Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SDP 2019-0012; RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION; STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN; 2020-04-01
C C .. C CITY OF CARLSBAD PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP) FOR RAF PACIFICA GROUP FU.SION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA GRADING PERMIT-DWG 523-3A PUD 2019-0007 / SOP 2019-0012 ENGINEER OF WORK: ~~ TYLER G. LAWSON, PE #80356 PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 535 N. HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 PREPARED FOR: RAF Pacifica Group 111 C Street, Suite 200 Encinitas, CA 92024 PH: 858-314-3116 PREPARED BY: EXP: 12-31-20 PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERING+ LAND PLANNING+ LAND SURVEYING 535 N. HIGHWAY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 PH: 858-259-8212 DATE: April 2020 RECEl~lED APR 2 3 202] LAND DEVELOPMENT ,,,_ ' .-,. 1 !" I,-r-.-. , '-l ,,-.,. ~ •'. '" ·-~:. ::~·j'~ C C STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION PROJECT VICINITY MAP STORM WATER STANDARD QUESTIONNAIRE SITE INFORMATION SUMMARY OF PDP STRUCTURAL BMPs ATTACHMENT 1 -Backup for PDP Pollutant Control BMPs SEPTEMBER 2019 Attachment 1 a ............................................................................................... OMA Exhibit Attachment 1 b ....... Tabular Summary of DMAs and Design Capture Volume Calculations Attachment 1 c ....................................................... Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening Attachment 1 d ....................................... Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Attachment 1 e .......................... Pollutant Control BMP Design Worksheets/ Calculations ATTACHMENT 2-Backup for PDP Hydromodification Control Measures Attachment 2a ..................................................... Hydromodification Management Exhibit Attachment 2b .............................. Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Exhibit Attachment 2c ....................................................................... Flow Control Facility Design ATTACHMENT 3-Structural BMP Maintenance Plan Attachment 3a ...................................................................... Structural BMP Maintenance ATTACHMENT 4-City of Carlsbad Standard Single Sheet BMP Exhibits Attachment 4a ............................................................. Single Sheet BMP Exhibit RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 2 C C C STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION PAGE Project Name: RAF Pacifica Group Fusion -Outdoor Amenity Area Project ID: DWG 523-3A (PUD 2019-0007 / SDP 2019-0012) SEPTEMBER 20/9 I hereby declare that I am the Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of storm water BMPs for this project, and that I have exercised responsible charge over the design of the project as defined in Section 6703 of the Business and Professions Code, and that the design is consistent with the requirements of the BMP Design Manual, which is based on the requirements of SDRWQCB Order No. R9-2013-0001 (MS4 Permit) or the current Order. I have read and understand that the City Engineer has adopted minimum requirements for managing urban runoff, including storm water, from land development activities, as described in the BMP Design Manual. I certify that this SWQMP has been completed to the best of my ability and accurately reflects the project being proposed and the applicable source control and site design 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 SWQMP by the City Engineer is confined to a review and does not relieve me, as the Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of storm water BMPs for this project, of my responsibilities for project design. 4-20-20 Tyler G. Lawson, P.E. RCE 80356 Exp: 12-31-20 Date Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates 535 N. Highway 101, Suite A Solana Beach, CA 92075 RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 3 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 2019 Figure 1 -Vicinity Map RAF PA CIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 4 \Ccityof Carlsbad STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov E-34 I INSTRUCTIONS: To address post-development pollutants that may be generated from development projects, the city requires that new development and significant redevelopment priority projects incorporate Permanent Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMPs) into the project design per Carlsbad BMP Design Manual (BMP Manual). To view the BMP Manual, refer to the Engineering Standards (Volume 5). This questionnaire must be completed by the applicant in advance of submitting for a development application (subdivision, discretionary permits and/or construction permits). The results of the questionnaire determine the level of storm water standards that must be applied to a proposed development or redevelopment project. Depending on the outcome, your project will either be subject to 'STANDARD PROJECT' requirements or be subject to 'PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT' (PDP) requirements. Your responses to the questionnaire represent an initial assessment of the proposed project conditions and impacts. City staff has responsibility for making the final assessment after submission of the development application. If staff determines that the questionnaire was incorrectly filled out and is subject to more stringent storm water standards than initially assessed by you, this will result in the return of the development application as incomplete. In this case, please make the changes to the questionnaire and resubmit to the city. If you are unsure about the meaning of a question or need help in determining how to respond to one or more of the uestions, please seek assistance from Land Development Engineering staff. completed and signed questionnaire must be submitted with each development project application. Only one completed and signed questionnaire is required when multiple development applications for the same project are submitted concurrently. PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT NAME: RAF Pacifica Group Fusion -Outdoor Amenity Area PROJECT ID: DWG 523-JA / PUD 2019-0 ADDRESS: 1950 Camino Vida Roble, Carlsbad, CA 92008 APN: 212-093-12, & -05-00 The project is (check one): D New Development 1Z! Redevelopment The total proposed disturbed area is: 76,300 ft2 ( 1.752 ) acres The total proposed newly created and/or replaced impervious area is: 33,025 ft2 ( 0.76 ) acres If your project is covered by an approved SWQMP as part of a larger development project, provide the project ID and the SWQMP # of the larger development project: Project ID NIA SWQMP#: NIA Then, go to Step 1 and follow the instructions. When completed, sign the form at the end and submit this with your application to the city. E-34 Page 1 of 4 REV 02/16 00 STEP1 TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL PROJECTS ~ determine if your project is a "development project", please answer the following question: ,,, YES NO Is your project LIMITED TO routine maintenance activity and/or repair/improvements to an existing building □ IX] or structure that do not alter the size (See Section 1.3 of the BMP Design Manual for guidance)? If you answered "yes" to the above question, provide justification below then go to Step 5, mark the third box stating "my project is not a 'development project' and not subject to the requirements of the BMP manual" and complete applicant information. Justification/discussion: (e.g. the project includes only interior remodels within an existing building): NIA -project is a development project If you answered "no" to the above question, the project is a 'development project', go to Step 2. STEP2 TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS To determine if your project is exempt from PDP requirements pursuant to MS4 Permit Provision E.3.b.(3), please answer the following questions: , your project LIMITED to one or more of the following: _, YES NO 1. Constructing new or retrofitting paved sidewalks, bicycle lanes or trails that meet the following criteria: a) Designed and constructed to direct storm water runoff to adjacent vegetated areas, or other non- erodible permeable areas; □ ~ b) Designed and constructed to be hydraulically disconnected from paved streets or roads; c) Designed and constructed with permeable pavements or surfaces in accordance with USEPA Green Streets quidance? 2. Retrofitting or redeveloping existing paved alleys, streets, or roads that are designed and constructed in □ ~ accordance with the USEPA Green Streets guidance? 3. Ground Mounted Solar Array that meets the criteria provided in section 1.4.2 of the BMP manual? □ IX] If you answered "yes" to one or more of the above questions, provide discussion/justification below, then go to Step 5, mark the second box stating "my project is EXEMPT from PDP ... " and complete applicant information. Discussion to justify exemption ( e.g. the project redeveloping existing road designed and constructed in accordance with the USEPA Green Street guidance): Cyou answered "no" to the above questions, vour project is not exempt from PDP, go to Step 3. E-34 Page 2 of 4 REV 04/17 STEP3 TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL NEW OR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS -0 determine if your project is a PDP, please answer the following questions (MS4 Permit Provision E.3.b.(1 )): YES NO 1. Is your project a new development that creates 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces collectively over the entire project site? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, □ IX! and public development projects on public or private land. 2. Is your project a redevelopment project creating and/or replacing 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 IX] □ more of impervious surface? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land. 3. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a restaurant? A restaurant is a facility that sells prepared foods and drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and □ IX] refreshment stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 5812). 4. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a hillside development project? A hillside □ IX] development project includes development on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent or Qreater. 5. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a parking lot? A parking lot is Ix] □ a land area or facility for the temporary parking or storage of motor vehicles used personally for business or for commerce. 6. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious street, road, highway, freeway or driveway surface collectively over the entire project IX] □ site? A street, road, highway, freeway or driveway is any paved impervious surface used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, and other vehicles. '"'-· Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire site, and discharges directly to an Environmentally ,., Sensitive Area (ESA)? "Discharging Directly to" includes flow that is conveyed overland a distance of □ IX] 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).* 8. Is your project a new development or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface that supports an automotive repair shop? An automotive repair □ IX] shop is a facility that is categorized in any one of the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes: 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532-7534, or 7536-7539. 9. Is your project a new development or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious area that supports a retail gasoline outlet (RGO)? This category includes □ IX] RGO's that meet the following criteria: (a) 5,000 square feet or more or (b) a project Average Daily Traffic (ADTJ of 100 or more vehicles per day. 10. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that results in the disturbance of one or more acres of land IX] □ and are expected to generate pollutants post construction? 11. Is your project located within 200 feet of the Pacific Ocean and (1) creates 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface or (2) increases impervious surface on the property by more than 10%? (CMC □ IX] 21 .203.040) If you answered "yes" to one or more of the above questions, your project is a PDP. If your project is a redevelopment project, go to step 4. If your project is a new project, go to step 5, check the first box stating "My project is a PDP ... " and complete applicant information. If you answered "no" to all of the above questions, your project is a 'STANDARD PROJECT.' Go to step 5, check the second box statinQ "My project is a 'STANDARD PROJECT' ... " and complete applicant information. E-34 Page 3 of 4 REV 04/17 STEP4 TO BE COMPLETED FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (PDP) ONLY omplete the questions below regarding your redevelopment project (MS4 Permit Provision E.3.b.(2)): ... YES NO Does the redevelopment project result in the creation or replacement of impervious surface in an amount of less than 50% of the surface area of the previously existing development? Complete the percent impervious calculation below: Existing impervious area (A) = 332,500 sq. ft. □ IX] Total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area (B) = 33,025 sq. ft. Percent impervious area created or replaced (B/A)*100 = 10 % If you answered "yes", the structural BMPs required for PDP apply only to the creation or replacement of impervious surface and not the entire development. Go to step 5, check the first box stating "My project is a PDP ... " and complete applicant information. If you answered "no," the structural BMP's required for PDP apply to the entire development. Go to step 5, check the check the first box stating "My project is a PDP ... " and complete applicant information. STEPS CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX AND COMPLETE APPLICANT INFORMATION IX] My project is a PDP and must comply with PDP stormwater requirements of the BMP Manual. I understand I must prepare a Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) for submittal at time of application. 