HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 06-06; VILLAGES OF LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 3.7; STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN; 2007-07-11I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HUNSAKER
&ASSOCIATES
_._--..;:::1 5 AND lEG 0, INC.
PLANNING
ENGINEERING
SURVEYING
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
RIVERSIDE
SAN DIEGO
ARIZONA
DAVE HAMMAR
LEX WILLIMAN
ALiSA VIALPANDO
DAN SMITH
RAY MARTIN
CHUCK CATER
9707 Waples Street
San Diego, CA 92121
(858) 558·4500 PH
(858) 558·1414 FX
www.HunsakerSD.com
Info@HunsakerSD.com
STORM WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN
for
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7
City of Carlsbad, California
Prepared for:
Real Estate Collateral Management Company
c/o Morrow Development
1903 Wright Place
Suite 180
Carlsbad, CA 92008
w.o. 2352-178
July 11, 2007
Hunsaker & Associates
San Diego, Inc.
David A. Blalock, R.C.E.
RECEIVED
Gei 1Z 2U61.
ENG\NEER\NG
DEPARtMENT
DE:kc h:\reports\23S2\178\swmp-fe-02.doc
I
I
I
I
I
'1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 -Executive Summary
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Summary of Pre-Developed Conditions
1.3 Summary of Proposed Development
1.4 Results and Recommendations
1.5 Conclusion
1.6 References
CHAPTER 2 -Storm Water Criteria
2.1 Regional Water Quality Control Board Criteria
2.2 City of Carlsbad SUSMP Criteria
CHAPTER 3 -Identification of Typical Pollutants
3.1 Anticipated Pollutants from Project Site
3.2 Sediment
3.3 Nutrients
3.4 Trash & Debris
3.5 Oxygen-Demanding Substances
3.6 Oil & Grease
3.7 Pesticides
3.7 Bacteria & Viruses
3.9 Organic Compounds
3.10 Metals
CHAPTER 4 -Conditions of Concern
4.1 Receiving Watershed Descriptions
4.2 Surface Water Quality Objectives and Beneficial Uses
'4.3 Coastal Waters
4.4 303(d) Status
4.5 Conditions of Concern -Developed Condition Hydrology Summary
4.6 Identification of Primary & Secondary Pollutants of Concern
DE:djg H:IREPORTSI235211781SWMP-FE-02.doc
w.o.2352-178 719120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
CHAPTER 5 -Treatment Control BMP Design
5.1 BMP Location
5.2 Determination of Treatment Flow
5.3 BMP Unit Sizing
5.4 CDS Treatment Units
5.5 Pollutant Removal Efficiency Table
5.6 BMP Unit Selection Discussion
CHAPTER 6 -Source Control BMPs
6.1 Landscaping
6.2 Urban Housekeeping
6.3 Automobile Use
6.4 Integrated Pest Management Principles
6.5 Storm Water Conveyance Systems Stenciling and Signage
6.6 Efficient Irrigation Practices
6.7 Pet Ownership Responsibility
CHAPTER 7 -Site Design BMPs
7.1 Site Design BMPs
7.2 Minimize Impervious Footprint
7.3 Conserve Natural Areas
7.4 Permeable Pavements
7.5 Minimize Directly Connected Impervious Areas
7.6 Slope & Channel Protection I Hillside Landscaping
7.7 Maximize Canopy Interception & Water Conservation
7.8 Residential Driveways & Guest Parking
7.9 Trash Storage Areas
CHAPTER 8 -Operations & Maintenance Plan
8.1 Maintenance Requirements
8.2 Operation and Maintenance Plan
8.3 Annual Operation & Maintenance Costs
CHAPTER 9 -Fiscal Resources
9.1 Agreements (Mechanisms to Assure Maintenance)
OE:djg h:lreportsl2352\178\s\\mp-fe-02.doc
w.O.2352·178 7/9120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
List of Tables and Figures
Chapter 1 -Vicinity Map
Chapter 1 -Watershed Map
Chapter 1 -BMP Map
Chapter 3 -Pollutant Category Table
Chapter 4 -2002 CWA Section 303(d) List
Chapter 4 -Beneficial Uses of Inland Surface Waters
Chapter 4 -Water Quality Objectives
Chapter 5 -BMP Location Map
Chapter 5 -Pollutant Removal Efficiency Table
Chapter 5 -Design Runoff Determination Summary Table
Chapter 5 -85th Percentile Rational Method Calculations
Chapter 5 -CDS Product Information
Chapter 5 -CASQA Documentation
Exhibits
BMP Location Exhibit
Developed Conditions Hydrology Exhibit
OE:djg h:\reportsl23521178\s1wnp-fe-02.doe
w.Q.2352.178 7/9120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~;:::';
I :';;
'.'.' ...
I '·'···· , .'
";'-,
I ,'
,"-~
I ,"· l~< ,',
;~: .-.,..';,
I ·· .. ··· ,.
I?';
Ij~~i
I
I
I:
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
CHAPTER 1 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Storm Water Management Plan addresses the treatment of 85th percentile
. runoff from the proposed La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 development. The
design will utilize multiple flow based BMPs to treat the 85th percentile flow from the
development. 85th percentile design runoff calculations are provided in 'Chaptsr 5 of
this report.
1.1 -Introduction
The La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 development consists of 43 single-
family residences and a recreation lot, a single servicing drive and associated
sidewalks and open space. The La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood '3.1 site is,
located east of Rancho Santa Fe Road in the City of Carlsbad, 'C~lifornia (see
vicinity map below).
-t--
LA COSTA VICINITY MAP
NTS
Per the City of Carlsbad Storm Water Management Program for residential urban
runoff, the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 project is classifiecl as a priority
project and subject to the City's Permanent Storm WaterBMP' Requirements.
\
This Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) has been prepared pursuant to
requirements set forth in the City of Carlsbadis "Standard Urban Storm Water
Mitigation Plan (SUSMP)." All calculations are consistent with criteria set forth by
the Regional Water Quality Control Board's Order No. R9-2007-0t, and the City of
Carlsbad SUSMP.
This SWMP recommends the location and sizing of site Best Management Practices,
(BMPs) which include multiple flow based treatment units.'
DE:djg h:IrOportS123S2iiiaIsWlllP-re-02.doc
wn ,3.,!i'.17A 71A,r,nn7.?-'1 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
To proVide maximum water quality treatment for flows generated by the proposes
residential development, developed site flows will receive primary tre~tmenf v.ia CDS
treatment units prior to discharging from the project site. .
Furthermore, this report determines anticipated project pollutahts, pollutants.bf
concern in the receiving watershed, peak flow mitigation, recommended :sour'ce
control BMPs, and methodology used for the design of flow-based BMPs.
1.2 -Summary of Pre-Developed Conditions
Located on a 13.8 acre site, the proposed La Costa Oaks North -Neighborhood 3.7
has been mass graded per the "Mass Graded and Erosion Control Plans for La
Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.6 & 3.T' by Hunsaker & Associates, dated
October 2005.
The project site has been graded into three (3) mass-graded pads for future single
family development. Runoff from the two westerly graded pads and a portion of
future Avenida Soledad will drain into two desilt basins prior to discharging into an
existing 30-inch RCP system per Drawing No. 429-7D and ultlmatelyio SanMarcos
Creek (See Table 1). Runoff from the third mass-graded pad 'to the ea~t and the
remaining portion of future Avenida Soledad also dra'ins Into a desilt basin prior to
discharging into an existing 24-inch RCP system per Drawing No. 429-7D and
ultimately to San Marcos Creek (See Table 1).
Table 1 -Summary of Existing Conditions
Drainage Location Area (Acres) 100-YearPeak Flow
(of5) ,.
Existing 30-inch RCP 7.4 1:8.6 (Avenida Soledad)
Proposed Storm Drain 2.0 '5.4 (San Marcos Creek)
Peak flow rates listed above were obtained from the "Mass-Graded Drainage Study
for La Costa Oaks North Neighborhoods 3.2, 3.6 & 3.7" by Hunsaker & Associates,
dated February 2006.
The Regional Water Quality Control Board has identified San Marcos Greek as part
of the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit (904.00), San Marcos HydrologiG,A~e,a (904.50), and
the 8atiquitos Hydrologic Subarea (basin number 904.51).
1.3 -Summary of Proposed Development
All runoff from the developed condition La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 site
will drain to the Batiquitos Lagoon, Development of the :;;ite will not cause any
diversion to or from the existing condition watershed.
DE!m/ h:\repilr(s12352117.81Swmp-fti-OZ,doc
, w,O,2352-17!i 7111120072;10 PM
: ~>. I','
1',;-:':>
.' .. < -, ,
I
I
I
1-
I ,,"· ,,~,~
.~ .'
,'", .... -
I ,·:::· " ::.
I :::,::
~:~~
I·~~:(~
:::,~
:;~;:~
I~~j~
I~R
I
I,
I.
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
runoff coefficient of 0.57 was selected to quantify the rainfall to runoff response from
the single-family development.
Runoff from the developed site will discharge to two (2) receiving storm ,drain
systems. Runoff from the eastern portion of the proposed La Costa Oaks North -'
Neighborhood 3.7 will be conveyed via curb and 'gutter to two (2) receiving curb
inlets. Flow is intercepted then conveyed via storm drain in a southerly direction',
draining to the adjacent hillside and u'ltimately flowing into San Marcos Creek.
Runoff from the western portion of the proposed La Costa Oaks ~orth """
Neighborhood 3.7 will also be conveyed via curb and gutter into four (4) curb inlets
within Avenida Soledad. Flows are then conveyed via storm drain h a westerly
direction, discharging to an existing 3D-inch RCP within Avenida Soledad.
Per the "Drainage Study for La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7;', dated July
2007 by Hunsaker & Associates, peak flow data from the developed site is
summarized in Table 2 below.
TABLE 2 -Summary of Developed ,Conditions Peak Flows
Drainage Location Area (Acres) 100-Year'Peak Flow
, (cfs)
Existing 3D-inch RCP 6.7 16.7 (Avenida Soledad)
Proposed Storm Drain 2.6 1.6' (San Marcos Creek)
To provide maximum water quality treatment for flows generated by the pr:oposed
residential development, developed site flows will receive primary treatment via CDS
treatment units prior to discharging from the project site.
1.4 -Results and Recommendations
Two (2) flow-based 8M P has been proposed to treat 85th 'percentile, runoff from the
site prior to discharge from the project site.
To determine the Design Treatment Flow for the CDS treatment uniU?", the 85th
percentile design runoff has been calclJlated using the Ratkmal Method. A funoff
coefficient of 0.57 was assumed for the proposed developed site as pet the"'~2003
San Diego County Hydrology Manual",
OE:dl\J h:IreP,Orls123S21178\.w!TIp-f .... 02.doC
I~::~:
I~::i:!
I':'
I··'·, ,~~ .:
I :;·,·,
:-,'
1\:: ,' .. ,::,:<
I;~s
liJ~
I
I·
I.
I.
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
Rational Method Input Data
Drainage 851M
Percentile Runoff . Treatment Unit Area
(Ac) Rainfall Coefficient
(inches/hour)
BMP#1-Western
Treatment Unit 6.7 0.2 . 0.57
(Avenida Soledad)
BMP#2 -Eastern
Treatment Unit 2.6 0.2 0.57
(San Marcos Creek)
85th
. Percentile
Flow (cfs)
0.8
0.3
Rational method calculations predict 85th percentile flows of approximatelY 0.8 cfs
and 0.3 cfs for the western and eastern treatment units respectively.
Calculations .show that a CDS Model PMSU 2015 and CDS Model PMSU 20' 20
will be required to treat the design 85th percentile flow-·at the eastern and western
points of discharge respectively. These units areinline systems and do Iiot require'
the construction of a special diversion box upstream of the treatment unit. .
85th percentile flows conveyed via the private storm drain will receive primary
treatment via CDS flow based treatment units, filtering out trash and debris.,
sediments and oil/hydrocarbon based pollutants.
Further 'information and product testing on the CDS treatment units are provided in
Chapter 5 of this report.
Many alternate treatment BMPs, including infiltration basins! inlet filters; extended
detention basins, media filters, wet ponds and master grassy swales were explored
and evaluated (see Chapter 5 for a full comparison on all treatment BMPs
considered). However, due to site design constraints and BMP treatment .
efficiencies for pollutants of concern, the BMP treatment consisting of on":lot site
design BMPs and CDS treatment units were deemed to be fhe most effective and
feasible for the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 development.
Site design BMPs will also be implemented on each 'individuallot to the maximum
extent practicable to ensure water quality treatment is maximized throughout the
development. Rooftop runoff will be discharged to vegetated land$caped areas on
each residential lot, draining overland via the vegetated landscaping to the receivirfg
curb and gutter. This conveyance through the natural landscaping provides passive
treatment for these flows and also allows for partied infiltration via. the on-lot
vegetated areas, targeting the potential bacterial and nutrient pollutants of concern
generated via each single family residence.
1;-;:;0;
"
'.;':.
I~~~;:
i:tj
t":' .. ~"
I :t:: ~:~3
I~~::i >~.f"
11;;:~
~~~~J
li~j
I
I
I·
I:
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
The conveyance of treatment flows via the vegetated landscaped areas on each
individual residence provides passive treatment for pollutants of concern typically
associated with single family residential developments such as Nutrients and
Bacteria & Viruses.
Permeable pavements were also evaluated fat implementation. within the La Costa
Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 project site. However due to several factors 'including
. porous pavements high failure rate, porous pavements. have been deemed
infeasible for the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3,7 project slte~ A full
discussion is provided within Chapter 7 of this. report.
Grassy swales within the interior of the project site were also.' evaluated and deemed
infeasible. Grassy swales were deemed infeasible due to :potential damage to' street
foundations (for swales running along road sections):and aJso:swaJe areas often
. result in standing water that could lead to vector issues (see· discussion provided in
Chapter 7 for further details).
Per EPA NPDES Phase /I requirements~ the implementation of this proposed 8MP
Treatment Train meets the requirement of using the best available technology to
reduce or eliminate pollutants to the maximum extent practicable.
An operations and maintenance plan will be submitted to the City during the Grading
Plan approval process.
1.5 -Conclusion
The combination of proposed construction and permanent BMP's Will reduce, to the
maximum extent practicable, the expected project pollutants' arid will not adversely
impact the beneficial uses of the receiving waters.
[lE:dJg h:\repor!s\235:?1171l\s~p-r ... o2.iloc
••. _ ._ .. _ .. _ ......... .;;;... .... i. ..... _~ ..
I?::
I:'>:
I'"
I ',:·:
~"'< -~ ..
I:::"
I :':';
>:.': ".'
I'
I.
I
I:
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
1.6 -References
"Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan -Storm Water Standards': City of
Carlsbad, April 2003.
"Standards for Design and Construction of Public WorkS Improvements in the Oityof
Carlsbad': City of Carlsbad, California; April 1'993.
[tMaster Drainage and Storm Water Quality ManagemenfPlan': City of Carlsbad,
California; March 1994.
"Drainage Study forLa Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7': Hunsaker &
Associates, July 2007.
"Hydrology Manual': County of Sa'n Diego Department. of Public Works -Flood
Control Division; Updated April 1993.
"San Diego County Hydrology Manual':' County of San P,iego Oepartment of Public
Works -Flood Control Section; June 2003.
"Order No. R9-2007-0001, NPDES No. CAS0108758-Waste Discharge
Requirements for Discharges of Urban RUf1offkom. the MuniCipal Separate
Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) Draining the. Watersheds' of the County of San
Diego, the Incorporated Cities of San Diego Counfy, San Diego Unified Port
District and the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority: California
Regional Water Quality Control Board -San 'Diego. Region; January 24, 2007
"Water Quality Plan for the San Diego Basin", Californi'C;l Regional Water QuaHty
Control Board -San Diego Region, September 8, 1994. .
"2002 CWA Section 303(d) List of Watet Quality Limited Segment, 11 San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
oi;:djo' 1I:lreports123S21178\s\ymp-Je-02,dQC
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
~
~
~ 0 5D ----50 ~ 50 100
SCALE 1'=50'
'-
NOTES:
SITE BMp DE$IGN:
-IMPERVIOUS AREAS WILL BE MINJMIZED'BY
IMPLEMENJING. MINIMUM STflI;ET WIDTHS AND
INCORPORATION LANDSCAPE BUFFERS.
