets
found in appendix E for selected Structural BMP(s):
☐ Worksheet B.6-1 - Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite
retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/description and indicate which onsite retention
or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below)
☐ Retention by harvest and use (HU-1)
☐ Continuous simulation Model
☐ Worksheet B.4-1
☐ Infiltration basin (INF-1)
☐ Bioretention (INF-2)
☐ Permeable pavement (INF-3)
X Worksheet B.5-1
☐ Biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1)
X Biofiltration (BF-1)
X Biofiltration with Nutrient Sensitive Media Design (BF-2)
X Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water Pollutants of Concern
☐ Proprietary Biofiltration (BF-3)
☐ Appendix F checklist
☐ Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water Pollutants of Concern
X Worksheet B.5-3 Minimum Footprint
☐ Worksheet B.5-4 Biofiltration + Storage
X Selected BMPs have been designed to address the entire DCV. The DMA is compliant with
Pollution Control BMP sizing requirements. STOP *
☐ Other (describe in discussion section below)
☐ Worksheet B.6-1 - Flow-thru treatment control with alternative compliance (provide BMP
type/description in discussion section below)
☐ Describe in discussion section below why the remaining BMP size could not fit on site.
☐ Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water Pollutants of Concern
☐ Selection of Flow-Thru Treatment Control BMPs with high or medium effectiveness
☐ FT-1 Vegetated swales
☐ FT-2 Media Filters
☐ FT-3 Sand Filters
☐ FT-4 Dry Extended Detention Basin
☐ FT-5 Proprietary flow-thru treatment control
☐ Pollutant Control Offsite Alternative Compliance Participation form
☐ Water Quality Equivalency Worksheets20
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) REQUIREMENTS 17
Template Date: September 26, 2019 Preparation Date: June 14, 2021
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)
Who will be the final owner of this BMP?
X HOA ☐ Property Owner ☐ City
☐ Other (describe)
Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity?
X HOA ☐ Property Owner ☐ City
☐ Other (describe)
Discussion (as needed):
(Continue on subsequent pages as necessary)
* If this box is checked, Worksheet B.6-1 does not need to be filled out.
Category # Description Value Units
0 Design Capture Volume for Entire Project Site 14,364 cubic-feet
1 Proposed Development Type Residential unitless
2 Number of Residents or Employees at Proposed Development 60 #
3 Total Planted Area within Development 200,000 sq-ft
4 Water Use Category for Proposed Planted Areas Low unitless
5 Is Average Site Design Infiltration Rate ≤0.500 Inches per Hour?Yes yes/no
6 Is Average Site Design Infiltration Rate ≤0.010 Inches per Hour?No yes/no
7 Is Infiltration of the Full DCV Anticipated to Produce Negative Impacts? Yes yes/no
8 Is Infiltration of Any Volume Anticipated to Produce Negative Impacts? No yes/no
9 36-Hour Toilet Use Per Resident or Employee 1.86 cubic-feet
10 Subtotal: Anticipated 36 Hour Toilet Use 112 cubic-feet
11 Anticipated 1 Acre Landscape Use Over 36 Hours 52.14 cubic-feet
12 Subtotal: Anticipated Landscape Use Over 36 Hours 239 cubic-feet
13 Total Anticipated Use Over 36 Hours 351 cubic-feet
14 Total Anticipated Use / Design Capture Volume 0.02 cubic-feet
15 Are Full Capture and Use Techniques Feasible for this Project? No unitless
16 Is Full Retention Feasible for this Project? No yes/no
17 Is Partial Retention Feasible for this Project? Yes yes/no
Result 18 Feasibility Category 4 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Worksheet B.3-1 General Notes:
H. PDPs participating in an offsite alternative compliance program are not held to the feasibility categories presented herein.
Capture & Use
Inputs
Automated Worksheet B.3-1: Project-Scale BMP Feasibility Analysis (V1.3)
C. Feasibility Category 1: Applicant must implement capture & use, retention, and/or infiltration elements for the entire DCV.
D. Feasibility Category 2: Applicant must implement capture & use elements for the entire DCV.
E. Feasibility Category 3: Applicant must implement retention and/or infiltration elements for all DMAs with Design Infiltration Rates greater
than 0.50 in/hr.