0 My project is a 'STANDARD PROJECT' OR EXEMPT from PDP and must only comply with 'STANDARD PROJECT' stormwater requirements of the BMP Manual. As part of these requirements, I will submit a "Standard Project Requirement Checklist Form E-36" and incorporate low impact development strategies throughout my project. ... ~ote: For projects that are close to meeting the PDP threshold , staff may require detailed impervious area calculations 1d exhibits to verify if 'STANDARD PROJECT' stormwater requirements apply. D My Project is NOT a 'development project' and is not subject to the requirements of the BMP Manual. Applicant Information and Signature Box Applicant Name: Adam Robinson for: RAF Pacifica Group Applicant Title: President Applicant Signature: [./' k---Date: 3/2/20 .. • Environmentally Sensitive Areas include but are not limited to all Clean Water Act Section 303(d) 1mpa1red water bodies: areas designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (1994) and amendments); water bodies designated with the RARE beneficial use by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (1994) and amendments); areas designated as preserves or their equivalent under the Multi Species Conservation Program within the Cities and County of San Diego; Habitat Management Plan; and any other equivalent environmentally sensitive areas which have been identified by the City. This Box for City Use Only YES NO City Concurrence: □ □ By: Date: Project ID: E-34 Page 4 of 4 REV 04/17 STORJ\.1 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLA N SEPTEMBER 2019 SITE INFORMATION CHECKLIST Project Summary Information Project Name RAF Pacifica Group Fusion -Outdoor Amenity Area Project ID DWG 523-3A (PUD 2019-0007 / SOP 2019-0012) Project Address 1950 Camino Vida Roble Carlsbad, CA 92008 Assessor's Parcel Number(s) (APN(s)) 212-093-05 and 212-093-12 Hydrologic Unit: Carlsbad Project Watershed (Hydrologic Unit) Hydrologic Area: Encinas Hydrologic Sub-Area #: 904.40 Parcel Area 10.96 Acres (477,330 Square Feet) Existing Impervious Area 7.63 Acres (332,493 Square Feet) (subset of Parcel Area) Area to be disturbed by the project 1.792 Acres (78,050 Square Feet) (Project Area) Project Proposed Impervious Area 0.758 Acres Square Feet) (subset of Project Area) (33,025 Project Proposed Pervious Area 1.033 Acres Square Feet) (including D.G., Deminimus, and Self-(45,025 Mitigating Area) Note: Proposed Impervious Area + Proposed Pervious Area = Area to be Disturbed by the Project. This mav be less than the Parcel Area. RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 5 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 20/9 Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns Current Status of the Site (select all that apply): ~ Existing development □ Previously graded but not built out □ Agricultural or other non-impervious use □ Vacant, undeveloped/natural Description / Additional Information: The existing site consists of a large commercial building, private drive aisle, surface parking lot and associated hardscape and landscape. Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply): ~ Vegetative Cover □ Non-Vegetated Pervious Areas ~ Impervious Areas Description / Additional Information: See description above. Underlying Soil belongs to Hydrologic Soil Group (select all that apply): D NRCS Type A D NRCS Type B D NRCS Type C ~NRCS Type D Approximate Depth to Groundwater (GW): D GW Depth < 5 feet □ 5 feet < GW Depth < 1 0 feet □ 10 feet < GW Depth < 20 feet ~GW Depth> 20 feet Existing Natural Hydrologic Features (select all that apply): □ Watercourses □ Seeps □ Springs □Wetlands ~ None Description/ Additional Information: N/A RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION-OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 6 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 20/9 Description of Existing Site Topography and Drainage [How is storm water runoff conveyed from the site? At a minimum, this description should answer (1) whether existing drainage conveyance is natural or urban; (2) describe existing constructed storm water conveyance systems, if applicable; and (3) is runoff from offsite conveyed through the site? if so, describe]: In the existing condition, onsite storm water runoff flows overland and in storm drain in a southerly direction. There is no offsite surface drainage flowing onto the property. An existing 36" RCP private storm drain runs through the property conveying runoff from the McClellan-Palomar Airport to the storm drain in Owens Avenue. There are four (4) major onsite drainage basins which discharge to the public storm drain located in Camino Vida Roble and Owens Avenue. Drainage through the site is urban, as the site has been previously developed and existing private storm drain infrastructure exists to convey water through the site prior to discharging to public storm drain in the adjacent right-of-way. For detailed hydrologic calculations, refer to the report titled "Hydrology Study for Grading Permit for RAF Pacifica Group Fusion -Outdoor Amenity Area" dated April 2020, prepared by Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates. RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 7 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLA N SEPTEMBER 2019 Descriotion of Prooosed Site Develooment and Dralnaae Patterns Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities: The area being disturbed by the project amounts to a small portion of the overall property. The proposed project consists of the construction of an outdoor amenity area for the existing commercial building including seating areas, basketball and bocce ball courts, miscellaneous surface, utility, and retaining wall improvements, and a 20-foot-wide fire access road. The proposed building will remain. The project also includes a proposed BMP biofiltration basin to meet the requirements for storm water treatment and flow control. List/describe proposed impervious features of the project (e.g., buildings, roadways, parking lots, courtyards, athletic courts, other impervious features): Proposed impervious features include the basketball court, drive aisle, walkways and hardscape. List/describe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas): Proposed pervious areas include the bocce ball court, landscape areas and the BMP biofiltration basin. Does the project include grading and changes to site topography? ug Yes □ No Description/ Additional Information: Grading will be performed to construct the amenities, surface improvements and the HMP biofiltration basin. Grading will not change the overall site topography nor will it alter drainage patterns. RAF PA CIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 8 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 2019 Does the project include changes to site drainage (e.g., installation of new storm water conveyance systems)? ~ Yes □ No Description/ Additional Information: In the proposed condition, storm water runoff from the majority of the proposed improvements will be collected and conveyed to the BMP biofiltration basin. Due to existing grades, it is not feasible to drain a portion of the proposed impervious area to the BMP biofiltration basin, therefore, storm water runoff equating to an equivalent water quality volume (DCV) consisting of existing impervious area will be directed to the BMP biofiltration basin for treatment. The total equivalent water quality volume (DCV) draining to the BMP biofiltration basin and receiving treatment is equal to or greater than the actual area requiring treatment. Flow from the project will discharge to the existing storm drain and continue downstream as it does in the existing condition. The proposed drainage pattern mimics the existing condition. Identify whether any of the following features, activities, and/or pollutant source areas will be present (select all that apply): l!l On-site storm drain inlets □ Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps □ Interior parking garages □ Need for future indoor & structural pest control ~ Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use □ Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features □ Food service □ Refuse areas □ Industrial processes □ Outdoor storage of equipment or materials □ Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning □ Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance □ Fuel Dispensing Areas □ Loading Docks □ Fire Sprinkler Test Water □ Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water l!l Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 9 STORM WATER QUA LITY MANAGEMENT PLA N SEPTEMBER 2019 Identification of Receivina Water Pollutants of Concern Describe path of storm water from the project site to the Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable): Runoff from the project site discharges to the existing storm drain in Camino Vida Roble and Owens Avenue which flows south and discharges to an existing detention basin located northeast of the intersection of Camino Vida Roble and Palomar Airport Road. The detention basin discharges south of Palomar Airport Road to Encinas Creek which flows westerly and discharges to the Pacific Ocean. List any 303(d) impaired water bodies within the path of storm water 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 for the impaired water bodies: 303(d) Impaired Water Body Pollutant(s)/Stressor(s) TMDLs None Identification of Prolect Site Pollutants Identify pollutants anticipated from the project site based on all proposed use(s) of the site (see BMP Design Manual Appendix 8 .6): Also a Receiving Not Applicable to Anticipated from the Water Pollutant of Pollutant the Project Site Project Site Concern Sediment X N/A Nutrients X N/A Heavy Metals X N/A Organic Compounds X N/A Trash & Debris X N/A Oxygen Demanding X N/A Substances Oil & Grease X N/A Bacteria & Viruses X N/A Pesticides X N/A RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA JO STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 2019 Hvdromodification Manaaement Reaulrements Do hydromodification management requirements apply (see Section 1.6 of the BMP Design Manual)? 00 Yes, hydromodification management flow control structural BMPs required. □ No, the project will discharge runoff directly to existing underground storm drains discharging directly to water storage reservoirs, lakes, enclosed embayments, or the Pacific Ocean. □ No, the project will discharge runoff directly to conveyance channels whose bed and bank are concrete-lined all the way from the point of discharge to water storage reservoirs, lakes, enclosed embayments, or the Pacific Ocean. □ No, the project will discharge runoff directly to an area identified as appropriate for an exemption by the WMAA for the watershed in which the project resides. Description/ Additional Information (to be provided if a 'No' answer has been selected above): RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA II STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 20/9 Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas* *This Section only reauired if hydromodification manaaement reaulrements aoolv Based on the maps provided within the WMAA, do potential critical coarse sediment yield areas exist within the project drainage boundaries? D Yes (See discussion below) 00 No, No critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected based on WMAA maps If yes, have any of the optional analyses presented in Section 6.2 of the BMP Design Manual been performed? D 6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units (GLUs) Onsite D 6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment □ 6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite D No optional analyses performed, the project will avoid critical coarse sediment yield areas identified based on WMAA maps If optional analyses were performed, what is the final result? D No critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected based on verification of GLUs onsite □ Critical coarse sediment yield areas exist but additional analysis has determined that protection is not required. Documentation attached in Attachment 2B of the SWQMP. D Critical coarse sediment yield areas exist and require protection. The project will implement management measures described in Sections 6.2.4 and 6.2.5 as applicable, and the areas are identified on the SWQMP Exhibit. Discussion/ Additional Information: Refer to Attachment 2b for a Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield GIS overlay of the project area and surrounding areas. RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMEN/Tl' AREA 12 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 20/9 Flow Control for Post-Project Runotr -rrhis Section only reaulred if hvdromodlflcatlon manaaement reaulrements apply List and describe point(s) of compliance (POCs) for flow control for hydromodification management (see Section 6.3.1 ). For each POC, provide a POC identification name or number correlating to the project's HMP Exhibit and a receiving channel identification name or number correlating to the project's HMP Exhibit. There is one POC for the project, POC-1 , located at the southern boundary of the site. Refer to the exhibit located in Attachment 2a. Has a geomorphic assessment been performed for the receiving channel(s)? ~ No, the low flow threshold is 0.102 (default low flow threshold) □ Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.102 □ Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.302 □ Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.502 If a geomorphic assessment has been performed, provide title, date, and preparer: Discussion/ Additional Information: (optional) RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 13 STORM WATER QUALITY MA NAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 2019 Other Site Requirements and Constraints When applicable, list other site requirements or constraints that will influence storm water management design, such as zoning requirements including setbacks and open space, or City codes governing minimum street width, sidewalk construction, allowable pavement types, and drainage requirements. Due to existing site topography, it