• EFFICIENT IRRIGATION PRACTICES WILL BE
iNTERGflATED INTO ALL HOA 'MAINTAINED
LANDSCAPED AREAS •
.. ROOFTOP RUN OFF WILL DISCHARGE INTO
VEGETATED LANDSCAPING TO PROVIDE PASSIVE
TREATMENT OF THE FLOWS.
• ALL SLOPES WILL BE STABALIZED BY EROSION
CONTROL MEASURES.
• LANDSCAPING ON SITE WILL INCORPORATE THE
PLANTING OF NATIVE. DROUGHT TOLERANT
VEGETATION TO MAXIMIZE CANOPY INTERCEPTION
AND WATER CONSERVATION.
SOURCE CONTROL:
• HOME OWNERS WILL BE EDUCATED AS TO THE
PROPER APPLICATION OF HERBICIDES AND
PESTICIDES. AND PROPER USE. STORAGE, AND
DISPOSAL OF POTENTIAL STORM WATER RUNOFF
CONTAMINANTS.
• THE HOA WILL MAKE ALL HOMEOWNERS AWARE OF
THE RWQCB REGULATIONS THROUGH A
HOMEOWNERS' EDUCATION PROGRAM.
• PEST CONTROL MATERIALS ARE SELECTED AND
APPLIED IN A MANNER THAT MINIMIZES RISKS TO
HUMAN HEALTH, BENEFICIAL AND NON·TARGER
ORGANISMS, AND THE ENVIRONMENT.
• CURB INLETS WILL FEATURE STENCILING & SIGNAGE
WITH PROHIBITIVE LANGUAGE SATISFACTORY TO THE
CITY ENGINEER.
• ALL HOA MAINTAINED LANDSCAPED AREAS WILL
INCLUDE RAIN SHUTOFF DEVICES TO PREVENT
IRRIGATION DURING AND AFTER PRECIPITATION.
• ALL OPEN SPACES WILL FEATURE SIGNAGE AND PET
WASTE COLLECTION BAGS TO PREVENT ANY
SOURCES OF POTENTlAL BACTERIAL POLLUTANTS.
_'_-'-'F---""-"~''''''-'>---''--.:---'''--'-I'~--}.
LEGEND
WATERSHED BOUNDARY
FLOWLINE
CDS TREATMENT UNIT
CURB INLET
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
LANDSCAPED AREA
AREA
0)
11
I(.,:(·~:::,":J
" ... ,... 'I . "
= .. ---:, ----=~~~=::==:--:====---
~~
#",.,,-// ..... "'/
/., •.. /
.... -....... .. ... ,,,-/ j ./' .-
.... <.~~.-.::==:-= ~ .. ;;:~~-,/
L '---r---/' r
M ___ --.. ,_~~, ....... ././
-.......... ~
"'. '--
>-; .. ->// / / ) t .... /j'/d.. ('--''-~_ ""/~ v;".'::-<:::-----, ---........,,r---.-
HUNSAKER &ASSOCIATES
SAN OI!C~ IHt
~ 1Otl91brn1bni1St.U
DQ.mlI.IC SvI Dqcr" C& !ZttI
SUlvm.«: ~sz:o.~1nt
BMP LOCATION MAP FOR SHEET I
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH 1
NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7 OF %
"1 a CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
R,\0712\&Hyd\712SHD3-BHP,dwrg[ 1275lApr-16-2007113146
I'
I
I -II
I
I-
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I ..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa-Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
'Storm Water Management Plan '
CHAPTER 2 -STORM WATER CRITERIA
2.1 -Regional Water Quality Control Board Criteria
All runoff conveyed in the proposed storm drain systems,will 'be treated ih
'compliance with Regional Water Quality Control BQard regulations' and NPDES
criteria prior to discharging to natural watercourses. ,California Regional Water
Quality Control Board Order No. R9-2007",01, dated January 24,2007, sets waste
discharge requirements for discharges of urban runoff from municipal storm
separate drainage systems draining the watersheds of San Diego County.
Per the RWQCB Order, post-development runoff from a site shall ,not contain
pollutant loads which cause ,or contribute to an exceedance of r~ceiving water
quality objectives or which have not been reduced to the maximum extent
practicable. post-construction Best Management. Practices (BMPs), Which refer to
specific storm water management techniques that are applied tO'manage
construction and post-construction s'ite runoff a'nd minimize erosion, 'include source
control -aimed at reducing the amount of sediment and otber pollutants...;.. and
treatment controls that keep soil and other polh,.Itants onsite,once: they have been
loosened by storm water erosion.
Post construction pollutants are a result of the urban development of the property
and the effects of automobile use. Runoff from paved surfaces can contain' both
sediment (in the form of silt and sand) as well as a variety of pollutants transported
by the sediment. Landscape activities by homeowners are an additional source of
sediment.
All structural BMPs shall be located to infiltrate, filter, or treat the required runoff
volume or flow (based on the 85th percentile rainfall) prior to its discharge to any'
receiving watercourse supporting beneficial uses. ' , '
2.2 -City of Carlsbad SUSMP Criteria
Per the City of Carlsbad SUSMP, the La Costa Oakl? North Neighborhood 3.7
project is classified as a Priority Project and subject to the City's Permanent Storm
Water BMP Requirements. These requirements required the preparation of this
Storm Water Management Plan. '
The Storm Water Applicability Checklist which must be included along with Grading
Plan applications, is inc/uded on the following page.
Oe:dJO /i:\REPqRTSI2352\178ISWMp.!'E.02.doc
w,o.2352-178 7Jlii200i 2!21 PM
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
Project Address Assessors' Parcel Number(~* Project #,(city use only):
Complete Sections 1 and 2 of the following checklist to, determine your project's' permanent $nd
construction storm water best management practices requirements. This 'form must be completed
and submitted with your permit application.
Section 1. Permanent Storm Water 8MP Requirements:'
If any answers to Part A are answered "Yes," your project is subject to the "Priority Project
Permanent Storm Water BMP Requirements," and "Standard Permanent Storm Water BMP "
Requirements" in Section III, "Permanent Storm Water BMP Selection Procequre" 'in the Storm
Water Standards manual. '
If ,all answers to Part A are "No," and any aRsw~rs to Part. S are "Yes," your project is 'only subject
to the "Standard Permanent Storm Water BMP Requirements", If every question in Part A and 8"
is answered "No," your project is exempt from permanent storm water reqlJlrements. ,
Part A : Determine Prior ty Project Permanent Storm w aterS MPR equlrement$.
Does the project meet the definition of one or more of the priority project categories?* Yes
1. Detached residential development of 10 ot more units. ,[21
2. Attached residential development of 10 or more Hnits. 0
3. Commercial development greater than 100,,000 square feet. 0
4. Automotive repair shop. :0,
5. Restaurant. 0
6. Steep hillside development greater than 5,000 square feet. 0
7. Project discharging to receiving waters within Environmentally Sensitive Areas., [21
2 0' 8. Parking lots greater than or equal to 5,000 ft or With at least '15 parking spaces, and
potentially exposed to urban runoff.
9. Streets, roads, highways, and freeways which would create a new paved surface that is [~l 5,000 square feet or greater
* Refer to the definitions section in the Storm Water Standards for expandecf definitions of the
priority project categories.
Limited Exclusion: Trenching and resurfacing work associated with utility projects are not
considered priority projects. P?lrki.ng Jots, buildings and other structyres al:)sociated wi,th utmty
projects are priority projects if one or more of the criteria in Part A is: met. If all answers 10 part A
are I'No", continue to Part S.,
No
0
I2l'
13
[21
[~T
[~l :0
ca
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
1
I·
P B D t St d d P tSt W R t art . e ermine an ar ermanen orm ater equlremen $ • . .
.Does the project propose: .. Y~s No
1. New impervious areas, such as rooftops, roads, parking lots, driveways, paths anq 0 0'· sidewalks?
2. New pervious landscape areas and irrigation systems? D O·
3. Permanent structures within 100 feet of any natural water body? D' :0
4. Trash storage areas? ·0 0
5. Liquid or solid material loading and unloading areas? '0 0
6. Vehicle or equipment fueling, washing, or maintenance areas?
.. -D 0
7. Require a General NPDES Permit for Storm Water Discharges Assoc.iatecfwith Industrial' 0 -D ActJvities (Except construction)?*
8. Commercial or industrial waste handling or storage, excluding typical office or household 0 0 waste? .-,> • ---
·9. Any grading or ground disturbance during construction? lD 0 ..
to. Any new storm drains, or alteration to existing storm drains? 0 0
*To find out if your project is required to obtaih an individual General NPDES per-mit fdr Storm Water
Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities, visit the State Water Resources Gontrol Board'web site
at, www.swrcb.ca.gov/stormwtr/industrial.html
Section 2. Construction Storm Water BMP Requirements:
If the answer to question 1 of Part Cis answered "Yes/' your project is subject to Section IV, "Constl1,.lction
Storm Water BMP Performance Standards," and must prepare a Storm Water Pdllr.,ltion Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). If the answer to question 1 is "No," but the answer to any of th.e remaining questions is, "Yes,"
your project is subject to Section IV, "Construction Storm Water BMP Performance Standards," alid. must
prepare a Water Pollution Control Plan (WPCP). If every question i'n Part C is answered "No," your project
is exempt from any construction storm water BMP requirements. If any oOhe answers to the questions in
Part C are "Yes," complete the construction site prioritization in Part 0, below:
Part C : Determine c f Ph onstruc Ion ase st orm W t R a er t eqUlremen s.
Would the project meet any of these criteria during construction? 'Yes, No
1. Is the project subject to California's statewide General NPDES Permit for Storm Water [2] ·0· Discharges Associated With Construction Activities?
2. Does the project propose grading or soil disturbance'? " . ~ 0
3. Would storm water or urban runoff have the potential' to contact any portion of the :0 0 construction area, including washing and staging areas?'
4. Would the project use any construction materials that could negatively ,affect water quality. [21 "0 if discharged from the site (such as, paints, solvents, concrete, and stucco)? . '" .
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Part D: Determine Construction Site Priority
In accordance with the Municipal Permit, each construction site witl1 construction storm water BMP
requirements must be designated with a priority: high. medium or low. This prioritization must be
completed with this form, noted on the plans, and ,included in the SWPPP or \NPCP. Indicate the project's
priority in one of the check boxes using the criteria below, and existing, and surrounding conditions of the
project, the type of activities necessary to complete the construction and 'any other extenuating
circumstances that may pose a threat to water'quality. The City reserves the-right to adjl1sHhe priority of
the projects both before and during construction. [Note: The construction priority does NOT change
construction BMP requirements that apply to projects; all cO'nstruction BMp requirements mList 'be
identified on a case-by-case' basis. The construction priority does C!ffElct the frequency of inspections that
will be conducted by City staff. See Section IV.1 for more details on construction BMP requirements.]
GJ'A) High Priority
1) Projects where the site is 50 acres or more and grading will occur dUJing the rainy season
2) Projects 1 acre or more.
3) Projects 1 ,acre or more within or directly adjacent to or discharging directly to' a coastal lagoon or
other receiving water within an environmentally sensitive area
4) Projects, active or,inactive, adjacent or tributary to sensitive:water bodies
o B) Medium Priority
5) Capital Improvement Projects where grading occurs, howeVer a StorrnWater POlh,ltlon Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) is not required under the State General Construction Peniiit (i.e;, water and sewer
replacement projects, intersection and street re-alignments, widening, comfort stations, 'etc.)
6) Permit projects in the public right-of-way where graQing OCC1!rS, such. as installation of sidewalk,
SUbstantial retaining walls, curb and gutter for ali entire street frontage, etc. "noweyer sWPPPs:are
not required. -,
7) Permit projects on private property where grading permits are'-required, however, Notice Of Intents
(NOls) and SWPPPs are not required.
o C) Low Priority
I
8) Capital Projects where minimal to no grading occurs, such as si'gnal light. and loop installations,
street light installations, etc.
9) -Permit projects in the public right-of-way where minimal to no grading occurs, such as pedestrian
ramps, driveway additions, small retaining walls, etc. "
10) Permit projects on private property where grading permij$ are not required, sLich as small retaining
walls, single-family homes, small tenant improvements, etc. '
Owner/Agent/Engineer Name (Please Print): Title:
DAVfD L k -'EnGineer ~~----------------------------~~---Signature" }-A B I I I Date: ! I ~ ______ ~~~~~ ________________ ~ ____ 7_-~~~/O~7~ ____ ~~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Standards
4/03/03
APPENDIXB
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF CARLsBAD
Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
/'V Major Roads o Carlsbad City Boundary
19 Environmentally Sensitive Areas
e
5,000 2,900 0 5.600 Feet
34
I
I
I
I
I III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
CHAPTER 3 -IDENTIFICATION OF TYPICAL POLLUTANTS
3.1 -Anticipated Pollutants from Project Site
The following table details typical anticipated and potent'ial pollutants generated by
various land use types. The La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 development
will consist of detached single-family residences. Thus, the Detached Residential
Development, Parking Lots and Streets, Highways & Freeways categories. have
been highlighted to clearly illustrate which general pollutant categories are
anticipated from the project area.
Priority
Project
Categories
Commercial
Development
>100 ff
Autom
Repair
Restaurants
Hillside
Development
ft2
X = anticipated
p = potential
III .... C ell E :s ell en
x
p(1)
X
II)
"C C II) .... Co) ~ 015(1) C »(1) .-0 ell CQ, ..c .-.£: >-ca E caS II) ... .... ~o cu.Q ~ ell ell ... ell z ::x::E 0(.) ... 0
X X
p(1) p(2) X
X X(4)(S) X
X-
X X
(1) A potential pollutant if landscaping exists on-site.
0)11) ell III C ell cu 015 ._ Co) e c"C C .~ III ell C ca (!) ... ell O)cu"li) ell III 015 >.E..Q .... ~ ~.= >< CI) ~ (5 Ooen £0>
p(1) . p(2) P
pIS) X p(3)
X
X X X
X X
(2) A potential pollutant if the project includes uncovered parking areas.
(3) A potential pollutant if land use involves food or animal waste product$.
(4) Including petroleum hydrocarbons.
(5) Including solvents.
III ell "C 'u := III ell Il.
X
pIS)
X
OE:dJg h:\reporls\2352\178\svm1pofe-02.doc
w.o.2352.-178 719120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
3.2 -Sediment
Soils or other surface materials eroded and then transported or deposited by the
action of wind, water, ice, or gravity. Sediments can increase turbidity, clog fish gills,
reduce spawning habitat, smother bottom dwelling organisms, and suppress aquatic
vegetative growth.
3.3 -Nutrients
Inorganic substances, such as nitrogen and phosphorous, that commonly exist in the
form of mineral salts that are either dissolved or suspended in water. Primary
sources of nutrients in urban runoff are fertilizers and eroded soils. Excessive
discharge of nutrients to water bodies and streams can cause excessive aquatic
algae and plant growth. Such excessive production, referred to as cultural
eutrophication, may lead to excessive decay of organic matter in the water body,
loss of oxygen in the water, release of toxins in sediment, and the eventual death of
aquatic organisms.
3.4 -Trash & Debris
Examples 'include paper, plastic, leaves, grass cuttings, and food waste, which may
have a significant impact on the recreational value of a water body and aquatic
habitat. Excess organic matter can create a high biochemical oxygen demand in a
stream and thereby lower its water quality .. In areas where stagnant water is
present, the presence of excess organic matter can promote septic conditions
resulting in the growth of undesirable organisms arid the release of odorous and
hazardo~s compounds such as hydrogen sulfide.
3.5 -Oxygen-Demanding Substances
Biodegradable organic material as well as· chemicals that react with dissolved
oxygen in water to form other compounds. Compounds such as ammonia and
hydrogen sulfide are examples of oxygen-demanding compounds. The oxygen
demand of a substance can lead to depletion of dissolved.oxyge'n in a wat.er body
and possibly the development of septic conditions. .
3.6 -Oil & Grease
Characterized as high high-molecular weight organic compounds. Primary sources
of oil and grease are petroleum hydrocarbon products, motor products from leaking
vehicles, oils, waxes, and high-molecular weight fatty acids. Elevated oil and grease
content can decrease the aesthetic value of the water body, as well as the water
quality. .
DE:djg h:lreportsl2352\1781s'Mnp-fe-02.doc
w.o.2352·178 719120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
3.7 -Pesticides
Pesticides (including herbicides) are chemical compounds commonly used to control
nuisance growth or prevalence of organisms. Excessive application of a pesticide
may result in runoff containing toxic levels of its active component.
