The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCUP 2017-0004; CATEGORIZATION OF INFILTRATION FEASIBILITY CONDITION FORM (I-8); 2017-06-13GILE? ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 'Atlanta GA GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION M*itais CONSULTANTS Baftimore, MD DOW, Los Angeles, CA Manassas,VA June 13 2017 Mtwaul Wl West Coast Self-Storage Group 4012 148 Street SE Mill Creek, Washington 98012 Attention: Mr. Jim Fitzpatrick Real Estate/Development Manager Subject Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition (Form I-B) West Coast Self Storage Development SEC El Camino Real and Cougar Drive Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1703003 Reference: Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis, West Coast Self Storage Development, SEC El Camino Real and Cougar Drive, Carlsbad, California, prepared by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc., dated April 10, 2017, Project No. 2G-1703003 Dear Mr. Fitzpatrick: As requested by Howes Weiler & Associates, Giles Engineering and Associates, Inc. completed the City of Carlsbad Form 1-8 and Is attached to this letter. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If we may be of additional assistance, should geotechnical related problems occur, please do not hesitate to call at any time. Respectfully submitted, GILES I C070687 112, EXP L. Gatus, P.E. ' mt Branch Manager Attachment: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition (Form 1-8) Distribution: West Coast Self-Storage Group Attn.: Mr. Jim Fitzpatrick (email MWatrick@wcsolfstoracie.com Howes Weiler & Associates Attn.: Mr. Wafter H. Brown (2 Copies USPS, email: wbrownhwDlanninpcorn) Attn.: Mr. Stan Weiler (email: stanweiIerhwplanning.com) 1965 North Main Strsi Orange1 CA 92865 714/2790817 • Fax 714/2799687 • E-Mail iosangetes@gflesengroom Appendix I: Fonns and Checklists Im1!untfls PattI- Full 1nfihtadnn Fessibilhty Screetiing Cnteria Would infiltration of the full design volume be feasible from a physical perspective without any undesitsble consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Criteria Screening Question Yes No Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed I facility locations greater than 03 inches per hour? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the actors presented in Appendix C,2 and Appendix 1¼ov1debas1s: 44. .fti oil t4 CY-) c o 'SA 14 c,t. £o13 .j arc. to Jt4z.IC ' nfRM4el'. Summarize findings of studies; provide rekrence to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide n*rrsdve discussion of study/data source applicability. Can infiltration greater than 0.5 Inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, 2 groundwater wounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The xcspqnse to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of chc factors presented in Appendix C.2 Provide bask: {c4w f'e, jrtfr c1'J 4° s4t 3(OjC CbPl9C4onf. Il5WtIJtf, iviiU'rMior sco(i o4r *41v C1AiIA? rck4 w4'c(. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculation; map; data sources,, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 1-3 February 2016 Appendix I: Forms and Checklists flflIk1qiiT Critea Screening Question Ye. No Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without Increasing risk of groundwater contamination (shallow water table, storos 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 Appendix C3. Provide basis: S tt'l'ov' 3IMt' 4Lvi O..t in/ ae Vt it SR. £t4IJ911 O4).'rt4oflS. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources. etc. Provide osottive discussion of study/data source applicability. - - 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 comprehensivc evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. / Provide basis: C4J JTICI 4cf -flip O'S' 14v art. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, dta sources, etc. Provide namtive 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 i, Full Infiltration If any answer from row 14 is "No", infiltration may be possible to some extent but would not genemlly be feasible or desirable to achieve a "full infiltration" design. Proceed to Put EP in Z016 Appendix 1: Forms and Checklists Part 2— Paithl Infilsia vs. NoinfihralionFcosibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Cdtcria IscoeeningQucstiort Yes No 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 Appendix C.2 and Appendia D. Provide basis: slij~ soils o( dA'ic.f kc'aC lhrtIiWJ 64vc 4 %s'few o(44.s. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide nanstive discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to znitig!tte low infiltration r#tes. Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without increasing risk of gcotcchzsical hazards (slope 6 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: 11It'4l1b vIDulsi ii4 an erded vVsk 3 utn.Iø 1 L't..'f reSc,O 4 e s i1. .4){ ,uz. CAC.T j ILIJ ?Mweelt ;0414,ra~61w. Summarize findings of studies; provide tefetence to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide nauajve discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 1-5 Fcbrnasy 2016 Appendix I.! Forms and Checklists Criteria Screening Question Yes No Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix Ci. Provide basis: w4 ojjL v'ik 4f 9 (*I4%O(It14k('rA46L cohwtvkljot.( 44. 4'LiUvit.. • fCvi Att; J14 ci.} rtt4 14 It ra4.. Summarize findings of studies; provide zference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narntive discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream 8 water sights? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C?' Provide basis z . IIs e.l., y/QI1i sii.1 vioLb VJ' t(ifi1 10 4i.i. lf(,v1(L f 4eIf 4q4. it cMi ru&s ik4ho Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide naitathre discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feaslblç to mitigate low infiltration rates. If all answers from row 5-8 an yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible, Part 2 The feasibility screening category is Partial infiltration. Result* 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 i o Infiltration. 'i.o oc compiercu using gaccerca site snrnrmauon anu ocsr pzolcss!onat juagmcnr consiacring inc aerinwon 01 Met' 10 the MS4 Permit. Additional resting and/or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings- 1-6 February 2016