is not feasible to drain a portion of the proposed disturbed area onsite and replaced impervious area to the biofiltration basin (portion of site being referenced shown as DMA 2 in the DMA Exhibit included as Attachment 1 to this report). Removed and replaced or new impervious area proposed in this drainage basin occurs within the existing parking lot on Lot 32 of Map 11288. It is infeasible to only capture the replaced hardscape areas without also capturing and conveying the entire existing parking lot to the proposed biofiltration basin. Therefore, to mitigate for this new/ replaced impervious area and pervious area bypassing the proposed biofiltration basin, an equivalent water quality volume (DCV) consisting of existing impervious area will be captured and directed to the biofiltration basin for treatment. The total water quality volume (DCV) draining to the biofiltration basin and receiving treatment as part of the existing site is equal to or greater than the DCV generated from the disturbed area bypassing treatment (the impervious and pervious areas shown as part of DMA 2).This existing equivalent impervious area is delineated on the project DMA Exhibit. Optional Additional lnfonnation or Continuation of Previous Sections As Needed This space provided for additional information or continuation of information from previous sections as needed. RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION-OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 14 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN [Insert City's Standard Project Requirement Checklist Form E-36 (here)] RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 15 SEPTEMBER 2019 C City of Carlsbad STANDARD PROJECT REQUIREMENT CHECKLIST E-36 Project lnfonnatlon Project Name: RAF Pacifica Group Fu.sion -Outdoor Amenity Area Project ID: PUD 2019-0007 / SOP 2019-0012 DWG No. or Building Permit No.: DWG 523-3A Source Control BMPs Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov All development projects must implement source control BMPs SC-1 through SC-6 where applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4 and Appendix E.1 of the BMP Design Manual (Volume 5 of City Engineering Standards) 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 and/or Appendix E.1 of the Model BMP Design Manual. Discussion/justification is not required. • "No" means the BMP is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement. Discussion/justification must be provided. Please add attachments if more space is needed . • "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 may be provided. Source Control Requirement Applied? ,.,,.SC-1 Prevention of Illicit Discharges into the MS4 Iii Yes 0 No 0 NIA Discussion/justification if SC-1 not implemented: SC-2 Storm Drain Stenciling or Signage Iii Yes D No D N/A Discussion/justification if SC-2 not implemented: SC-3 Protect Outdoor Materials Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind D Yes 0 No Iii N/A Dispersal Discussion/justification if SC-3 not implemented: The project has no permanent outdoor materials storage areas. E-36 Page 1 of 4 Revised 09/16 Source Control Reaulrement (continued) Annlled? SC-4 Protect Materials Stored in Outdoor Work Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and □ Yes □ No ~ N/A Wind Dispersal ,,.. Discussion/justification if SC-4 not implemented: The project has no permanent materials stored in outdoor work areas. SC-5 Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal ~ Yes □ No □ NIA Discussion/justification if SC-5 not implemented: Outdoor trash storage areas will be covered and protected from rainfall. SC-6 Additional BMPs based on Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants must answer for each source listed below and identify additional BMPs. (See Table in Appendix E.1 of BMP Manual for quidance). ~ On-site storm drain inlets ~Yes □ No □ N/A □ Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Interior parking garages □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Need for future indoor & structural pest control □ Yes □ No ~ N/A ~ Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use ~ Yes □ No □ N/A C, □ Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Food service □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Refuse areas □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Industrial processes □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Outdoor storage of equipment or materials □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Fuel Dispensing Areas □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Loading Docks □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Fire Sprinkler Test Water □ Yes □ No ~ N/A □ Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water □ Yes □ No ~ N/A Iii Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots Iii Yes O No O N/A For "Yes" answers, identify the additional BMP per Appendix E.1. Provide justification for "No" answers. On-site storm drain inlets: Inlet markings will be maintained I periodically repainted . New tenants/ lessees will be provided storm water pollution prevention information Landscape / Outdoor Pesticide Use: Landscaping will be maintained using minimum or no pesticides Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots: Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots will be swept regularly to prevent accumulation of litter and debris E-36 Page 2 of 4 Revised 09/16 Site Design BMP& All development projects must implement site design BMPs SD-1 through SD-8 where applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4 and Appendix E.2 thru E.6 of the BMP Design Manual (Volume 5 of City Engineering Standards) 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 BMPs as described in Chapter 4 and/or Appendix E.2 thru E.6 of the Model BMP Design Manual. Discussion / justification is not required. • "No" means the BMPs is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement. Discussion/justification must be provided. Please add attachments if more space is needed. • "N/A" means the BMPs is not applicable at the project site because the project does not include the feature that is addressed by the BMPs (e.g., the project site has no existing natural areas to conserve). Discussion/justification may be provided. Site Design Requirement I Applied? 5D-1 Maintain Natural Drainage Pathways and Hydrologic Features I □ Yes I □ No I l!l N/A Discussion/justification if SD-1 not implemented: There are no natural drainage pathways or hydrologic features to maintain or protect. SD-2 Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation I □ Yes I □ No I [!] N/A Discussion/justification if SD-2 not implemented: There are no natural areas, soils or vegetation. ,, SD-3 Minimize Impervious Area I l!l Yes I □ No I □ N/A Discussion/justification if SD-3 not implemented: 5D-4 Minimize Soil Compaction I l!l Yes I □ No I □ NIA Discussion/justification if SD-4 not implemented: SD-5 Impervious Area Dispersion I □ Yes I □ No I [!] N/A Discussion/justification if SD-5 not implemented: ll E-36 Page 3 of 4 Revised 09/1 6 Site Design Reaulrement (continued) I ADDlled? SD-6 Runoff Collection I ~ Yes I □ No I □ N/A Discussion/justification if SD-6 not implemented: SD-7 Landscaping with Native or Drought Tolerant Species I ~ Yes I □ No I □ NIA Discussion/justification if SD-7 not implemented: SD-8 HarvestinQ and UsinQ Precipitation I D Yes I ~ No I □ N/A Discussion/justification if SD-8 not implemented: Harvesting and Using Precipitation is not a feasible BMP for this project. Refer to Attachment 1 c. E-36 Page 4 of 4 Revised 09/16 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 20/9 SUMMARY OF PDP STRUCTURAL BMPS PDP Structural BMPs All PDPs must implement structural BMPs for storm water pollutant control (see Chapter 5 of the BMP Design Manual). Selection of PDP structural BMPs for storm water pollutant control must be based on the selection process described in Chapter 5. PDPs subject to hydromodification management requirements must also implement structural BMPs for flow control for hydromodification management (see Chapter 6 of the BMP Design Manual). Both storm water pollutant control and flow control for hydromodification management can be achieved within the same structural BMP(s). PDP 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 to certify construction of the structural BMPs (see Section 1.12 of the BMP Design Manual). PDP structural BMPs must be maintained into perpetuity, and the City must confirm the maintenance (see Section 7 of the BMP Design Manual). Use this form to provide narrative description of the general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the project site in the box below. Then complete the PDP structural BMP summary information sheet for each structural BMP within the project (copy the BMP summary information page as many times as needed to provide summary information for each individual structural BMP). RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 16 STORM WATER QUA LITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 2019 Describe the general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the site. This information must describe how the steps for selecting and designing storm water pollutant control BMPs presented in Section 5.1 of the BMP Design Manual were followed, and the results (type of BMPs selected). For projects requiring hydromodification flow control BMPs, indicate whether pollutant control and flow control BMPs are integrated together or separate. Step 1A: DMA's 1,2 are not self-mitigating, de minimis, or self-retaining. Due to site constraints, OMA 2 will bypass the proposed biofiltration basin and an equivalent impervious area upstream of OMA 1 will be routed to the BMP . There is a small 145 SF area that will be disturbed (and impervious area replaced) that is impractical to drain to the proposed BMP. This area is a proposed de minimis area in accordance with BMP Design Manual section 5.2.2 and constitutes less than 2.0% of the proposed total impervious area. Step 1 B: There are no site design BMPs proposed for the project for which the runoff factor can be adjusted. Step 2: Harvest and use is not feasible. Refer to Attachment 1 c. Step 3: Infiltration is not feasible. Refer to Attachment 1 d (Form 1-8). Step 3C: Biofiltration BMP (BF-1) has been selected and sized per the design criteria to meet both pollutant control and hydromodification management flow control requirements. BIOFIL TRATION (BF-1) Biofiltration systems are effective at removing sediments and pollutants which are associated with fine particles by filtration through surface vegetation and underlying engineered soil media. These systems can also delay runoff peaks by providing detention and/or retention capacity in the media layer and ponding area through the controlled release of treated runoff. The addition of vegetation not only increases the aesthetic value of these areas, but also enhances the filtration component of the system through plant uptake and helps maintain the porosity of the engineered soil layer. Biofiltration systems can be constructed as either large or small scale devices with native or amended soils. Biofiltration systems, like the system designed for this project, collect storm water from impervious areas (roof areas and other impervious surfaces) through the site's grading design. Biofiltration systems function by allowing ponded runoff to infiltrate down through the mulch layer, amended soil layer, and the gravel layer; ultimately discharging to the onsite storm drain system through the system's perforated under drain. The biofiltration basin area will be landscaped with a combination of ground covers, shrubs and/or trees as selected by the project's landscape architect. Rip rap energy dissipaters will be located at points where concentrated flow enters the biofiltration basin to minimize erosion from occurring. The biofiltration system for this project has been integrated into the drainage design to meet pollutant control and hydromodification flow control requirements for the site. Storm water runoff from the majority of the proposed improvements will be collected and conveyed to the biofiltration basin for treatment. Due to existing grades, it is not feasible to drain a portion of the proposed impervious area to the biofiltration basin, therefore, storm water runoff from an equivalent area consisting of existing impervious area will be directed to the biofiltration basin for treatment. The total area draining to the biofiltration basin and receiving treatment is equal to or qreater than the actual area requirinq treatment. RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 17 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Structural BMP Summary Information Structural BMP ID No.: 1 (DMA-1) Sheet No. DWG 523-3A (Sheets 5-6) Type of structural BMP: o Retention by harvest and use (HU-1 ) o Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) o Retention by bioretention (INF-2) □ Retention by permeable pavement (I NF-3) o Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1 ) 00 Biofiltration (BF-1 ) SEPTEMBER 2019 o 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) □ Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management □ Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: o Pollutant control only o Hydromodification control only ~ Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control o Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP □ Other (describe in discussion section below) Discussion (as needed): OMA 1 will be treated by a 2,000 SF biofiltration basin. Due to existing site topography, it is not feasible to drain a portion of the proposed disturbed area onsite and replaced impervious area to the biofiltration basin (portion of site being referenced shown as OMA 2 in the OMA Exhibit included as Attachment 1 to this report). Therefore, to mitigate for this new/ replaced impervious area and pervious area bypassing the proposed biofiltration basin, an equivalent water quality volume (DCV) consisting of existing impervious area will be captured and directed to the biofiltration basin for treatment. The total water quality volume (DCV) draining to the biofiltration basin and receiving treatment as part of the existing site is equal to or greater than the DCV generated from the disturbed area bypassing treatment (the impervious and pervious areas shown as part of OMA 2). RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 18 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 2019 ATTACHMENT 1 BACKUPFORPDPPOLLUTANTCONTROLBMPS Attachment Contents Sequence Attachment 1 a OMA Exhibit (Required) See OMA Exhibit Checklist on the back of this Attachment cover sheet. (24"x36" Exhibit typically required) Attachment 1 b Tabular Summary of DMAs Showing Checklist ~ Included OMA ID matching OMA Exhibit, OMA □ Included as Attachment 1 b Area, and OMA Type (Required)* separate from OMA Exhibit Attachment 1 c Attachment 1 d *Provide table in this Attachment OR on OMA Exhibit in Attachment 1 a Form 1-7, Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening Checklist (Required unless the entire project will use infiltration BMPs) Refer to Appendix B.3-1 of the BMP Design Manual to complete Form 1-7. Form 1-8, Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition (Required unless the project will use harvest and use BMPs) Refer to Appendices C and D of the BMP Design Manual to complete Form 1-8. ~ Included D Not included because the entire project will use infiltration BMPs ~ Included D Not included because the entire project will use harvest and use BMPs Attachment 1 e Pollutant Control BMP Design ~ Included Worksheets / Calculations (Required) Refer to Appendices B and E of the BMP Design Manual for structural pollutant control BMP design guidelines RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION-OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 19 \ \ \ I I .I 7V I 1~1!11' I I I I "-----+---~ ----&- / / I DMA2 AREA = 17,830 SF = 0.409AC DMA2 -AREA= 11,830 SF -=0.409AC --lh<~>-7>--- ---t----1 I I I / @-,/- PROPOSED 12' PVC I I I I ll.