B. Negative impacts associated with retention may include geotechnical, groundwater, water balance, or other issues identified by a geotechnical
engineer and substantiated through completion of Form I-8.
Infiltration
Inputs
G. Feasibility Category 5: Applicant must implement standard lined biofiltration BMPs sized at ≥3% of the effective impervious tributary area
for all DMAs with Design Infiltration Rates of 0.010 in/hr or less. Applicants may also be permitted to implement reduced size and/or
specialized biofiltration BMPs provided additional criteria identified in "Supplemental Retention Criteria for Non-Standard Biofiltration BMPs"
are satisfied.
A. Applicants may use this worksheet to determine the types of structural BMPs that are acceptable for implementation at their project site (as
required in Section 5 of the BMPDM). User input should be provided for yellow shaded cells, values for all other cells will be automatically
generated. Projects demonstrating feasibility or potential feasibility via this worksheet are encouraged to incorporate capture and use features in
their project.
F. Feasibility Category 4: Applicant must implement standard unlined biofiltration BMPs sized at ≥3% of the effective impervious tributary area
for all DMAs with Design Infiltration Rates of 0.011 to 0.50 in/hr. Applicants may be permitted to implement lined BMPs, reduced size BMPs,
and/or specialized biofiltration BMPs provided additional criteria identified in "Supplemental Retention Criteria for Non-Standard Biofiltration
BMPs" are satisfied.
Calculations
C-11 July 2018
Appendix C: Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Requirements
Worksheet C.4-1: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition
Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Worksheet C.4-1
Part 1 - Full Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria
Would infiltration of the full design volume be feasible from a physical perspective without any undesirable
consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated?
Note that it is not necessary to investigate each and every criterion in the worksheet if infiltration is
precluded. Instead a letter of justification from a geotechnical professional familiar with the local conditions
substantiating any geotechnical issues will be required.
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
1
Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility
locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response to this
Screening Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of
the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability.
2
Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed
without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability,
groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be
mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening
Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors
presented in Appendix C.2.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability.
Percolation testing performed and test results included in :
Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Update), Wingsweep Entitlement, PA-10, PA-12 and PA-33A, City of
Temecula, California, by Leighton and Associates, project no. 12673.001, dated June 30, 2020.
X
X
Percolation rates below 0.5 in/hr based on testing performed in:
Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Update), Wingsweep Entitlement, PA-10, PA-12 and PA-33A, City of
Temecula, California, by Leighton and Associates, project no. 12673.001, dated June 30, 2020.
C-12 July 2018
Appendix C: Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Requirements
Worksheet C.4-1 Page 2 of 4
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
3
Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed
without increasing risk of groundwater contamination (shallow
water table, storm water pollutants or other factors) that cannot
be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening
Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors
presented in Appendix C.3.
4
Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed
without causing potential water balance issues such as change of
seasonality of ephemeral streams or increased discharge of
contaminated groundwater to surface waters? The response to this
Screening Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of
the factors presented in Appendix C.3.
Part 1
Result*
If all answers to rows 1 - 4 are “Yes” a full infiltration design is potentially feasible.
The feasibility screening category is Full Infiltration
If any answer from row 1-4 is “No”, infiltration may be possible to some extent but
would not generally be feasible or desirable to achieve a “full infiltration” design.
Proceed to Part 2
*To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in
the Regional MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by City staff to substantiate findings.
X
Provide basis:
Groundwater was not encountered within the depth explored of 51.5', boring logs included in:
Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Update), Wingsweep Entitlement, PA-10, PA-12 and PA-33A, City of
Temecula, California, by Leighton and Associates, project no. 12673.001, dated June 30, 2020.
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability.
X
Provide basis:
Groundwater was not encountered within the depth explored of 51.5' per:
Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Update), Wingsweep Entitlement, PA-10, PA-12 and PA-33A, City of
Temecula, California, by Leighton and Associates, project no. 12673.001, dated June 30, 2020.
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability.
C-13 July 2018
Appendix C: Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Requirements
Worksheet C.4-1 Page 3 of 4
Part 2 – Partial Infiltration vs. No Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria
Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative
consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated?
