Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD 2020-0003; PACIFIC RIM; PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP); 2020-03-12CITY OF CARLSBAD RECORD COPY ~t'.k Initial PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP) FOR AVIARA GOLF COURSE RENOVATIONS PROJECT No. MILES J. LEANDRO ---GRADING No. GR2020-0002 DRAWING No. DWG 316-7A ENGINEER OF WORK: RCE 84291 PREPARED FOR: XHR CARLSBAD TRS 200 S. ORANGE AVENUE SUITE 2700 ORLANDO, FL 32801 PREPARED BY: FUSCOE ENGINEERING, INC 6390 GREENWICH DRIVE SUITE 170 SAN DIEGO, CA 92122 (858) 554-1500 DATE: March 12, 2020 EXP. 09-30-21 0 z ~ (_) UJ :c (_) z <.'( j; ~ TABLE OF CONTENTS Certification Page Project Vicinity Map FORM E-34 Storm Water Standard Questionnaire Site Information FORM E-36 Standard Project Requirement Checklist Summary of PDP Structural BMPs Attachment 1: Backup for PDP Pollutant Control BMPs Attachment 1 a: DMA Exhibit Attachment 1 b: Tabular Summary of DMAs and Design Capture Volume Calculations Attachment 1 c: Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening (when applicable) Attachment 1d: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition (when applicable) Attachment 1 e: Pollutant Control BMP Design Worksheets I Calculations Attachment 2: Backup for PDP Hydromodification Control Measures Attachment 2a: Hydromodification Management Exhibit Attachment 2b: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Attachment 2c: Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels Attachment 2d: Flow Control Facility Design Attachment 3: Structural BMP Maintenance Thresholds and Actions Attachment 4: Single Sheet BMP (SSBMP) Exhibit CERTIFICATION PAGE Project Name: AVIARA GOLF COURSE Project ID: ___ _ 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. idr RCE 84291 EXP: 09-30-21 Engineer o Miles J. Leandro Print Name Fuscoe Engineering Inc. Company Date NOT TO SCALE PACIFIC OCEAN PROJECT VICINITY MAP VICINITY MAP ROAi) 0 \ ~ City of 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 questions, please seek assistance from Land Development Engineering staff. A 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: AVIARA GOLF COURSE RENOVATIONS PROJECT ID: ADDRESS: 7447 BATIQUITOS DRIVE APN: 215-592-02 The project is (check one): D New Development 181 Redevelopment The total proposed disturbed area is: 1, 128,632 ft2 ( 25.91 ) acres The total proposed newly created and/or replaced impervious area is: 10?95 ft2 ( 0.25 ) 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 SWQMP#: 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 STEP1 C TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL PROJECTS To 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 □ ~ 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): 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: C Is 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? □ ~ 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): ' If you answered "no" to the above questions, your project is not exempt from PDP , ao to Step 3. E-34 Page 2 of 4 REV 04/1 7 To determine if your project is a PDP, please answer the following questions (MS4 Permit Provision E.3.b.(1 )): 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, and ublic develo ment ro ·ects on ublic or rivate 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 more of impervious surface? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public develo ment ro ·ects on ublic or rivate 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 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 develo ment ro·ect includes develo ment on an natural slo e that is twent -five ercent or reater. 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 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 site? A street, road, highway, freeway or driveway is any paved impervious surface used for the trans ortation of automobiles, trucks, motorc cles, and other vehicles. 7. 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 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 ro ·ect to the ESA i.e. not commin led with flows from ad'acent 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 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 RGO's that meet the following criteria: (a) 5,000 square feet or more or (b) a project Average Daily Traffic ADT of 100 or more vehicles er da . 10. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that results in the disturbance of one or more acres of land 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 21 .203.040 YES NO □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 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 statin "M ro'ect is a 'STANDARD PROJECT' ... " and com lete a licant information. E-34 Page 3 of 4 REV 04/17 C C STEP4 TO BE COMPLETED FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (PDP) ONLY Complete 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) = 364,550 sq. ft. l8l □ Total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area (B) = 10 795 sq. ft. Percent impervious area created or replaced (B/A)*100 = 3.0 % 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 BM P'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 aoolicant information. STEPS CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX AND COMPLETE APPLICANT INFORMATION ~ 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. □ 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. Note: For projects that are close to meeting the PDP threshold, staff may require detailed impervious area calculations and 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: Miles J. Leandro Applicant Title: Project Manager, Civil Engineer Applicant Signature: /4~ LI -----k---· Date: ~-,-i,-w .. • Environmentally Sens1t1ve 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 preseives or their equivalent under the Multi Species Conseivation 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 Citv Use Onlv YES NO City Concurrence: □ □ By: Date: Project ID: E-34 Page 4 of 4 REV 04/17 SITE INFORMATION CHECKLIST Project Summary Information Project Name IA viara Golf Course Project ID Project Address 7447 Batiquitos Drive Carlsbad, CA 92011 Assessor's Parcel Number(s) (APN(s)) 215-295-04, 215-592-02, 19,22,28,29, 215-612-05,25,26 Project Watershed (Hydrologic Unit) Carlsbad 904.51 Parcel Area 183.29 Acres ( 7,984,114 Square Feet) Existing Impervious Area (subset of Parcel Area) 8.37 Acres ( 364,550 Square Feet) Area to be disturbed by the project (Proiect Area) 25.91 Acres ( 1,128,632 Square Feet) Project Proposed Impervious Area (subset of Project Area) 0.25 Acres ( 10,795 Square Feet) Project Proposed Pervious Area (subset of Project Area) 25.70 Acres (1,119,487 Square Feet) Note: Proposed Impervious Area+ Proposed Pervious Area= Area to be Disturbed by the Project. This may be less than the Parcel Area. Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns Current Status of the Site (select all that apply): l8l Existing development D Previously graded but not built out D Agricultural or other non-impervious use D Vacant, undeveloped/natural Description / Additional Information: !The existing site is Aviara Golf Course which is made up of 183.29 acres. A total disturbed area of 25.91 aces proposed. Disturbed areas consist of regrading, replacing and reshaping bunkers, eliminating bunkers, constructing new bunkers, realigning portions of cart paths, constructing new tee boxes, reshaping and releveling tee box areas and new area drains and associated pipes. Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply): l8l Vegetative Cover l8l Non-Vegetated Pervious Areas l8l Impervious Areas Description/ Additional Information: The existing site is Aviara Golf course which is made up of 183.29 acres. The golf course consists of existing golf cart path, existing greens, bunkers, fairways, rough, tee boxes, existing water features and storm drain Underlying Soil belongs to Hydrologic Soil Group (select all that apply): l8l NRCS Type A D NRCS Type B D NRCS Type C l8l NRCS Type D Approximate Depth to Groundwater (GW): D GW Depth < 5 feet l8l 5 feet < GW Depth < 10 feet Holes #2 -#17 D 1 0 feet < GW Depth < 20 feet l8l GW Depth > 20 feet Holes #1 & #18 Existing Natural Hydrologic Features (select all that apply): D Watercourses D Seeps D Springs D Wetlands l8l None Description/ Additional Information: The project site is not located in an area known for erosive soil conditions, such as hillside ldevelopment. Portions of the golf course are located near environmentally sensitive areas which have been identified through a Biological Technical Report and avoided. Therefore, it is expected hat construction will not impact water quality or environmentally sensitive areas . I Description of Existing Site Topography and Drainage I 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 3. Is runoff from offsite conveyed through the site? if so, describe Describe existing site drainage patterns: With the golf course being such a large sprawling site, the drainage conveyance is a combination of natural and urban. The golf course is located within canyons and is surrounded by natural hillsides and open space area that drain onto the course. At the top of the canyons are a hotel that is associated with the course along with housing development that all drain through the course property. The westerly basin constructed as "Desiltation Basin No. 4" per DWG 286-9C has a tributary area of approximately 340 acres which include urban development, open space, and Holes #2-6 of the golf course. This basin is located west of the Hole #2 tee boxes and north of Batiquitos Drive. Flow going to this basin is captured through a series of storm drain, sheet flow, and a large channel along the westerly edge of Hole #2. As the basin ponds, flow is filtered through a dewatering pipe which conveys runoff through a storm drain system that crosses south under Batiquitos Drive and discharges directly into the Batiquitos Lagoon. The middle basin constructed as "Desiltation Basin No. 3" per DWG 286-9C is located on the south side of the course driving range just north of the tee area. The tributary area for this basin is approximately 11 0 acres combining flow from urban development, open space, Holes #7-9, and the driving range. The runoff draining to this basin is collected through a series of storm drain, sheet flow, and a minor channel. Ponding in the basin is filtered through a dewatering pipe and conveyed by a storm drain system which crosses south under Batiquitos Drive and discharges directly into the Batiquitos Lagoon. The easterly basin constructed as "Desiltation Basin No. 2" per DWG 286-9C is located west of the green at Hole #17 and north of Batiquitos Drive. This basin captures runoff from urban development, open space, and Holes #10-17 which combine for an approximate tributary area of 380 acres. This runoff is captured and conveyed to the basin through a series of storm drain and sheet flow. As the basin begins to pond, flow is filtered through a dewatering pipe and conveyed south under Batiquitos Drive and discharges directly into the Batiquitos Lagoon. Holes #1 and #18 are located south of Batiquitos Drive and do not drain to the upstream desiltation basins. Both holes #1 and #18 contain a series of area drains that collect runoff from the course that will outlet over land before flowing into Batiquitos Lagoon. To better understand the hydrology of the desiltation basins, please refer "The Pacific Rim Country Club & Resort Unit A Phase 1 Desilting Basin Study" under project number C.T. 85-35A. Within this report shows the entire tributary area map for each basin and provides supplemental information for the basin sizing and design. Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities: The project consists of multiple disturbed areas throughout the golf course. Disturbed areas consist of minor regrading, regrassing efforts, replacing and reshaping bunkers, eliminating bunkers, constructing new bunkers, realigning portions of cart paths, constructing new tee boxes, reshaping and releveling tee areas, and grading partial retention basins. This project will not impact the overall drainage patterns of the site and all holes on the course will continue to discharge to one of the 3 desiltation basins or the Batiquitos Lagoon. LisUdescribe proposed impervious features of the project (e.g., buildings, roadways, parking lots, courtyards, athletic courts, other impervious features): This project proposes to realign portions of the existing golf cart path to better navigate around areas that are being regraded. The existing cart path that is being removed equals 12,830 sq. ft. while the proposed realignment equals 10,870 sq. ft. therefore decreasing the overall impervious footprint by 1,960 sq. ft. LisUdescribe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas): rThe design process for this project included identifying areas of turfgrass that we could remove and change to a more drought-tolerant landscape while at the same time not negatively affecting ~he playability of the golf course. The result of those efforts includes transforming existing ~urfgrass areas to new landscape area as well as new fescue grasses. rThe new landscape areas will be masses of closely planted shrubs and groundcovers and some ~ccasional trees, with the entire area covered in wood mulch. These areas will be irrigated with rotors for the shrubs/groundcovers and drip bubblers for the trees. A small portion includes only wood mulch beds with no plantings, therefore no irrigation. The plant species chosen for these areas are a combination of moderate to low water-demand plants that per square foot, will require between 50-80% less water (depending on the species) than the previous turf application per square foot. The frequency of watering of these landscape areas vs. turf will also decrease, therefore decreasing the entire property watering time. The overall effect is a decrease in evapotranspiration, water use, and water costs. The new fescue grass areas are comprised of adapted native grasses that will be mowed less frequently and watered less frequently than the turfgrass. These grasses have deeper rootzones that allow the plant to withstand longer durations of very little water, thus making it extremely drought tolerant. Like the landscape zones, the introduction of these new fescue zones will decrease overall evapotranspiration, water use, and water costs for the property. Fertilization will occur once in the Spring to about 70% of the shrubs. 30% will not require additional fertilization after the 1st growing season (native plants). Pesticide use will be non- existent on the 30% and minimal on the 70%. These changes will result in less fertilizer and pesticide use in the proposed landscaping. Does the project include grading and changes to site topography? lg] Yes D No Description / Additional Information: This project proposes to regrade portions of fairways and rough where course play is difficult in order to smooth out slopes and mounds. As part of this regrading of the fairways and roughs, portions of the cart path will need to be realigned in order to navigate better around the course which require minor grading. The overall site topography will not be impacted by the minor grading at each hole. Existing drainage patterns will be maintained for all holes. There will also be grading done to eliminate, relocate, and add new bunkers. Some tee boxes will also be regraded, reshaped, realigned, and added. The course in general is considered a self-mitigating site with proposed impervious cart path accounting for less than 5% of the total drainage area and therefore being considered incidental. This site does not require treatment control bmp's but will instead implement a series of site design and source control bmps to mitigate the generation of pollutants from the landscaped areas. As part of these site design bmp's there will be partial retention basins graded onto Holes #1 & #18. These basins will be graded to capture and retain a portion of runoff from the fairways. Does the project include changes to site drainage (e.g., installation of new storm water conveyance systems)? lg] Yes D No Description / Additional Information: Portions of the fairways and rough are being regraded to improve course play. Some of this regrading is creating new low spots which will have area drains installed that will connect back into the existing system. Overall drainage patterns will not be impacted by grading and area drains will be installed at localized low points which immediately tie back to the course storm drain system. Identify whether any of the following features, activities, and/or pollutant source areas will be present (select all that apply): [8] On-site storm drain inlets □ Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps o Interior parking garages o Need for future indoor & structural pest control [8] Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use [8] Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features D Food service □ Refuse areas □ Industrial processes □ Outdoor storage of equipment or materials □ Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning □Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance o Fuel Dispensing Areas D Loading Docks D Fire Sprinkler Test Water D Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water [8] Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots Identification of Receiving 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): There are 3 existing desiltation basins located on site north of Batiquitos Drive. These desiltation basins capture all of the runoff generated from Holes #2-17. Upon getting filtered through the basins, flow is then captured by a storm drain system that drains directly into the Batiquitos Lagoon which is connected to the Pacific Ocean. See DWG 286-9C for desiltation basin design and discharge to the Batiquitos Lagoon. Holes #1 and #18 are located south of Batiquitos Drive and do not drain to the upstream desiltation basins. Each hole contains a series of area drains that collect runoff from the course drain directly into the Batiquitos Lagoon. 