-..:r---,~'o,.__.c,,,_) 1 / I I I -----,-HI/A'~• (_ ,-c,-- 1 I / I I '--=-,\ \ I ~~~ \ \ \ 0\ ' , \ PROPOSED PRIVATE STORM ' DRAIN CURB INLET ' '------+<@>-+---- I ; I· ----1$-1 DMA2 AREA = 17,830 SF =0.409AC -w--. PROPOSED PR/VA TE STORM DRAIN CURB INLET ~ , '-.A.)• V--J L PRIVATE STORM DRAIN EXISTING PVC PRIVATE STORM DRAIN PER DWG 34:3-A TO REMAIN '8,600 SF OF EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA ROUTED TO BMP FOR TREATMENT TO ACCOUNT FOR 392 CF WATER QUALITY VOLUME GENERA TED AS PART OF OMA 2 THAT JS INFEASIBLE TO ROUTE TO PROPOSED BIOFIL TRA TION BASIN 4,550 SF EXISTING EQUIVALENT IMPERVIOUS AREA TO BE ROUTED TO BMP FOR TREATMENT TOTAL BASIN SIZE (A) TOTAL OMA SIZE (Cx 'Ax) RUNOFF FACTOR (Cx) 85TH PERCENTILE RAINFALL DEPTH (rf) = = = = 8,600 SF (0.197 AC) 8,600SF'0.9= 7,740SF 0.90 0.61 IN PROPOSED 12" PVC PRIVATE STORM DRAIN LI D EXISTING PVC PRIVATE STORM DRAIN PER DWG 343-A TO REMAIN 4,050 SF EXISTING EQUIVALENT IMPERVIOUS AREA TO BE ROUTED TO BMP FOR TREATMENT \ A / (250 SF) DE MIN/MUS OMA ----l-..__ i 7 EXISTING 18" RCP STORM DRAIN PER DWG 241-6 TO REMAIN ' \ \ \ \ . \ ' \ ~ \ . 1 '--'",-' PROPOSED/B"PVC / PRIVATE STORM DRAIN \ I (145 SF) DE MIN/MUS OMA (DM-1) PER BMP DESIGN MANUAL SECTION 5.2.2 OCV (C'D'A'3,630) = 393 CU FT > 392 CU FT FROM OMA 2 PLAN VIEW -OMA EXHIBIT (DM-2) PER BMP DESIGN f.== MANUAL SECTION 5.2.2 O I ~-- PROPOSED 18" PVC STORM -...__ DRAIN TO CONNECT TO EXISTING I I SOIL TYPE INFORMATION SOIL: TYPED HYDROLOGIC SOILS PER WEB SOIL SURVEY APPL/CATION AVAILABLE THROUGH UNITED STA TES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD NO CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS TO BE PROTECTED. REFER TD PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SWQMP PREPARED BY PASCO, LARET, SUITER & ASSOCIATES GROUNDWATER INFORMATION GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED; ASSUMED TO BE AT DEPTHS GREATER THAN 20' TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS BIOFJL TRA TION BASIN PR-1 1.0%-2.0% 30 MIL THICK PVC IMPERVIOUS LINER ALONG SID.ES AND BOTTOM OF BASIN 4"WASHED PEA-GRAVEL 12' FREEBOARD AND CONVEYANCE ABOVE RISER SCALE: 1" = 30' HORIZONTAL 36' X 36' BROOKS BOX; 238.0 TG PLANT MIX PER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PLAN ~ r 12" PONDING __lJ DEPTH ,---~----, .c; I __ r ~l~~~~~~q ~,-~ 234.1 IE 234.0 BOTTOM OF BASIN ELEVATION 4' PERFORATED PIPE 'TRUNKLINE" TO CONNECT TO BROOKS BOX; NOTE: PIPE SHALL BE CENTERED IN BMP AND RUN ENTIRE LENGTH OF BMP r ORIFICE PLATE 1.4" HMP SIZED LOW- FLOW ORIFICE; 234.1 IE 18" RCP OUTLET DRAIN PIPE TO CONNECT TO PUBLIC STORM DRAIN; IE PER PLAN MIN. 3" AGGREGATE BELOW UNDERDRAIN; INSTALL 3' CRUSHED ROCK IN 1' WIDE TRENCH BENEATH SUBDRAIN PIPING AND IMPERMEABLE LINER PVT STORM DRAIN C.O. PRIOR TO DISCHARGING OFFS/TE ~// 1.0%-2.0% TYPICAL DETAIL -BIOFILTRA TION BASIN NOTTO SCALE I / / J:IACTIVE JOBSl3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUPICIVILIREPORTSISWQMPIFINAL ENGINEERINGIA TTACHMENTSIA TTACHMENT 1 -POLLUTANT CONTROL IA TT 1A -OMA EXHIB/nA TT 1A_B -OMA EXHIBIT.DWG \ DE MIN/MIS AREA TOTAL PROPOSED I REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA DE MIN/MIS OMA 1 (DM-1) DE MIN/MIS OMA 2 (DM-2) TOTAL DE MIN/MIS OMA IMPERVIOUS AREA % OVERALL PROPOSED HARDSCAPE = = = = 33,025SF 145SF 250SF 395SF 1.2% SECTTON 5.2.2 OF CITY OF CARLSBAD BMP DESIGN MANUAL ALLOWS FOR DE MIN/MIS DMAAREAS OF UP TO 250 SQUARE FEET. TOTAL DE MIN/MIS OMA AREAS SHOULD REPRESENT LESS THAN 2.0 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ADDED OR REPLACED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OF THE PROJECT. OMA 2 -AREA CALCULATIONS IMPERVIOUS AREA (REMOVED I REPLACED IMPERV.) 8,225 SF TOTAL 8,225 SF \ \ ( \ \ I I I OMA! BMP 1 1 AREA (SF) 8225 3050 PERVIOUS AREA (PERVIOUS AREA! TOTAL TOTAL NEW SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS % IMPERVIOUS AREA MAINTENANCE (AC GRIND & OVERLAY) TOTAL DISTURBED AREA CONNECT ONSITE STORM DRAIN TO EXISTING PUBLIC STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT OMA TABlE -TREATMENT (OMA 2) POST.PROJECT SURFACE ADJUSTMENT SURFACE TYPE RUNOFF FACTOR FACTOR HARDSCAPE 0.9 1 PERVIOUS AREA 0.1 1 TOTAL 'PER APPENDIX B OF CITY OF CARLSBAD BMP DESIGN MANUAL 3.050SF 3,050SF 11,275SF 72.9% 6,555SF 17,830 SF AREAX ADJUSTED RUNOFF (SF) 7403 305 7708 HONL Y NEW AND REMOVED/REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREAS CONSIDERED FOR EOUAIVALENT OCV CALCULATION OF OMA 2; AC GRIND AND DVERLA Y SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS AND AREAS UPSTREAM OF PROJECT DISTURBED AREA NOT INCLUDED TOTAL OMA SIZE = 7,708 SF DCV CALCULATION -OMA 2 AREA TRIBUTARY TO BMP (A) = 11,275 SF (0.259 AC) TOTAL OMA SIZE (Cx 'Ax) = 7,708SF WEIGHTED RUNOFF FACTOR (Cx) = 0.68 85TH PERCENTILE STORM DEPTH (rf) = 0.61 IN DCV (C'D'A '3,630) = 392CUFT LEGEND PROPERTY BOUNDARY CENTERLINE OF ROAD -------- ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE I RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING CONTOUR LINE -256- PROPOSED CONTOUR LINE ----256 ---- OMA DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY PROPOSED I REMOVED AND REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA WITHIN DISTURBED AREA OF SITE BYPASSING BMP TREATMENT EXISTING EQUIVALENT IMPERVIOUS AREA TO BE ROUTED TO BMP FOR TREATMENT KXXXXXX)(XX><;g BMP I B/OFIL TRA TION BASIN AREA SELF-MIT/GA TING AREA (NONE CLAIMED) +++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++i DE MIN/MIS AREA ("SEE NOTE THIS SHEET) t,,>>>>>>>>>>>>>l tS66?S6?S6&SJ PROJECT SITE AREA CALCULATIONS TOTAL GROSS SITE AREA EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA EXISTING PERVJOUS AREA TOT AL AREA DISTURBED BY PROJECT 477,340 SF (10.958 AC) 332,500 SF (7.633 AC) 144,840 SF (3.325 AC) TOT AL PROPOSED OR REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA 78,050 SF (1.192 AC) 33,025 SF (0. 758 AC) AREA DISTURBED DRAJNING TO BMP PROPOSED I REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA TO BMP 59,825 SF (1.373 AC) 24,800 SF (0.569 AC) AREA DISTURBED BYPASSING BMP PROPOSED I REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA BYPASSING BMP DE MIN/MIS PROPOSED I REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA 17,830 SF (0.409 AC) 8,225 SF (0.189 AC) 395 SF (0.010 AC) OMA 1 -AREA CALCULATIONS IMPERVIOUS AREA (MISC IMROVEMENTS) PERVIOUS AREA (LANDSCAPING) TOTAL BASIN AREA % IMPERVIOUS AREA (BIOFILTRA TION BASIN) TOTAL 68,425SF 48.3% 33,025SF 33,400SF 2,000SF 35,400SF OMA TABLE · TREATMENT/BASIN 1) OMA / AREA POST-PROJECT SURFACE ADJUSTMENT BMP (SF) SURFACE TYPE RUNOFF FACTOR FACTOR 1 33025 HARDSCAPE 0.9 1 1 2000 BMPBASJN 0. 1 1 1 33400 LANDSCAPE 0.1 1 TOTAL 'PER APPENDIX B OF CITY OF CARLSBAD BMP DESIGN MANUAL TOTAL OMA SIZE = 33,263SF AREAX ADJUSTED RUNOFF(SF) 29723 200 3340 33263 IMP. SIZING FACTOR MIN. AREA REQUIRED = = 0.03 (FOR BIOFILTRAT/ON BMPS) 0. 03 • 33,263 SF= 998 SF 2,000 SF PROVIDED> 998 SF REQUIRED THEREFORE, OK FOR WATER QUALITY DCV CALCULATION -OMA 1 AREA TRIBUTARY TO BMP (A) = 68,425 SF (1.571 AC) TOTAL OMA SIZE (Cx 'Ax) = 33,263SF WEIGHTED RUNOFF FACTOR (Cx) = 0.49 85TH PERCENTILE STORM DEPTH (rf) = 0.61 IN DCV (C'D'A'3,630) = 1,691 CU FT GRAPHIC SCALE: 1"= 30' 30 0 30 60 OMA EXHIBIT-ATTACHMENT 1A & 18 RAF FUSION OUTDCOR AMENITY AREA · 1950 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE CITY OF CARLSBAD 90 PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERING + LAND PLANNING + LAND SURVEYING 555 North lllpway 101. Ste A, Solau Beach, CA 92075 pb 151.259.B:U2 I & 158.259.ft12 I pl■■cnsfneerllls-com PLSA 3140-01 ATTACHMENT le 3 140 RAF Pacifica -Outdoor Amenity Area Worksheet B.3-1. Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening 1. Is there a demand for harvested water (check all that apply) at the project site that is reliably present during the wet season? D Toilet and urinal flushing ✓ Landscape irrigation Other: ______ _ 2. If there is a demand; estimate the anticipated average wet season demand over a period of 36 hours. Guidance for planning level demand calculations for toilet/urinal flushing and landscape irrigation is provided in Section B.3.2. Landscape Irrigation (1.24 ac irrigated) x (1,470 gal/ac-36hr) x (0.13368 cuft/gal) = 244 cuft/36hr 3. Calculate the DCV using worksheet B-2.1. DCV = 1,690 cuft 3a. Is the 36-hour demand greater than or equal to the DCV? Yes / v No Harvest and use appears to be feasible. Conduct more detailed evaluation and sizing calculations to confirm that DCV can be used at an adequate rate to meet drawdown criteria. 36. Is the 36-hour demand greater than 0.25DCV but less than the full DCV? Yes / v No Harvest and use may be feasible. Conduct more detailed evaluation and sizing calculations to determine feasibility. Harvest and use may only be able to be used for a portion of the site, or (optionally) the storage may need to be upsized to meet long term capture targets while draining in longer than 36 hours. 3c. Is the 36-hour demand less than 0.25DCV? v Yes Harvest and use is considered to be infeasible. ATTACHMENT td Appendix I: Forms and Checklists 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? Criteria Screening Question Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in .-\ppendix C.2 and .-\ppendix D. Provide basis: Yes No X The infiltration rate of the existing soils for location P-1 based on the on-site infiltration study was calculated to be less than 0.5 inches per hour (P-1=0.03 inches per hour) after applying a minimum factor of safety (F) of F= 2. 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 shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2. Provide basis: No. See Criterion 1. X Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/ data source applicability. I-3 February 2016 Appendix I: Forms and Checklists Criteri a 3 Screening Q uestion 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 shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in .-\ppendix C.3. Provide basis: Water contamination was not evaluated by NOVA Services. Yes No Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/ data source applicability. 4 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without causing potential water balance issues such as change of seasonality of ephemeral streams or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: The potential for water balance was not evaluated by NOVA Services. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/ data source applicability. Part 1 Result * If all answers to rows 1 -4 are ''Yes" a full infiltration design is potentially feasible. The feasibility screening category is Full Infiltration If any answer from row 1-4 is "No", infiltration may be possible to some extent but would not generally be feasible or desirable to achieve a "full infiltration" design. Proceed to Part 2 Proceed to Part 2 *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of °NIBP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/ or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. 1-4 February 2016 Appendix I: Forms and Checklists 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 5 Screening Question Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any appreciable rate or volume? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in .-\ppendix C.2 and ~-\ppendix D . Provide basis: Yes No X The infiltration rate of the existing soils for location P-1 based on the on-site infiltration study was calculated to be less than 0.5 inches per hour (P-1 =0.03 inches per hour) after applying a minimum factor of safety (F) of F=2. These widespread very low permeability soils and geologic conditions do not allow for infiltration in any appreciable rate or volume. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/ data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 6 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2. Provide basis: C2. l A geologic investigation was performed at the subject site. X C2.2 Settlement and volume change due to water infiltration is possible due to the expansive soils underlying the site. C2.3 Infiltration has the potential to cause slope failures. BMPs are to be sited a minimum of 50 feet away from any slope or the BMP design should implement an impermeable liner. C2.4 BMPs are to be sited a minimum of 10 feet away from all underground utilities. C2. 