3.8 -Bacteria & Viruses
Bacteria and viruses are ubiquitous microorganisms that thrive under certain
environmental conditions. Their proliferation is typically caused by the transport of
animal or human fecal wastes from the watershed. Water, containing excessive
bacteria and viruses can alter the aquatic habitat and create a harmful environment
for humans and aquatic life. Also, the decomposition of excess organic waste
causes increased growth of undesirable organisms in the water.
3.9 -Organic Compounds
Organic compounds are carbon-based. Commercially available or naturally
occurring organic compounds are found in pesticides, solvents and hydrocarbons.
Organic compounds can, at certain concentrations, indirectly or directly constitute a
hazard to life or health. When rinsing off objec~s, toxic levels of solvents and
cleaning compounds can be discharged to storm drains. Dirt, grease and grime
retained in the cleaning fluid or rinse water may also adsorb level of organic
compounds that are harmful or hazardous to aquatic life.
3.10 -Metals
Metals are raw material components in non-metal products such as fuels, adhesives,
paints and other coatings. Primary sources of metal pollution in storm water'are
typically commercially available metals and metal products. Metals of concern '
include cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury and zinc. Lead and chromium
have been used as corrosion inhibitors in primer coatings and cooler tower systems.
At low concentrations naturally occurring in soil, metals are not toxic. However, at
higher concentrations, certain metals can be toxic to aquatic life. Humans can be
impacted from contaminated groundwater resources, ,and bioaccumulation of metals
in fish and shellfish. Environmental concerns, regarding the potential for release of
metals to the environment, have already led to restricted metal usage in certain
applications.
DE: h:lrepons12352117B1s"mp-fe-01.doc
w.o.2352-178 4/1512007 10:27 AM
I
I
I
I .
I' .
I.
I·
I
I
I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I
I.
IV
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
, Storm Water Management Plan
CHAPTER 4 -CONDITIONS OF CONCERN
4.1 -Receiving Watershed Descriptions
As shown in the watershed map on the following page, the pre-developed and post-
'developed La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 site drains to the'San Marcos
Creek watershed.
Development of the site will not cause any diversion to or from the existing
watershed.
The Regional Water Quality Control Board has 'identified San Marcos Creek as part
of the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit, San Marcos Creek Watershed, and the Batiquitos
Hydrologic Subarea (basin number 904.51).
4.2 -Surface Waters
The existing beneficial uses of inland surface waters for San Marcos Creek include
agricultural supply (AGR), contact water recreation (REC-1), non-contact water
recreation (REC-2), warm freshwater habitat (WARM), and wildlife habitat (WILD).
Refer to the table at the end of this chapter titled "Beneficial Uses of Inland Surface
Waters".
The'table at the end of this chapter titled 'Water Quality Objectives" depicts the
water quality objectives for the inland surface waters.
4.3 -Coastal Waters
The existing beneficial uses of costal waters for Batiquitos Lagoon include contact
water recreation (REC-1), non-contact water recreation (REC-2), preservation of
biological habitats of special significance (BIOl), estuarine habitat (EST), wildlife
habitat (WILD), rare, threatened, or endangered species (RARE), marine habitat
(MAR), migration of aquatic organisms (MIGR) and spawning, rep'roduction, and/or
early development (SPWN). Refer to the table at the end of this chapter titled
"Beneficial Uses of Coastal Waters".
4.4 -303! d) Status
Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires the State to identify
surface waters that do not meet applicable water quality standards with certain
technology-based controls. The State Water Resources COr:Jtrol Board has
approved the 2002 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segment.
San Marcos Creek and Batiquitos Lagoon are not listed on the EPA's 303(d) List of
endangered waterways (included in this Chapter). The nearest impaired water body
is the Pacific Ocean Shoreline located at Moonlight State Beach, impaired by
bacteria. The Moonlight State Beach is roughly three (3) miles from the project site.
OE:djg, 11:\reports\2352l178\sWml>'fe-02,doc
w,o,2352·178 719120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I . "~ .::' .. :.:",' '" .. ;;. ~ ',:: .'.
I
I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
4.5 -Condition of Concern-Developed Condition Hydrology Summary
Table 4 summarizes developed vers~s existing conditions drainage areas and
resultant 1 DO-year peak f10wrates at the storm drain discharge locations. Per San
Diego County rainfall isolpluvial maps, the design 1 DO-year rainfall depth for the site
area is 2.9 inches. . .
Table 4:.... Summary of Existing Vs Developed Conditions Peak Flows
Discharge Location Existing 100 Year Flow Developed 100 Year
(cfs) . Flow (cfs)
3D-inch RCP -Avenida 18.6 1'6.7 Soledad .. .-
San Marcos Creek 5.4 7.6
TOTAL 24.0 . 24.3 ..
Peak flow rates listed. above were generated based on criteria set forth in "San
Diego County Hydrology Manual", for further information in regards to this rational
method analysis, please refer to the "Drainage Study' for La Costa Oaks North
Neighborhood 3.7" dated July, 2007 by Hunsaker & AssoCiates.
4.6 -Identification of Primary & Secondary Pollutants of Concern
As stated previously in segment 4.4, the nearest '303( d) listed endangered water
body the La Costa Oaks North ~ Neighborhood 3.7 development is tributary to is the'·
Pacific Ocean Shoreline (San Marcos Hydrologic Area -904.51). This water body is
listed as being sensitive to Bacteria Indicators.
Thus, primary pollutants of concern from the proposed single family residential
development include Bacteria & Viruses. Secondary pollutants generated by the
project site include Sediment, Nutrients, Trash 'and Debris, Oxygen Demanding
Substances, Oil and Grease and Pesticides. "
DE:djg h:1reportsl235211781swmp-fe-02.doc
w.o.2352·178 71B12007 2:21 PM
- - -- - - - - - ---- -----2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Apprlll'I'tI by (lSllP.·I:
.11/(1' 20tH
:', .: .. :" '! ~: X'
; R~G:ION Wi'I<:'
." t·.· '. >'1: :',~,);~~'( ~. ~." ' .. ~
NA~iE' ..
9 R Agull Hediondn Creel,
9 E Agnn IIcdiondn Lngoull
9 It Aliso C,'cel,
9 E Aliso Creek (mouth)
9 l~ Uuenll Vistl! LlIgoon
.. , .. ,.;: :: .. ; .... : ·:'cA[;)YAri~:'':,<;::'< :: .. :~;:':;i:f/ij;'::~.::·>:.::·.··:'·'.·:···:. ·.:·:.'po:rEN:1!iAL
. . 'WATEUSIlEI)" POLJ;..U'fJ).NT/STltIJ;Sf;iQR . SOURCES
.'. '.,',
90431000
'1'01111 Dissolved Solids
{MllIn Rnnoff/Storm Sewers
Unlmown Nonpoint Source
Unknown point source
90431000
U:,clerill Indicutm's
Nonllointll'oint Sonrce
Sedimcntlltioll/Siltulioll
Non!,ointll'oillt Source
90113000
Ilucterill Indiclliors
UrlllIll Runoff/Storm Sewers
Unknown point sonrce
Non point/Point Source
l'hosphorus
lmpait'melll located at lowcr 4 miles.
Urlmn UunofffStorm Scwers
Unkllown NOlllloillt SOlll'ce
Unlmown poillt source
TO:licily
Urbull RUlloff/Storm Sewers
Unknown Nonpoint SOlll'ce
Unknowll point source
90113000
Ducterh, Illdiclltors
NOIlIIOilll/J>oillt Source
90421000
. Ullclerill Indiclliors
NOllllOintll'oint Source
Nutricllts
i .' TJ\.-UlL· ,. ,;:. l~shMA·r~il>. '. ~.' Im()l>OSEl) n1J)L
. iiiUOIUTY '. siz~~ AI~I?I~CTEI) COMI'LE1'JON
Low 7 Miles
Low 6.8 Acres
Low 6.8 Aeres
MediulII 19 Miles
Low 19 Miles
Low 19 Miles
Medium 0.29 Acres
Low 202 Acres
Low 202 Acres
Estimated si=e of illlpairlllelll is 150 acres located ill upper portion of lagooll,
NOIIIIOillt/I'oillt Sonrce
Sedimcntlltioll/Siltation Medinm 202 Act'es
Nonlloint/l'oint Source
Pagel tifl6
-
-- - ---.. ------ - ---.. 2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Appl"lII'<'d by llSEP.'I:
.I/1~" ](JlJ:I
'·t ,:.:,-. : ... ::, ', .. ~ .' ~ '.;' • ", I .. '! .. .. •. , 'M-,,:,.:,: .. I .. ~; \.' "". '" , •• ,.~,: .;" • 'l'!, I -:J 'I·· •• '" ~ ., ••••• , :'. ,-,J '}., .,' ... , ~ . ~-'.. ,: ..... .:_ .• > -~:~.,,.' . • •.•••. ', .' t', • ~. '-':.' .' "
: :',:CALWAl'El~i;i'.': "<" ::::5',:~l~:i::~:,:,:}:;:;',' ,,",,' : ", ,J, .. ' 'l'OTENTIAL' ' :;:'" :,' ," ", "l'MJjL , ESTlIVIA.l'ED, : .. , PIW1~OSI~I), 'l'MDl"
REGION TYPE', N~~iE ,'::' WATltRsinjj»:;: 1'()[XUl'ANTiSTRESSOR:': SOUR(;ES ' ,": 1;ltlORlTY slil~ A!"I~i~C;1'ED COMI'U~TIOJII
9 R Cbollns Creel, 90822000
Bncterill Indicntors Medium 1.2 Miles
Nonlloint/I'oinl Source
Cndmilllll IJigb 1.2 Miles 2004
NOllpllinl/l'oint Sonrce
Copper High 1.2 Miles 2004
Nllnpoinlll'lIinl Source
l>inziuon I1igb 1.2 Miles 2002
Nonpoilll/Pllint Source
Lend IIigh 1.2 Miles 2004
Nonlloinlll'lIint SlIurce
Zinc High 1.2 Milcs 2004
Nllnpoiut/I'oint Sourcc
9 R Clo\'cl'd:llc Creell 90532000
I'hllsl,horus Low 1.2 Miles
llrb:lII Runoff/Storm Scwcrs
Unknown Nonlloint Source
Unknown point source
Totnl Dissoll'Cd Solids Lllw 1.2 Miles
l1rblln Runoff/Storm Sewcrs
Uuknown Nonlloint Sourcc
Unknown Iloint sourcc '
9 H Ihna I'oinillar\lor 90114000
H:.cteria Indicators Medium 119 Acres
/IIIJllIil'lIIl!lII/()catecl (If Bahy Bl!ach.
lIrbllll Rnnoff/Storm Scwel's
M:.rinlls lind Rccl'clllioJlul Honting
Unknown Nllnpoinl Source
lInknownlll.in, sourcc
9 I~ F:unosll Slough lind Chllnncl 90711000
1~lItrllllhic I,ow 32 Acrcs
Nonllllillt Sourcc
PlIg/!2o/lf!
-
- -
.. '
,-------- ------2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
--.·fjljlrm'l'" I~I' lJSm~'f:
J"{I' 10t)J
';.; ',:':.: -• • • •• ~I ',' ' ... 'i' • ' .. ~.
, ;'
.. ' " . . ~ . "r" .. , '.' • .' ., • '. V., H I '.,~~::' •. ,
REGION TYPE :NA~iE .
cAL\V;(.J:~I~·(,t; ::.::,:; .: :';"!;:';:~/? :~": ,'~'::,.:'<:::'::';'.' "
WATE·I~Si'iE~).;'· ~6LLpT/\N;ri$:r¥~~s'c>R" POT~~Tl;\.I.; .
SOURCES
': : ". ,TMDJ[;"': :: .. ; Esi'iMAiEI); .. l~ROPOSlm TMJ)L ~RioRl'i'Y SIZIC KI11il~d'EJ) 'COiVll~I,El'ION
9 R Feliritll Creel. 90523000
9 R Forester Creel. 90712000
9 R Green VulJey Crec/. 90511000
9 L GUII.iolllc LIII.e 90311000
Totul l>issolved Solids
FCCIII Coliform
Agriculhll'lll Retut'll 1110ws
lIrblill RUlloff/Storm Sewers
Flow Regululion/ModiliclltioJl
Unknown Nonpoint Source
Unknown point source
Impairment Located (If /oll'l!r I mi/e,
pll
Urbull RUlloff/Storm Sewers
SIIil/s
Unlmown Nonpoint Sonrce
Unknown point source
Impairment Located CIt IIpper 3 miles.
Total l>issolved Solids
Industrillll'oint Sources
IIl1bitut Modilieulion
Spills
Unknown Nonpoint Sourcc
Unknown point source
Impairmcllt Locmct/ atloll'c/' I mi/e.
Sulflltes
I~utropbic
PlICe30fl6
Agricultural Retnrn 1;low5
lJrbllll Runoff/Storm Sewcl's
Flow Regnllitioll/Modiliclition
Unknown Nonpuint Suurce
Unknown point source
ll.'blln Runoff/Storm Sewers
Nllturlll Sources
Unknown Nonlloint Sonrce
Unknown point source
Nonlloint/l'oint Soune
Low 0.92 Miles
Medinlll 6.4 Miles
Low 6.4 Miles
Low 6.4 Miles
Low 1.2 Miles
Low 33 Acres
-
---, ----.--------, ---
': .. "
REGION TYI'E
9 L
9 It
9 E
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN, DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY'CONTROL BOARD
,IIJ'J1'1II't'111~1' liSE"..!:
.111(1' lfJl).1
~~~J{ ',"',:>(,'
Hodgcs, Lnllc
Kit C:II'SIIII Creck
LOlIIll AlIlI Slough
"", "., ·,::'·:··.· .. ",>·:·,.).i\' •• ·:·',~·'j'!.i~'(t·,l.I'i.';'l.~'!J'.·l;~' . '\.' ,,;;': .;,.., ',".,,~ . ; .. ,~ .. \ ... ~~ ..... '(,.',~' '. :. )'.: " .\ , ,', , ' ' .... '. CALWA':rER{,,;,/,(,t'''::,''!',;.'':i/\,.'h':r.~;·'.:;·~~··,·.:',~:;" ::'; P.o,TENTIAL· .";:",'." ';'".:' ,,,TMDL .",:i;,;,: ESl'IMATED';'<",PROP9Sf,)) TMPI,
, 'VATERSli~J}' ~9Li;l!rAt'l1;(s1.'R~SSOR: ' , ' SOURCES"" ," 'I;RIOii'd'y S.il~'Ai?lfI~cfi~i> 'CO~'lptr~i'lON
90521000
Color
Nitrogcn
I'hosphorus
T otull)issolvcd Solids
90521000
Tot:II ))issolved Solids
90410000
Huctel'ill IndiclIlors
l~ntrollhic
PIIgl!4oj16
lJrb:lII Runoff/Storm Scwers
Unknown NonJloint SOIll'ce
Unknown Iloint SOUrtC
Agricullure
I):,iries
,UrbllnltnllofffStorlll Sewel's
Unknown NonJloint SouJ'Cc
Unknown point source
Agricultul'C
I>lIiries
Urb:lII ItnnofflSlorlll Sewers
Unknown Nonpoint Sonrce
lJnlmown lloint sonrce
Agricultnrlllltctnrn Flows
lJrbllnltnnoff/Stm'lII SCWCI'S
IlIow Itegululioll/Modificlltion
Natnral Sources
Unknown Nonlloinl Sonrce
Unknown poinl sonrce
Agricultnl'lll Return 1110W5
lJrbull Runoff/Storlll Sewers
Illow ltegllllllioJl/ModificlItion
Unknown NonllClinl SlInrce
lJnllllown Jloinl source
Nonpoinl Source
Nonlltlint Sunrce
Low 1104 Acres
Low 1104 AereS
Low 1104 Acres
Low 1104 Acrcs
Low 0.99 Miles
I",w 8.2 Acres
Low 8.2 Acres
-
-- ------ --- ---- -
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
- -
Apl'rtll"'fi by OSI;J>.·I:
.I/1~" 20tH
~~ci~~~' ·~:~I)~·t .: ': .~::: ~~~;~~·,: .. t., .. : .:;;; .. :.: ....... . ::', .~ ~,Y~At)';.A i~I~~~~',~~i1:.~~!;~·};~t·.~:.w~r ~;;~~:~~··~'i/j < ~'?j}~'{ .