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
5
Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any
appreciable rate or volume? The response to this Screening
Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors
presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D.
6
Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without
increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability,
groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot
be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening
Question must be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors
presented in Appendix C.2.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates.
X
Provide basis:
Percolation/infiltration testing has yielded an average infiltration rate of 0.11in/hr. Soil is not impermeable,
however the infiltration rate is low. Testing performed in:
Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Update), Wingsweep Entitlement, PA-10, PA-12 and PA-33A, City of
Temecula, California, by Leighton and Associates, project no. 12673.001, dated June 30, 2020.
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates.
X
Proposed infiltration areas are away from cut/fill slopes, retaining walls, are located +10' from high groundwater level
and are not near utilities.
C-14 July 2018
Appendix C: Geotechnical and Groundwater Investigation Requirements
Worksheet C.4-1 Page 4 of 4
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
7
Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without
posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns
(shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)?
The response to this Screening Question must be based on a
comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates.
8
Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream water
rights? The response to this Screening Question must be based on a
comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.
Provide basis:
Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative
discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates.
Part 2
Result*
If all answers from row 5-8 are yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible.
The feasibility screening category is Partial Infiltration.
If any answer from row 5-8 is no, then infiltration of any volume is considered to be
infeasible within the drainage area. The feasibility screening category is No Infiltration.
*To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in
the Regional MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by Agency/Jurisdictions to substantiate
findings.
X
Groundwater not encountered within the upper 51.5', boring logs:
Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Update), Wingsweep Entitlement, PA-10, PA-12 and PA-33A, City of
Temecula, California, by Leighton and Associates, project no. 12673.001, dated June 30, 2020.
X
Based on low infiltration rate and depth to groundwater. Rates and depth to groundwater:
Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Update), Wingsweep Entitlement, PA-10, PA-12 and PA-33A, City of
Temecula, California, by Leighton and Associates, project no. 12673.001, dated June 30, 2020.
Appendix D: Approved Infiltration Rate Assessment Methods
D-19 July 2018
Worksheet D.5-1: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate Worksheet
Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration
Rate Worksheet Worksheet D.5-1
Factor Category Factor Description
Assigned
Weight (w)
Factor
Value (v)
Product (p)
p = w x v
A Suitability
Assessment
Soil assessment methods 0.25
Predominant soil texture 0.25
Site soil variability 0.25
Depth to groundwater / impervious
layer 0.25
Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = p
B Design
Level of pretreatment/ expected
sediment loads 0.5
Redundancy/resiliency 0.25
Compaction during construction 0.25
Design Safety Factor, SB = p
Combined Safety Factor, Stotal= SA x SB
Observed Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, Kobserved
(corrected for test-specific bias)
Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, Kdesign = Kobserved / Stotal
Supporting Data
2
3
2
1
2
2
3
0.50
0.75
0.50
0.25
1.00
0.5
0.75
2.00
2.25
4.50
0.11 (average)
0.024
Briefly describe infiltration test and provide reference to test forms:
Infiltration tests performed in general accordance with procedures of Section 2.3 of the Riverside County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District Design Handbook.
Results included in :
Geotechnical Evaluation Report (Update), Wingsweep Entitlement, PA-10, PA-12 and PA-33A, City of
Temecula, California, by Leighton and Associates, Inc., project no. 12673.001, dated June 30, 2020.