5 Stormwater infiltration can result in damaging ground water mounding during wet periods. Due to the low infiltration rates, this site is at a high risk. C2. 6 Infiltration has the potential to increase lateral pressure and reduce soil strength which can impact foundations and retaining walls. BMPs are lo be sited a minimum of 10 feet away from any foundations or retaining walls. C2. 7 Other Factors: Based on the low infiltration rates, high risk for groundwater mounding, and clayey soils underlying the site, infiltration is not feasible. 1-5 February 2016 Appendix I: Forms and Checklists Criteria 7 Screening Question 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 Q uestion shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Water contamination was not evaluated by NOVA Services. Yes No 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 shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: The potential for water balance was not evaluated by NOVA Services. 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. No Infiltratio *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of lv1EP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/ or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. 1-6 February 2016 ATTACHMENT le 3140 RAF Pacifica -Outdoor Amenity Area 3/9/2020 Appendix B: Stormwater Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods 1 2 3 4 s 6 Worksheet B.2-1. DCV DMAl 85,h percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= 0.61 inches Area tributary to BMP (s) A= 1.571 acres Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1.1 and B.2.1) * See calculation below C= 0.49 unitless Street trees volume reduction TCV= 0 cubic-feet Rain barrels volume reduction (1 cubic foot=7.48 gallons) RCV= 0 cubic-feet Calculate DCV = (3630 x C x d x A) -TCV -RCV DCV= 1691 cubic-feet OMA TABLE· TREATMENT (BASIN 1) OMA / AREA POST-PROJECT SURFACE ADJUSTMENT AREAX RUNOFF ADJUSTED BMP (SF) SURFACE TYPE FACTOR FACTOR RUNOFF (SF) 1 33025 HARDSCAPE 1 2000 BMP BASIN 1 33400 LANDSCAPE TOTAL OMA SIZE AREA TRIBUTARY TO BMP (A) TOTAL OMA SIZE (Cx • Ax) WEIGHTED RUNOFF FACTOR (Cx) = 0.9 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 TOTAL 33 . .263SF = = = 68,425 SF (1.571 AC) 33,263 SF 0.49 29723 200 3340 33263 3140 RAF Pacifica -Outdoor Amenity Area 3/9/2020 Appendix B: Stormwater Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods 1 2 3 4 5 6 Worksheet B.2-1. DCV DMA2 85,h percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure 8.1-1 d= Area tributary to 8MP (s) A= Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix 8.1.1 and 8.2.1) * See calculation below C= Street trees volume reduction TCV= Rain barrels volume reduction (1 cubic foot=7.48 gallons) RCV= Calculate DCV = (3630 x C x d x A) -TCV -RCV DCV= OMA TABLE -TREATMENT (OMA 2) OMA / AREA POST-PROJECT BfvfP (SF) SURFACE TYPE 1 8225 HARDSCAPE PERV/OUS 1 3050 AREA TOTAL DMA SIZE AREA TRIBUTARY TO BMP (A) TOTAL OMA SIZE (Cx • Ax) WEIGHTED RUNOFF FACTOR (Cx) = SURFACE ADJUSTMENT RUNOFF FACTOR FACTOR 0.9 1 0.1 1 TOTAL T.T08SF = = 11,275 SF (0.259 AC) 7,108 SF = 0.68 0.61 inches 0.259 acres 0.68 unitless 0 cubic-feet 0 cubic-feet 392 cubic-feet AREAX ADJUSTED RUNOFF (SF) 7403 305 7708 3140 RAF Pacifica -Outdoor Amenity Area 3/9/2020 DMAl Worksheet 8.5-1: Simple Sizing Method for Biofiltration BMPs 1 Remaining DCV After implementing retention BMPs 1690.0 cu-ft Partial Retention 2 Infiltration rate from Worksheet D.5-1 if partial infiltration is feasible 0.00 in/hr 3 Allowable drawdown time for aggregate storage below the underdrain 36 hours 4 Depth of runoff that can be infiltrated [Line 2 x Line 3] 0.00 inches 5 Aggregate pore space 0.40 in/in 6 Required depth of gravel below the underdrain (Line 4 / Line SJ 0.00 inches 7 Assumed surface area of the biofiltration BMP 2000.0 sq-ft 8 Media retained pore storage 0.1 in/in 9 Volume retained pore storage 300.00 cu-ft 10 DCV that requires biofiltration (Line 1 -Line 9] 1390.0 cu-ft BMP Parameters 11 Surface Ponding (6 inch minimum, 12 inch maximum] 12 inches 12 Media Thickness (18 in Min], also add mulch layer thicknes to this line 18 inches 13 Aggregate Storage above underdrain inver (12 inches typical) -Use O inches for 12 inches sizing if the aggregate is not over the entire bottom surface area 14 Freely drained pore storage 0.2 in/in Media filtration rate to be used for sizing (5 in/hr. with no outlet control; if the 15 filtration rate is controlled by the outlet, use the outlet controlled rate which will 2.062 in/hr be less than 5 in/hr.) Baseline Calculations 16 Allowable Routing Time for sizing 6 hours 17 Depth filtered during storm [Line 15 x Line 16] 12 inches Depth of Detention Storage 20.40 inches 18 [Line 11 + (Line 12 x Line 14) + (Line 13 x Line 5)] 19 Total Depth Treated [Line 17 + Line 18] 32.77 inches Option 1 -Biofilter 1.5 times the DCV 20 Required biofiltered volume (1.5 x Line 10] 2085 cu-ft 21 Required Footprint (Line 20 / Line 19] x 12 763.5 sq-ft Option 2 -Store 0.75 of remaining DCV in pores and ponding 22 Required Storage (surface+ pores) Volume [0.75 x Line 10] 1043 cu-ft 23 Required Footprint [Line 22 / Line 18] x 12 613 sq-ft Footprint of the BMP 24 Area draining to the BMP 68425 sq-ft Adjusted Runoff Factor for drainage area 0.49 25 (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2) 26 BMP Footprint Sizing Factor (Default 0.03 or an alternative minimum footprint 0.03 sizing factor from Worksheet B.5-2, Line 11) 27 Minimum BMP Footprint [Line 24 x Line 25 x Line 26] 998 sq-ft 28 Footprint of the BMP = Maximum (Minimum(Line 21, Line 23), Line 27) 998 sq-ft J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWQMP\Final Engineering\Attachments\Attachment 1- Pollutant Control\Att le -BMP Calcs\3140 WorksheetB-5.xlsx E.12 BF-1 Biofiltration Location: 43rd Street and Logan Avenue, San Diego, California Description Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets MS4 Permit Category Bio filtration Manual Category Bio filtration Applicable Performance Standard Pollutant Control Flow Control Primary Benefits T reatment Volume Reduction (Incidental) Peak Flow Attenuation (Optional) Biofiltration (Bioreteotion 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. Bioretention 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 bioretention with underdrain components include: • Inflow distribution mechanisms (e.g, perimeter flow spreader or filter strips) • E nergy 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 o f fines into uncompacted native soils or the aggregate storage layer • Aggregate storage layer with underdrain(s) • Impermeable liner or uncompacted native soils at the bottom of the facility E-66 February 2016 • Overflo w structure CURB + + + + + + .... ~ APRON FOR ENERGY + •DISSIPATION ,.3H:1V (MIN.) + .. .. :• ~~::_; '. • .. • .. + + ..... .,, •' :~ ..... _ ,":' . CURB CUT EXCAVATED SLOP (SHOWN AT 1H:1 PLAN NOTTO SCALE 4-6" DROP FROM CURB CUT TO APRON APRON FOR ENERGY DISSIPATION 6" MIN. TO 12" MAX. SURFACE PONDING CLEANOUT Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets .. ... ... .. MAINTENANCE + ACCESS (AS NEEDED) + ... .. .., ... MEDIA SURFACE AREA 2" MIN. FREEBOARD 3" WELL-AGED. SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH (OPTIONAL) MAINTENANCE ACCESS (AS NEEDED) , .. -. ;;,,=ttrtt?~';,,, ,( I ,,' ·----,,, ,r OVERFLOW ,'/,/,', / STRUCTURE MIN. 18" MEDIA WITH MIN. 5 IN/HR FILTRATION RATE SATURATED STORAGE (OPTIONAL) FILTER COURSE AGGREGATE STORAGE LAYER --'v--\_ IMPERMEABLE LINER (OPTIONAL) MIN. 3" AGGREGATE BELOW UNDERDRAIN MIN. 6" DIAMETER UNDERDRAIN EXISTING UNCOMPACTED SOILS SECTION A-A' NOTTO SCALE Typical plan and Section view of a Biofiltration BMP E-67 February 2016 Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets Design Adaptations for Project Goals Biofiltration Treatment BMP for storm water pollutant control. T he 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. Design Criteria and Considerations Bioretention 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: Siting and Design □ □ □ Placement observes geotechnical recommendations regarding po tential hazards (e.g., slope stability, landslides, liquefaction zones) and setbacks (e.g., slopes, foundations, utilities). A n impermeable liner or other hydraulic restriction layer is included if site constraints indicate that infiltration or lateral flows should not be allowed. Contributing tributary area shall be ~ 5 acres (~ 1 acre preferred). E-68 Intent/Rationale Must not negatively impact existing site geotechnical concerns. 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. 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 E ngineer if the following conditions are met: 1) incorporate design features (e.g. flow spreaders) to minimizing short circuiting of flows in February 2016 Siting and Design □ Finish grade of the facility is :S 2%. Surface Ponding □ □ □ □ Surface ponding is limited to a 24-hour drawdown time. Surface ponding depth is~ 6 and :S 12 inches. A minimum of 2 inches of freeboard is provided. Side slopes are stabilized with vegetation and are= 3H:1V or shallower. Vegetation E-69 Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets Intent/Rationale the BMP and 2) incorporate additional design features requested by the City Engineer for proper performance of the regional BMP. Flatter surfaces reduce erosion and channelization within the facility. 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. 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 o r 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. Freeboard provides room for head over overflow structures and minimizes risk of uncontrolled surface discharge. Gentler side slopes are safer, less p rone to erosion, able to establish vegetation more quickly and easier to maintain. February 2016 Siting and Design Plantings are suitable for the climate and Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets Intent/Rationale □ Plants suited to the climate and ponding expected ponding depth. A plant list to aid in depth are more likely to survive. selection can be found in Appendix E .20. □ An irrigation system with a connection to water supply should be provided as needed. Mulch (Optional) □ A minimum of 3 inches of well-aged, shredded hardwood mulch that has been stockpiled or stored for at least 12 months is provided. 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. Media is a minimum 18 inches deep, meeting either of these two media specifications: City of San Diego Storm Water Standards Appendi'C F (February 2016, unless superseded by more recent edition) or County of San Diego Low Impact Development Handbook: Appendi" G -Bioretention Soil Specification Qune 2014, unless superseded by more recent edition). Alternatively, for proprietary designs and custom media mixes not meeting the media specifications contained in the 2016 City of San Diego Storm Water Standards or County LID Manual, the media meets the pollutant treatment performance criteria in Section F.1. E-70 Seasonal irrigation might be needed to keep plants healthy. Mulch will suppress weeds and maintain moisture for plant growth. Aging mulch kills pathogens and weed seeds and allows the beneficial microbes to multiply. 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. A deep media layer provides additio nal 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. February 2016 Siting and Design □ □ Media surface area is 3% of contributing area times adjusted runoff factor or greater. 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). Filter Course Layer □ □ □ A filter course is used to prevent migration of fines through layers of the facility. Filter fabric is not used. Filter course is washed and free of fines. Filter course calculations assessing suitability for particle migration prevention have been completed. Aggregate Storage Layer □ Class 2 Permeable per Caltrans specification 68-1.025 is recommended for the storage layer. Washed, open-graded crushed rock may be used, however a 4-6 inch washed pea gravel E-71 Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets Intent/Rationale Greater surface area to tributary area ratios: a) maximizes volume retention as reguired by the MS4 Permit and b) decrease loading rates per sguare 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. Use Worksheet B.5-1 Line 26 to estimate the minimum surface area required per this criteria. 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. Migration of media can cause clogging of the aggregate storage layer void spaces or subgrade. Filter fabric is more likely to clog. Washing aggregate will help eliminate fines that could clog the facility and impede infiltration. 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. Washing aggregate will help eliminate fines that could clog the aggregate storage layer void spaces or subgrade. February 2016 Siting and Design □ filter course layer at the top of the crushed rock is required. The depth of aggregate provided (12-inch typical) and storage layer configuration is adequate for providing conveyance for underdrain flows to the outlet structure. In.iow, Underdrain, and Out.iow Structures □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Inflow, underdrains and outflow structures are accessible for inspection and maintenance. Inflow velocities are limited to 3 ft/ s or less or use energy dissipation methods. (e.g., riprap, level spreader) for concentrated inflows. Curb cut inlets are at least 12 inches wide, have a 4-6 inch reveal (drop) and an apron and energy dissipation as needed. Underdrain outlet elevation should be a minimum of 3 inches above the bottom elevation of the aggregate storage layer. Minimum underdrain diameter is 6 inches. Underdrains are made of slotted, PVC pipe conforming to ASTM D 3034 or equivalent or corrugated, HDPE pipe conforming to AASHTO 252M or equivalent. 