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 Batiquitos Lagoon Toxicity TMDLs have been established Identification of Project Site Pollutants Identify pollutants anticipated from the project site based on all proposed use(s) of the site (see BMP Desiqn Manual Appendix B.6): Also a Receiving Not Applicable to Anticipated from the Water Pollutant of Pollutant the Project Site Project Site Concern X Sediment X Nutrients X Heavy Metals X Organic Compounds X Trash & Debris Oxygen Demanding X Substances X Oil & Grease X Bacteria & Viruses X Pesticides Hydromodlflcatlon Management Requirements Do hydromodification management requirements apply (see Section 1.6 of the BMP Design Manual)? [gJ 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): The project is subject to hydromodification requirements, however the disturbed areas are self- mitigating. Proposed impervious area within the disturbed areas are considered incidental impervious because they are less than 5% of the drainage management area. Self-mitigating areas are not considered for hydromodification requirements. Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas* *This Section only required if hydromodlficatlon management requirements apply Based on the maps provided within the WMAA, do potential critical coarse sediment yield areas exist within the project drainage boundaries? □ Yes [gJ 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? □ 6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units (GLUs) Onsite D 6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment D 6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite o 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? □ No critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected based on verification of GLUs onsite D Critical coarse sediment yield areas exist but additional analysis has determined that protection is not required . Documentation attached in Attachment 8 of the SWQMP. □ 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: Flow Control for Post-Project Runoff" .,.his Section only required If hydrornodlflcatlon management requirements 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. The project is subject to hydromodification requirements, however the disturbed areas are self- mitigating. Proposed impervious area within the disturbed areas are considered incidental impervious because they are less than 5% of the drainage management area. Self-mitigating areas are not considered for hydromodification requirements. Has a geomorphic assessment been performed for the receiving channel(s)? l8l No, the low flow threshold is 0.1Q2 (default low flow threshold) □ Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.1 Q2 □ Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.3Q2 D Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.5Q2 If a geomorphic assessment has been performed, provide title, date, and preparer: Discussion/ Additional Information: (optional) The project is subject to hydromodification requirements, however the disturbed areas are self- mitigating. Proposed impervious area within the disturbed areas are considered incidental impervious because they are less than 5% of the drainage management area. Self-mitigating areas are not considered for hydromodification requirements. 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. The course in general is considered a self-mitigating site with proposed impervious cart path accounting for less than 5% of the total drainage area and therefore being considered incidental. This site does not require treatment control bmp's but will instead implement a series of site design and source control bmps to mitigate the generation of pollutants from the landscaped areas. As part of these site design bmp's there will be partial retention basins graded onto Holes #1 & #18. These basins will be graded to capture and retain a portion of runoff from the fairways. See Attachment 1 e for sizing calculations for the partial retention basins. In addition to implementing partial retention basins for Holes #1 & #18, the project proposes to use a series of site design bmp's across the site to mitigate pollutant runoff. These are described in Chapter 4 of the BMP Design Manual and their locations are shown on the Single Sheet BMP exhibit in Attachment 4. The site will also utilize the three existing desiltation basins that collect runoff from Holes #2-17. These basins were constructed to promote infiltration back into the soil and they each have a dewatering pipe with aggregate and filter fabric to filter runoff before entering the downstream conveyance system. Design and details for the desiltation basins can be found under DWG 286- 9C. Optional Additional Information or Continuation of Previous Sections As Needed This space provided for additional information or continuation of information from previous sections as needed ( City of Carlsbad STANDARD PROJECT REQUIREMENT CHECKLIST E-36 Project Information Project Name: Aviara Golf Course Renovations Project ID: DWG No. or Building Permit No.: OWG316-7A 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 orovided. Source Control Requlrament Applied? SC-1 Prevention of Illicit Discharges into the MS4 Ill Yes □ No 0 N/A Discussion/justification if SC-1 not implemented: SC-2 Storm Drain Stenciling or Signage l!l]Yes □No □ N/A Discussion/justification if SC-2 not implemented: SC-3 Protect Outdoor Materials Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind □Yes 0 No 1!11 N/A Dispersal Discussion/justification if SC-3 not implemented: E-36 Page 1 of 4 Revised 09/16 Source Control Requirement (continued) lnnlled? SC-4 Protect Materials Stored in Outdoor Work Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and □Yes D No 111 N/A Wind Dispersal Discussion/justification if SC-4 not implemented: SC-5 Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal □ Yes □ No Ill N/A Discussion/justification if SC-5 not implemented: 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 ). Ill On-site storm drain inlets ~ Yes □ No 0 N/A □ Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps □Yes 0 No 111 N/A □ Interior parking garages D Yes 0 No 111 N/A □ Need for future indoor & structural pest control □Yes □ No 111 N/A Ill Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use ~ Yes □ No □ N/A Ill Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features ~Yes D No 0 N/A □ Food service □Yes 0 No 111 N/A D Refuse areas D Yes 0 No 111 N/A D Industrial processes □Yes ONo 111 N/A □ Outdoor storage of equipment or materials □Yes 0 No Ill N/A D Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning □Yes □No 111 N/A D Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance D Yes □No Ml N/A D Fuel Dispensing Areas □Yes D No 111 NIA □ Loading Docks □Yes □No Iii N/A D Fire Sprinkler Test Water □ Yes □No Iii N/A D Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water □ Yes □No Ill N/A Ill Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots Ill Yes □No D N/A For "Yes" answers, identify the additional BMP per Appendix E.1 . Provide justification for "No" answers. -Maintain all inlets. Storm water pollution prevention information to be provided to site owners -Maintain landscaping using minimum or no pesticides. Applicable operational BMPs in SC-41 in CASQA Storm Water Quality Handbook will be implemented. 