W J\ UnSIIEI) . .1~O.L~,UT.A.~T./STRE~PR
..: ...... PO·rENTiAJJ~·. .:::: "', !,:::,~",' ':;1;61.~E~ .. .'.·~::;· :··ES'l'lMAi£EO·:·.:: ':j;R{)POSlm'~I'M()L
. 'SOUltCES' ..' Pl{lOItiTY ~ sii'i~ AI~FECfED COMJ'LETION
9 Ii:
9 n
9 It
9 C
9 c
9 C
Los Pcnnslluitos Lngooll
Mission nn)'
MUI'rietn C"eek
I'Mific Oce:1lI Shoreline, Aliso liSA
J'ncific Oce:1lI Shorelillll, IhlC1U1 Vishl CI'eck
IIA
J'ucifie OcellI! Shoreline, Dillin Point liSA
90610000
90640000
90252000
90113000
904210011
90114000
Sedimcnlnlion/Siitution Low 469 Acres
NonlJointll'oint Source
Bncterin Illdicntors MediulIl 2032 Acres
IIIIj!airlllellf locatecl alol/g ellfire bay shorelil/e,
NOllpoilllll'oillt Source
Euh'Ollhic Low 2032 ACI'es
!J~vtilllated (/I'eCl o/impClil'mellf cifO.5 IIcres localed lit 111011111 0/ Rose Creek IIl/d 11.5 IIcres locllle(1 lIl'lIIolIIlI cif'J'ecolole (i'eek
NOlilloinlll'oillt Source
Lend Low 2032 Acres
I~:vtilll(/(ed W'CCI (ifilllpairlllellf (if 0.5 at'res located lit 111011111 o/Rose Creek IImlll.5l1cres locmed lit 111011111 o/recolore Creek.
Phosphorus
Bllcterill Illdiclltors
Nonpoilllll'oint Souree
lJl'b:1Il Rlilloff/Stol'lU Sew~I's
Ullknown NOllpoillt Source
Ullknown Jloint source
Low
MediulII
Impairmellilocaled (// Lagl/I/a Beach al Lagl/llita Pillce / Bll/e Lllgool/ PllIce. Aliso Belich
NOIIJloillt/l'oint Source
Bucteria Indicutors Low
12 Miles
0.65 Miles
1.2 Miles
IlIIpttii'lIIelll located at BlIel/a I'isfc/ Creek. Carlsblld Cit), Beach III Carlsbad ViI/age Dril'l!. Carl.vbad SWtl! Beach III Pille
AI-ell/te.
NOI!Jlllilll/Point Source
nlletcrill Indicntors Medilllll 2 Miles
Impairment located CIt Aliso Beach III Wesl Street. Aliso Beach at TlIble Rocl, Drb-e, /()()O Sleps Belich at Pacific Coast Hw)'
(Hospital. 91h AI-e), Salt Creek (large o/lllet). Salt Creek Beach at Sail Creek sen-ice /'Oad. Salt Creek /leacll at Dalla
SlI'lllld Road.
NOIIJlllintll'oint Source
PlIge 5 0/16
-
-- - - - ---- ------ -
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
--tljljll'llIwl f~I' USI;'''A:
.l1l~I' 211t/}
'", '~ I ',~" '~'N ... ! f' ..•• t".~ ••...... I •
,nEGlON T\:;i;E'. ':.,. ':~'::-'" "~~~~t' .. t" ;;', , ·":·,<~cAi~v.At~~i~'~;!;:!;'~:.~~t»'l:~:tF};<~<'i :~::,:',(:' ',:"i9~i,lt~fiAi(' .·".::I~'(::':T:.::<,~rKip~ ,.:<::, ':E~'t'llV~A,.Tlm
\\'ATEI~S.iED' : ,~Ot:LUTANT/STRESSOn: ' ,SOURCES "I'IUORl'i'Y' 'SIZ": AFIIE(!Tlm
PROP()SI~~ TMDL
COlVU'LE'i'iON
9 C
9 C
9 C
9 C
9 C
9 C
9 c
I'licilic Ocenn Shoreline, Escondido C"celt
JlA
I'licilic OCelli' Shol'elinc, Lngulln Bend. liSA
I'llcific Ocenu SIIOI'elinc, LOllln Altn I1A
1':lcilic Ocenll SlIorelillc, Lower SIIII JUlIlI
lISA
I'ncilic Oce:UI Shorelille, Mi.':IIn:II· Rescr\'oir
IIA
l'ncilic Ocellll Shorelille, Snll Clemente IIA
I'ncific Oceun ShOl'elill~, 8nll mego IIll
90461000
9UII2000
90410000
9UI200UU
9U610000
90130000
9117111100
Bncterin Indiclltors Low 0.44 Miles
Impairmelll/ocClled al &111 Elija Lagooll Ollt/ct.
NonllOint/Point Source
Bnetcrin ludicntOl's McdiulII 1.8 Miles
ImjJlIirlllelll/ocaled at Maill LlIglI/w Bcacll, Laglllla BClIc" 1I1 Oceall AWlllle, l,agll/Ill Beacll al l,agUlla AVCIIIII!, Lagulla
Beach al Cleo Slreel, Arc" Cm'e (II [J/lleiJird C(lnyoll Road, LagllllaBclIc" al DIIII/olld Dril'l!,
Noulloint/l'oint Source
Bneterin Indicntors Low 1.1 Miles
IIIIJlai/'lI/elll/ocaled al LOllla A/la Cree" MOil/it.
Nonpoillt/l'oint Source
Bllcterill (lldicntors McdiulII 1.2 Miles
Illlpai/'lI/ellt/OCllled al Non" BecIC" Creefc, SallJllall Cree" (large ollllet), Capislrclllo Beach, SOl/lh ('api,vlr(///() Beach 1II
Beach Road,
NOllllOiut/l'oint Soure~
B:lcterin (lIdic:ltors Low
ImpllirmelllloG'llled al Torrey Pilles Siale Beach III Del Mar (Alldel:w)// CallyolI).
lll'bllll RUlloff/Storlll Sewcrs
UnlmowlI NOlIllOillt SOUl'ce
llllkllOWIII,oilit source
0,39 Miles
Bncterin Indiclltors Mediulli 3.7 Miles
Impairment/ocaleel al Poche Beach (/lIl'ge ollllet), Ole Hal/soli Belich Clllb Belich al Pico/)mii,. SCIII C/ellle/lle City Beadz
(II EI Portal SI. Slairs, Sail C/emcllle City Beacll at Mariposa St" Stm Clemellie Ci(I' lJellch 1II Ul/cllI LCl/le, Scm ('/emellte
Cily Beach III Somh Liilela LallI!. Stili Clelllellle City Beach al LijegulIrcllleaclqllarte/w, Ullcler Sail Clemellle Municiplli
Pier. Sclll Clelllellle Ci(v Belich 1I1 IhifcllgclI' Canyoll (7i'cl/iligar 1.11,). SCIII Clemellle .'lIllie iJeadl at RMel'll BecICh, SCIII
Clemell/e S/CIle Belich el/ C,.I1Jre,vs Shores,
NOllpoiutll'oillt Source
BlIcterill IlldiclItors
lmpairmellllocalecl 1I1 Sal/ Diego RiveI' MOil/II (akll /Jog /Jeaell),
NtlllllClilll/l'oillt Source
PIlge 6 lif 16
Medium 0,37 Miles
-
---- - ---- -- --- - ---
i{~~;'ION "~i':~I'~
9 C
9 C
9 C
9 C
9 C
9 C
9 It
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
AJlJI/'(""llf/~1' lfSEPA:
.111(1' l1J1J.1
,', ~i~l:k;':,-:,,:/~' :':';' '" : ':; :,,:,~ ';,::: : ,'cAi'YA:t~j~:\;::,:U:'!_:;.:'f,~,.!)';;{:,/:~:,;\;;!.',,,, ,fl~:-;~::."'" : 'POfENiJA~
" WAT,lmS~lED ' ~OLLlJ:rANT/S'I:'RESSOR' 'SOURCES
. ,~f " . ", ,,' ~",;tMDl::' ""i: ,:ES1~IMAT.E'I):
"j;iUOiii'l'V 'sIzi£ AI~I~l~C'mD PR9poSIm 'I'M.!)L
COMI'U:'I'ION
I'acific Ocelln SlIol'cline, San Diecluito IIlI
I'llcifie Occlln Shoreline, Sun .I«lIIclliin Hills
liSA
Pacific Oceun Shoreline, Slin Lnis Rey IIlI
I'llcific Ocellll Shorelinc, SUII MlIl"Cos IIA
I'ucific Oceall Shoreline, SCl'illl'S IIA
I'ucific Ocenll Shorelille, 'l'ijnlllill HU
I'ine Vnllcy Creek (lIl'ller)
90511000
90111000
90311000
90451000
90630000
91111000
911410110
Hllcterill Indicators Low
/mpairmelllloC(/led (/1 .'illll Dieglli/o Lagooll MOlllh Solalla Beach.
NOIlllOint/Point Source
Hllcterill IndiclItol'S Low
/mpai/'mellllocated at Call/co Cell'e at iI,'il/l! Cow Dr.lRil<iera Wa)'. Heisler Parlc-North
l1rb:1JI Rllnoff/Storm Sewers
l1nknown Nonl'oillt Source
Unknown I'oint sonrce
Illlcterill Ilidicutors Low
Impairmellllo('ated at Scm LlIis Rey IUl'el' MOIllh.
Nonlloint/l'oint Source
Hucteria IlIdicutcU's Low
Impairmellt localed at Moonlighl Slale Beach.
NOlllloint/l'oint Source
0.86 Miles
0.63 Miles
0.49 Miles
0,5 Miles
Hacterill IlIdic:ltors Medium 3,9 Miles
/1II/lairmIJllllocated at La Jolla Shores Beach (I( EI Pasell Gr{/Ildc. I.a .I0l/ll Shorl!s Beach III Camillito Del Oro. /.a .folia
Shores B/!(/eh al Val/ecitos. La .Jolla Sho,.es Beach (I( Al'e e/e fa l'/ay". Casll Be(/ch (Childrells 1'11111). SOlllh ('a.m /Jellch CII
COlisl Blvcl,. Whisperillg Slil/Cl~ Beach at R(Il'illa St,. Wille/aI/Sell !Jellch at Visla de III l'laYll. lI'illdtmsl!a Beach CII Bcmllir St,.
Willt/clIlseli Beach 1IIl'la)'a clel Norte, Willc/clIlsl!a Bcach lit PlIlolI/a/, AI'e,. TOl/mllllille Sill/Park, Pacific Beach at Gralld
Al'!!,
NOlllloilltll'oiut Sourcc
Hneterill llldicntors Low
Impairmel/t located Jhllll the bonIer, extelldillg IlIIrth alollg the .~//l1re,
NOlIl'oiutlPoint Source
Eutcrococci
Pllgl! 7cl/16
Medinlll
, Grnzing-Rclnted SOUl'ces
Concclltrnted Anillllli Fceding Ol'crutions
{(lcl'milled, IlOint som'ee)
'I'l'lIusiellt eni:lIInlllllcllts
3 Miles
2.9 Miles
-
- - - - - -- - - -- -- - - -
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
- -
ApprlJl'c'l/ I~I' l!SEI~·I:
.I11~1' 1(}(J:I
it~G~~N TYl;E .. :.:.c .~~(~/ .. :::,. .< ... . :: ... ' .. t CAt\\;.A:~~J~;/< })Ti::~·:;?·~?%~~i6·~· :;:!·x/p::~r~·!· .. ~' '::j~6:rk~*I~L .
. WATE~{$Il~P"' .rQ.,-!i.UT4~T/Sl'R~f5SQ~· .' .. . S9URt:ES
'.." ·:t· ,:::··::"r~1rii.:.'(;· :·(.:,:·{~s·l;·I~·ATlti).">·· P.ROl'OSEI> TMI)L
. .; . PRl(uiil:V" SJZI£'Ai?jIEC'fJm 'COl\'U'LETlON
9 R
9 R
9 n
9 n
PI'illln I>eshechn Creel,
Rainbow Creel,
Slin I)jego lillY Shorelille, 3211d St S:m J)iego
NIIVlIISI:ltioll
SIIII Diego lillY Shorelille, between Slimpsoll
1I11d 281h Streets
90130000
I'hosphorlls
Tnrbidity
90222000
Nitrogen
Phosphorns
90822000
lIenthic COllllllunity (O:ffccts
Sediment Toxicily
90822000
COII(lcr
Mercury
PAils
Ptlge 8tif /6
LJrb:m RlInorf/Storlll Sewers
Unknown Nonpoint SOllI'Ce
Unknown point source
lJrbun Runoff/Storm Sewers
Unknown Nonlloinl Source
Unknown point source
Agriculturnl Returll Flows
Other Urbllll RUllorr
Nurseries
Low
Low
IIigh
Ollsitc WlIstewllter Syslems (Septic Tllllks)
NOllpoilllll'oint Sonrce
Agl'icnltnrlll Return J1lows
Olher Urbull RUlloff
Nursel'ies
IIigh
Ollsite Wlistewnter Systems (SClllic TlInk.~)
Nonpointll'oint Source
MediulII
Non(loinl/l'oinl Source
Medium
Nonlloint/I'oint Source
High
NOllllointll'oin' Source
Higb
NOllpoilll/Poill'Source
lIigh
NOII)loint/)'oin' Source
1.2 Miles
1.2 Miles
5 Miles 2U03
5 Miles 2003
103 Acres
103 Acres
55 Acres 2003
55 Acres 2003
55 Acres 2003
-
----- - -- - - - --- - - --
REGION TYl'l~
9 C
9 n
9 C
9 IJ
9 IJ
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST O}r WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Ajljll'lI1'<'r/ 1~I'lfSl::l~'I:
.l1I(1121J1J.1
. :. ~:" ~ ~.:. .' -; "",:"(., ~. ,<, " " , . :;~~ ': :' . ,,:~ ;.' , ~ \ .. ,. ,;~:;:t: .:;,: ·~·;:~·:\·::.:'~:Yr;·':-;r;'t:';~~~,':;1[.'j ';.~,:':'!;;: !, ~':'! '.".~.' '";":~:.: . . ' .. CALWAfML·:c.: .... ·,. :.: ....... ,.,~,:,.;,."; ........ '" .Ii;·' .. ··,···· l'OfENTIAL
: wATjmsi~ifl): ':. PO,LI;l!'r ~N:t/STRE'SSO:i{'" SOURCES
.: . TiVIDL'" .
PRIOlti'h'
ES1'iMAiED . .1~ROPOSEI)· TMDL
. SIZI~ Ai11'EC+~iD COl\-il'LE·j·ioN NAME'
PClJs High 55 Acres 2003
Noul'oiul/Poiul Source
Zinc lligh 55 Acres 211113
Nonl'oinl/l'oinl Source
Snll I>iego IJIlY Shorclin(:, Chnla Visln 909121100
M:u'iJul
IJnclerin Indicntors Low 0.41 Miles
Urbnu Ruuoff/Storm Sewcl's
Mllrilllis nnd Recrentilllllil Bouting
IJontynrds
lJont I)ischllrges/Vcssel Wasles
Sun I>iegll Buy Shm'eline, Downtown 90821000
Allchomge
Benthic COllllllunity Effects Medium 7.4 Acres
Noupuintfl'oint Source
Sediment Toxicity Medium 7.4 Acres
Noulloint/Point Sonrce
Sun I>iego IJIlY Shorelinc, G Street I'ier 90821000
1J:lctel'ill Indicutors Low 0.42 Miles
UrlullI UuuofflStorm Sewcrs
Unknown Nonlloint Source
Unknown point source
Sun l>iego Buy Shol'eline, IIcnr Cholllls Creek 90822000
Bellthic ConllJllmity I~ffecls Medinlll 15 Acres
NOllllOiut/l'oint Source
Sedimellt Toxicity Medium J5 Acres
Nonpoinf/l'oint Source
Snll l>iego Iluy Shorcline, lIellr COI'Cllllldo 90822000 .
Bridge
Ilcllthic COllllllunity Effects MediulII 37 Acres
NCUll'oillt/l'oillt Source
Sedilllent Toxicity MediullI 37 Acres
Includes Crosby Street/Cesar CIICII'e= Park area. tl1at il'i1/recl!il't! additiollal !//(Jllitorillg.