Category # Description i ii iii iv v vi vii viii ix x Units
0 Drainage Basin ID or Name DMA 33 - - - - - - - - - sq-ft
1 Design Infiltration Rate Recommended by Geotechnical Engineer 0.024 - - - - - - - - - in/hr
2 Effective Tributary Area 246,243 - - - - - - - - - sq-ft
3 Minimum Biofiltration Footprint Sizing Factor 0.030 - - - - - - - - - ratio
4 Design Capture Volume Tributary to BMP 14,364 - - - - - - - - - cubic-feet
5 Is Biofiltration Basin Impermeably Lined or Unlined? Unlined unitless
6 Provided Biofiltration BMP Surface Area 14,750 sq-ft
7 Provided Surface Ponding Depth 6 inches
8 Provided Soil Media Thickness 27 inches
9 Provided Depth of Gravel Above Underdrain Invert 11 inches
10 Diameter of Underdrain or Hydromod Orifice (Select Smallest) 2.50 inches
11 Provided Depth of Gravel Below the Underdrain 3 inches
12 Volume Infiltrated Over 6 Hour Storm 177 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
13 Soil Media Pore Space Available for Retention 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 unitless
14 Gravel Pore Space Available for Retention 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless
15 Effective Retention Depth 2.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 inches
16 Calculated Retention Storage Drawdown (Including 6 Hr Storm) 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 hours
17 Volume Retained by BMP 3,311 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
18 Fraction of DCV Retained 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio
19 Portion of Retention Performance Standard Satisfied 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio
20 Fraction of DCV Retained (normalized to 36-hr drawdown) 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio
21 Design Capture Volume Remaining for Biofiltration 11,778 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
22 Max Hydromod Flow Rate through Underdrain 0.3098 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a CFS
23 Max Soil Filtration Rate Allowed by Underdrain Orifice 0.91 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a in/hr
24 Soil Media Filtration Rate per Specifications 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 in/hr
25 Soil Media Filtration Rate to be used for Sizing 0.91 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 in/hr
26 Depth Biofiltered Over 6 Hour Storm 5.44 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 inches
27 Soil Media Pore Space Available for Biofiltration 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 unitless
28 Effective Depth of Biofiltration Storage 15.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 inches
29 Drawdown Time for Surface Ponding 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 hours
30 Drawdown Time for Effective Biofiltration Depth 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 hours
31 Total Depth Biofiltered 21.24 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 inches
32 Option 1 - Biofilter 1.50 DCV: Target Volume 17,667 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
33 Option 1 - Provided Biofiltration Volume 17,667 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
34 Option 2 - Store 0.75 DCV: Target Volume 8,834 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
35 Option 2 - Provided Storage Volume 8,834 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet
36 Portion of Biofiltration Performance Standard Satisfied 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio
37 Do Site Design Elements and BMPs Satisfy Annual Retention Requirements? Yes - - - - - - - - - yes/no
38 Overall Portion of Performance Standard Satisfied 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio
39 This BMP Overflows to the Following Drainage Basin - - - - - - - - - - unitless
40 Deficit of Effectively Treated Stormwater 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a cubic-feet
Worksheet B.5-1 General Notes:
False
Retention
Calculations
Automated Worksheet B.5-1: Sizing Lined or Unlined Biofiltration BMPs (V1.3)
False
BMP Inputs
False
Biofiltration
Calculations
A. Applicants may use this worksheet to size Lined or Unlined Biofiltration BMPs (BF-1, PR-1) for up to 10 basins. User input must be provided for yellow shaded cells, values for blue cells are automatically populated based on user inputs from previous worksheets, values for all
other cells will be automatically generated, errors/notifications will be highlighted in red/orange and summarized below. BMPs fully satisfying the pollutant control performance standards will have a deficit treated volume of zero and be highlighted in green.
False
False
False
False
Result
False
False
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-120 July 2018
E.18 BF-1 Biofiltration
Location: 43rd Street and Logan Avenue, San Diego, California
Biofiltration (Biofiltration with underdrain) facilities are vegetated surface water systems that filter
water through vegetation, and soil or engineered media prior to discharge via underdrain or
overflow to the downstream conveyance system. Biofiltration with underdrain facilities are
commonly incorporated into the site within parking lot landscaping, along roadsides, and in open
spaces. Because these types of facilities have limited or no infiltration, they are typically designed to
provide enough hydraulic head to move flows through the underdrain connection to the storm drain
system. Treatment is achieved through filtration, sedimentation, sorption, biochemical processes and
plant uptake.