1PM information to be provided to site owners. -Applicable operational BMPs in SC-72 in CASQA Storm Water Quality Handbook will be implemented. -Golf cart path shall be swept regularly to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris E-36 Page 2 of 4 Revised 09/16 Site Design BMPs 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? SD-1 Maintain Natural Drainaqe Pathways and Hvdroloqic Features l Ill Yes I D No ID N/A Discussion/justification if SD-1 not implemented: SD-2 Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation I Ill Yes I D No ID N/A Discussion/justification if SD-2 not implemented: SD-3 Minimize Impervious Area I III Yes I D No ID N/A Discussion/justification if SD-3 not implemented: SD-4 Minimize Soil Compaction l Ill Yes I D No ID NIA Discussion/justification if SD-4 not implemented: SD-5 Impervious Area Dispersion l ~ Yes I D No ID NIA Discussion/justification if SD-5 not implemented: E-36 Page 3 of 4 Revised 09/16 Site Deslan Requirement (continued) I Applied? SD-6 Runoff Collection I Ill 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 □ N/A Discussion/justification if SD-7 not implemented: SD-8 Harvesting and Using Precipitation I □Yes I □ No 1111 N/A Discussion/justification if SD-8 not implemented: E-36 Page 4 of 4 Revised 09/16 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). 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. Because the project falls into the priority development project category, both pollutant control treatment and hydromodification requirements apply. The project is subject to hydromodification requirements, however the disturbed areas are self- mitigating. Proposed impervious area within the disturbed areas are considered incidental impervious because they are less than 5% of the drainage management area. Self-mitigating areas are not considered for hydromodification requirements. Per section of 5.2.1 of Chapter 5 of the City of Carlsbad BMP Design Manual, self-mitigating DMAs consists of natural or landscaped areas that drain directly offsite or to the public storm drain ~ystem. Self-mitigating DMAs must meet all characteristics to be eligible for exclusion. The K::haracteristics includes the following: 1) Vegetation in the natural or landscaped area is native and/or non-native/non-invasive drought tolerant species that do not require regular application of fertilizers and pesticides. • Vegetation within the natural areas is native to the site while landscaping vegetation contains a series of native, drought tolerant grass species that do not require the regular application of fertilizers and pesticides. 2) Soils are undisturbed native topsoil, or disturbed soils that have been amended and aerated to promote water retention characteristics equivalent to undisturbed native topsoil. • The soils are proposed to be equivalent to native topsoil. 3) The incidental impervious areas are less than 5 percent of the self-mitigating area. • The project's impervious areas consist of cart paths that are being realigned. The cart path area within their DMA's is significantly lower than 5 percent of the self- mitigating area. 4) Impervious area within the self-mitigated area should not be hydraulically connected to other impervious areas unless it is a storm water conveyance system (such as a brow ditch}. • Cart path runoff drains directly to self-mitigated areas and is not hydraulically connected to other impervious areas. 5) The self-mitigating area is hydraulically separate from DMAs that contain permanent storm water pollutant control BMPs. • There are no permanent storm water pollutant control BMPs proposed on site. The proposed project meets all the characteristics outlined in Section 5.2.1 . Therefore, no structural bmp's are proposed for this site. Harvest and reuse is deemed infeasible for this project site as mentioned in Form 1-7 in Attachment 1 c of this report. Structural BMP Summary lnfonnatlon [Copy this page as needed to provide infonnatlon for each individual proposed structural BMP] Structural BMP ID No. NA DWG Sheet No. Type of structural BMP: D Retention by harvest and use (HU-1) D Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) D Retention by bioretention (INF-2) D Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) D Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) D Biofiltration (BF-1) D Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatmenUforebay 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) D Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management D Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: D Pollutant control only D Hydromodification control only D Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control D Pre-treatmenUforebay for another structural BMP D Other (describe in discussion section below) Discussion (as needed): Structural BMPs are not proposed for this project ATTACHMENT 1 BACKUP FOR PDP POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPS This is the cover sheet for Attachment 1. Check which Items are Included behind this cover sheet: Attachment Contents Checklist Sequence Attachment 1 a OMA Exhibit (Required) ~ Included Attachment 1 b Attachment 1 c Attachment 1 d See OMA Exhibit Checklist on the back of this Attachment cover sheet. (24"x36" Exhibit typically required) Tabular Summary of DMAs Showing OMA ID matching OMA Exhibit, OMA Area, and DMA Type (Required)* *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) ~ Included on OMA Exhibit h Attachment 1 a D Included as Attachment 1b, separate from OMA Exhibit D Included D Not included because the entire project will use infiltration BMPs Not applicable to the Refer to Appendix B.3-1 of the BMP proposed project 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) D Included D Not included because the entire project will use harvest and use BMPs Refer to Appendices C and D of the Not applicable to the BMP Design Manual to complete Form proposed project. Geotechnical 1-8. letter provided as part of this attachment to support a 96-hour drawdown time for the partial retention basins located on Holes #1 & # 18. Attachment 1 e Pollutant Control BMP Design ~ Included Worksheets/ Calculations (Required) Not applicable to the Refer to Appendices B and E of the proposed project, structural BMPs BMP Design Manual for structural not proposed. Calculations shown pollutant control BMP design ~s part of this attachment support guidelines ~he sizing of the partial retention basins located on Holes #1 & #18. Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the OMA Exhibit: The DMA Exhibit must identify: □ Underlying hydrologic soil group □ Approximate depth to groundwater □ Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) □ Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected (if present) □ Existing topography and impervious areas □ Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite □ Proposed grading □ Proposed impervious features □ Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness □ Drainage management area (DMA) boundaries, DMA ID numbers, and DMA areas (square footage or acreage), and DMA type (i.e., drains to BMP, self-retaining, or self-mitigating) □ Structural BMPs (identify location and type of BMP) VARIES FRO M 3' TO 12' 10-INCH PONDING DEPTH WSE= 12.0' LANDSCAPING PER LANDSCAPE PLANS OMA 3. .-.~ :::..::-----------(VAR1[5 Ff101.1 J 7 • To &0 I MATCH~ 12.0 FG I:----EXISTING EASEMEN "' s""' c,w,c ,AA ss mo, ,· , , ' J.·, ~ 1% 019 2.5-INCH PONDING DEPTH VARJ[s FR WSE=23.8' OM 3./ 2.5-INCH \ 24.0 FG PONDING DEPTH \ MATCH EX WSE=23.8' 23.8 TG 0 "' . « .,. 0 . ro NW w O' u.. r EXISTING GRADE (8. 1) 0.25 ACR OMA 3.2 -. ' -~ (VA/li[S ~· 1 FR \_ OM iS•/ :__:,_ ,~ \ -~-=,~~ ;_ fa OMA 3.3 0.51 ACRES ;:;; ~'\, 1.13 ACRES ~,;,~. ~~ ')',',))// J,I: -~L Q7\J ' \\\('-, LANDSCAPING PER LANDSCAPE PLANS 11.17 FG 11. 1 7 FG I MATCH • EXISTING GRADE To 35:/) MATCH EXISTING GRADE 4.4' BOTTOM OF BASIN 23.6 FG \~'i ~/,//// ~../ NOTE: SEE SWQMP FOR BASIN SIZ ING CALCULATIONS ,Mes [ J '-23.6 FG 4.4' BOTTOM OF BASIN 1 HOLE# 1 PARTIAL RETENTION BASIN EXISTING AREA DRAIN TO BE PROTECTED IN PLACE NOT TO SCALE ~ SELF MITIGATING DMAS: ALL DMAS SHOWN IN THIS EXHIBIT ARE SELF-MITIGATING, AND MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 5.2.1 OF THE 2016 CARLSBAD BMP DESIGN MANUAL, WHICH STATES: SELF-MITIGATING DMAS CONSIST OF NATURAL OR LANDSCAPED AREAS THAT DRAIN DIRECTLY OFFSITE OR TO THE PUBLIC STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. SELF-MITIGATING □MAS MUST MEET ALL THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR EXC LUSION : • VEGETATION IN THE NATURAL OR LANDSCAPED AREA IS NATIVE AND/OR NON-NATIVE/NON-INVASIVE DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE REGULAR APPLICATION OF FERTILIZERS AND PESTICIDES . • SOILS ARE UNDISTURBED NATIVE TOPSOI L, OR DISTURBED SOILS THAT HAVE BEEN AMENDED AND AERATED TO PROMOTE WATER RETENTION CHARACTERISTICS EQUIVALENT TO UNDISTURBED NATIVE TOPSOIL. • THE INCIDENTAL IMPERVIOUS AREAS ARE LESS THAN 5 PERCENT OF THE SELF-MITIGATING AREA. • IMPERVIOUS AREA WITHIN THE SELF-MITIGATED AREA SHOULD NOT BE HYDRAULICALLY CON NECTED TO OTHER IMPERVIOUS AREAS UNLESS IT IS A STORM WATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM (SUCH AS BROW DITCHES). • THE SELF-MITIGATING AREA IS HYDRAULICALLY SEPARATE FROM DMAS THAT CONTAIN PERMANENT STORM WATER POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPS. DMA SUMMARY TABLE OMA I TOTAL AREA TOTAL AREA (AC) (Sf) PROPOSED EXISTING PERVIOUS I IMPERVI OUS IMPFRVIOUS AREA (SF) AREA (SF) AREA (SF. 1.1 7.85 342,154 33s,76s I I 3,386 1. 