NOIlI)ointll'oint Source
PlIge90jl6
-
- - -- -- --- ----- - -
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
--tfjlPI'III"',ll~r lfSI-:I'.·I;
.Il/b' 2tJ{)3
.' ":" .. :':::';-;' .... ::: ::::;".;.: ':;.: .. , . i: :.:>: :/;:.: ,; .' ..... ; .. :: .. ; .. ;';: '.o-~~~~;~f~I~;r');7!~"f:::~;:;K~);:;':;~(> :X;' . .:?( ;" .-:,;:.:.: .. , ." ·· .. t'Q:l:EN1:iAL:
T.Yl'E NAME ." \VATimSIIElf: POLLl,IJ;AN:r/$TRI,i:SSOR"' . SOURCES'.
:.'. ~ ": • ': I· ... ··: ~:', .. :.,~: .: ... ~:.~~", .~ ', •• '. ',':,',' .. ' , 'i'~ .
" .' . ·1'1\'IDL·: ':' .. :. ESUMATIi:D: '. P~~~)l>OSI~I) .TMDL
1'lUOiih'y , Sliit AI~I1I~CTED . COi\.IPLETJON
9 u
9 H
9 B
9 B
SUII Diego BIIY Shorclille, lIellr sub buse
Sun I>iego Hlly Shoreline, lIelll' Swilzel' Creel.
SlIn I>iego BIIY Shoreline, North of24th
SlI'cct Mllrillc Tcrmilllli
SIIII I>iego IJIIY Shorelinll, Seventh Street
Cllllllllel
90810000
Benthic Commllnity Effccts
Sedimcnt Toxicity
90821000
Chlordllnc
Lindllllc
l'Al-ls
90832000
Benthic COllllllllllily I~ffects
Sedimcnt Toxicity
90831000
Bcnthic Comllluuity Effects
Sediment Toxicity .
Ptlge 10 lif 16
NOlllloilltlI'oint Source
NOlilloillt/Poiut Sourcc
Urbll\l Ruuoff/Storm Sewers
Other
HOlltYllrds
NonJloilit/Poilit Source
V,'bull RuuofrJStorm Sewers
Other
lIolltyllrds
NonJloillt/l'oilit Source
lIrblln Runoff/Storm Sewers
Other
BOlltYllrds
Nonpoilil/Point Source
Nonllointll'oint SOllrce
NOllpoiutlI'oiut Source
Nonpoillt/Point Source
NOlilloint/l'oillt Sourcc
Medium 16 Acres
Medium 16 Acres
Medium 5,5 Acres
MediulII 5,5 Acres
Medium 5.5 Acres
Mcdium 9.S Acres
Medium 9.S ACI'cs
Medium 9 Acres
Medium 9 A~res
-
----- - --- -- -- - - -
ImGioN 'TYI)I~
9 C
9 C
9 U
9 B
9 R
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF' WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
, :.' ..... :! t·· .. · .
., I~/: . ;:. "
. NA~IE
Snll Diego BIIY Shot'eline, Shelter Islnnd
Shurelille 1':lrl,
Snn l>iego BIIY ShoJ"Cline, Tidehlllds Pllrl,
Snu l>iego llllY Shoreline, Viciuity of B SI
:\IId UrondwlIY Piers
SlIn l>iego Uny, Shelter blllnd Yllcbt IIl1sin
SlIn l>icgo River (Lowel')
CAdvA:&i{" :·:(f~;:·,::,)::;:\;;···;C:: ';~'. ;';~:J:',;':';;~:'.".
.' \VATEUSIrElr' 'i'OLLUiANi-;~TRE~SOR' .
90810000
Bncterin hu)icntm's
91010000
Bncterill Indicntors
90821000
llllcterin Indicnlors
. l'O'rENTIAL
. SOURCES
:.' ···::.':··i:~;II)f ' ... : ". ESTIl\:IAl-.im;··
. j'ltiORlTY. Slzi~ AI1l'ICC~l'im
Unknown Non point Source
Vn)mown Iloint source
Uulmown Noupoint Source
Uukuown point source
Low
Low
Low
0,42 Miles
0,38 Miles
9.9 Acres
Estill/CIted sb! of imflllirmem is 0.4 miles CI/'OlI/lll'he shoreline of 'he bay.
90810000
90711000
Benthic COUllllllllity IUfecls
Sediment Toxicily
Copper, l>issolved
Fccnl Culiform
Lower 6l11iles.
Low Dissolved Oxygeu
Vrbllu Rnlloff/Slorm Sewers
Uulmown Nonlloinl Source
Unkuown )lOiul source
Nonpoinlll'oint Source
Noulloinl/l'oint Source
Noniloint/l'uiul SOllrce
Vrb:m Ruuoff/Storm Sewers
Wnstewnter
NoullllintlPoiut Source
III/poiI'll/em tralls"l!ncl~ Qc{jucellt CU/II'Cllel' lI'ful'e.vhecl 90712.
Pllge 11 (if 16
Urball Rllnoff/Stofm Sewers
Unknown Nonpoint SOllrce
Unknown IlOinl source
Medinm 9.9 Acres
Medium 9.9 Acres
IIigh 153 Acres
Low 12 Miles
Low 12 Miles
- -
AJlJI"III'4'fll~I' USEI'.·I:
.I11~" 2IJIJ3
PROl'OSEI) TMDI.
COMI'LI~TlON
2003
-
-
, :
--- - - ----- - -- - -
'llEGU)N TYI,"jl:
9 I~
9 It
9 E
9 Il.
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
"NA;i ~.<~ ... ":,:,:.,:,,. ':.' ..
Snn Elijo LlIgoun
SUII JUIIII Creel,
SIIII .hulII Creel, (lIIolllh)
San Luis Rey River
'. ': ;' .. ' .. ' CAL'VAii~I{):.:·';;":::·";:;·/·.:Z:'(X.;,:t::':: .. ,::,;.:,:<.~'"-o. ; :·.·.:O'l'ENTIAi'· :":,.;:.' :': ··t .... -::-;.T~IDlf
WAT·lti{SliEIf. !'Q'ti':;UT 4NT/SIREssoii'" . . .. SOUltCES '. ':r'i{iOltl'i'Y
9U46100U
9"1200UO
90120000
9031 WOO
Phosllhorus
/mpa;/'mcllttl'tlllsccl1ds adjClccl1t Ca/w{l/c/' lI'Cltcrshcd 907 J 2,
tll'bun Runoff/Storm Sewers
Unknown NOllpoint SOllrce
Unknown (loint SOUl'ce
Totull)issolved Solids
/mplIirll/cIIIII'lI/lSC/!/1{l.v ac/jacc/ll CalwlIte/'lI'CI/er,vited 9()7 J 2.
Ullclcrill Illdicuturs
U.'blllllbllloff/Storm Sewers
Flow Regulalion/Modificlltion
Nutlll'lli SOllrccs
LJnlmuwn Nunpuint Source
lInknown (loint sOllrce
EstimClted si=e of ill/jJClirmel/l is ISO acrcs.
NOII(luintll'oillt Source
Eutl'Ophic
EstimClted si=e /If ;mpairll/el/l is 33IJ (tcres.
NOlllloint/Poiut Sourcc
Sedilllelltntion/Sililltioll
Estilllatc(lsi=e (lfimjJail'll/clII is J SII ac('es,
NonllOint/Point SOllrce
Dnctcrill Indicnturs
Non(loinlll'oint Source
IhlcteriallldiclIlors
NOllllOint/Poillt Source
Chloride
/lIIjJClinlllllll/(}Ccl/ed at/oweI' /3 miles,
Pllge 11 (if 16
Urblill Runoff/Storm Sewers
Unlmowu Non(loillt 80ur(:e
Uuknown Iloint sonl'Ce
Low
Low
Low
Low
Medilllll
Mediulll
MediulII
Low
, Esi;i~iAl.',im~ slii~ 'Alll~Ec-i'lm
12 Miles
12 Miles
566 Acres
566 Acres
566 Acres
1 Miles
6,3 Acres
19 Miles
- -
"f/pI'/II·"d I~I' lfSBl~·':
./u(,'1IJ1J.I
PROPOSED TMI)I,
C0l\1i'LETlON
-
--- - --- ----- - -- - - -
. .
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT "'pp/'/lI','tll~I' USEI'A:
.111(1' 1IJtJ3
REGION TVI'E
',' :; .. .... '.:,' ~:\rv~{·::;:·: ~" :. ',' .. ::
9 It S:lIIl1ill Creel.
9 E SlIntll MnJ'gllril1l Lngllllll
9 It SlIlItll MlIJ'gllritllltiver (Upper)
9 R Scgunlla Deshecllll Creek
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
..... q.L";AirE~~:<:i;;;·:~:·~,~{';:i ... / .. -;:>-:~;. :"//,C . ..:. : ·,:,l"o·ti~TlAL;:".' :'.::',: <: . .'.:··};·: .. ::J;~uit .:. ,'.,' ·E~TI~AT1!;I)·. .PROPOSED 'I'MDL
WATEUSIlED' ~Q~LUTA~T/S:rI!.ES~9R' '. SOURCES . J'R10R~'J'V SIZI<~AI~I~~CTlm COMI'LETION
TotnlDissolvell Solills
90222000
Totall>issoh'ell Solills
90211000
Eutrollliic
90222000
I'\losllllorus
90130000
1'\losllllorus
Turbillity
p{/gelJ (if 16
Inllustrilll Point Sonrccs
Agriculture-storm runoff
Urban Runoff/StoJ'm Sewcrs
Surfllce Mining
III ow Regulntion/Mollilicntion
Nntnl"lll Sonrces
Golf coursc nctivilics
Unknown Non point SOUl'ce
Unknown point sonrcc
Urlmn Runoff/Storm Sewcrs
Flow Rcgnlnlion/Mollificnlion
Nallll'lll Sonrccs
Unknown Nonpoint SOlll'ce
Unknown point source
NOllpointll'oinl Source
lll'bllll RUllorf/Storm Sewers
Unknown Nonlloint Sou.'cc
Unknown point source
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Unknown Nonpoiut Source
llukno\vn point source
Construction/LIIIlIII)evcJopment
lh'bllll Runoff/Storm Sewers
Clulllnelizlllion
Flow -Regulation/Mollification
Unknown Nonpoint Sonrce
Unknown Iwillt S(lIIrce
Low 19 Milcs
Low 1.5 Miles
Low 28 Acres
Low 18 Miles
Low 0.92 Miles
Low 0.92 Miles
-
- -
'"
--- ---- - - - -- - -
2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
""." ~ f,
- -
,"I'I'I"IJI'<'(/ by USHI'.'I:
.Il1{l'l()(U
REGION TYPE '. '~A~;~: :',:< i'::f:',', ::',~ ~dA:dYA~~lt;;;:::)).;:~)~::::~;.;~?p~~;;:UhC~lflf!:~n!g:.~':::: 'rO;~ENT~~~:;, <:' :,':~:,:' '~:·,,::·!.:~,:S:T~~P.,~\::~·:;. ':'~:~;'~;~1:~Qt./ ;~P~Q~,()Sm) 'i'Min,
, WATEltSI.ED:·'.: }?:QLl.U,Tl~N,T!~r~!1!~~9~· , ~ c/' :', SOUltCES , . , :' 'I~RIORIT:V . SIZIC AI1FI~CTlm. c::Ol\>11'J,ETJON
9 L Suthe"l:lI1d Iteservoh' 90553000
Color Low 561 Atres
Urb:1I1 Runoff/Storm Sewers
Uuknown NOllpoiut Source
Uulmowu point source
9 It Tecolole Creel, 90650000
Illlcte,'i:1 Illdicntlll's Medium 6.6 Miles
Nonpoint/l'oint Source
Clldmium Low 6.6 Miles
NonlJoint/l'oint Source
COPller Low 6.6 Miles
NonJlointll'oillt Souree
Lend Low 6.6 Miles
NOIIJlointll'oint Soune
To~icity Low 6.6 Miles
NOIIJloint/l'oint SOllrce
Zillc Low 6.6 Miles
Nonpoint/Poiut Source
9 It Tijmlllll niver 91111000
Illlctcrin Illdicniors Low 5.8 Miles
NonJloillllJ'oillt SOllrce
Eutrollbic Low 5.8 Miles
NOUlloiut/I'oiut Source
Low l>issolvcd Oxygell Low 5.8 Miles
NOlllloilllll'oinl Source
I'esticides Low 5.8 Miles
Nonll(linlll'oint Source
Solids Low 5.8 Miles
Nonlllliut/J>o.int Source
Syntbetic Orgnuics Low 5.8 Miles
NonlloilltlPoillt Soune
Tl'Slce Elements Low 5.8 Miles
Noupoillt/I'oilll Sonrce
Trnsb Low 5,8 Miles
NOIIIIOilllll'oillt Source
Pllg/! 14 (if J 6
-
-- -------- - -- ---2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
, REG.lON Wi:E"':'::" , "<';~:~IIi~'{/;': !, ~: .. ":>:/~ , . F .' :. : ~A~}y:~:t~,~~~:~;~t~~~~:Fi;::~:~~~\;C{~,::~~~:h~~?:~~tt~.\~~:~;~:
.W ATIC'~SHEP',:'.' l'OLLUT~Nr!~'pm$sQ~ ,
_',':t:",..: ,.:-;;,h~.,,:'· ': I ':.:,:';,.-:':' •• :':;,~.:';:'.'1 ,'I'OTENTIAL "':; ", '; , '.-"TMDL,
sOURCES "j'itIORh'Y
.': ~si'iMA1:im:
sizic A'FlrlCCl'Im
9 l~ TijlUllln IUVCI" Eslunry 91111000
Bllclerill ludicnlors
/?stimtlled si;e IIf illlpail'lIIellf i.v J 50 acres.
Noupuiut/Poiut Suurce
Eulrllilhic
Estimateci ,vi::e of illlpairmellt is I Clcre.
Nllllplliul/Plliul Suurce
LClid
Estimated sb! ofilll}Jail'lIIellf is I Clcre,
Low Dissolved Oxygen
Nic/,el
Nllnpoilll/Poiut Sourcc
Urban Rlllloff/Storm Sewers
Wnstewllter
Unknown NOlllloinl Source
Uuknown point source
Estimated si::e ofilllpClirl/lelll is I acre.
NOUPllilll/l'oillt Source
I'esticidcs
listilll(lteci si::e q( illlfJ(lil'lIIelll is I acre.
NOililOilll/Poillt Sourcc
Thlillitllli
ESlimaled .vi::e of illlpai/'mellf is I (Ic/'e.
NOlIllOilltll'oiut Source
Trllsb
Estimaled .vi::e II/ impClil'l/Ielll is I aCl'e,
NllIlllOilll/l'oillt Suurce
Pllge 1511/16
Low 1319 Acrcs
Luw 1319 Acres
Low 1319 Acres
Low 1319 ACI'es
Luw 1319 Acres
Low 1319 Acres
Low 1319 Acres
Low 1319 Acres
--Ap"I'/lI·c·tll~J' lISI;/~'I:
JI/(J' 21JfJ3
PROl'OSED TMDL
COl\1i'LEtION
-
-- ------- ---- --. -2002 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENT
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
--"/lp/,,,,,,I({ 11,1' USHI'A:
.I11~1' 2IJflJ
:\;:~;':ON TYPE ~i~~~i:» . ".:":' ." ". I. :>,~ .. :: : '.': .·CAL\V kh~lr .. , '.' <-:,:;X;~ ;:;:)~i'.~:,:::Y;(C:: ':,.\::r:;};,:~'" ;"~~; i;,6;i'J£I~.TIKi::{:·.'; :;,';":_,:~<;: >. ::>r~l~L: (::',;' :·.'E.~i~~i~l'~~i?·;: < P.R()~)OSED Ti\U>I.