Typical biofiltration with underdrain components include:
Inflow distribution mechanisms (e.g, perimeter flow spreader or filter strips)
Energy dissipation mechanism for concentrated inflows (e.g., splash blocks or riprap)
Shallow surface ponding for captured flows
Side slope and basin bottom vegetation selected based on expected climate and ponding
depth
Non-floating mulch layer (Optional)
Media layer (planting mix or engineered media) capable of supporting vegetation growth
Filter course layer consisting of aggregate to prevent the migration of fines into
uncompacted native soils or the aggregate storage layer
Aggregate storage layer with underdrain(s)
Description
MS4 Permit Category
Biofiltration
Manual Category
Biofiltration
Applicable Performance
Standard
Pollutant Control
Flow Control
Primary Benefits
Treatment
Volume Reduction (Incidental)
Peak Flow Attenuation (Optional)
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-121 July 2018
Impermeable liner or uncompacted native soils at the bottom of the facility
Overflow structure
Typical plan and Section view of a Biofiltration BMP
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-122 July 2018
Biofiltration Treatment BMP for storm water pollutant control. The system is lined or un-lined
to provide incidental infiltration, and an underdrain is provided at the bottom to carry away filtered
runoff. This configuration is considered to provide biofiltration treatment via flow through the
media layer. Storage provided above the underdrain within surface ponding, media, and aggregate
storage is considered included in the biofiltration treatment volume. Saturated storage within the
aggregate storage layer can be added to this design by raising the underdrain above the bottom of
the aggregate storage layer or via an internal weir structure designed to maintain a specific water level
elevation.
Integrated storm water flow control and pollutant control configuration. The system can be
designed to provide flow rate and duration control by primarily providing increased surface ponding
and/or having a deeper aggregate storage layer above the underdrain. This will allow for significant
detention storage, which can be controlled via inclusion of an outlet structure at the downstream
end of the underdrain.
Siting Criteria Intent/Rationale
□
Placement observes geotechnical
recommendations regarding potential hazards
(e.g., slope stability, landslides, liquefaction
zones) and setbacks (e.g., slopes, foundations,
utilities).
Must not negatively impact existing site
geotechnical concerns.
□
An impermeable liner or other hydraulic
restriction layer is included if site constraints
indicate that infiltration or lateral flows should
not be allowed.
Lining prevents storm water from
impacting groundwater and/or sensitive
environmental or geotechnical features.
Incidental infiltration, when allowable,
can aid in pollutant removal and
groundwater recharge.
□
Contributing tributary area shall be ≤ 5 acres (≤
1 acre preferred).
Bigger BMPs require additional design
features for proper performance.
Contributing tributary area greater than 5
acres may be allowed at the discretion of
the City Engineer if the following
conditions are met: 1) incorporate design
features (e.g. flow spreaders) to
minimizing short circuiting of flows in the
BMP and 2) incorporate additional design
features requested by the City Engineer
Design Adaptations for Project Goals
Recommended Siting Criteria
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-123 July 2018
Siting Criteria Intent/Rationale
for proper performance of the regional
BMP.
□ Finish grade of the facility is ≤ 2%. Flatter surfaces reduce erosion and
channelization within the facility.
BMP Component Dimension Intent/Rationale
Freeboard
≥ 2 inches
Freeboard provides room for head
over overflow structures and
minimizes risk of uncontrolled
surface discharge.
Surface Ponding
≥ 6 and ≤ 12 inches
Surface ponding capacity lowers
subsurface storage requirements.
Deep surface ponding raises safety
concerns.
Surface ponding depth greater than
12 inches (for additional pollutant
control or surface outlet structures
or flow-control orifices) may be
allowed at the discretion of the City
Engineer if the following
conditions are met: 1) surface
ponding depth drawdown time is
less than 24 hours; and 2) safety
issues and fencing requirements are
considered (typically ponding
greater than 18” will require a fence
and/or flatter side slopes) and 3)
potential for elevated clogging risk
is considered.
Recommended BMP Component Dimensions
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-124 July 2018
BMP Component Dimension Intent/Rationale
Ponding Area Side Slopes
3H:1V or shallower
Gentler side slopes are safer, less
prone to erosion, able to establish
vegetation more quickly and easier
to maintain.
Mulch
≥ 3 inches
Mulch will suppress weeds and
maintain moisture for plant growth.
Aging mulch kills pathogens and
weed seeds and allows the beneficial
microbes to multiply.
Media Layer
≥ 18 inches
A deep media layer provides
additional filtration and supports
plants with deeper roots. Standard
specifications shall be followed. For
non-standard or proprietary designs,
compliance with F.1 ensures that
adequate treatment performance
will be provided.