2 0.13 5,552 5,552 1.3 0.24 10,576 10,576 1.4 6.35 276,630 274,009 2,_?Q9_ 421 1.5 0.17 7,443 7!443 1.6 0.04 1,683 1,683 1.7 0.60 26,315 26,315 1.8 0.78 33,841 33,841 1.9 0.17 7,456 7,456 1.10 3.30 143,802 143,802 2.1 1.40 61,119 61,119 2.2 0.20 8,689 8,689 2.3 0.83 36,146 36,146 2.4 0.15 6,588 6,588 2.5 0.28 11,980 11,980 2.6 2.98 130,004 128,268 1,736 2.7 2.41 104,998 104,998 2.8 0.27 11,730 11,730 2.9 0.22 9,733 9,733 2.10 0.20 8,832 8,832 2.11 0.40 17,405 17,405 2.12 0.48 20,980 20,980 2.13 8.85 385,332 381,988 21.094 1,250 2.14 1.33 57,845 55,510 1,841 494 2.15 0.22 9,666 9,666 3.1 0.25 10,705 10,705 3.2 0.51 22,155 22,155 3.3 1.13 49,238 49,238 3.4 7.23 314,834 304,050 10,784 3.5 0.74 32,026 32,026 3.6 0.11 4,910 4,910 3.7 0.09 4,019 4,019 3.8 1.49 64,934 62,418 2,516 3.9 0.85 37,213 36,733 480 3.10 0.25 10,708 10,708 3.11 1.60 69,565 67,892 1,673 3.11 0.25 11,069 11,069 4.1 0.40 17,350 17,350 4.2 0.48 20,913 20,913 4.3 0.36 15,588 15,588 4.4 9.28 404,260 397,024 3,005 4,231 4.5 0.32 14,032 14,032 4.6 0.07 3,184 3,184 1 . 1 ACRES OMA 1.3 0.24 ACRES OMA 1.21) 0.13 ACRES OMA 2.1 1.40 ACRES .\\11111 PORTION OF TRIBU TARY AREA TO DESILTATION BASIN NO. 4 PORTION SHOWN*=9 1.0 ACRES TOTAL AREA =340 ACRES ~ ·~ 1.4 82·· 5 ACRES ~ ~ :--.._ A._1.5 17 ACRE ~1nn~ OMA 1 .6 0.04 ACRE ''.. -/I ,--=d, MA 1.7 l 0 ACR ES ~'-,',_\"'"" ~ NOTE: SEE SWQMP FOR BASIN SIZING CALCULATIONS HOLE# 18 PARTIAL RETENTI_ON BASIN NOT TO SCALE LEGEND: ITEMS GOLF COURSE HOLE NUMBER EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR OMA BOUNDARY SYMBOL HO LE rn 95 " ~ ~ 1, OMA 3. f 7.23 ACRES @ !!)1~ CRITICAL COURSE SEDIMEN YIELD AREA (TO BE PROTECTED H / l \'----~7· 7 SEE ATTACHMENT 2B / \ \, ) \ ~\\\\ ~~\\\I/ I /~ OMA 3.5 lll.f:til J 1i ~ / 1.69 ACR ES • ' ~•• " -•-• ' b \ i) g ~ L,( f l \1'1!JJ l1 '-,ll\l"ll I I \\l ('\ OMA 3.6 ~,..__, I I/ DESILTATION BA.SIN TRIBUTARY AREA EXISTING UNDISTURBED GREENS EXISTING IMPERVIOUS CART PATH EXISTING WATER FEATURE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS CART PATH SELF-MITIGATING PERVIOUS AREA l~w uMP; l OMA 3.12 1.69 ACRES 0.11 ACRES ~~\~ l ~ ~~ OMA 2.2 " ~ ) » ~ l~ ~-,I OMA 2.3 83 ACRE \...':---../, ~ r D ~ I F TRIBUTARY AR EA OMA 2. JJ TO DES ILTATION BAS IN NO. 3 0.28 AC 7 PORTION SHOWN*=63 .7 ACRE S 10 111~',:III~\\\\. ,{tJ;;~!g>[ TOTAL AREA = 110 ACRES i /\ • ' MA 2.7 .6 ACRES CRIT ICAL COURSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREA (TO BE PROTECTED) SEE ATTACHMENT 28 l ,,.. . "2.41 ACRES ::=.,.- \31'1'" t r ~·, ~r:) / I ( \ ~ / 1 OMA 2.8 \ X 0.27 ACRES MA 3.7 ( /\?i/(\0\ ACRES MA 3.8 CR ITI CAL COURSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREA "½Y/' 1 ::VlJ «4 , (TO BE PROTECTED) I/ 17 o , , ~1 SEE ATTACHMENT 2B ~I OMA 0.25 A 1,./ ( J PORTION OF TRIBUTARY AREA -.<::) TO DES ILTATION BASIN NO . 2 ~ , . PORTION SHOWN*=123.9 ACR ES ,·~Y?\" TOTAL AREA =380 ACRES OMA 3.11 ;'---...> /1~~C~ES § 11111111 0.40 ACRES .~ , . -,_, --. .. . . . .. . . I ~ 0 '7 9 : , , ·, t I ?Ii ::;.._-/!If' /lfl I II( II I ~/~n DMA_4.1 -=-= OMA 4.3 ,,. ,1f7 0.36 ACRfJ -~~ OMA 1.8 .78 ACRES . ....___ '·-:!ii3 ~~~ OMA 2.10 i~u' 'ir~:~ f «~~ i(,RFS ~ 0.20 ACRES ~=d© . f: ~ · . ~( /'JI( ) ~-·~\ _, ~/\r--'- 1. 9 CRES OMA _2.11 ~-0.40 ACRES \\~ .\ ,1 ,. ,\\\:_, OMA 2.12 • ,--~- RES 1 "D ES ILTATION BASIN NO. 2" ~r'j !'-' r ~~\ \\\~ -~,'\~ : / PER DWG 286 -9C c},, ir=--~ . • • ~~;,';. /!~_/ ·r=· \OMA 4.4 C;, 9.28 ACRES % IMPERVIOUS METl-100 OF TRFATMENT f~ •~-:-• ~~\ -( ) I 85 ACR ES ( -OMA 2.14 D MA 2. 1 3 ~ .i;:; - 1.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATI NG 0.9% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 1.3% SELF-MITIGATING O.CY'/4 SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING O.CY'/4 SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.9% SELF-MITIGA TING 4.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 3.4% SELF-MITIGATING O.CY'/4 SELF-MITIGATING O.CY'/4 SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 3.9% SELF-MITIGATING 1.3% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 2.4% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 1.8% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING OMA 4.5 OMA 1. 10 3.30 ACRES ~.~ v.~\•~IB'--\~ _SJ _ ___, ,~-"i\~, 1.33 ACRES /1_✓(J Cl_ 1'<.l1 ~/"f/!.'-C ___.,.. -\. ; \ \ / . --' ) ,-.,,,,,:, lllP-J u .....-, ~\' )/ • ,\ / /4 flji•>", ...__ ~ \~ ( ( r )~ r I) "'-\ OMA 4. 7 '-....... 2.83 ACRE . , 0.32 ACR ES OMA 4.6 h'\ \ ! I \ .\,) "DESILTATION BASIN NO. PER DWG 286 -9C OMA 4.8 0.07 ACRES /: Q _.r..-,.~ -.) '~' 0 CJ =-----~ -----. " DESILTATION BASIN NO. 3"_} """"" 0.23 ACRES -_ PER DWG 286-9C ,.._, ~ I r ~ ----._ ~ --~ D MA 2 1 , :::r----.._r----------.... OMA 6 2 0.22 , 5 ~, OMA 5.1 , , , HOL["sccc:c-·~ -,.,---,-..r ~ ~ _,, . OMA 6.1 -0.13 ACRES OMA 7 /~ _ACRES 0.19 ACRE_S: 1 • ~18 ~ , ~~--....:::_.....----~."-~""' ·~~ ~~·· ~~~ ~ I 0.32 ACR -~-__ 1.84 ACR ES O • ~ , _ I • •·· "'-~~'/IJrJ~~~ ~ / ~ .. 2> '°"' ~ .,,..--~.r..e:J ~-....___ ~~:Z'tJ C,......./w~I • • ¾, '.. • f -') ,~ ~-<,t< . -~~ . ~ ·, I O ~-t-,''j,--••• _. ~·11 •~__//«' OMA 5.4 ~ ',==-'"~~~~~~ . •-1 OMA 5 2 •• 83 . ~-• -~ [ __ ·, ~!J oMA 6.6 -.:-1.~·21 ACRES _, ,~'YJ ~M~s ' REs OMA 6.4 ° 0.10 ACRES ~• 0 Ci' -~&'::, r?., 1 00 0.54 ACRFS ( ''ice OMA 5.3 • •• • • •• •. • ACR ES OMA 6 M-----./-~ OMA 6.5 • 0.14 ACRES ~ () " ,3 0 08 \ 'f_ ~"?7/ '"?,05 ACRES ' ACRlS PROPosrn PARTIA ' ~ __ ,y PROPOSED :.---iJ.' BASIN. SEE DETA L RETENTION : 1 , '"°' ,;i "BASIN s PARTIAL RrTEN TI0N , , 1 C,., • VOLUM E R IL 2 • THIS SHEET •• ; ,,.~· voLuME ~EEiuER~6 '_ THIS SHEET j [~ J~~:". VOLUME p~~~:~~~ _ 457 cF r'j'" <I VOLUME PROVIDED = 343 CF -• -~:·~ -561 CF • / , _.,.'; -918 CF ·~ --~ {;;)or:;..,..,,.--J· ~~ ,1 0-S PROJECT SITE INFO UNDERLYING HYDROLOGIC SO IL A & D HOLES 1 &18 APPROXIMATE DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: < 1 D FT HOLES 2-17 APPROXIMATE DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: > 20 FT n ! 0 "' '\. 'cil' ·.V' ~ "' ~ 'l 0 ; ,, 4.7 2.83 123,327 123,327 0.0% 4.8 0.23 10,112 10,112 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING NOTE: ALTHOUGH TESTING WAS NOT PERFORMED FOR HOLES #1 & #18, GROUNDWATER IS ASSUMED TO BE LESS THAN 10' 200' o· 1 oo· 200· 400' 1J w 5.1 0.19 8,187 8,187 0.0% 5.2 0.21 8,966 8,966 O.CY'/4 5.3 0.14 5,903 5,903 0.0% 5.4 2.83 123,391 120,331 3,060 2.5% 6.1 0.32 13,910 13,910 0.0% 6.2 0.13 5,664 5,664 0.0% 6.3 0.05 2,185 2,185 0.0% 6.4 0.54 23,428 23,428 0.0% 6.5 0.08 3,442 3,442 0.0% 6.6 0.10 4,350 4,350 0.0% 7 1.84 79,983 79,983 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGA TING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING W/PARTIAL RETENTION EXISTING NATURAL HYDROLOG IC FEATURES (WATERCOURSES, SEEPS , WETLANDS): NONE CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS TO BE PROTECTED: SEE LOCATION IN EXHIBIT CRITICAL COARSE AREA TO BE PROTECTED (SEE ATTACHMENT 2b) EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA: 364,550 SF DISTURBED AREA: 1,128,632 SF PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA: 9,145 SF PROPOSED PERVIOUS AREA: 1,119,487 SF *NOTE: TOTAL DESILTATION BASIN TRIBUTARY AREA NOT SHOWN ON THIS EXHIBIT. TO SEE EXTENTS OF TRIBUTARY AREA FDR DESILTATION BASINS CONSTRUCTED PER DWG. 2B6-9C, PLEASE REFER TO "TH E PACIFIC RIM COUNTRY CLUB & RESORT UNIT A PHASE 1 DESILTING BASIN STUDY" UNDER PROJECT NUMBER C.T. 85-35A. AVIARA GOLF COURSE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA EXHIBIT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DATE MARCH 2020 SCALE: 1" = 200' . . 111111 •m,~ FUSCOE I N G O N I I I O N G 6390 Greenwich Drive, Suite 170 San Diego, California 92122 ~ j ~ i ~ " " "' 0 ~ !· q § M w w 8 1.00 43,675 TOTALS 75.75 3,29? nr:. 43,675 SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% jW/PARTIAL RETENTION I I ,.,,I ,,.,,, . ., I 3,260,554 I 9,140 I 30,031 l I I SHEET 1 OF 1 I ~ L.::::::::::::=:=::::::~======:::'.::::====:::::====::::::'.