. : -:':.' 'v.AT.lntsli~D:, ,:~Q·q"q:rA,.l)I.'''·ZI?;~.iU!;~sq-!(:''· :. ;-:~: 's6U~¢I;g':' ...... : : ' ..... f:; ,'pitioiit6:''': 'SIZI~'AilllECJ'ED COI\;U'I.ETION
r------ABURIWIATIONS
ImGIONAL WATER QUALITY CQNTJWL nOAIWS WATIm HODY TYI)J~
I North COllsl n = Hays lIud lIarbors
2 Snll Fnlllcisro Hny C = ConsilII Shllrclillcs/IJenches
3 Celltl':ll Const E = I~slunl'ics
4 LosAllgeJcs L = Lnkes/RescI'Viol's
5 Ceull':lJ Valley R = Rivers IlIId SlrenJIIs
6 LnlllJllIIIII S = Snlille Lllkes
7 Colol'lldo Rh'e\' Rnsill T = Wethlllds, Tidal
8 SnulllAlln W= Welllluds. I?resJl\vnlcl'
9 Snu l>icgo
(,AtWATER WATERSIlF,1l
"Cahvlllel-Walershed" is the Sill Ie Wlllcl' Reso\ll'ces Contl'ol ROIlI'd hydl'ologicnl subunillll'cll or llIl even smllllcr IIrea delillelllion,
GROllI' A PESTICJl)ES OR CIIEM A
nldriu, dicldl'ill. chllll'dalle. endrin, bClltllcblllr, bClllllchlor epllxide,
hcxnchlorocycJohexllllc (inclnding lindllllc). endoslJlfllll, :lIId toxlllibenc
P//ge16 lif 16
____ ':J
-
------------'---
l'alb~e 2-2. IBIENIEIF~C~Al USES OIF ~NILAND SURFACIE WA l'ERS
BENEFICIAL USE
1,2 M A I P G F P R R B W C W
Hydrologic Unit U G N R W R ,0 E E I A 0 I ~ll1Ilall1ldl Suncnce Wail:ers Basin Number N R 0 0 R S W C C '0 R L L
C J-I 1 2 L M 0 0
San Diego County Coastal Streams -continued
BLlena Vista Lagoon 4.21 See Coastal Waters-Tabie 2-3
Buena Visla Creek 4.22 + G CD I1iI 0 I1iI (])
Buena Vista Creele 4.21 + 0 I1iI en> II) CEJ @
Agua Hed/ollda 4.31 See Coastal Waters-Table 2-3
Agu!,! I'ledionda Creel< 4.32 I'i) ® I'i) 1111 $ CII CD
BUena Creele 4.32 I1iI @ 0 G) (]) II) II)
Agua I-Iedionda Crl!lel( 4.31 <J) ® I1iI C ell I1iI III
;
LeUerbox canyon 4.31 ® ® 0 ;
0 GI Il) 0
Canyon de las EncInas 4.40 + 0 (9 CII 0
San Marcos Creel< Watershed
Batiquflos Lagoon 4.51 See Coastal Waters-Table 2-3
San Marcos Creele 4.52 + ® CD GI @ (I)
unnamed Intermittent streams 4.53 + 0 <J) CD II) fj)
San Marcos Creele Watershed
San Marcos Creele 4.51 ... \!J) (II CD II) c
EncInitas Creele 4.51 + (iii Q CD CD G
1 Walerbodies arc listed multiple times if they cross hydrologic area or sub area boundaries. \l) ExistIng BE)neficial Use ° Potenllal Beneficial Use 2 Beneficial use designations apply to all trlbularles 10 Ihe Indicated waterbody. If noillsted separately.
+ Excepted From MUN (See Text)
ToblD 2·2
OENEFICIAI. UsES 2-27
----
R S
A P
R W
E N
I
I
CD II
I
Morch 12. 1997
------'-------------
Talb~e 2-3a IBIENlEf~C~Al USIES Of COASTAL WATERS
I
BENEFICIAL USE
Coasta~ V\Patelr5 Hydrologic I N R R C 8 E W R
Unit Basin N A E E .0 I S I A
Number D V C C M 0 T L R
1 2 M L 0 E
Pacific Ocean @ <WD $ ~ @ ® G •
Dana Point Harbor @ QlID @) @) ® @ G
Del Mar Boat Basin $ ~ 0 Gi9 \\J • Cll)
I-i-
Mission Bay @ ~ ® @ ® @ ~ --I---
Oceanside Harbor @ @j) • QID <® ® (I
San Die~o Bay 1 @ $ 0 ~ @ G @ • 4llt
Coastal Lagoons
. Tijuana .River Estuary 11.11 @ ~ • @ Ii' ~ e --- --
Mouth of San Diego River 7.'11 ~ ® It Cll& ® 19
Los Penasquitos Lagoon 2 6.10 $ @) @ @ • •
San Dieguito Lagoqn 5.11 ® II @ • • ~
Batiquitos Lagoon 4.61 e I> ® • • 49
San Elijo Lagoon 5.61 @ ~ ® • e G
Aqua Hedionda Lagoon 4.31 @ @ @ @ @ 6) •
hicilldcs the tidal prisms of the Otay and Sweetwnter Rivers_
2 Flshin[J from sho~e or bont permitted, but other water contact recreotionol (REG-1) uses are prohibitod.
®> Existing Beneficial Use
Tnblo 2-3
BENEFICIAL USES 2-47
M A M S W s
A Q I P A I-I
R U G W R E
A R N M L
L
® ~ • • e
0 • G G)
$ ~ 19 @
@D • Clf/) @ --
®I • Il/) •
I® e @ G!P
@ : ~ ~ ® I
It • G GI
@ • e • !
I1iiJ G «9
e G 41)
I!il (i) I\il
G • Ci) • e
Morch 12, 1997
- ---- ------------- -
TaJb~e 3-2. WA TIER OtUJAIUTY o IBJIECTHVES.
Concentrations not to be Glcceeded more than 10% of the time during anyone ona year period.
----------~ ... -. -._--.------------
Constitiuent (mg/L or as noted)
~U1l~aD1ldl SUJIlrface WateIrS Hydrologic
Unit Basin TDS CI SO 4 %Na N&P Fe
Number
Mn MBAS B ODOR Turb Color F NTU Units
SAN LUIS REY HYDROLOGIC UNIT 903.00
Lower San Luis I-IA 3.10 600 250 260 60 a 0.3 0.06 0.5 0.75 none 20 ·20 1.0
Monserat I-IA 3.20 500 250 250 60 e 0.3 0.05 0.6 0.76 none 20 20 1.0
Warner Valley HA 3.30 600 260 250 60 a 0.3 0.06 0.5 0.76 none 20 20 1.0
CARLSBAD HYDROLOGIC UNIT 904.00
Lorna Alta HA 4.10 ~ --------none 20 20 1.0
Buena Vista Croel, HA 4.20 500 250 250 60 a 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.75 nona 20 20 1.0
Agua Hediondo HA 4.30 509 260 250 60 a 0.3 0.05 0.6 0.75 nona 20 20 1.0
Encinos HA 4.40 ---------none 20 20 1.0
. San Marcos I-IA 4.50 500 250 260 60 a 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.75 none 20 20 1.0
Escondido Creel' HA 4.60 500 250 260 60 a 0.3 0.05 0.6 0.75 none 20 20 1.0
SAN PIEGUITO HYDROLOGIC UNIT ·905.00
Solana Beach HA 5.10 500 250 250 60 a 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.75 nona 20 20 1.0
Hodges HA 5.20 .500 260 250 60 a 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.75 none 20 20 1.0
San Pasqual . I~A 5.30 600 2!i0 260 60 n ·0.3 0.06 0.5 0.75 nona 20 20. 1.0
Santa Maria Valley HA 5.40 500 250 250 60 a 0.3 0.06 0.6 0.75 none 20 20 1.0
Santa Ysabel 1-1 A 5.50 500 250 260 60 a 0.3 0.05 . 0.6 0.75 I)one 20 20 1.0
PENASQUITOS HYDROLOGIC UNIT 906.00
Miramar Reservoir HA 6.10 600 250 260 60 a 0.3 0.06 0.6 0.75 nona 20 20 1.0
P9way .. I·IA 6.20 500 .260 260 60 a 0.3 0.06 0.5 0.75 none 20 20 1.0
HA -Hydrologic Awn
HSA -I·lydrologlc Sub Art/II Il.owor CUIlU lottcrs Indlcntu undnotoD following tho tabla.}
TobIn 3-2
WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES Pouu 3-23 Soptumbur 8. 1994
------------\~-------
Talbie 3-3. WA'f1E1R QUAlrJrV OIBJIEC'f~VIES
Concontrations not to bo exceeded more than 10% of the time during anyone year period.
Constituent (mg/L or as noted)
Ground! WarteD' Hydrologic Turb Color Basin Unit TDS CI 604 %Na N03 Fe Mn MBAS B ODOR F
Number NTU Units
Buena Vista Creele HA 4.20
EI Salta \-1 SA a 4.21 3500 800 500 60 45 0.3 0.05 0.5 2.0 nona 5 15 1.0
Vista 1-1 SA a 4.22 1000 b 400 b 500 b 60 10 b 0.3 b 0.05 b 0.5 0.76 b Ilone 5 15 1.0
Agua Hedionda HA a 4.30 1200 500 600 60 10 0_3 0.05 0.5 0.75 llano 5 16 '1.0
Los Monos I-ISA aj 4.31 3500 BOO 500 60 46 0.3 0.05 0.5 2.0 none 5 15 '1.0
Encinils HA a 4.40 3500 b 800 b 500 b 60 45 b 0.3 b 0.05 b 0.5 2.0 b none 5 15 1.0
San Marcos HA ae 4.50 1000 1)00 600 60 10 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.75 none [) 16 1.0
Batiqultos I-I SA aelt 4.51 3500 800 500 60 45 0.3 0.05 ' 0.5 2.0 none [) 15 1.0
Escondido Crcel< I-IA 0 4.60 750 300 300 60 10 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.75 none [) 15 1.0
San Elijo I-ISA a 4.61 2800 700 600 60 45 0.3 0.05 0.5 1.0 nanD 5 16 '1.0
Escondido HSA 4.62 1000 300 400 60 10 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.75 none 5 15 '1.0
SAN D1EGUITO HYDROLOGIC UNrr 905.00 I
Solana Beoch i-IA 5.10 1500 b ,500 ~ 500 I? 60 45 b 0.85 b 0.15 b 0.5 0.75 b 5 15 1.0 I a none I
Hodgos I-IA 5.20 1000 b 400 b 500 b 60 10 b 0.3 b 0.05 b 0.5 0.75 b nona 6 15 1,(>
6.30 1000 b' 400 b 500 b 60 10 b 0.3 b 0.05 b 0.5 0.75 b r-:-:--
San Pasqual I-IA none 6 15 1.0 ------Santa Maria Valley HA 5.40 1000 400 500 60, 10 0.3 0.06 0.5 0.75 none 5 15 1.0
Santa Ysabel I-IA 5.60 500 250 250 60 5 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.75 none 6 15 1.0 i
PENASQUrrOS HYDROLOGIC UNIT 906.00 I
Miramar Reservoir HA af 6.10 1200 500 500 60 10 0.3 0.06 0.5 0.75 none 5 15 1.0
Poway HA 6.20 750 q 300 300 60 10 0.3 0.06 0.5 0.75 nona 5 15 1.0
Scripps I-IA 6.30 -- --. . -. - - --.
Miramar I-IA 9 6.40 750 300 300 60 10 0.3 0.05 0.6 0.75 none G 15 1.0
Tocolotc I-IA 6.50 . . . -. -. . . . -. .
---
HA • Hydrologic Aroo
I'ISA -Hydrologic Sub Amp (lownr canll IOllers Indlclllo ondnoton followlno tho 111blo.)
iablu 3-3
WATER QUAlITV OEl.IECTIVIlS PUOo 3-29 Oclobar 13. 1994
I
I
I
1
1
.1'
1
I
I v
I
I,
1
1
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
Chapter 5 -TREATMENT ,CONTROL BMP DESIGN
5.1 -BMP Location
To provide maximum water quality treatment for flows generated by the proposed
residential development, dual CDS treatment units will be employed within the La
Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 development at the two (2) developed
discharge locations. '
The' CDS treatment units will be placed at the downstream end of theif respective
storm drain systems, prior to discharge from the project site.
The enclosed map shows the location of the proposed flow-based' BMPs.,
5.2 -Determination of Treatment Flow
Flow-based BMPs shall be designed to mitigate the maximum flowrate of runoff
produced from a rainfall intensity of 0.2 inch per hour. Such HMP's utilize either
mechanical devices (such as vaults that produce vortex effects)6r non-m'echanica:1
devices (based on weir hydraulics and specially designed filters) to promote settling
and removal of pollutants from the runoff.
Per the request of the City of Carlsbad, 85th percentile flow calculations were'
performed using the Rational Method. The basic Rational Method runoffproced\.lre
is as follows:
Design flow (0) = C * I * A
Runoff Coefficient (C) -The weighted runoff coeffioient for the .tre~Jment unit was
determined using the areas analyzed in the final eng'ineering hydrology report. ,The
runoff coefficient is based on the following characteristics of the watershed:
Land Use -Single-Family Residential
Soil Type -Hydrologic soil group D was assumed for all areas,. Group D
soils have very slow infiltration rates when thorougnly wetted. Consisting
chiefly of clay soils with a high swefling potential. soil's with. a high
permanent water table, sons with clay pan or clay layer at. or m~arthe
surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious materials, Grol,jp D'soils
have a very slow rate of water transmission. '
Rainfall Intensity (I) -Regional Water Ouality Control Board,regulations and NPDES
criteria have established that flow-based BMPs shall be deSigned to mitigate a
rainfall intensity of 0.2 inch per hour.
Watershed Area (A) -Corresponds to total area draining to treatment unit.
OE:dja h;\reptirtSI2352.1178\SWmp-ffl-02.QOc
w.o,2352-176 719/2001'2:21 PM
C'::r oi '~ III
u. Z 0 0 g;! W j:: W tl:: W ~ooc Z J: OC 0 iii 0 I-a. J: 00 ~ ..:I-w z' w W I-Zz w o~ iii 0~C!l >-..: aI ~~ffi °o":::J aI OO' -10 I-a. 0 I-zujoc WooOC
of' ~w OC oo 1--": :::!!;g w offi~ ~":C!lffi ffi~:;E UOCI-
l:!lofQ 3:_ wO ~ ofB~1-wOO Z .
~~le oo~ ~H5 a.-I_ ZC!l": -lWol-
ci oc o >-woo~ 3:::JOC l}j!:::!zm Z' u. Wz ..:oc 81-a. !;(-I-°0C!l w~o~ -Ii:i::J Q;a: J:a. l:!l ~!i:~ u Q oo:::;
!i ~waI G~ ~o ::J aI uj OC Woc O oc~zz
wocw ~~ -I-. ~ -I C!l": . OOCooO ~Fg: ..:~..:o
all-a. 0C!loo -I::J()Z w~::Jt; J:ooZ OOI--I!:!; ::1(/)13 ~@l:!l~ ..l..:::f> a. J:' ::lz3: ~ Wu.OC-l ::l5 Q ::fJ:uz -~oo Z'-I ~~~ ~C:~~ aloW..: 3:::Jo (/) .:.i ..:-!;( OCI-[LW
id :#'< Q <t . ::lz~j:: Wocww < ~ z ciJ~z tl::Uw :gffi OOW~OC 0 w~u !;(WZJ:
CJ UJ~S !;(o~ z2!~l}j a:: ~Qg:m :.:: ::J O~F ::lOC ":::JO ~ZWI-'w :oc :::; Z C!ll-O!;( Z I-ffi~~~~ zalo a:~!¥ zZu. ~iil z ~C!lW -I..: "Z w ":C!l0 C!lzgo ;j::g~ ,0 ~~~ ~[l[l ::JSO ooUJ Zu. U 0 @~F": OCi::l1-0 ~ltui~~ I-..:..l " w::;:; a:oZoc 3:alW
til 0. o !Z' OC z!;(a. a.wz a.-I ":C!lQw w ..:uz zZUJ~ ::i: 5.w'0 !!:!oc 13 Ol-UJ 90 U z !;(!;( o":~-l_ 0~3: 8;;J:!!l w 1Il ffi~'ll: t:~~ 0 UJoc-~~
I-UC!loo ooOC ~j::Ii:i3: a:: ~UJQo~ J:oc @ I-WZZ
W a.~o [LOCo 8C!lUJ ::l!z ::J oo:J":~ 0 I-:a:a.() u.UJ z ZZC!lO ~~~~5 ~w~ ll:lt~oc Z w 7~~ ~~:5 OCUJOC ..:0 S:5wz 0 I-J:O .>1-.() • a.>": CIJ .a.a.ou .I-J: .":J:O
--- --- -- - -----
>-0:::: « 0 z
::J 0 m
0 0 W Z I W
UJ (f) Z
0:::: ---1 (!J w 3: I-W « 0 ---1 --I S LL
ww C!lJ: ":1-Zo ::l . f21-~~5 oo>-c/SOC ooW-C!l~ UJiIi~ Z() ~g:!b ;;;!It OOU Uoo WI-::g Zj:: w..: a.ooa. t;(/) ":Woc
WW ~Uw
oc~ o,[t~ ::J::J Zo ~C!l SU.o oU.Z u.Z wO": ::lS zl-C!l _UJ -::J z 3: 2! . ~J:-~~§ ool-OC
Ii:i ffiW ":::(0 _W -lJ:Z ~ OC z. ~~(jj ~UJQ ala.Z J:O!;( ocJ:w -I3C!l ::JI-~ -I,U'a: S>~(3 ~~g;;
--
Ii:i w J: (/)
a: f2 a.. « :2 z
0 ~ 0 0 -I
a.. :2 co
u. .,-.,-0
:c
J-~ 0:" z OC'"5 a:
Zo 0 u..,
00 0 :J (§ ~o ~,~
<cas I-I OOC!) u..