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. Overflow is safely conveyed to a downstream storm drain system or discharge point Size overflow structure to pass 100-year peak flow E-72 Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets Intent/Rationale Proper storage layer configuration and underdrain placement will minimize facility drawdown time. Maintenance will prevent clogging and ensure proper operation of the flow control structures. High inflow velocities can cause erosion, scour and/ or channeling. Inlets must not restrict flow and apron prevents blockage from vegetation as it grows in. Energy dissipation prevents erosion. A minimal separation from subgrade or the liner lessen s the risk of fines entering the underdrain and can improve hydraulic performance by allowing perforations to remain unblocked. Smaller diameter underdrains are prone to clogging. Slotted underdrains provide greater intake capacity, clog resistant drainage, and reduced entrance velocity into the pipe, thereby reducing the chances of solids migration. Properly spaced cleanouts will facilitate underdrain maintenance. Planning for overflow lessens the risk of property damage due to flooding. February 2016 Siting and Design for on-line infiltration basins and water quality peak flow for off-line basins. Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets Intent/Rationale Conceptual Design and Sizing Approach for Storm Water Pollutant Control Only To design bioretention 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. Conceptual Design and Sizing Approach when Storm Water Flow Control is Applicable 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 determinatio n 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 bioretention 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 bioretention 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. E-73 February 2016 STORM WATER QUA LITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 20/9 ATTACHMENT 2 BACKUP FOR PDP HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL MEASURES Attachment Contents Checklist Sequence Attachment 2a Hydromodification Management 00 Included (Project is exempt from Exhibit (Required) Hydromodification Control Requirements) Attachment 2b Management of Critical Coarse 00 Exhibit showing project Sediment Yield Areas (WMAA drainage boundaries marked Exhibit is required, additional on WMAA Critical Coarse analyses are optional) Sediment Yield Area Map See Section 6.2 of the BMP Design (Required) Manual. Optional analyses for Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Area Determination □ 6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units Onsite □ 6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment □ 6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite Attachment 2c Geomorphic Assessment of 00 Not performed Receiving Channels (Optional) □ Included See Section 6.3.4 of the BMP Design Manual. Attachment 2d Flow Control Facility Design and 00 Included Structural BMP Drawdown Calculations (Required) See Chapter 6 and Appendix G of the BMP Design Manual RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION-OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 20 \ ' \ I ,____\ I I--- , , j I / ---------I I I --------+--- --+-----0-I I \ --- -ro----=--~ -=--=-___ -- / " I DMA2 AREA = 17,830 SF =0.409AC ---+-<©>+-- I __--DMA2 ----- I -AREA= 17,830 SF _ =0.409AC I -+----1 I I I I I -----f PROPOSED 36" --------\4'-, PVC PRIVATE ---/-r-1_ STORM DRAIN i I PROPOSED 12' PVC PRIVATE STORM DRAIN EXISTING PVC PRIVATE I I I -----I j I / I ----- n \ \___,___,, \ \ ' --\ <> I ---, . \ ~~\' c\'. u_\ (l I PROPOSED PRIVATE STORM DRAIN CURB INLET --@-- , PROPOSED PRIVATE STORM DRAIN CURB INLET / ----- PROPOSED 12" PVC PRIVATE STORM DRAIN EXISTING PVC PRIVATE STORM DRAIN PER DWG 343-A TO REMAIN EXISTING 18' RCP STORM DRAIN PER DWG 241-6 TO REMAIN . I I \ \ \ ' \ \ ' I I . . \, \ -,· PROPOSED 18" PVC PRIVATE STORM DRAIN \ ' \ \ \ \ \ J DE MINIMIS AREA TOTAL PROPOSED I REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA DE MIN/MIS DMA 1 (DM-1) DE MIN/MIS OMA 2 (DM-2) TOTAL DE MINIM/$ OMA IMPERVIOUS AREA % OVERALL PROPOSED HARDSCAPE = = = = 33,025SF 145SF 250SF 395SF 1.2% SECTION 5.2.2 OF CITY OF CARLSBAD BMP DESIGN MANUAL ALLOWS FOR DE MIN/MIS DMA AREAS OF UP TO 250 SQUARE FEET. TOTAL DE MIN/MIS OMA AREAS SHOULD REPRESENT LESS THAN 2.0 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ADDED OR REPLACED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OF THE PROJECT. OMA 2 -AREA CALCULATIONS IMPERVIOUS AREA {REMOVED I REPLACED IMPERV.) 8,225 SF TOTAL 8,225 SF PERVIOUS AREA (PERVIOUS AREA) TOTAL TOTAL NEW SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS % IMPERVIOUS AREA MAINTENANCE (AC GRIND & OVERLAY) TOTAL DISTURBED AREA CONNECT ONSITE STORM DRAIN TO EXISTING PUBLIC STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT EXISTING 36" RCP STORM DRAIN PER DWG 241-6 TO REMAIN 3,050 SF 3,050SF 11,275SF 72.9% 6,555SF 17,830 SF LEGEND PROPERTY BOUNDARY CENTERLINE OF ROAD ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE I RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING CONTOUR LINE PROPOSED CONTOUR LINE OMA DRAINAGE BASIN BOUNDARY PROPOSED I REMOVED AND REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA WITHIN DISTURBED AREA OF SITE BYPASSING BMP TREATMENT EXISTING EQUIVALENT IMPERVIOUS AREA TO BE ROUTED TO BMP FOR TREATMENT BMP I BIOFIL TRA TION BASIN AREA SELF-MIT/GA TING AREA DE MIN/MIS AREA ("SEE NOTE THIS SHEET) -------- -;>56- ----256 ---- KX,XXXXXxxxx;a +++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++ t! > > > > > > > > > > > > >l rxYYS<'.YYYY5l PROJECT SITE AREA CALCULATIONS TOTAL GROSS SITE AREA EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA EXISTING PERVIOUS AREA TOTAL AREA DISTURBED BY PROJECT TOTAL PROPOSED OR REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA DISTURBED DRAINING TO BMP PROPOSED I REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA TO BMP AREA DISTURBED BYPASSING BMP 477,340 SF (10,958 AC) 332,500 SF (7.633 AC) 144,840 SF /3.325 AC) 78,050 SF (1.792 AC) 33,025 SF (0.758 AC) 58,450 SF /1.342 AC) 24,800 SF (0.569 AC) PROPOSED I REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA BYPASSING BMP DE MIN/MIS PROPOSED I REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA 17,830 SF (0.409AC) 8,225 SF (0.189 AC) 395 SF (0.010 AC) OMA 1 -AREA CALCULATIONS IMPERVIOUS AREA (MISC IMROVEMENTS) PERVIOUS AREA (LANDSCAPING) TOTAL BASIN AREA % IMPERVIOUS AREA /8/DFILTRATION BASIN) TOTAL 68,425SF 48.3% 33,025 SF 33,400SF 2,000SF 35,400SF STORM DRAIN PER DWG 343-A TO REMAIN *8,600 SF OF EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA ROUTED TO BMP FOR TREATMENT TO ACCOUNT FOR 392 CF OF WATER QUALITY VOLUME GENERA TED AS PART OF OMA 2 THAT IS INFEASIBLE TO ROUTE TO PROPOSED BIOFIL TRA TION BASIN 4,050 SF EXISTING EQUIVALENT -- IMPERVIOUS AREA TO BE ROUTED ~ l _,, ,-t---11 ~ r-· 1 _/ / /,, 1-------1 1 4,550 SF EXISTING EQUIVALENT IMPERVIOUS AREA TO BE ROUTED TO BMP FOR TREATMENT (145 SF) DE MIN/MUS OMA (DM-1) PER BMP DESIGN MANUAL SECTION 5.2.2 PLAN VIEW -HMP EXHIBIT SOIL TYPE INFORMATION SOIL: TYPED HYDROLOGIC SOILS PER WEB SOIL SURVEY APPL/CATION AVAILABLE THROUGH UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD NO CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS TO BE PROTECTED. REFER TO PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SWQMP PREPARED BY PASCO, LARET, SUITER & ASSOCIATES GROUNDWATER INFORMATION GROUNDWATER NOT ENCOUNTERED; ASSUMED TO BE AT DEPTHS GREATER THAN 20' TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS BIOFIL TRA TION BASIN BF-1 SCALE: 1" = 30' HORIZONTAL 1.0% -2.0% 30 MIL THICK PVC IMPERVIOUS LINER ALONG SIDES AND BOTTOM OF BASIN TO BMP FOR TREATMENT (250 SF) DE MIN/MUS OMA --+::/_ . ; (DM-2) PER BMP DESIGN u-1 - MANUAL SECTION 5.2.2 F'--'-.1 -- Q PROPOSED18"PVCSTDRM-- DRAIN TO CONNECT TO EXISTING I PVT STORM DRAIN C.O. PRIOR TO DISCHARGING OFFS/TE I ~I/ I I 12" FREEBOARD AND CONVEYANCE ABOVE RISER r 36' X 36" BROOKS 12' PONDING BOX; 238.0 TG DEPTH I ~--~--- PLANT MIX PER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PLAN 2'HARDWOOD MULCH 1.0% -2.0% ~ ____.,-c:::::;7L 7 234.0 BOTTOM OF BASIN ELEVATION FG=237.0 4" PERFORATED PIPE "TRUNKL/NE' TO CONNECT TO BROOKS BOX; NOTE: Pf PE SHALL BE CENTERED IN BMP AND RUN ENTIRE LENGTH OF BMP r ORIFICE PLATE ..--,-=-'--'-~ ,7.V,______.,. EX CAVA TED € SLOPE; 1H:1V b~~~!:;:=l':::1cf~~~~; I.-'----'--'---' ~ 18" ENGINEERED SOIL ~ LAYER;'SEENOTEBELOW --lllll~~iii1J;i//?19" --12'3l4"CRUSHED ;,i l ROCK ~ --=--1 I 4"PERFORATEDPIPEW!FILTER ~~~~'/~ -\ FABRICPERFDRATIONSATTHE --,--~ -~~111 ==\ INVERT;234.1/E;INSTALL/N ----CONNECT TO 'TRUNKLINE" µ~-=--_ ~ HERRINGBONE PATTERN AND ~ I I 'BIOFIL TRA T/ON "ENGINEERED SOIL" LA YER SHALL BE MINIMUM 18" DEEP PER 1.4" HMP SIZED LOW- FLOW ORIFICE; 234.1 IE 18' RCP OUTLET DRAIN PIPE TO CONNECT TO PUBLIC STORM DRAIN; IE PER PLAN MIN. 3" AGGREGATE BELOW UNDERDRA/N; INSTALL 3' CRUSHED ROCK IN 1' WIDE TRENCH BEN EA TH SUBDRAIN PIPING AND IMPERMEABLE LINER COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK: APPENDIX G - B/ORETENTION SOIL MEDIA (BSM) EXAMPLE SPECIF/CATION TYPICAL DETAIL -BIOF/L TRA TION BASIN NOTTO SCALE GRAPHIC SCALE: 1' = 30' 30 o 30 60 HMP EXHIBIT -ATTACHMENT 2A RAF FUSION OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA -1950 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE CITY OF CARLSBAD 90 PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES CIVIL EN81NEERIN8 + LAND PLANNIN8 + LAND SURVEYING 555 North Highway 101. Ste A, Solau Beach. CA 92075 pb 858.259.1212 I fl: 858.259.4812 I pJw-..,neer:1111-com PLSA 3140-01 ATTACHMENT 2b Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yie ld Areas Regional San Diego County Watersheds Source: 2015 Regional Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Area Mapping Google Earth kmz file from www.projectcleanwater.org 3140 \. J acifica -Outdoor Amenity Area 9/12/2019 PRE-PROJECT MODEL .ti.di. ~ " I • • I I I I I ' ' I ' ' I I • ' •?OC>t T SWMM MODEL SCHEMATICS POST-PROJECT MODEL l2I O' I "' • o: I I 1111 I a.· - I " I , ' I \ ' ' I ✓ I I , • , ' , . • J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\Output\3140_SWMM_Schematics.xlsx 3140 RAF Pacifica -Outdoor Amenity Area 12/17/2019 PRE-PROJECT Width (Area/Flow DMA Area (ac) Length) (ft) 1 1.82 785 Total: 1.82 POST-PROJECT Width (Area/Flow DMA Area (ac) Length) (ft) 1 1.38 861 2 0.39 340 BMP-1 0.04591 48 Total: 1.82 D:I 0.025 Jin/hr POC-1 % % Slope Impervious % "C" Soils 3.0% 19% 0% % Impervious % Slope % "C" Soils 44% 3.0% 0% 71% 2.0% 0% 0% 0.0% 0% D:I 9}in J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\3140_SWMM_lnput.xlsx Weighted Weighted Weighted %"D" Conductivity Suction Initial Soils (in/hr): Head (in): Deficit: 100% 0.025 9.000 0.330 Weighted Weighted Weighted %"D" Conductivity Suction Initial Soils (in/hr): Head (in): Deficit: 100% 0.025 9.000 0.330 100% 0.025 9.000 0.330 100% 0.025 9.000 0.330 D:I 0.33] [TITLE] ;;Project Title/Notes 3140 RAF Pacifica -Outdoor Amenity Area Pre-Project Condi tion [OPTIONS] ; ;Option FLOW UNITS INFILTRATION FLOW ROUTING LINK OFFSETS MIN SLOPE ALLOW PONDING SKIP STEADY STATE -- START DATE START TIME REPORT START DATE --REPORT START TIME --END DATE END TIME SWEEP START SWEEP END DRY DAYS REPORT STEP WET STEP DRY STEP ROUTING STEP RULE STEP INERTIAL DAMPING NORMAL FLOW LIMITED FORCE_MAIN_EQUATION VARIABLE STEP LENGTHENING STEP MIN SURFAREA MAX TRIALS HEAD TOLERANCE SYS FLOW TOL LAT FLOW TOL MINIMUM STEP THREADS Value CFS GREEN AMPT KINWAVE DEPTH 0 NO NO 08/28/1951 05 :00:00 08/28/1951 05 :00:00 05/23/2008 23 :00:00 01/01 12/31 0 01:00:00 00 :15:00 04 :00:00 0 :01 :00 00 :00:00 PARTIAL BOTH H-W 0.75 0 12 .557 8 0.005 5 5 0 .5 1 [EVAPORATION] ; ; Data Source Parameters MONTHLY DRY_ONLY .06 NO .08 . 11 .15 [ RAINGAGES] ; ;Name Format Interval SCF POC-1 .17 .19 .19 .18 .15 .11 .08 .06 Source Oceanside [SUBCATCHMENTS] ; ;Name DMA-1 [SUBAREAS] ;;Subcatchment DMA-1 [ INFILTRATION] ;;Subcatchment . ·--------------'' DMA-1 [OUTFALLS] ; ;Name ;Basin 1 POC-1 [TIMESERIES] ; ;Name POC-1 INTENSITY 1 :00 1. 0 TIMESERIES Oceanside Rain Gage Outlet Area %Imperv Width %Slope CurbLen ---------------------------------------------------------------- Oceanside N-Imperv N-Perv 0.012 0.056 Suction Ksat 9 .025 Elevation Type 0 FREE Date Time POC-1 S-Imperv 0.05 IMD .33 Stage Data Value 1. 82 19 785 3 0 S-Perv PctZero RouteTo PctRouted ---------- 0 .1 25 OUTLET Gated Route To NO SnowPack Oceanside FILE "J :\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\Rainfall\oceanside.dat" [REPORT] ;;Reporting Options SUBCATCHMENTS ALL NODES ALL LINKS ALL [TAGS] [MAP] DIMENSIONS 0 .000 0 .000 10000.000 10000.000 Units None [COORDINATES] ; ; Node ; ; POC-1 [VERTICES] ; ; Link [Polygons] X-Coord Y-Coord 1000.000 2500.000 X-Coord Y-Coord ;;Subca tchment DMA-1 [SYMBOLS) ; ; Gage , , Oceansi de POC-1 X-Coord Y-Coord 663 .017 4914 .842 X-Coord Y-Coord 747 .985 6731 .113 [TITLE] ;;Project Title/Notes 3140 RAF Pacifica Outdoor Amenity Area Post-Project Condition [OPTIONS] ; ;Option Value FLOW UNITS CFS INFILTRATION GREEN AMPT FLOW ROUTING KINWAVE LINK OFFSETS DEPTH MIN SLOPE 0 ALLOW PONDING NO SKIP STEADY STATE NO START DATE 08/28/1951 START TIME 05 :00:00 REPORT START DATE 08/28/1951 --REPORT START TIME 05 :00:00 --END DATE 05/23/2008 END TIME 23:00:00 SWEEP START 01/01 SWEEP END 12/31 DRY DAYS 0 REPORT STEP 01:00:00 WET STEP 00 :15:00 DRY STEP 04 :00:00 ROUTING STEP 0 :01 :00 RULE STEP 00 :00:00 INERTIAL DAMPING PARTIAL NORMAL FLOW LIMITED BOTH FORCE_MAIN_EQUATION H-W VARIABLE STEP 0.75 LENGTHENING STEP 0 MIN SURFAREA 12.557 MAX TRIALS 8 HEAD TOLERANCE 0.005 SYS FLOW TOL 5 LAT FLOW TOL 5 MINIMUM STEP 0 .5 THREADS 1 [EVAPORATION] ; ; Data Source Parameters , , MONTHLY DRY ONLY .06 NO .08 .11 .15 [RAINGAGES] ; ;Name Format Interval SCF POC-1 .17 .19 .19 . 18 .15 .11 .08 .06 Source POC-1 . ------------------------ Oceanside INTENSITY 1: 00 1 .0 TIMESERIES Oceanside [SUBCATCHMENTS] ; ; Name Rain Gage Outlet Area %Imperv Width %Slope CurbLen . ·------------------------------------------------------, , DMA-1 Oceanside BMP-1 BMP-1 Oceanside POC-1 DMA-2 Oceanside POC-1 [SUBAREAS] ;;Subcatchment N-Imperv N-Perv S-Imperv . ·------------------- DMA-1 0.012 0.06 0.05 BMP-1 0 .012 0.06 0.05 DMA-2 0 .012 0.06 0.05 [ INFILTRATION] ;;Subcatchment Suction Ksat IMO . ·-------------------------------------------- DMA-1 BMP-1 DMA-2 [LID_CONTROLS] ; ;Name BMP-1 BMP-1 BMP-1 BMP-1 BMP-1 [LID_USAGE] ;;Subcatchment FromPerv BMP-1 0 [OUTFALLS] ; ; Name ;Basin 1 POC-1 [ TIMES ERIES] ; ; Name , , 9 .025 .33 9 .025 .33 9 .025 .33 Type/Layer Parameters -------------------- BC SURFACE 12 0 SOIL 18 0 .4 STORAGE 12 0. 