Underdrain Diameter
≥ 6 inches
Smaller diameter underdrains are
prone to clogging.
Cleanout Diameter
≥ 6 inches
Properly spaced cleanouts will
facilitate underdrain maintenance.
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-125 July 2018
Biofiltration with underdrain must meet the following design criteria. Deviations from the below
criteria may be approved at the discretion of the City Engineer if it is determined to be appropriate:
Design Criteria Intent/Rationale
Surface Ponding
□
Surface ponding is limited to a 24-hour
drawdown time.
Surface ponding limited to 24 hours for
plant health. Surface ponding drawdown
time greater than 24-hours but less than
96 hours may be allowed at the discretion
of the City Engineer if certified by a
landscape architect or agronomist.
Vegetation
□
Plantings are suitable for the climate and
expected ponding depth. A plant list to aid in
selection can be found in Appendix E.26.
Plants suited to the climate and ponding
depth are more likely to survive.
□ An irrigation system with a connection to water
supply should be provided as needed.
Seasonal irrigation might be needed to
keep plants healthy.
Mulch (Optional or Mandatory – Dependent on jurisdiction)
□ A minimum of 3 inches of well-aged, shredded
hardwood mulch that has been stockpiled or
stored for at least 12 months is provided.
Mulch will suppress weeds and maintain
moisture for plant growth. Aging mulch
kills pathogens and weed seeds and allows
the beneficial microbes to multiply.
Media Layer
□
Media maintains a minimum filtration rate of 5
in/hr over lifetime of facility. An initial filtration
rate of 8 to 12 in/hr is recommended to allow
for clogging over time; the initial filtration rate
should not exceed 12 inches per hour.
A filtration rate of at least 5 inches per
hour allows soil to drain between events.
The initial rate should be higher than long
term target rate to account for clogging
over time. However an excessively high
initial rate can have a negative impact on
treatment performance, therefore an
upper limit is needed.
□
Media is a minimum 18 inches deep, meeting
either of these two media specifications:
Section F.3 Biofiltration Soil Media (BSM) or
specific jurisdictional guidance.
A deep media layer provides additional
filtration and supports plants with deeper
roots.
Design Criteria and Considerations
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-126 July 2018
Design Criteria Intent/Rationale
Alternatively, for proprietary designs and
custom media mixes not meeting the media
specifications, the media meets the pollutant
treatment performance criteria in Section F.1.
Standard specifications shall be followed.
For non-standard or proprietary designs,
compliance with F.1 ensures that
adequate treatment performance will be
provided.
□
Media surface area is 3% of contributing area
times adjusted runoff factor or greater. Unless
demonstrated that the BMP surface area can be
smaller than 3%.
Greater surface area to tributary area
ratios: a) maximizes volume retention as
required by the MS4 Permit and b)
decrease loading rates per square foot and
therefore increase longevity.
Adjusted runoff factor is to account for
site design BMPs implemented upstream
of the BMP (such as rain barrels,
impervious area dispersion, etc.). Refer to
Appendix B.2 guidance.
□
Where receiving waters are impaired or have a
TMDL for nutrients, the system is designed
with nutrient sensitive media design (see fact
sheet BF-2).
Potential for pollutant export is partly a
function of media composition; media
design must minimize potential for export
of nutrients, particularly where receiving
waters are impaired for nutrients.
Filter Course Layer
□ A filter course is used to prevent migration of
fines through layers of the facility. Filter fabric
is not used.
Migration of media can cause clogging of
the aggregate storage layer void spaces or
subgrade. Filter fabric is more likely to
clog.
□
Filter course is washed and free of fines.
Washing aggregate will help eliminate
fines that could clog the facility and
impede infiltration.
□
Filter course calculations assessing suitability for
particle migration prevention have been
completed.
Gradation relationship between layers can
evaluate factors (e.g., bridging,
permeability, and uniformity) to
determine if particle sizing is appropriate
or if an intermediate layer is needed.
Aggregate Storage Layer
□ Class 2 Permeable per Caltrans specification 68-
1.025 is recommended for the storage layer.