=======:::::_---------------------~~~_:__:__ ______ _J:r tel 858.554.1500 ° fax 858.597.0335 www.fuscoe.com ATTACHMENT 1d Leighton Consulting, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY March 2, 2020 To: Xenia Hotels & Resort, Inc. 200 S. Orange Ave. Suite 2700 Orlando, FL 32801 Attention: Mr. Stephen Long Project No. 12493.003 Subject: Field Percolation Testing for Proposed Basin Areas at Holes 1 and 18, Aviara Golf Course, Carlsbad, California As requested, Leighton Consulting, Inc. (Leighton) has performed field percolation testing at proposed basin areas for Holes 1 and 18 at the Aviara Golf Course in Carlsbad, California. The purpose of the field percolation testing is for determining the feasibility of on-site near surface storm water infiltration in general accordance with the County of San Diego Storm Water Standards (2019) using section 0 .2.1, Borehole Percolation Test Method. This letter provides our findings, including field exploration, testing procedures, measured percolation rates, and calculated infiltration rates for the test locations. In accordance with the County of San Diego Storm Water Standards, D.2.1, the Borehole Percolation Test Method was selected and performed between February 27 and 28, 2020. Specifically, we advanced two 3.25-inch diameter borings, P-1A and P-2A, to depths of approximately 2 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs). Approximate locations of the field percolation test locations are shown on the attached Exhibits A and B (Hole 1 and Hole 18, respectively). In summary, the boreholes were filled with water and allowed to pre-soak for at least 24 hours prior to performing the in-situ percolation testing. The water level in each test hole was measured at 30-minute intervals using a water meter, which is accurate to 0.01 feet. Refilling of the boreholes was done at 30-minute intervals, or as needed. The total testing period lasted approximately 6 hours or until consistent measurements were observed. 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 8205 ■ San Diego, CA 92123-4425 858.569.6914 ■ Fax 858.292.0771 ■ www.lelghtongroup.com 12493.003 Field testing data is presented in Appendix A. After the conclusion of in-situ percolation testing, the boreholes were backfilled with soil cuttings. Based on our field percolation testing (P-1 A and P-2A), the in-situ percolation rates and calculated infiltration rates at tested locations and depths are summarized in Table 1. We have used the following equation based upon the Porchet Method to convert measured percolation rates to infiltration rates in accordance with the County of San Diego BMP Design Manual (2019). In addition, we have included a factor of safety of 2 for the evaluation of existing site conditions. The storm water design factor of safety, if applicable, should be determined by the civil engineer and reviewed by the geotechnical consultant. Test No. P-1A (Hole 1) P-2A (Hole 18) 11 =AH* 60 * r At(r+2HAvG) Where: 11 = calculated infiltration rate, inches/hour AH = change in head over the time interval, inches At = time interval, minutes r = radius of test hole HAvG = average head over the time interval, inches Table 1 Percolation and Infiltration Rates Measured Calculated Calculated Depth Soil Type Percolation Infiltration Infiltration (ft) Rate Rate Rate w/ FS of (min/in) (inch/hr) 2 (inch/hr) Light 2 Brown Silty 25.0 0.230 0.115 Sand (SM) Light 2 Brown Silty 83.3 0.054 0.027 Sand (SM) 2 Leighton 12493.003 It is important to note that percolation rates are not equal to infiltration rates. As a result, we have made a distinction between percolation rates where water movement is considered laterally and vertically versus infiltration rates where only the vertical direction is considered . It should also be noted that the above percolation test results are representative of the tested locations and depths where they were performed, and that percolation test field measurements are accurate to 0.01 feet. Varying subsurface conditions may exist outside of the test locations, which could alter the calculated percolation rate indicated below. It is also possible that the long-term rate of transmissivity of permeable soil strata may be lower than the values obtained by testing. Infiltration may be influenced by a combination of factors including but not limited to: a highly variable vertical permeability and limited lateral extent of permeable soil strata; a reduction of permeability rates over time due to silting of the soil pore spaces; and other unknown factors. Accordingly, the possibility of future surface ponding of water, as well as, shallow groundwater impacts on subterranean structures such as basements, underground utilities, etc. should be anticipated as possible future conditions in all design aspects of the site. The findings and conclusions contained within this letter are based on data obtained from limited number of observations, site visits, soil excavations, samples, and tests. Such information is, by necessity, incomplete. The nature of many sites is such that differing soil or geologic conditions can be present within small distances and under varying climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. In addition, changes made during design development and construction should be reviewed by Leighton to determine if recommendations are still applicable. Please also note that the evaluation in this letter report was limited to assessment of the geotechnical aspects of the project and did not include evaluation of structural design. 3 Leighton 12493.003 If you have any questions regarding our letter, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON CONSUL TING, INC. William D. Olson, RCE 45283 Associate Engineer Attachments Exhibit A-Hole 1 Field Percolation Test Location Exhibit B -Hole 18 Field Percolation Test Location Appendix A -Field Percolation Test Results Distribution: E-mail 4 Leighton 12493.003 EXHIBITS Cahfomia 92011 >I ~ Exhibit A -Hole 1 Field Percolation Test Location ~ ield Percolation Test Location 12493.003 APPENDIX A FIELD PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS Leighton FIELD PERCOLATION TEST DATA SHEET Proiect Name: XHR Aviara Golf Proiect No.: 12493.003 Proi. Address: 7447 Batiquitos Drive, Carlsbad, Ca SOIL TYPE/ TEST LOCATION / BOREHOLE Soil Type: Light Brown Silty sand Location: Hole 1 A Hole Dia: 3.25" De th 2' Tested by:SLR/TAS Pre-Saturation Date:2-27-20 Test Date:2-28-20 Notes: Measurements in 1 00ths of foot Time of Day Interval / Notes Water level !Time of Day Interval / Notes Water Level 7:59 Start 0.9 1:03 29Min 1.2 8:27 28 Min 1.14 1:33 30Min 1.31 8:29 add water 0.95 2:03 30Min 1.41 9:00 31 min 1.08 "'· 9:30 30 min 1.2 I 10:00 30 Min 1.29 10:01 add water 1 10:32 31 Min 1.21 10:33 add water 0.97 11:03 30 Min 1.2 11:33 30 Min 1.3 11:34 add water 1.01 12:03 30 Min 1.26 12:33 30 Min 1.35 12:34 add water 0.9 l~oR OFFICE USE ONL v DATE RECEIVED: By: Notes: 25 min per inch or 2.4 inches per hour Leighton FIELD PERCOLATION TEST DATA SHEET Project Name: XHR Aviara Golf Project No.: 12493.003 Proi. Address: 7447 Batiauitos Drive, Carlsbad, Ca SOIL TYPE / TEST LOCATION / BOREHOLE Soil Type: Light Brown Silty sand Location: Hole 18A Hole Dia: 3.25" De th 2' Tested by:SLR/T AS Pre-Saturation Date:2-27-20 Test Date:2-28-20 Notes: Measurements in 100ths offoot Time of Day Interval / Notes Water Level Time of Day Interval / Notes Water Level 7:37 Start 0.9 8:10 33 Min 0.96 8:40 30 Min 1.01 9:10 30 min 1.04 \ 9:40 30 min 1.08 I 10:12 32 Min 1.11 10:13 add water 0.95 10:48 35 Min 1 11:14 26 Min 1.03 11:44 30 Min 1.05 12:16 32 Min 1.08 12:47 31 Min 1.12 1 :17 30 Min 1.15 1:47 30 Min 1.18 I ~OR OFFICE USE ONL y DATE RECEIVED: By: Notes: 83.3 min per inch or .72 inches per hour Drawdown Cales Hole #1 Basin Hole #18 Basin Infiltration Rate (in/hr) 0.23 0.054 Infiltration Rate w/ FS of 2(in/hr) 0.115 0.027 Ponding Depth (in) 10 2.5 Drawdown Time (hr) 87 93 Attachment 1 e Hole #1 Partial Retention Basin 1 2 3 4 5 6 Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods Worksheet B.2-1. DCV Design Capture Volume Works heet B-2.1 85th percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= 0.58 inches Area tributarv to BMP (s) (Hole #1 PuttinQ Green) A= 0.163 acres Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1.1 and B.2.1) C= 1 unitless Tree wells volume reduction TCV= cubic-feet Rain barrels volume reduction RCV= cubic-feet Calculate DCV = (3630 x C x d x A) -TCV -RCV DCV= 343 cubic-feet Note: Hole #1 Partial Retention Basin was sized to retain an area equivalent to the entire Hole #1 putting green therefore yielding a runoff coefficient of 1 and the tributary area "A" is equal to the putting green area. Based on these parameters, see below for volume provided: Volume Required = 343 cu. ft. Volume Provided = 918 cu. ft. B-10 February 2016 Attachment 1 e 1 2 3 4 5 6 Hole #18 Partial Retention Basin Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods Worksheet B.2-1. DCV Design Capture Volume Worksheet B-2.1 85th percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= 0.58 inches Area tributary to BMP (s) (Hole #18 Putting Green) A= 0.233 acres Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix 1 B.1.1 and B.2.1) C= unitless Tree wells volume reduction TCV= cubic-feet Rain barrels volume reduction RCV= cubic-feet Calculate DCV = (3630 x C x d x A) -TCV -RCV DCV= 491 cubic-feet Note: Hole #18 Partial Retention Basin was sized to retain an area equivalent to the entire Hole #18 putting green therefore yielding a runoff coefficient of 1 and the tributary area "A" is equal to the putting green area. Based on these parameters, see below for volume provided: Volume Required = 491 cu. ft. Volume Provided= 561 cu. ft. B-10 February 2016 ATTACHMENT 2 BACKUP FOR PDP HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL MEASURES [This is the cover sheet for Attachment 2.) Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet: Attachment Contents Checklist Sequence Attachment 2a Hydromodification Management l8l Included Exhibit (Required) See Hydromodification Management Exhibit Checklist on the back of this Attachment cover sheet. Attachment 2b Management of Critical Coarse l8l Exhibit showing project drainage Sediment Yield Areas (WMAA Exhibit boundaries marked on WMAA is required, additional analyses are Critical Coarse Sediment Yield optional) Area Map (Required) See Section 6.2 of the BMP Design Optional analyses for Critical Coarse Manual. Sediment Yield Area Determination n 6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units Onsite n 6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment r1 6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite Attachment 2c Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving l8l Not performed Channels (Optional) D Included See Section 6.3.4 of the BMP Design Manual. Attachment 2d Flow Control Facility Design and D Included Structural BMP Drawdown Calculations (Required) See Chapter 6 and Appendix G of the Not applicable to the proposed project BMP Design Manual Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the Hydromodification Management Exhibit: The Hydromodification Management Exhibit must identify: D Underlying hydrologic soil group D Approximate depth to groundwater o Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) D Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected (if present) l J Existing topography o Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite n Proposed grading U Proposed impervious features u Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness D Point(s) of Compliance (POC) for Hydromodification Management D Existing and proposed drainage boundary and drainage area to each POC (when necessary, create separate exhibits for pre-development and post-project conditions) D Structural BMPs for hydromodification management (identify location, type of BMP, cJ-d size/detail) 7 7 (VARJ[s 'ROM VARIES FROM 3' TO 12 ' 10-INCH PONDING DEPTH WSE= 12.0' lANDSCAPING PER lANDSCAPE PlANS 2.5-INCH \ 24.0 FG PONDING DEPTH \ MATCH EX . WSE=23.8' 0 "' = c3 sr CD NW OMA 3. 0 .25 ACRE ,-;. J·1 ro B:1J 12.0 FG I__---EXISTING EASEM ENT VARI Es FROM 3' TO 1 g' ~ I , " ,fill (VAl?irs 2 .5 -INCH PONDING DEPTH VARtfs FRo _ WSE=23.8' M .5: I 23.8 TG w 0:: "-r EXISTING GRADE (8· 1) OMA 3.2 0.51 ACRE MATCH EXISTING GRADE lANDSCAPING PER lANDSCAPE PlANS 11. 17 FG .-; •' 15:1 J 1/~ • 'ROM To J I MATCH 5•7; EXISTING GRADE 11 .1 7 FG MATCH EXISTING GRADE NOTE: SEE SWQMP FOR BASIN SIZING CALCUlATIONS 1 HOLE# 1 PARTIAL RETENTION BASIN NOT TO SCALE _ _.,,...-:;:, HO 1 . 1 ACRES OMA 1.2 0.1 3 ACRES OMA 1.3 .24 ACRES OMA 2.1 1 .40 ACRES PORT ION OF TRIBUTARY AREA TO DES ILTATION BASIN NO. 4 PORTION SHOWN*=91.0 ACRES TOTAL AREA=340 ACRES Wrc11 1 .4 AC ~~ ro_zs, " \_m.. """ -•r-m cc 4.4' BOTTOM OF BASIN ~ 2&_ 1---=..:;::;~-- J 23.6 FG 4.4' BOTTOM OF BAS IN EXISTING AREA DRAIN TO BE PROTECTED IN PlACE NOTE: SEE SWQMP FOR BASIN SIZING CALCUlATIONS HOL E# 18 PARTIAL RETENTION BASIN NOT TO SCALE LEGEND: ITEMS GOLF COURSE HOLE NUMBER EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR OMA BOUNDARY SYM BOL HOLE [ill 95 "· ~ OMA 3.3 1.1 3 ACRES ~)//_~·~: 1.,...11-1 ~ <~ ;?}j { OMA 3. ::: 7.23 ACRE il)}/)1~~ CR ITICAL COURS YIE LD AR EA (TO BE PROTECTED )-{ j L \~ SEE ATTAC HM ENT 2B I \ \) .:WI\\\\\ Ufi I\ Ill 11 r-v OMA .-l..5 1.69 ACR ES /Ir{\\~- -~\ DESILTATION BASIN TRIBUTARY AREA EXISTING UNDISTURBED GREENS EXISTING IMPERVIOUS CART PATH EXISTING WATER FEATURE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS CART PATH SELF-M ITIGATING PERVIOUS AREA 1¥&.✓~ OMA 3.12 1.69 ACRES 0.11 ACRES ~~i~ @~ OMA 2.2_ ~'\\~.'IA~ R\~0~- _;;, k .11.''~'""'::' ;,,!))~ OMA 2.3 S3 ACRES • :~, . - ,. .,. PORTION OF TRIBUTARY AREA OMA 2.5 ; ',.!Ji' -'j '(, ~ TO DES ILTATI ON BAS IN NO. 3 0.28 ACRES . •• 01 1 PORT ION SHOWN*=63.7 ACRES 1111111 , ~ c: ~:o,-r, TOTAL AREA =11 0 ACRES V//r:,JJJ_;;,~; OMA 2.6 ACRES MA_3_.7 1 \v.09 ACRES 1\ j I ![) ol ' , MA 3.8 " 1 //4 ACRES CRITI CAL COURSE SEDIM ENT YIEL D AREA ,. 1 (TO BE PROTECTED) 111»lv1 ,\1 '\:i«A >r-1~~~~1~ SEE ATTACHMENT 2B ' ·"'' , J DM 0.25 1 PORTION OF TRI BUTARY AREA TO DESILTATION BASI N NO. 2 POR TI ON SHOWN*= 123.9 ACRES r;,-1 ~¾~-,., TOTAL AREA =380 ACRES --.....__ OMA 3.11 ~ ft /~ 1.60 ACRES ~~--2 ------ 1.5 SELF MITIGATING DMAS: 17 ACRE CRITICAL CO URSE SED IM ENT YI ELD AREA 1 (TO BE PROTECTED) SEE ATTACHMENT 2B [~ II) ALL DMAS SHOWN IN TH IS EXHIBIT ARE SELF-MITIGATING, AND MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 5.2.1 OF THE 2016 CARLSBAD BMP DESIGN MANUAL, WH ICH STATES: SELF-MITIGATI NG DMAS CONSIST OF NATURAL OR LANDSCAPED AREAS THAT DRAIN DIRECT LY OFFSITE OR TO THE PUBLIC STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. SELF -MITIGATING DMAS MUST MEET ALL THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR EXCLUSION: • VEGETATION IN THE NATURAL OR LANDSCAPED AREA IS NATIVE AND/OR NON -NATIVE/NON-INVASIVE DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE REGULAR APPLICATION OF FERTILIZERS AND PESTICIDES. • SO ILS ARE UNDI STURBED NATIVE TOPSOIL, OR DISTURBED SO ILS THAT HAVE BEEN AMENDED AND AERATED TO PROMOTE WATER RETENTION CHARACTER ISTICS EQUIVALENT TO UNDISTURBED NATIVE TOPSOIL. • THE IN CIDENTAL IMPERVIOUS AREAS ARE LESS THAN 5 PERCENT OF THE SELF-MITIGATIN G AREA. • IMPERVIOUS AREA WITHIN THE SE LF-MITIGATED AREA SHOULD NOT BE HYDRAULICALLY CO NNECTED TO OTHER IMPERVIOUS AREAS UNLESS IT IS A STORM WATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM (SUCH AS BROW DITCHES). • TH E SELF -MITIGATING AREA IS HYDRAULICALLY SEPARATE FROM DMAS THAT CONTAIN PERMANENT STO RM WATER POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPS. OMA SUMMARY TABLE I TOTAL AREA TOTAL AREA OMA IAC) (SF) PROPOSED EXISTING PERVlOUS I IMPERVIOUS IMPE.RVIOUS AREA (SF) AREA (SF) ARFA (SF. 1.1 7.85 342,154 338,768 I I 3,386 1.2 0.13 5,552 S,S52 1.3 0.24 10,576 10,576 1.4 6.35 276,630 274,009 2,200 421 1.5 0.17 7,443 7,443 1.6 0.04 1,683 11.683 1. 7 0.60 26,315 26,3 15 1.8 0.78 33,841 33,841 1.9 0.17 7,456 7,456 1.10 3.30 143,802 143,802 2.1 1.40 61,119 61,119 2.2 0.20 8,689 8,689 2.3 0.83 36,146 36,146 2.4 0.15 6,588 6,588 2.5 0.28 ll,980 11,980 2.6 2.98 130,004 128,268 1,736 2.7 2.41 104,998 104,998 2.8 0.27 11,730 11,730 2.9 0.22 9,733 9,733 2.10 0.20 8,832 8,832 2.11 0.40 17,405 17,405 2.12 0.48 20,980 20,980 2.13 8.85 385,332 381,988 2,094 1,2so 2.14 l.33 57,845 55,510 1,841 494 2.15 0.22 9,666 9,666 3.1 0.25 10,705 10,JOS 3.2 0.51 22,155 22,155 3.3 1.13 49,238 49,238 3.4 7.23 314,834 304,050 10,784 3.5 0.74 32,026 32,026 3.6 0.11 4,910 4,910 3.7 0.09 4,019 4,019 3.8 l.49 64,934 62,418 2,Sl6 3.9 0.85 37,213 36,733 480 3.10 0.25 10,708 10,708 3.11 l.60 69,565 67,892 1,673 3.11 0.25 11,069 11,069 4.1 0.40 17,350 17,3SO 4.2 0.48 20,913 20,913 4.3 0.36 15,588 15,588 4.4 9.28 404,260 397,024 3,00S 4,231 4.5 0.32 14,032 14,032 4.6 0.07 3,184 3,184 % IMPERVIOUS 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 0,0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%, 0.0% 3.4% 0.0% 0.0"/2 0.0"/2 3.9% 1.3% 0.0"/2 2.4% 0.0"/2 0.0"/2 0.0% 0.0"/2 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% ~11\1\~ t w' OMA 1.6 OMA 4.2 ~ 04 ACRE ( 0.48 ACRES '. METI 100 OF TR[ATM[NT SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MIT IGATIN G SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MIT IGATIN G SELF-MITI GATIN G SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MITI GATIN G SELF-MITI GATIN G SELF-MIT IGATIN G SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITI GATIN G SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SEL F-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF·MITIGATI NG SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATI NG SEL F-MITIGATIN G SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MITIGATIN G SELF-MITIGATI NG SELF-MITIGATI NG ~ ~~ \U ////./////,.... ,~~,t~E~S l lfr OMA 1.8 .78 ACRES ->~ 1. 9 {r OMA 4.3 ✓ 0.36 ACRES r ~ ~ ' 2 41 ACRES .::=-• -c-_,· \, ·--.// ;::2. • !Iii\\......./,,..----t..~ --- ,,, ~ OMA 2. g -...._ (/U HUl _t: -"' 0 2? ACRES --- OMA 2. 