67 DRAIN 0.3210 0.5 LID Process Number Area BMP-1 1999.84 Elevation Type Stage Data 0 FREE Date Time Value 1. 38 44 861 3 0 0 .04591 0 48 0 0 0 .39 71 340 2 0 S-Perv PctZero RouteTo PctRouted 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 .2 0 0 Width 0 Gated NO 25 25 25 0 0 .1 0 6 -------------------- InitSat 0 OUTLET OUTLET OUTLET 5 5 0 Fromimp 100 Route To 5 0 ToPerv 0 SnowPack 1. 5 RptFile * Oceanside FILE "J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\Rainfall\oceanside .dat" DrainTo * [REPORT] ;;Reporting Op tions SUBCATCHMENTS ALL NODES ALL LINKS ALL [TAGS] [MAP] DIMENSIONS 0 .000 0.000 10000 .000 10000.000 Units None [COORDINATES] ; ;Node POC-1 [VERTICES] ; ; Link [Polygons] ;;Subcatchrnent DMA-1 BMP-1 DMA-2 [SYMBOLS] ; ;Gage Oceanside X-Coord 1000.000 X-Coord X-Coord 663.017 654.206 1900.312 Y-Coord 2500 .000 Y-Coord Y-Coord 4914 .842 3676.012 4049.844 X-Coord Y-Coord 747.985 6731.113 POC-1 SWMM OUTPUT REPORT PRE-PROJECT CONDITION EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL -VERSION 5 .1 (Build 5 .1 .013) 3140 RAF Pacifica -Outdoor Amenity Area Pre-Project Condition ********************************************************* NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step. ********************************************************* **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units ............... CFS Process Models : Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES RDII ................... NO Snowmelt ............... NO Groundwater ............ NO Flow Routing ........... NO Water Quality .......... NO Infiltration Method ...... GREEN AMPT Starting Date ............ 08/28/1951 05 :00 :00 Ending Date .............. 05/23/2008 23 :00 :00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0 .0 Report Time Step ......... 01:00:00 Wet Time Step ............ 00:15:00 Dry Time Step ............ 04 :00:00 ************************** Runoff Quantity Continuity ************************** Total Precipitation ..... . Evaporation Loss ........ . Infiltration Loss ....... . Surface Runoff .......... . Final Storage ........... . Continuity Error (%) ************************** Flow Routing Continuity ************************** Dry Weather Inflow Wet Weather Inflow ...... . Groundwater Inflow ...... . RDII Inflow ............. . External Inflow ......... . External Outflow ........ . Flooding Loss ........... . Volume acre-feet 102 .389 5.553 63.362 35.419 0 .001 -1.902 Volume acre-feet 0 .000 35 .419 0 .000 0 .000 0.000 35.419 0 .000 Depth inches 675.090 36.616 417.771 233.533 0 .008 Volume 10A6 gal 0.000 11. 542 0.000 0.000 0.000 11. 542 0 .000 J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\Output\3140_PreProject_SWMM_results.docx SWMM OUTPUT REPORT Evaporation Loss ........ . Exfiltration Loss ....... . Initial Stored Volume ... . Fi nal Stored Volume ..... . Continuity Error (%) .... . *************************** Subcatchment Runoff Summary *************************** Total Precip Subcatchment in DMA-1 675.09 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 Total Runon in 0 .00 Analysis begun on: Tue Dec 17 08:55 :47 2019 An alysis ended on: Tue Dec 17 08:55 :57 2019 Total elapsed time: 00:00:10 PRE-PROJECT CONDITION 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0 .000 Total Total Imperv Evap Infil Runoff in in in 36.62 417. 77 111. 83 Perv Total Total Peak Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff in in 10A6 gal CFS -------------------- 121 .71 233 .53 11.54 2 .07 0 .346 J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\Output\3140_PreProject_SWMM_results.docx SWMM OUTPUT REPORT POST-PROJECT CONDITION EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL -VERSION 5 .1 (Build 5 .1 .013) 3140 RAF Pacifica Outdoor Amenity Area Post-Project Condition ********************************************************* NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step. ********************************************************* **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units ............... CFS Process Models : Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES RDII ................... NO Snowmelt ............... NO Groundwater ............ NO Flow Rout ing ........... NO Water Quality .......... NO Infiltration Method ...... GREEN AMPT Starting Date ............ 08/28/1951 05 :00:00 Ending Date .............. 05/23/2008 23 :00:00 Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0 .0 Report Time Step ......... 01 :00 :00 Wet Time Step ............ 00 :15:00 Dry Time Step ............ 04 :00 :00 ************************** Runoff Quantity Continuity ************************** Initial LID Storage ..... . Total Precipitation ..... . Evaporation Loss ........ . Infi ltration Loss ....... . Surface Runoff .......... . LID Drainage ............ . Final Storage ........... . Continuity Error (%) .... . ************************** Flow Routing Continuity ************************** Dry Weather Inflow Wet Weather Inflow ...... . Groundwater Inflow ...... . RDII Inflow ............. . External Inflow ......... . Volume acre-feet 0.007 102 .159 11 .844 37 .599 17 . 583 36.579 0 .012 -1 .420 Volume acre-feet 0 .000 54.161 0.000 0 .000 0.000 Depth inches 0 .046 675.090 78.265 248.461 116.193 241. 724 0.079 Volume 10~6 gal 0 .000 17.649 0.000 0 .000 0 .000 J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\Output\3140 Po stProject SWMM_results.docx SWMM OUTPUT REPORT External Outflow ........ . Flooding Loss ........... . Evaporation Loss ........ . Exfiltration Loss ....... . Initial Stored Volume ... . Final Stored Vol ume ..... . Continuity Error (%) .•.•• *************************** Subcatchment Runoff Summary *************************** Subcatchment DMA-1 BMP-1 DMA-2 *********************** LID Performance Summary *********************** Total Precip in 675.09 675.09 675.09 54 .161 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 Total Runon in 0 .00 10393.99 0 .00 POST-PROJECT CONDITION 17. 649 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 Total Evap in 53.46 843.96 75.91 Total Infil in 285 .30 0 .00 147.35 Imperv Runoff in 258 .59 0 .00 416.74 --------------------------------------------------------------- Perv Runoff in 87 .20 0 .00 46. 18 Total Runoff in 345 .79 10224 .46 4 62 . 92 Total Runoff 10A6 gal 12 .96 12.75 4 .90 Peak Runoff CFS 1. 60 1. 65 0 . 46 Total Evap Infil Surface Drain Initial Final Continuity Inflow Loss Loss Outflow Outflow Storage Storage Error Subcatchment LID Control in in in in in in in % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BMP-1 BMP-1 11069. 08 843 .99 0 .00 663 .40 9561 .43 1. 80 2 .34 -0.00 Analysis begun on : Tue Dec 17 08:59:31 2019 Analysis ended on : Tue Dec 17 08 :59:43 2019 Total elapsed time : 00 :00 :12 J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\Output\3140 PostProject SWMM_results.docx Runoff Coe ff 0.512 0.924 0.686 Peak Flow Frequency Summary Return Period Pre-project Qpeak Post-project -Mitigated Q (cfs) (cfs) LF = 0.lxQ2 0.101 0.052 2-year 1.010 0.517 5-year 1.264 1.053 10-year 1.660 1.425 J:\Active Jobs\3140 RAF PACIFICA GROUP\CIVIL\REPORTS\SWMM\3140 SWMM_postProcessing.xlsx 2.000 1.800 1.600 1.400 .,, 1.200 -u .!: ~ 1.000 ii: ~ 111 CII 0. 0.800 0.600 0.400 0.200 0.000 I I ti- . I I .l... ~ 0 1 - ~ ,. if .A 2 Peak Flow Frequency Curves I I I I --T" 'T"-T T' T I I I I I I I I I I I . ! I I I II ~ I i I I I I I 1 I I I I I : : ' ' I I I ! i Ith ~· I i ' . I I I I ' I I I t I ~ I I I --, I . ~ --I ~ _,_ --I . ' I I I I I I -. --I I l.j ,# -I I I I I I I I I I ~ I -0-Pre-project Qpeak - I I ~I' I I , - I I ' I ' -tr-Post-project Mitigated Qpeak I I I l.). ..... I I -I I I ,/J'~l: I I I : i 11 I I I I I I I I I r/) I I I . I I I ; : I I I I I . I I ' I , I I : I I I I , I I ' I I I I I i ; I I I I I I I I I ' I I l I · : ! 1111 I . I I I I I 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Return Period in Years Low-flow Threshold:I! 10% 11 O.lxQ2 (Pre): 0.101 cfs QlO (Pre): 1.660 cfs Ordinate#: 100 Incremental Q (Pre): 0.01559 cfs Total Hourly Data:11 497370 llhours The proposed BMP:! PASSED Interval Pre-project Flow Pre-project Hours Pre-project ¾ Post-project Post-project ¾ Percentage Pass/Fail (cfs) Time Exceeding Hours Time Exceeding 0 0.101 1070 2.15E-03 1084 2.18E-03 101% Pass 1 0.117 945 l.90E-03 736 l.48E-03 78% Pass 2 0.132 824 l.66E-03 516 l.04E-03 63% Pass 3 0.148 780 l.57E-03 390 7.84E-04 50% Pass 4 0.163 734 l.48E-03 286 5.75E-04 39% Pass 5 0.179 693 l.39E-03 237 4.77E-04 34% Pass 6 0.195 658 l.32E-03 189 3.80E-04 29% Pass 7 0.210 626 l.26E-03 157 3.16E-04 25% Pass 8 0.226 594 l.19E-03 137 2.75E-04 23% Pass 9 0.241 553 l.llE-03 114 2.29E-04 21% Pass 10 0.257 510 l .03E-03 102 2.05E-04 20% Pass 11 0.273 481 9.67E-04 94 l.89E-04 20% Pass 12 0.288 444 8.93E-04 88 l.77E-04 20% Pass 13 0.304 387 7.78E-04 80 l.61E-04 21% Pass 14 0.319 352 7.08E-04 68 l.37E-04 19% Pass 15 0.335 335 6.74E-04 53 l.07E-04 16% Pass 16 0.350 318 6.39E-04 51 l.03E-04 16% Pass 17 0.366 306 6.15E-04 49 9.85E-05 16% Pass 18 0.382 296 5.95E-04 48 9.65E-05 16% Pass 19 0.397 279 5.61E-04 48 9.65E-05 17% Pass 20 0.413 261 5.25E-04 47 9.45E-05 18% Pass 21 0.428 245 4.93E-04 46 9.25E-05 19% Pass 22 0.444 235 4.72E-04 45 9.05E-05 19% Pass 23 0.460 218 4.38E-04 44 8.85E-05 20% Pass 24 0.475 196 3.94E-04 43 8.65E-05 22% Pass 25 0.491 169 3.40E-04 41 8.24E-05 24% Pass 26 0.506 159 3.20E-04 38 7.64E-05 24% Pass 27 0.522 148 2.98E-04 37 7.44E-05 25% Pass 28 0.538 135 2.71E-04 34 6.84E-05 25% Pass 29 0.553 130 2.61E-04 33 6.63E-05 25% Pass 30 0.569 126 2.53E-04 32 6.43E-05 25% Pass 31 0.584 124 2.49E-04 32 6.43E-05 26% Pass 32 0.600 120 2.41E-04 32 6.43E-05 27% Pass 33 0.616 108 2.17E-04 32 6.43E-05 30% Pass 34 0.631 103 2.07E-04 31 6.23E-05 30% Pass 35 0.647 96 l.93E-04 31 6.23E-05 32% Pass 36 0.662 84 l.69E-04 29 5.83E-05 35% Pass 37 0.678 78 1.57E-04 26 5.23E-05 33% Pass 38 0.694 72 l.45E-04 24 4.83E-05 33% Pass 39 0.709 70 l.41E-04 24 4.83E-05 34% Pass 40 0.725 67 l.35E-04 24 4.83E-05 36% Pass 41 0.740 67 l.35E-04 24 4.83E-05 36% Pass 42 0.756 63 l .27E-04 23 4.62E-05 37% Pass 43 0.771 61 1.23E-04 22 4.42E-05 36% Pass 44 0.787 56 l .13E-04 22 4.42E-05 39% Pass 45 0.803 54 l .09E-04 21 4.22E-05 39% Pass 46 0.818 53 l.07E-04 20 4.02E-05 38% Pass 47 0.834 49 9.85E-05 19 3.82E-05 39% Pass 48 0.849 47 9.45E-05 19 3.82E-05 40% Pass 49 0.865 45 9.0SE-05 17 3.42E-05 38% Pass so 0.881 44 8.85E-05 16 3.22E-05 36% Pass 51 0.896 44 8.85E-05 15 3.02E-05 34% Pass 52 0.912 42 8.44E-05 15 3.02E-05 36% Pass 53 0.927 42 8.44E-05 15 3.02E-05 36% Pass 54 0.943 38 7.64E-05 15 3.02E-05 39% Pass Interval Pre-project Flow Pre-project Hours Pre-project % Post-project Post-project % Percentage Pass/Fail (cfs) Time Exceeding Hours Time Exceeding 55 0.959 38 7.64E-05 14 2.81E-05 37% Pass 56 0.974 38 7.64E-05 14 2.81E-05 37% Pass 57 0.990 36 7.24E-05 14 2.81E-05 39% Pass 58 1.005 35 7.04E-05 14 2.81E-05 40% Pass 59 1.021 31 6.23E-05 14 2.81E-05 45% Pass 60 1.037 27 5.43E-05 14 2.81E-05 52% Pass 61 1.052 22 4.42E-05 13 2.61E-05 59% Pass 62 1.068 22 4.42E-05 12 2.41E-05 55% Pass 63 1.083 22 4.42E-05 12 2.41E-05 55% Pass 64 1.099 22 4.42E-05 11 2.21E-05 50% Pass 65 1.114 21 4.22E-05 11 2.21E-05 52% Pass 66 1.130 21 4.22E-05 11 2.21E-05 52% Pass 67 1.146 21 4.22E-05 11 2.21E-05 52% Pass 68 1.161 21 4.22E-05 11 2.21E-05 52% Pass 69 1.177 21 4.22E-05 10 2.0lE-05 48% Pass 70 1.192 19 3.82E-05 10 2.0lE-05 53% Pass 71 1.208 16 3.22E-05 10 2.0lE-05 63% Pass 72 1.224 14 2.81E-05 10 2.0lE-05 71% Pass 73 1.239 12 2.41E-05 9 1.81E-05 75% Pass 74 1.255 12 2.41E-05 8 l.61E-05 67% Pass 75 1.270 9 l.81E-05 7 l.41E-05 78% Pass 76 1.286 9 l.81E-05 7 1.41E-05 78% Pass 77 1.302 9 l.81E-05 7 1.41E-05 78% Pass 78 1.317 9 l .81E-05 7 1.41E-05 78% Pass 79 1.333 9 l.81E-05 6 l .21E-05 67% Pass 80 1.348 8 l .61E-05 6 l.21E-05 75% Pass 81 1.364 7 l.41E-05 6 l .21E-05 86% Pass 82 1.380 7 l.41E-05 5 l.0lE-05 71% Pass 83 1.395 7 1.41E-05 5 l.0lE-05 71% Pass 84 1.411 6 l.21E-05 5 l.0lE-05 83% Pass 85 1.426 6 l.21E-05 5 l.0lE-05 83% Pass 86 1.442 6 l.21E-05 5 1.0lE-05 83% Pass 87 1.458 6 l.21E-05 5 l.0lE-05 83% Pass 88 1.473 6 l.21E-05 5 1.0l E-05 83% Pass 89 1.489 6 1.21E-05 5 l.0l E-05 83% Pass 90 1.504 6 1.21E-05 5 l.0lE-05 83% Pass 91 1.520 6 l.21E-05 5 l.0lE-05 83% Pass 92 1.535 6 l.21E-05 5 1.0lE-05 83% Pass 93 1.551 6 l.21E-05 5 1.0lE-05 83% Pass 94 1.567 6 l.21E-05 5 l .0lE-05 83% Pass 95 1.582 6 l.21E-05 5 l .0lE-05 83% Pass 96 1.598 6 l.21E-05 5 l.0lE-05 83% Pass 97 1.613 6 l.21E-05 5 1.0lE-05 83% Pass 98 1.629 6 l.21E-05 5 l.0lE-05 83% Pass 99 1.645 6 l.21E-05 5 l.0lE-05 83% Pass 100 1.660 5 1.0lE-05 5 l.0lE-05 100% Pass ~ ~ ::C 0 ;;: 1.800 1.600 1.400 1.200 1.000 0.800 0.600 0.400 0.200 0.000 l.0E-06 l.0E-05 Flow Duration Curve [Pre vs. Post (Mitigated)] l.0E-04 % Time Exceeding ~ Pre-project Q ~ Post-project (Mitigated) Q l.0E-03 l.0E-02 SWMM Model Flow Coefficient Calculation BMP-1 PARAMETER Ponding Depth Bioretention Soil Layer Gravel Layer TOTAL Orifice Coefficient Low Flow Orifice Diameter Drain exponent Flow Rate (volumetric) Ponding Depth Surface Area Bioretention Surface Area Porosity of Bioretention Soil Flow Rate (per unit area) Effective Ponding Depth Flow Coefficient ABBREV. PD s G Cg D n Q Apo As,AG As,AG n q PDett C Bio-Retention Cell LID BMP 12 in 18 in 12 in 3.5 ft 42 in 0.6 -- 1.4 in 0.5 -- 0.095 cfs 2000 ft2 2000 ft2 0.0459 ac 1.00 - 2.063 in/hr 12.00 in 0.3210 -- PASCO LARET S: ITER Mf 'VAC.t·,,~·c.~- & ASSOC IAT FS (»,t;{_ Q I)'(' ~ 11y ht P'- Job # 3 \4 0 1' .... ....... :o·: i .. \-1 _;,~:~i-biTh~u..'.I.: • _,. • ..... ~--• ,,. t· ••f' ···t· .. ♦· r-•·• •· . •· ~ , . . . . ; . : ' . 