Washing aggregate will help eliminate
fines that could clog the aggregate storage
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-127 July 2018
Design Criteria Intent/Rationale
Washed, open-graded crushed rock may be
used, however a 4-6 inch washed pea gravel
filter course layer at the top of the crushed rock
is required.
layer void spaces or subgrade.
□
The depth of aggregate provided (12-inch
typical) and storage layer configuration is
adequate for providing conveyance for
underdrain flows to the outlet structure.
Proper storage layer configuration and
underdrain placement will minimize
facility drawdown time.
Inflow, Underdrain, and Outflow Structures
□ Inflow, underdrains and outflow structures are
accessible for inspection and maintenance.
Maintenance will prevent clogging and
ensure proper operation of the flow
control structures.
□ Inflow velocities are limited to 3 ft/s or less or
use energy dissipation methods. (e.g., riprap,
level spreader) for concentrated inflows.
High inflow velocities can cause erosion,
scour and/or channeling.
□ Curb cut inlets are at least 12 inches wide, have
a 4-6 inch reveal (drop) and an apron and
energy dissipation as needed.
Inlets must not restrict flow and apron
prevents blockage from vegetation as it
grows in. Energy dissipation prevents
erosion.
□
Underdrain outlet elevation should be a
minimum of 3 inches above the bottom
elevation of the aggregate storage layer.
A minimal separation from subgrade or
the liner lessens the risk of fines entering
the underdrain and can improve hydraulic
performance by allowing perforations to
remain unblocked.
□ Minimum underdrain diameter is 6 inches. Smaller diameter underdrains are prone to
clogging.
□
Underdrains are made of slotted, PVC pipe
conforming to ASTM D 3034 or equivalent or
corrugated, HDPE pipe conforming to
AASHTO 252M or equivalent.
Slotted underdrains provide greater intake
capacity, clog resistant drainage, and
reduced entrance velocity into the pipe,
thereby reducing the chances of solids
migration.
□ An underdrain cleanout with a minimum 6-inch
diameter and lockable cap is placed every 250 to
300 feet as required based on underdrain length.
Properly spaced cleanouts will facilitate
underdrain maintenance.
□
Overflow is safely conveyed to a downstream
storm drain system or discharge point Size
overflow structure to pass 100-year peak flow
for on-line infiltration basins and water quality
Peak flow for off-line basins.
Planning for overflow lessens the risk of
property damage due to flooding.
BF-1 Biofiltration
E-128 July 2018
To design biofiltration with underdrain for storm water pollutant control only (no flow control
required), the following steps should be taken:
1. Verify that siting and design criteria have been met, including placement requirements,
contributing tributary area, maximum side and finish grade slopes, and the recommended
media surface area tributary ratio.
2. Calculate the DCV per Appendix B based on expected site design runoff for tributary areas.
3. Use the sizing worksheet presented in Appendix B.5 to size biofiltration BMPs.
Control of flow rates and/or durations will typically require significant surface ponding and/or
aggregate storage volumes, and therefore the following steps should be taken prior to determination
of storm water pollutant control design. Pre-development and allowable post-project flow rates and
durations should be determined as discussed in Chapter 6 of the manual.
1. Verify that siting and design criteria have been met, including placement requirements,
contributing tributary area, maximum side and finish grade slopes, and the recommended
media surface area tributary ratio.
2. Iteratively determine the facility footprint area, surface ponding and/or aggregate storage
layer depth required to provide detention storage to reduce flow rates and durations to
allowable limits. Flow rates and durations can be controlled from detention storage by
altering outlet structure orifice size(s) and/or water control levels. Multi-level orifices can be
used within an outlet structure to control the full range of flows.
3. If biofiltration with underdrain cannot fully provide the flow rate and duration control
required by this manual, an upstream or downstream structure with significant storage
volume such as an underground vault can be used to provide remaining controls.
4. After biofiltration with underdrain has been designed to meet flow control requirements,
calculations must be completed to verify if storm water pollutant control requirements to
treat the DCV have been met.
Normal Expected Maintenance. Biofiltration requires routine maintenance to: remove
accumulated materials such as sediment, trash or debris; maintain vegetation health; maintain
Conceptual Design and Sizing Approach for Storm Water Pollutant Control Only
Conceptual Design and Sizing Approach when Storm Water Flow Control is Applicable
Maintenance Overview