Ow 0
~ oz 0
:5
\ I
\ \
\ " \ \ \ ' \ \ \ I \ . \ \
\
\
\
\ \ \
'Ii:.
DO 8<8:·;······ ~ ~', J .' . ~,l' ' , 3 ~. :;-~; \ .-: \
« w
0:::: «
I-W z u
::J « « LL W I-0:::: 0::::
Z ::J « w if)
2 I-0
I-(f) W « w ::::J CL
W .-J 0 «
0:::: Z > U I-(f) m 0:::: 0 (f) 0:::: W
0 ::::J 0.. Z « U U 2 ---1
Ii:i a. W 0 I-,Z Z ..: ..: w>-""' C!l Z 3 ~":-I C!l~~ -W-I ~iIi::f ococOC ::Ja.W
!;(oG wI-..: U.ooaI ..l<!l-l -I":": ~'aI j:: ooZZ wow uj::1-":U O a.wa. OO::lu. zoo wufB a.WU °l-OC ::l~5 ~3:oo -----
- --
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
The 85th percentile flow rate has been calculated using the Rational Method.
Required data for the Rational. Method Treatment flow determination is as follows:
Drainage 85m
85th
Percenti·le Runoff Treatment Unit Area Rainfall Coefficient Percentile
(Ae) (inches/hour) Flow (cfs)
BMP#1 -Western
Treatment Unit 6.7 0.2 0.57 0.8
(Avenida Soledad) ..
BMP#2 -Eastern
Treatment Unit 2.6 0.2 0.57 0.3
(San Marcos Creek)
Rational method calculations predict 85th percentile flows of approximately 0.8 cfs
. and 0.3 cfs from the proposed La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 project site
and the respective western and eastern outlet locations.
5.3 -BMP Unit Sizing
5.3.1 CDS Unit Sizing
. Calculations show that a CDS Model PMSU 20 15 and CDS Model PMSU 20 20
treatment units would be required to treat the design 85th percentile flow. These
units are an inline system and do not require the construction of a special diversion
box upstream of the treatment unit. .
The following table shows the treatment capacities of the proposed CDS units.
CDS UNIT TREATMENT CAPACITY TABLE
85m Pct.·
Treatment Unit Design Flow
(cfs)
BMP#1 -Western
Treatment Unit 0.8
(Avenida Soledad)
BMP#2 -Eastern
Treatment Unit . 0.3
(San Marcos Creek) ..
Recommended
CDS Model'
PMSU 20-20
PMSU 20-15
Treatment Capacity
(cfs)
1.1
\
0.7
OE:djg h:lrepor1S123521176\swmp-fe-02.doC
w.o.2352·178 7/9120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
5.4 -CDS Treatment Units '
, ' ,
The Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) storm water pollu~ion control devices
are designed for the sustainable removal and retention of suspended solids and
floatables from storm water. CDS technology utilizes a non-blocking, non-screening
process to remove pollutants from storm water flow.
According to CDS information, these units capture fine sands and solids and are
capable of removing more than 80 percent of annual total suspended solids from
storm water. Additionally, CDS units are reported to remove 100 percent of
floatables as well the following:
100% of all particles in the storm water equal to or greater than one-half the size
of the screen opening
93% of all particles 'equal to or greater than one-third the size of the
screen opening
53% of all particles equal to or greater than one-fifth the size of the
screen opening
Standard CDS units have no moving parts (they are gravity-driven by the hydraulic
energy in the storm water flow», require no power or supporting infrastructure, and
according to CDS information will not clog. Screen and supporting hardware are
made of staiilless steel and designed to resist corrosion. The units are installed
below ground.
CDS units have large sump capacities relative to their design flows and only need to
be cleaned out with a standard vactor truck one to four times per year. This
operation eliminates workers' exposure to materials captured in the units.
All 85th percentile runoff from the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7' site will be
treated via two (2) CDS units.
5.5 -Pollutant Removal Efficiency Table
The table below shows the generalized pollutant removal efficiencies for
hydrodynamic separators and drainage inserts. Pet CDS literature, their units are
capable of removing more than 80 percent of annual total suspended solids from
storm water. .
The FloGard inlet filters provide initial treatment for pollutants such as trash and
debris, hydrocarbons and heavy metals. The CDS unit provides secondary
treatment for pollutants such as sediments, trash and debris, and hydrocarbons.
OE:djg h.lreportsl235211761swmp-f .. 02.dOC
w.o,2352-178 7/9120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
·1
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management-Plan
Detention
Pollutant of Concern Bioffirers Ba.sins
Sediment M H
Nutrients L M
:heavy Metals M M
Organic Compounds U :u-
lmsh & Debris L H
Oxygen OOuanding L M Substances
Bacteria U U
Oil & Grease M M
Pesticides U U
(1) h:hding n-..nches ;mdpoIC"-S p..~.
(2) Also hlm-n ashydrod}"l.:aIlic denices and baSe 1==.
!.: !..O\\r ~~-al efficiency
:M: Medimn l1!IllO~-a! efficiallcy
H: High~sffi~'
U: tiDl'n==\-a! e5~~'
Treatment Control BMF Categories
Wet Ponds Hydrodynamic
Inffitration Or Drainage Separator
Basins (l) Wedands Inserts Flltration Systems (2)
H H L H M
.M M L M L
M H L H L
u u L M L·
U U M H M
M M L M L
H U L M L
U U L H L
U U L U L
50=: G-.LitWl&€ ¥..croing MJ11'.!1gCll:en; M..~JTe:; for SOUTC"::; of Nor;poi1l1 Poilurkm in Coa:;tG1 W .. rsr. (1993). NtIIior.al Sromm~ B=
M::ncgemonr ProcW..-e: J);r.abze (lotH), a!loi G-.Lide/GT B1!P :d£aiG11 in Urban IkI'i!kpod .--!rea; (2I.'lOl).
OE:djg h:lreportsl2352117B\slmlp-fe-02.doc
w.o.2352-179 719120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I .,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
5.6 -BMP Unit Sel'ection Discussion
5.6.1 Extended Detention Basins
Extended detention basins collect the first flush runoff volume and retain it in the
basin for a period of 24-48 hours.
85th percentile runoff volume, contained belc;>w the overflow elevation of the ~asin
riser, will be slowly discharged from the treatment control basin via low flow orifices
in the basin riser. After passing through the riser, an outlet pipe will dewater the
basin and discharge runoff to the natural drainage course downstream.
Advantages
'. . .
• Due to the simplicity of design, extended. detention basins are relatively
easy and inexpensive to construct and operate.
• Extended detentions basins can provide substantial capture of
sediment and the toxics fraction associated with particulates.
• Widespread application with sufficient capture volume can provide
significant control of channel erosion and enlargement caused by
changes to flow frequency relationships resulting from the increase"of
impervious cover in the watershed.
Limitations
• Limitation of the diameter of the orifice may not allow use of extended
detention in watersheds of less than 5 acres (would require an orifice
with a diameter of less than 0.5 inches that would be prone to
clogging).
• Dry extended detention ponds have only moderate pollutant removal
when compared to some other structural stormwate'r practices, and
they are relatively ineffective at removing soluble pollutants.
• Dry ponds can detract from the value of a home due to the adverse
aesthetics of dry, bare areas and inlet and outlet structures.
Conclusion:
Due to the minimal footprint area available for the BMP treatment units and multiple
points of outlet, construction of an extended detention basin is not a feasible option
for the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 project site.
, OE:djg , h:\reports\2352\17B\swmp-fe-02.doc
w.o. 2352·178 719/2007 2:21 PM
I
I
I
I.
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
5.6.2 Vegetated'Swale
Vegetated swales are open, shallow channels with vegetation covering the side
slopes and bottom that collect and slowly convey runoff through filtering by the
vegetation in the channel, filtering through a subsoil matrix, and/or infiltration into the
underlying soils. Swales can be natural or manmade. They trap particulate
pollutants (suspended solids and trace metals), promote infiltration, and reduce the
velocity of stormwater runoff. Vegetated swales can serve as part of a stormwater
drainage system and can replace curbs, gutters and stormwater systems.
Advantages
• If properly designed, vegetated, and operated, swales can serve as an
aesthetic, potentially inexpensive urban development or roadway
drainage conveyance measure with significant collateral water quality
benefits.
Limitations
• Can be difficult to avoid channelization.
• May not be appropriate for industrial sites or locations where spills may
occur.
• Grassed swales cannot treat a very large drainage area. Large areas
may be divided and treated using multiple swales.
• A thick vegetative cover is needed for these practices to function
properly.
• They are impractical in areas with steep topography.
• They are not effective and may even erode when flow velocities are
high, if the grass cover is not properly maintained.
• In some places, their use is restricted by law: many local municipalities
require curb and gutter systems in residential areas.
• Swales are more susceptible to failure if not properly maintained than
other treatment BMPs.
Conclusion:
Proposed swales to line the sides of the proposed private roads has potential to
undermine the serviceability of the adjacent roads and sidewalks. Also, due to the
limited footprint available and site topography with the project site for BMP
treatment, master treatment swales are not a feasible treatment option.
DE:djg h:\reports12352\1781swmp-fe-02.doc
w.o.2352·176 7/9120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I ,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
5.6.3 Infiltration Basins
An infiltration basin is a shallow impoundment that is designed to infiltrate
stormwater. Infiltration basins use the natural filtering ability of the soil to remove
pollutants in stormwater runoff. Infiltration facilities store' runoff until it gradually
exfiltrates through the soil and eventually into the water table. This practice has high
pollutant removal efficiency and can also help recharge groundwater, thus helping to
maintain low flows in stream systems. Infiltration basins can be challenging to apply
on many sites, however, because of soils requirements. In addition, some studies
have shown relatively high failure rates compared with other management practices.
Advantages
• Provides 100% reduction in the load discharged to surface waters.
• The principle benefit of infiltration basins is the approximation of pre-
development hydrology during which a significant portion of the
average rainfall runoff is infiltrated and evaporated rather than flushed
directly to creeks. .
• If the water quality volume is adequately sized, infiltration basins can
be useful for providing control of channel forming (erosion) and high
frequency (generally less than the 2-year) flood events.
Limitations
• May not be appropriate for industrial sites or locations where spills may
occur.
• Infiltration basins require a minimum soil infiltration rate of 0.5
inches/hour, not appropriate at sites with Hydrologic Soil Types C and
D.
• Infiltration rates exceeding 2.4 inches/hour, the runoff should be·
treated prior to infiltration to protect groundwater quality.
• Not suitable on fill sites or steep slopes.
• Risk of groundwater contamination in very coarse soils.
• Upstream drainage area must be completely stabilized before
construction.
• Difficult to restore functioning of infiltration basins once clogged.
Conclusion:
Due to the minimal footprint area available for the BMP treatment units and multiple
points of outlet, construction of an infiltration basin is not a feasible option for the La
Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 project site.
DE:dm h:lreporlS1235Z1178\swmpofe-Q2.doc
w.o.2352·178 719120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
5.6.4 Wet Ponds
Wet ponds are constructed basins that have a permanent pool of water throughout·
the year (or at least throughout the wet season) and differ from constructed wetlands
primarily in having a greater average depth. Ponds treat incoming stormwater runoff
by settling and biological uptake. The primary removal mechanism is settling as
stormwater runoff resides in this pool, but pollutant uptake, particularly of nutrients,
also occurs to some degree through biological activity in the pond. Wet ponds are
among the most widely used stormwater practices. While there are several different
versions of the wet pond design, the most common modification is the extended
detention wet pond, where storage is provided above the permanent pool in order to
detain stormwater runoff and promote settling.
Advantages
• If properly designed, constructed and maintained, wet basins can
provide substantial aesthetic/recreational value and wildlife and
wetland habitat.
• Ponds are often viewed as a public amenity when integrated with a
park setting.
• Due to the presence of the permanent wet pool, properly designed and
maintained wet basins can provide significant water quality
improvements across a relatively broad spectrum of constituents
including dissolved nutrients.
• Widespread application with sufficient capture volume can provide
significant control of channel erosion and enlargement caused by
changes to flow frequency relationships resulting from the increase of
impervious cover in a watershed.
Limitations
• Some concern about safety when constructed where there is public
access.
• Mosquito and midge breeding is likely to occur in ponds~
• Cannot be placed on steep unstable slopes.
• Need for base flow or supplemental water if water level is to be
maintained.
• Require a relatively large footprint.
• Depending on volume and depth, pond designs may require approval
from the State Division of Safety of Dams.
Conclusion:
Due to the large acreage requirements of a wet pond, proximity to residences
(vector issues) and the fact that other BMP's are able to treat pollutants of concern
with equal efficiency, wet ponds are not a feasible option for the La Costa Oaks
North Neighborhood 3.7 project site.
DE:djg h:\reporlSl23521178\swmp-fe-02.doc Ji
w.o.2352·178 7/9120072:21 PM _. .
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
5.6.5 Media Filters
Stormwater media filters are usually two-chambered including a pre.;treatment
settling basin and a filter bed filled with sand or other absorptive filtering media. As
stormwater flows into the first chamber, large particles settle out, and then finer
particles and other pollutants are removed as stormwater flows through the filtering
media in the second chamber.
Advantages
• Relatively high pollutant removal, especially for sediment and
associated pollutants.
• Widespread application with sufficient capture volume can provide
significant control of channel erosion and enlargement caused by
changes to flow frequency relationships resulting from the increase of
impervious cover in a watershed.
Limitations
• More expensive to construct than many other BMP's.
• May require more maintenance than some other BMP's depending
upon the sizing of the filter bed.
• Generally require more hydraulic head to operate properly (min 4 feet).
• High solids loads will cause the filter to clog.
• Work best for relatively small, impervious watersheds.
• Filters in residential areas can present aesthetic and safety problems if
constructed with vertical concrete walls.
• Certain designs maintain permanent sources of standing water where
mosquito's and midge breeding is likely to occur.
Conclusion:
Due to the minimal footprint area available for the BMP treatment units and other
BMPs providing equal levels of treatment efficiency for pollutants of concern, media
filters are not a feasible option to treat all developed flows for the La Costa Oaks
North Neighborhood 3.7 project site.
DE:djg h:lreportsl2352117B\swmp-fe-02.doc
w.o.2352-178 71912rxt1 2:21 PM
I
I·
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
5.6.6 Drainage Inserts
Drainage inserts are manufactured filters or fabric placed in a drop inlet to remove
. sediment and debris. There are a multitude of inserts of various shapes and .
configurations, typically falling to one of three different groups: socks, boxes and
trays. The sock consists of a fabric, usually constructed of polypropylene. The
fabric may be attached to a frame'or the grate of the inlet holds the sock. Socks are
meant for vertical (drop) inlets. Boxes are constructed of plastic or wire mesh.
Typically a polypropylene "bag" is placed in the wire mesh box. The bag takes form
of the box. Most box products are one box; that is, the setting area and filtration
through media occur in the same box. Some products consist of one or more trays
and mesh grates. The trays may hold different types of media. Filtration media vary
by manufacturer. Types include polypropylene, porous polymer, treated cellulose
and activated carbon.
Advantages
• Does not require additional space as inserts as the drain inserts are
already a component of the standard drainage systems.
• Easy access for inspection and maintenance.
• As there is no standing water, there is little concern for mosquito
breeding.
• A relatively inexpensive retrofit option.
Limitations
• Performance is likely Significantly less than treatment systems that are
located at the end of the drainage system such as ponds and vaults.
• Usually not suited for large areas or areas with trash or leaves that can
plug the insert.
Conclusion:
All curb inlets within the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 development are
located on public streets. There for no curb inlets will be used on site.