535 North Highway l 01 Ste A Solana Beach, CA 92075 I plsaengineering.com Drawdown Calculation for BMP-1 Project Name Project No Surface Drawdown Time: Surface Area Underdrain Orifice Diameter: in C: Surface Ponding (to invert of lowest surface discharge opening in outlet structure): Amended Soil Depth: Gravel Depth: Orifice Q = Effective Depth Infiltration controlled by orifice RAF Pacifica -Outdoor Amenity Area 3140 5.8 hr 2000 sq ft 1.4 in 0.6 ft 1 1.5 ft 1 ft 0.095 cfs 20.4 in 2.062 in/hr s to t:; Hydrologic Soil Group-San u1ego County Area, California ~ = 473<!20 473470 47.ml = 47.m) 33' 7 27" N I I i I I 33' 7 17" N ~ = 3: to t:; ~ k 473<!20 473470 47.mJ 47EO 47.ml Map Scale: 1: 2,260 r prirred on A land9:ape ( 11" x 8.5") sheet ----====-------========i"eters 0 ~ 00 1~ 100 ----====-------=======feet 0 100 2W 40J tnl Map p-ojedion: Web Merultor Comer ooordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zme llN WGS84 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey -iiiii Conservation Service 473570 473570 4737al 4T3TIO 4737al 4T3T/O 473820 473820 > ~ ~ ~ 3: ~ ~ ~ I I i I I I I 8/27/2019 Page 1 of 4 33' 7 27" N 33' 7 17" N Hydrologic Soil Group-San urego County Area, California MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons D A D AID DB D BID D C □ CID DD D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A -AID -B -BID C -CID -D -, Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points 12 A D AID ■ B ■ BID USDA Natural Resources -em Conservation Service [] ■ C CID ■ D [] Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation +++ Rails -Interstate Highways -US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background • Aerial Photography Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1 :24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: San Diego County Area, California Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 12, 2018 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1 :50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Nov 3, 2014-Nov 22, 2014 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 8/27/2019 Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI HrO2 HrE2 Huerhuero loam, 9 to 15 D percent slopes, eroded Huerhuero loam, 15 to D 30 percent slopes, eroded 8.0 4.8 Totals for Area of Interest 12.8 Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (AID, BID, and CID). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. USDA Natural Resources -----Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 62.2% 37.8% 100.0% 8/27/2019 Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-San Diego County Area, California Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher USDA Natural Resources :iiiiiii Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 8/27/2019 Page 4 of4 Appendix G: Guidance for Continuous Simulation and Hydromodification Management Sizing Factors SAN BERNAADINO t 9 R S A N 117J 17 V E R S D I E G 0 16 18 D E 16 MPERIAL 18 !LCENlllO t Figure G.1-2: California Irrigation Management Information System "Reference Evapotranspiration Zones" G-5 February 2016 Appendix G: Guidance for Continuo us Simulation and Hydromodification Management Sizing Factors Table G.1-1: Monthly Average Reference Evapotranspiration by ETo Zone (inches/month and inches/day) for use in SWMM Models for Hydromodification Management Studies in San Diego County CIMIS Zones 1, 4, 6, 9, and 16 (See CIMIS ETo Zone Map) Zone I in/month in/month in/month in/month in/month in/month in/month in/month in/month in/month in/month in/month 0.93 1.4 2.48 3.3 4.03 4.5 4.65 403 3.3 2.48 1.2 0.62 4 1.86 2.24 3.41 4.5 5.27 5.7 5.89 5.58 4.5 3.41 2.4 1.86 6 1.86 2.24 3.41 4.8 5.58 6.3 6.51 6.2 4.8 3.72 2.4 1.86 9 I 2.17 I 2.8 4.03 5.1 5.89 6.6 7.44 6.82 5.7 4.03 2.7 1.86 16 I 1.55 I 2.52 4.03 5.7 7.75 8.7 9.3 8.37 6.3 4.34 2.4 1.55 Days I 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 Zone I in/tlay in/tlay in/tlay in/tlay in/tlay in/tlay in/ tlay in/tlay in/tlay in/tlay in/tlav in/tla 0.030 0.050 0.080 0.110 0.130 0.150 0.150 0.130 0.110 0.080 0.040 0.020 4 0.060 0.080 0.1 10 0.150 0.170 0.190 0.190 0180 0.150 0.110 0.080 0.060 6 0.060 0.080 0.1 10 0.160 0.180 0.210 0.210 0.200 0.160 0.120 0.080 0.060 9 I 0.070 I 0.100 I 0.130 0.170 0.190 0.220 0.240 0.220 0.190 0.130 0.090 0.060 16 I 0.050 I 0.090 I 0.130 0.190 0.250 0.290 0.300 0.270 0.210 0.140 I 0.080 I 0.050 G-6 February 2016 STORA1 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 2019 ATTACHMENT 3 Structural BMP Maintenance Information Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included in the Structural BMP Maintenance Information Attachment: Preliminary Design/Planning/CEQA level submittal: Attachment 3 must identify: J Typical maintenance indicators and actions for proposed structural BMP(s) based on Section 7.7 of the BMP Design Manual Final Design level submittal: Attachment 3 must identify: J Specific maintenance indicators and actions for proposed structural BMP(s). This shall be based on Section 7.7 of the BMP Design Manual and enhanced to reflect actual proposed components of the structural BMP(s) J How to access the structural BMP(s) to inspect and perform maintenance J Features that are provided to facilitate inspection (e.g., observation ports, cleanouts, silt posts, or other features that allow the inspector to view necessary components of the structural BMP and compare to maintenance thresholds) J Manufacturer and part number for proprietary parts of structural BMP(s) when applicable J Maintenance thresholds for BMPs subject to siltation or heavy trash(e.g., silt level posts or other markings shall be included in all BMP components that will trap and store sediment, trash, and/or debris, so that the inspector may determine how full the BMP is, and the maintenance personnel may determine where the bottom of the BMP is . If required, posts or other markings shall be indicated and described on structural BMP plans.) J Recommended equipment to perform maintenance J When applicable, necessary special training or certification requirements for inspection and maintenance personnel such as confined space entry or hazardous waste management RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 21 STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 2019 OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE FOR STRUCTURAL BMPs The operations and maintenance of the treatment control BMPs will be the responsibility of the owner. The current contact information for the responsible party is: RAF Pacifica Group 111 C Street, Suite 200 Encinitas, CA 92024 858-314-3116 A training program will be administered and implemented by RAF Pacifica Group and shall occur at a minimum of once annually. The training program shall consist of, at a minimum: the disbursement of the brochures and flyers included in this SWQMP and a copy of the maintenance plan to all operation and maintenance staff associated with the project. A training log shall be filled out at each training session and kept for a minimum of five (5) years. RAF Pacifica Group will complete and maintain operation and maintenance forms to adequately document all maintenance performed on the project's treatment control BMPs. These records should be kept on file for a minimum of five (5) years and shall be made accessible to the City of Carlsbad, the State Water Resources Control Board or any other authority regulating storm water discharges for inspection upon request at any time. All waste generated from the project site is ultimately the responsibility of RAF Pacifica Group. Disposal of sediment, debris, and trash will comply with applicable local, county, state, and federal waste control programs. Suspected hazardous waste will be analyzed to determine proper disposal methods. The following Operation and Maintenance Plan has been developed for each type of pollutant control BMP used on this project. These are minimum requirements only. The frequency and/or scope may be increased, if necessary, to meet and/or maintain the level of storm water quality treatment required of this project. All costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the pollutant control BMPs will be funded by RAF Pacifica Group in perpetuity or until the project is sold to another entity where the responsibility would transfer with the sale of the property or an individual parcel. The project's owner, RAF Pacifica Group, will enter into a Stormwater Facility Maintenance Agreement as required by the City of Carlsbad, which will be executed prior to grading permit issuance. RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 22 STORAf WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SEPTEMBER 20/9 Biofiltration System Inspection Activities Recommended Frequency Inspect biofiltration system -Before/after rainy season -Bi-weekly during the rainy season -After a rainfall event of 0.5'' or more Inspect soil and repair eroded areas Monthly Inspect for erosion or damage to vegetation, preferably at the end of the wet season to schedule dry season maintenance and before major wet season Prior to rainy season runoff to be sure the areas are ready for the wet season. However, additional & every other month inspection after periods of heavy runoff is recommended. Inspect to ensure grasses, ground covers, vegetation is well established. If not, either prepare soil and reseed or replant with appropriate alternative species. Every other month Install erosion control blankets if necessary. Check for debris and litter, areas of sediment accumulation Every other month Inspect health of trees and shrubs and vegetation Every other month Inspect system cleanouts and outfall structures Every other month Inspect for standing water and vectors Every other month Biofiltration System Maintenance Activities Recommended Frequency Remove litter and debris in conjunction with regularly scheduled landscape maintenance Irrigate biofiltration area(s) during dry season (April through October) and as necessary to maintain vegetation during the rainy season. Physically remove weeds Remove sediment As part of routine, Apply mulch to areas devoid of mulch, especially prior to the wet season regular landscape Replace damaged or diseased trees and shrubs maintenance Mow turf areas, if any Repair erosion at inflow points Unclog under drain system Remove and replace dead and diseased vegetation Replace tree stakes and wires, if any Mulch should be replaced every 2 to 3 years or when bare spots appear Every 2-3 years, or as needed Rototill or cultivate the surface if the system does not draw down in 48 hours As needed RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 23 -_(i) TREATMENT CONTROL BMP VERIFICATION FORM Pursuant to CMC 15.12.100 GENERAL INFORMATION Owner Name Owner Address City and Zip Contact Name Contact Phone New Contact New Phone BMP INFORMATION BMPType BMPID# l I Priority I BMP Description Manufacturer BMP Location BMP Address BMP Approval Date I Last Inspection Date Maintenance Freauencv I Comments BMP VERIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE U) 0 !:'" 3: ~ w zo > z oz z c::.:.:: BMP ACTIVITY COMMENTS IJ-'-<>-s the BMP been installed? the BMP been removed? I~-:, the BMP operatinq properlv? Has the BMP been replaced? If so when? Is BMP covered under a maintenance aqreement? Is the BMP on a regular maintenance schedule? Has trash or other debris accumulated in or around BMP? Has the BMP been inspected during the last year? Has the BMP been maintained or cleaned durina the last vear? Are discharge ooints free of litter and debris? Has it rained since the last time the BMP was maintained? □ Leaking Vehicles [ Erosion/Sediments □ Trash and Debris What are the sources of pollution that could impact the BMP? □ Over Irrigation □ Improvement Projects (paint, concrete wash, landscaping, etc.) D Pet/Animal Waste D Lawn clippings and yard waste D Other Certification Statement "I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system to assure that the responsible party gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or person who managed the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief true, accurate and complete, I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information inc/udina the oossibilitv of fines and other enforcement actions." PRINT NAME: u SIGNATURE Please return the com leted and si ned form to the p g City of Carlsbad CMI -Storm Water Compliance 5950 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92008 760-602-2780 or FAX 760-438-7178 DATE STORM WATER QUA LITY MANAGEMENT PLAN ATTACHMENT 4 City standard Single Sheet BMP (SSBMP) Exhibit RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA 24 SEPTEMBER 2019 City Standard Single Sheet BMP Exhib. __ _,,{R uired at Final~ 1st Sub •• -· ..... _ I PLAN VIEW -SINGLE SHEET BMP PLAN SCALE. I"= 30' HORIZONTAL \ I I ' ' \ \ \ I \ I \ \ I I I PAR1Y RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE: RAF PACIFICA GROUP -REAL ESTATE FUND IV, LLC CONTACT: ADAM ROBINSON 315 S COAST HWY 101, SUITE U-12 ENCINITAS, CA 92024 PH: (858) 314-3116 BMP NOTES: 1. THESE BMPS ARE MANDATORY TO BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS OR THESE PLANS. 2. NO CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED BMPS ON THIS SHEET WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE CITY ENGINEER. 3. NO SUBSTITUTIONS TO THE MATERIAL OR TYPES OR PLANTING TYPES WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE CITY ENGINEER. 4. NO OCCUPANCY WILL BE GRANTED UNTIL THE CITY INSPECTION STAFF HAS INSPECTED THIS PROJECT FOR APPROPRIATE BMP CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION. 5. REFER TO MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT DOCUMENT. 6. SEE PROJECT SWQMP FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. PLAN PREPARED BY: TYLER GLAWSON PASCO , LARET, SUITER & ASSOCIATES 535 N. HWY 101, SUITE A SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075 PH: (858) 259-8212 No. 80356 xp. 12/31/2D BMP TABLE BMP ID# BMPTYPE SYMBOL CASQA NO. QUANTITY DRAWING NO. SHEET NO.(S) INSPECTION MAINTENANCE FREQUENCY FREQUENCY TREATMENT CONTROL HYDROMODIFICATION & TREATMENT CONTROL G) BIOFILTRATION ~::::~ BASIN (BF-1) LOW IMPACT DESIGN (L.1.D.) SOURCE CONTROL ©-@ STENCILS NO DUMPING DRAINS TO OCEAN ®-0 BMPIWATER QUALITY SIGN TC-32 2,000 SF. --5,6 QUARTERLY SEMI-ANNUALLY SD-13 PERMANENT WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FACILITY KEEPING OUR WATERWAYS CLEAN MAINTAIN WITH CARE· NO MOD/FICA TJONS WITHOUT AGENCY APPROVAL WATER QUALITY SIGN-TYPICAL DETAIL SCALE: NOT TO SCALE ATTACHMENT 4-SWQMP SINGLE SHEET BMP PLAN RAF PACIFICA GROUP FUSION -OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA CITY OF CARLSBAD GRAPHIC SCALE: 1" = 30' PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES ~-30 0 30 60 90 CIVIL ENGINEERING+ LAND PLANNING+ LAND SURVEYING 535 North BlaJnray 101, Ste A, Solaa Beach, CA 112075 ph 851.2511,1212 I flt 151.2511.41112 I pJue1181neerlDIJ.com PLSA 3140-01