10 /, •• 8 ~~,~~ v ~{ /J. ., ~ 0.20 ~ • • • ~ DMA 2.11 1 ~ J ~'\: 0.40 ACR~~.. ", , ~·OMA ,. 12 I RASIN NO 2" , d ~ -=- J( OMA 1.10 3.30 ACRES ,l~ ~~ ~'. zl~lffr _=W" OMA 2.1 -, O 48 ACRES 1 "DES ILTATION DWG 286 -9C ~\="'1-·/ • / I / PER )1/' v"" .. \{ ' }, ~ ,/ __ _, (' /) 8 85 ACR ES ~ . -ii :.., v~'--:"\\\>. s~ ' ';· • -~"'' r HO DMA 2.14 1.33 \ / /ff'--:-./ '~ OMA 4.7 d ,,. =~ ~ 2.83 ACRES "DESILTATION BAS IN NO . 4" PER DWG 286-9C ,.>hii l "" -t • /'---".,,... :_-====--~ OMA 4.8 l \.~6 ,.., (\OMA 4.4 ;,9.28 ACRES OMA 4.5 0.32 ACRES M.8_4.~6 ~0~ ,·, --·-·-· ··-- 7 ACRES -0.23 ACR ES ~ ::..__ _ . _. . _ __ _ _ ' ' / ' "DES ILTATION BAS IN NO. 3"_} ~-, 'c/" I r }~ ;=;;:-~~~---~~'-"'_\_, ~~•, ~~~,✓ PER DWG 286 -9C OMA 2.15 _ OMA 5.1 , , HOLE ~~-----~~ -~-~: • ~ /Y /0.22 ACRES 0.1 9 ACRES • 1@ 18 -"i "' ff!;~ ~---. ff r;--~ I fil\ 'j _ ") )r, OMA 6.1 OMA 6.2 r=.=c-'--'----/ S -I /'2 __ ---•• i.;;;.._~_...... ~ .,r ,x:J~ ), . ~ OMA 5.4 0.13 ACRES /~-~~ ~CR ES O N _,.-~,,.-,\ c>__......,,;;~,.,...-'---, _ "-',,,,_ . cc.r..2c-"" ',r,-}11( iC ,~:~~83 ACRES ~r-+ DMA5.2 1 t}fJ(__( r~DMA8 .32 ACR ~ -.l__0.21 ACRES 1> ~c,~,.@, -=1.· • "1.00 ACRES OMA 6.6 • 1t1 e~"' • <k • A~6.4 \ ~ 0.10 ACRES -~ OMA 5.3 ";~-~ • ·-·), 0.54 ACRES . ( 0.14 ACRES ~ • = .r--._....,.../ OMA 6.5 \ ~ • • • iJ ~/ ("l ?.05 ACRES t [ ~"\{'" BAS l~oct~ED~~~~liEDTH IS 4;~1E~TF • 0 ZS ~ nonnncc-n nA □TI A I DLTL/\IT ln/\1 ~, c:i (J 'l;,..'e, _ _ _ _ _ '-1...BAS IN . SE E DETAIL 1, THI S SHEET ~v q;_-.!)'t'~:_...__ "'-~ ~=~.,,vr ,.._,-,~"" VO LU ME REQUIRED = 343 CF • ~ PROJECT SITE INFO UNDERLYING HYDROLOGIC SOIL: A & D VOLUME PROVIDED = 918 CF _.0-'3 Goe;:;...........,. HOLES 1&18 APPROXIMATE DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: < 10 FT HOLES 2-17 APPROX IMATE DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: > 20 FT ,.,.. -~ b ! 0 "' '0;1' I\. .'\ d:7 i),{,;1/ " m ~ ~ s ~ ., 4.7 2.83 123,327 123,327 4.8 0.23 10,112 10,112 0.0"/2 SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% SELF-MITIGATI NG NOTE: ALTH OUGH TESTIN G WAS NOT PERFORMED FOR HOLES #1 & #18 , GROUNDWATER IS ASSUMED TO BE LESS THAN 1 O' 200' o· 1 oo· 200· 400' J 5.1 0.19 8,187 8,187 0.0% 5.2 0.21 8,966 8,966 0.0% 5.3 0.14 5,903 5,903 0.0% 5.4 2.83 123,391 120,331 3,060 2.5% 6.1 0.32 13,910 13,910 0.0"/2 6.2 0.13 5,664 5,664 0.0% 6.3 0.05 2,185 2,185 0.0% 6.4 0.54 23,428 23,428 0.0"/2 6.5 0.08 3,442 3,442 0.0% 6.6 0.10 4,350 4,350 0.0% 7 1.84 79,983 79,983 0.0% SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITI GA Tl NG SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITI GATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING SELF-MITIGATING W/PARTIAL RETENTION EX ISTING NATURAL HYDROLOGIC FEATURES (WATERCOURSES, SEEPS, WETlANDS): NONE CRITICAL COARSE SEDI MENT YIELD AREAS TO BE PROTECTED: SEE LOCATION IN EXHIBIT CRITICAL COARSE AREA TO BE PROTECTED (SEE ATTAC HME NT 2b) EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA: 364,550 SF DISTURBED AREA: 1,128,632 SF PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA: 9,145 SF PROPOSED PERVIOUS AREA: 1,119,487 SF *NOTE: TOTAL DESI LTATION BASIN TRIBUrARY AREA NOT SHOWN ON THIS EXH IBIT. TO SEE EXTENTS OF TRIBUTARY AREA FOR DESILTATION BASINS CONSTRUCTED PER DWG. 286-9C, PLEASE REFER TO "THE PACIFIC RIM COUNTRY CLUB & RESORT UNIT A PHASE 1 DESILTING BAS IN STUDY" UNDER PROJECT NUMBER C.T. 85-35A. AVIARA GOLF COURSE HMP EXH IBIT CARLSBAD, CALIFORN IA m ~ ~ ~ SCALE: 1" = 200' ~ ~mfil! ~h ... -= I N G □ FUSCOE N I I I O N G 6390 G reenwich Drive, Suile 170 Son Diego1 California 921 22 lei 858.554.1500 ° fox 858.597.0335 i ~ ~ " ii' ~ ~I I 8 1.00 43,675 TOTALS 75.75 3,2QQ7'~ SELF-MITIGATING 0.0% lwlPARTIAL RETENTION 43,675 DATE MARCH 2020 I § I I ···-1 -,---,·--1 3,260,554 I 9,140 I 30,031 I I I SHEET l OF l I I~ www.fuscoe.com I-co -I >< w en <{ w 0: : <{ w 0 .. . . J Cl ) w 0: : >- I- :: > z 0 w <{ ~ () o □ ~w LL o en _J <{ w co en 0 en a: : .. . . J <{ (. 9 0: : 0 <{ 0 <( 0 .. . . J 0: : <{ 0 <( I- - 0: : ~ 0 .0 N I-z w ~ I 0 <{ ~ <{ ~ a: : u. , < (/ ) Q a: : .. . J ::: > uJ g> = ~ z- ... . . ~~ a ~~ 0 ... . . - - 0 a: : uJ z (. ) (/ ) w (! ) D w .. . . J C C 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: D Typical maintenance indicators and actions for proposed structural BMP(s} based on Section 7.7 of the BMP Design Manual Not applicable to the proposed project, structural BMPs not proposed Final Design level submittal: Attachment 3 must identify: D 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} D How to access the structural BMP(s} to inspect and perform maintenance D 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} n Manufacturer and part number for proprietary parts of structural BMP(s) when applicable n 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.) □ Recommended equipment to perform maintenance n When applicable, necessary special training or certification requirements for inspection and maintenance personnel such as confined space entry or hazardous waste management C ATTACHMENT 4 City standard Single Sheet BMP (SSBMP) Exhibit [Use the City's standard Single Sheet BMP Plan.] lJIJ \ ' _; < ,/ ' -~ ~\ rf;; </ ,. ~,( V>-.! l ,, ~ ~,F ', : i~~~)=~ ,~ ~-:-.: ' . • . ~ Iii ~,~~, ~ , . ' II~\ ~ RITICAL COURSE EDIMENT YIELD AREA ( ro BE PROTECTED) SEE ATTACHMENT 2B • \ !: ..JiJ!!; 11 i '"" ,,_,, __ ., --. ~>{1 C -\ ~j I ~)UW/l:~~Xl j 1 ( \ ~7\lill I y ' \ \.,,~ I\\ ~"~ "~• ·m m ,_, "o, """ J 1;c l' l r[i<:~,),\'J'.[l / (((~( 1 -~ , .~)Tl/(1/i(Q . ' , I ,~!~ «=::~,~;!~~; I~, \ ~ '-.\.~/ ~ pl h ,\ ~ I ' ••• , , , ' ' ,,--~~' .,\,\\-~ ..... j~'\'\llJ ~ ~ ~ ~ \l -,,,,,,.A ,,.,,.,,,,,.,.,,""-~ zypx--J I i ,'. -(t '• • 1• I~ ii~\/!~ 1 :I Ii CRITICAL COURSE ,, , \ HO 'I I~ J\t , 1 " ) )I \i, SEDIMENT YIELD AREA {{ I~ •:' (TO BE PROTECTED)\M) (\/ ,)l SEE ATTACHMENT 2B ,:-)), ~er~ 't,,' mill!\(~~/!!!}) I I' i ',~ i).....:(,lr, -~ :=-. ~ rv ~ r ~ • ~ ,.-r:) )~ i /JjJ(/i, _ 1 ~"' '«<I\<.\.'.~~~ ~ ' '. ~ ~( J ll!~f j~ ----- 1/jfJ ~_ ~- ~ ,<\'-,"'-__! •. -~~\'\,\~~ ~ J t~)\" , ' ';,~"~ 3 r <c__) ' D ~ I -~ 4 ~ r . . ~' s--. -• • --4 '0 • '-'. 1 . ~-~. ('. • 1•11//~ -:;,-, 1r 1\1--!,----,-'-'-'· I \, _-+' \' '(f CRITICAL COURSE 1 [(1 SEDIMENT YIELD AREA /1 ,,,,,-(TO BE PROTECTED) I / SEE ATTACHMENT 2B f i {! _o• ~ s£!;111 ' • ' • ~~~ ·-~~ :?:: . GY ~L ' ;,~../,'~ -1 1~1 ~ '-"'_,..,__ ·.::,,, ~~;r~ 1-=_......,______, = ~~~ . _, ---\ /p,,._~J .....,.., J ~ .J q ! ,,:r:7~, ,)i , ' JI I • • ,l:~O / ,i, I ' '• {.,-•-' ~l)J_,~ .1~-.J •• _0 M' LU~ ---~ ~~ ~· _,,_j:fo q c 2 -\. ~&J,Y" ~ ~ -~ ~"' -~.,,4~ \\ ~-/o;,_"',,.2'fP . c----. ~• ' ~ -~ ~ © ·1 1/ ~~0 -~~ -cJ I r.:::0~ o .. -' ~ ~~ -~\ --.r'o . c~I? /~ "'al.Jls'_·~:;,'t::3.a BMPID# BMP1YPE SITE DESIGN CD SELF-MITIGATING AREAS (2) PARTIAL RETENTION BASIN 0 DESILTATION BASIN 0 AREA DISPERSION ® MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREA /4 ~ ~li <f:: 1 "~ "j 300' o· 150• 300· 600' DATE INITIAL ENGINEER OF WORK REV ISION DESCRIPTION LEGEND: ITEMS GOLF COURSE HOLE NUMBER EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR OMA BOUNDARY DESILTATION BASIN COURSE TRIBUTARY AREA EXISTING UNDIS'T\JRBED GREENS EXISTING IMPERVIOUS CART PATH EXISTING CART PATH BEING REMOVED EXISTING WATER FEATURE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS CART PATH SELF-MmGATING PERVIOUS AREA PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE: SYMBOL HOLE I]] -----9'.:,---- ~-//~ /201 ™™ NAME XHR CARLSBAD TRS ADDRESS 7100 AVIARA RESORT OR. CONTAq GEOFF GRAY CARLSBAD, CA 92011 PHONE NO. (858) 663-2252 PLAN PREPARED BY: s j. LE:-1,1 NAME MILES J. LEANDRO, P.E. COMPANY FUSCOE ENGINEERING. INC ADDRESS 6390 GREENWICH DRIVE SIGNAi DRE 0 't: ("'/$' 00 lfiil l (:. ~ \ ~o . RCE 842n • ~ . SUrTE 170 SAN DIEGO, CA 92122 PHONE NO (858) 554-1500 NOTES: 9-JO- Civi\ 'F 1. SEE PROJECT SWQMP FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. BMP TABLE SYMBOL CASQA NO. QUANTITY (SF) DRAWING NO. CJ SD-7 3,335,953 SF 316-7A □ S0-6 6,518 SF 316-?A D SD-6 51,632 SF 286 -9C . D SD-5 9,145 SF 316 -7A ~ SD-3 10,795 SF 316-7A SHEET NO.(S) INSPECTION * MAINTENANCE * FREQUENCY FREQUENCY 4-17 N/A N/A 4 & 17 ANNUAL ANNUAL 5, 11, 16 ANNUAL ANNUAL 7, 11 , 15 N/A N/A 7, 11 , 15 N/A N/A -~"'''' ·~!!,~ FUSCOE E N G I N E E R I N G 6390 Greenwich Dr., Suite 170 Son Diego, California 92122 tel 858.554.1500 o fox 858.597.0335 www.fuscoe.com I SHEET I CITY OF CARLSBAD I SHEETS I ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ATTACHMENT 4 - AVIARA GOLF COURSE SINGLE SHEET BMP SITE PLAN RECORD COPY I PROJECT NO. I DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL I DRAWING NO. I OTHER APPROVAL CITY APPROVAL INITIAL DATE 316-?A C " ~ u ~ u ·c ~ k ~ c1! 0 e: j' ~ " 0 0 ['i c::. '-. ~ ~ < ~ :E ,, X w ~ "' £' " ~ ,;; .. ~ " ~ ,;; -" C: .. ~ ~ , "1 ;;;- 0 I D D ;;;-ro ro ~ u " ·e ~ C