DE:d}g h:\repOrtsl2352\178\swmp-fe-02.doc
w.o. 2352·178 71!!120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
5.6.7 . Hydrodynamic Separator Systems
Hydrodynamic separators are flow-through structures with a settling or separation
unit to remove sediments and other pollutants that are widely used in storm water
treatment. No outside power source is required, because the energy of the flowing
water allows the sediments to efficiently.separate. Depending on the type of unit,
this separation may be by means of swirl action or indirect filtration. Variations of
this unit have been designed to meet specific needs. Hydrodynamic separators are
most effective where the materials to be removed from runoff are heavy particulates
-which can be settled -or f10atables -which can be captured, rather than solids with
poor settleability or dissolved pollutants. In addition to the standard units, some
vendors offer supplemental features to reduce the velocity of the flow entering the
system. This increases the efficiency of the unit by allowing more sediments to
settle out.
Advantages
• May provide the desired performance in less space and therefore less
cost.
• May be more cost-effective pre-treatment devices than traditional wet
or dry basins.
• Mosquito control may be less of an issue than with traditional wet
basins.
Limitations
• As some of the systems have standing water that remains between
storms, there is concern about mosquito breeding.
• It is likely that vortex separators are not as effective as wet vaults at
removing fine sediments, on the order 50 to 100 microns in diameter
and less.
• The area served is limited by the capacity of the largest models.
• As the products come in standard sizes, the facilities will be oversized
in many cases relative to the design treatment storryl, in<?reasing cost..
• The non-steady flows of stormwater decreases the efficiency of vortex
separators from what may be estimated or determined from testing
under constant flow.
• Do not remove dissolved pollutants ..
• A loss of dissolved pollutants may occur as accumulated organic
matter (e.g., leaves) decomposes in the units.
Conclusion
When compared to other BMP treatment options, Hydro-dynamic separator units
provided a good overall treatment solution due to limited foot print constraints, vector
control, maintenance and treatment effectiveness criteria for the pollutants of
concern generated by the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 project site.
DlO:djg h:\reportsl235Z11781swmp-fe-02.doc
w.o.2352·178 719120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
85TH PERCENTILE PEAK FLOW AND VOLUME DETERMINATION
Modified Rational Method -Effective for Watersheds < 1.0 mi2
Hunsaker & Associates -San Diego
Note: Only Enter Values in Boxes -Spreadsheet Will Calculate Remaining Values
Project Name La Costa Oaks North 3.7
Work Order 2352-178 I
Jurisdiction City of Carlsbad I
BMP Location Iwestern Storm Drain System
Developed Drainage Area =
Total Drainage Area to BMP = 6.7 lacres
.6.7 acres
Dev. Area Runoff Coefficient = . 0.57
Runoff Coefficient = 0.57
RATIONAL METHOD RESULTS
J
Q = CIA where Q =
C=
---I =
85th Percentile Peak Flow (cfs)
Runoff Coefficient
A=
Using the Total Drainage Area:
C=
1=
A=
Q=
Rainfall Intensity (0.2 inch/hour per RWQCB mandate)
Drainage Area (acres)
0.57
0.2 inch/hour
6.7 acres
0.76 cfs
I'
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
85TH PERCENTILE PEAK FLOW AND VOLUME DETERMINATION
Modified Rational Method -Effective for Watersheds < 1.0 mi2
Hunsaker & Associates -San Diego
Note: Only Enter Values in Boxes -Spreadsheet Will Calculate Remaining Values
Project Name La Costa Oaks North 3.7
Work Order 2352-178 I .
Jurisdiction City of Carlsbad I
BMP Location IEastern Storm Drain System
Developed Drainage Area =
Total Drainage Area to BMP = 2.6 I acres
2.6 acres
Dev. Area Runoff Coefficient = 0.57
Runoff Coefficient = 0.57
RATIONAL METHOD RESULTS
I
Q = CIA where Q =
C=
1=
A=
85th Percentile Peak Flow (cfs)
Runoff Coefficient
Using the Total Drainage Area:
C=
1=
A=
Q=
Rainfall Intensity (0.2 inch/hour per RWQCB mandate)
Drainage Area (acres)
0.57
0.2 inch/hour
2.6 acres
0.30 cfs
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EAST
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH -NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7
CARLSBAD,CA
JULY 11,2007
PROJECT PARAMETERS
CDS Model PMSU20 15 o treat 0.7 cfs CDS treatment capacity = 0.7 cfs / Q85 = 0.3 cfs o system 7.6 cfs Assumed -Engineer to verify
Hcds 0.35 ft ReQuired Head Difference to Process a treat
DIS Pip_e Size 2.0 ft
DIS Pipe Slope 0.0387 ftllt
U/S Pipe Size 2.0 ft
U/S Pipe Slope 0.0158 ftllt
PMSU WEIR SUMMARY
PMSU Weir Height I 1.00 I ft I
PMSU Weir Length I 3.5 J ft I
HYDRAULIC IMPACT OF CDS UNIT AT SYSTEM FLOW
SO Station DIS of CDS 90+71.83
1 Pipe Invert EI dis of CDS 623.28
2 Finished Grade EI @ COS 631.66
3 EGL EI dis of CDS 624.64
HGL EI dIs of CDS 624.26 Critical Depth in dIs Pipe
4 Hcont 0.07 ft Contraction Loss from CDS Manhole to dis Pipe
5 EGL EI dis of Baffle 624.71
HGL EI dis of Baffle 624.62
6 Baffle Loss 0.25 ft Loss ThrouQh Baffle Orifice
7 EGL EI dis of Weir 624.96
HGL EI dis of Weir 624.95
8 Hweir 0.31 It Loss From Flow Over Submerged Weir
9 EGL EI u/s 01 Weir 625.34
HGL EI u/s of Weir 625.26
10 Hexp 0.00 ft Expansion Loss from u/s Pipe to CDS Manhole
11 EGL uls of CDS Unit 625.34
HGL EI uls of CDS Unit 625.24
SO Station U/S of CDS 90+66.83
Increase in HGL 0.98 ft
Freeboard U/S of CDS Unit 6.42 ft
UPSTREAM CONVEYANCE SYSTEM CHECK AT SYSTEM FLOW
Length to U/S Manhole/CS 8.50
Rim Elevation at U/S Manhole/CS 630
Friction Loss to U/S Manhole/CS 0.01
HGL EI at U/S Manhole/CB 625.24
Freeboard at U/S Manhole/CS 4.76
Loss of Head Due to Contractions
For Higher Velocities with H > 1.0 foot:
For Lower Velocities with H < 1.0 foot:
Loss of Head Due to Baffle
For Saffle/Orifice (pressure):
Loss of Head Due to Weir
For Weir (free discharge):
ft
ft
ft NO FLOODING OCCURS AT U/S MANHOLE/CS
Hcont = (1/c _1)2. [v2/2g] c = 0.582 + 0.0418/(1.1 -r)
r = ratio of pipe diameters
Hcont = 0.7*(v1 -v2)2 12g
Hbaffle = [0 I c Aor]21 2g c = 0.6
Hweir = [a 1 cLf3 c = 3.08
For Submerged Weir: Hweir = Huts -Hdts
Hu/s = [a I Ks • cL]2.'3 C = 3.08
Ks = [1 -(Hd/s 1 Huts) 1-;0.365
Loss of Head Due to Expansion/Enlargement:
For All Situations: Hexp = 1.098 [(v1 -v2) 1.91'1/2g
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WEST
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH -NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7
CARLSBAD,CA
JULY 11,2007
PROJECT PARAMETERS
CDS Model PMSU2020
o treat 1.1 cfs CDS treatment capacity = 1.1 cfs / Q8S = 0.8 cfs
o system 16.7 cfs Assumed -Engineer to verify
H cds 0.48 It Required Head Difference to Process 0 treat
DIS Pipe Size 2.0 It
DIS Pipe Slope 0.1171 Itlft
U/S Pipe Size 2.0 It
U/S Pipe Slope 0.1109 ftlft
PMSU WEIR SUMMARY
PMSU Weir Height I 1.17 I It I
PMSU Weir Length I 3.58 I ft I
HYDRAULIC IMPACT OF CDS UNIT AT SYSTEM FLOW
SO Station DIS of CDS 67+40.31
1 Pipe Invert EI dis of CDS 572.84
2 Finished Grade EI @ CDS 582.65
3 EGL EI dis of CDS 575.02
HGL EI dis of CDS 574.32 Critical Depth in dis Pipe
4 Hcont 0.02 It Contraction Loss from CDS Manhole to dIs Pipe
5 EGL EI dis of Baffle 575.04
HGL EI dis of Saffle 574.61
6 Baffle Loss 1.20 It Loss Through Saffle Orifice
7 EGL EI dis of Weir 576.24
HGL EI dis of Weir 576.23
8 Hweir 0.16 It Loss From Flow Over Submerged Weir
9 EGL EI uls of Weir 576.45
HGL EI u/s of Weir 576.39
10 Hexp 0.19 ft Expansion Loss from u/s Pipe to CDS Manhole
11 EGL u/s of CDS Unit 576.64
HGL EI u/s of CDS Unit 576.17
SO Station UlS of CDS 67+45.31
Increase in HGL 1.85 ft
Freeboard U/S of CDS Unit 6.48 It
UPSTREAM CONVEYANCE SYSTEM CHECK AT SYSTEM FLOW
Length to U/S Manhole/CS 38.50
Rim Elevation at UlS Manhole/CS 587.64
Friction Loss to UlS Manhole/CS 0.21
HGL EI at U/S Manhole/CS 576.38
Freeboard at U/S Manhole/CS 11.26
Loss of Head Due to Contractions
For Higher Velocities with H > 1.0 fool:
For Lower Velocities with H < 1.0 foot:
Loss of Head Due to Baffle
For Saffle/Orifice (pressure):
Loss of Head Due to Weir
For Weir (free discharge):
It
ft
ft NO FLOODING OCCURS AT UlS MANHOLE/CS
Hcont = (1/c _1)2. [J!/2g] c = 0.582 + 0.0418/(1.1 -r)
r = ratio of pipe diameters
Hcont = 0.7·(v1 -v2)2 /2g
Hbaffle = [0 I c Aor]2 I 2g c = 0.6
Hweir = [0 I CL]213 C = 3.08
For Submerged Weir: Hweir = Hu/s -Hdts
Huts = [0 I Ks • cL]2-'3 C = 3.08
Ks = [1 -(Hdls I Hu/s) "1°·385
Loss of Head Due to Expansion/Enlargement:
For All Situations: Hexp = 1.098 [(v1 -v2) 1.91~ 12g
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-".
CDS Technologies} Inc.,
CDS TECHNOLOGY
Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS®) is an innovative tecbnology that is revolutionizing
liquids/solids separation m storm water and combined sewer overflow industry. The technology
accomplishes high efficiency separation of settleable p~-ticu1ate matter and virtually 100 percent
capture of floatable material. Its application is ideal to any situation where removal of ~oss
pollutants is desired.
The primary features of the CDS® system are:
+ EFFECTIY""E: capturing more than 95% of solid pollutants
+ NON·BLOCKlNG: unique design takes advantage of indirect :filtration and properly
proportioned hydraulic forces that viliually makes the unit unblockab1e.
NON-:MECHA,l'i"'ICAL: the CDS® unit has no moving parts and requires no supporting
mechanical package to affect solid separation from stormwater flows.
LOW:MAINTENANCE COSTS: because the system has no moving parts and is
constructed of durable materials.
COMPACT A_i'ID FLEXIBLE: design and size flexibility enable units 'embodying the
CDS\'!) technology to be used in a variety of configurations and in limited spaces.
IDGH FLOW EJ:I'.t(ECTIVE1\r:ESS: the technology remains highly effective across a
broad spectrum of flow ranges, Vvith hydraulic loadings exceedmg 80 gallons per square
foot of plan s1;l'--face area.
ASSIIRED POLLTJ""TANT CAPTURE: all materials captured are retained during high
flow conditions.
SA.!:<-:E .4.N'"D EASY POLLUT.~"T REMOVAL: extraction methods allow safe and
easy removal of pollutants without manual handling ..
~ COST E£l1I'~CTrVE; total costs are lower per mass material captured compared to
existing available alternatives.
CDS® offers small separation units to process flows of 1 cubic foot per second (cfs) or less. The
smallest unit is ideal for small drainage areas such as p.a:r1cing lots. CDS@ offers a range of
premanufactured units sized to process typical drainage flows from new and existing urban
developments. CDS® also offers design services for larger cast in place units to meet the
treatment requirements of more significant runoff flows generated by larger drainag~ areas. To
date, CDS® can design units capable ofprocessing up to 300 cfs.
CDS® units are available in precast reinforced concrete modules for all applications processing
flows up to 64 cubic feet per second. For applications requiring larger flow processmg, U1Uts are
designed complete 'With construction specifications for cast in place construction.
Units can be readily adapted to pipelines: box culverts, and open channels with varying
geometric shapes.
I " \ .,
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CDS Technologies, Inc.,
CDS Technologies® includes multiple "Manhole" units in its Model lineup. These are uniquely
designed for in line use on small pipelines to 36" in diameter, where desired process flows are 6
cfs or less. The CDS® technology including its high flow bypass weir is neatly packaged inside
of standard manhole stacks from 4' to 8' diameter. These pi1l.--ticular units have been specially
con:6.gured to allow an effective oil baffle system to be installed increasing the capacity to hold
greater· quantities of free oil should the ileed arise. For piping larger than 36", CDS
Technologies® recommends using a standard beside line unit with a diversion weir box designed
specifically to accommodate the larger pipe.
~~ROLOG!C_~~~YS~
In storm water applications, an an8.J.ysis of the catchment in terms of its size, topography and
land use will provide information for determining the flow to be expected for vario~ return
periods. Based on the pollutograph Cif known), a CDS® unit can be designed for the flow that
mobilizes the gross pollution in the catchment. 'Since there are variations in catchnlent response
due to region, land use and topography, CDS Technologies® recommends the selection of a
design flow for treatment having a return period between three months and one year.
Typically, it is not necessary to design CDS® units to process a conveyance system's design flow
in order to achieve a very bigh level of pollutant removal. An effective design recognizes that
the vast majority of pollutants are mobilized in flows that are well below the "design capacity"
for the conveyance facility. Field evaluations to detem:ri.ne pollutant mobilization £lows in
combined sewer overflows have deternrlned that the pollutants are released and mobilized with
flows having return. periods of 3 to 6 months.
The majority of pollutants in storm water are mobilized in similar events.
It is well recognized that even though the three-month to one-year event is well below the
average system's capacity. the actual volume that is generated in the catchment from events
smaller than these is about 95% of the total annual volume generated by the catchment It is
worill. noting that a VERY small quantity of solid pollution actually travels in these 1#.gher flows,
therefore, from a practical perspective, designing for the three month to one year event is
virtually designing to treat nearly 100% of the runoff that will be transporting pollution.
HY"DR4.ULIC DESIGN
'Every CDS® i.i'lstallation requires a detailed hydraulic analysis to ensure the final installation will
properly perform to effect optimum solids separation without blocking the separation screeJ:?.
Proper design requrres knowledge of the conveyan~e syst~m, and its perfonnancet]:l..rough its
design flow raDge and the hydraulic perfo:r.Inance of the selected CDS® unit through the same
flow range. .
After the CDS® design flow is detennmed, the appropriate standard model can be selected from
TABLE A on Page 6. Each model on Page 6 identifies a reference PAGE on which additional.,
detailed information about the selected model is available. \
The design flow is .diverted into the CDS® unit by constructing a diversion weir across the flow
path of the conveyance facility. The approximate height of the weir can be established by
determining the hydraulic grade line (HGLdls) in the system immediately dOVillstream of the
CDS® unit and adding the CDS HEAD LOSS (hens) identified on the PAGE referenced for the
unit selected. The sum of the above represents. the HGLws required at the entrance to the
diversion weir.
2
I
I
I'
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CDS Technologies, Inc.,
HGLws= HGLdls + hcds
The height of the CDS diverslon weir can then be deterri:rined to be:
Weir Height= HGLurs-lnvert Level
Maximum Water Surface or HGL Upstream of me CDS Installation
The head loss identi£ed in the Tables on Pages 9 -13 represents the ideal hydraulic installation. .
The head required to operate a CDS® unit at the CDS® design flow does not control the
maximum rise in water sUI.1'ace upstream of the CDS® unit. At the CDS® design flow; the HGL
is at the top of the diversion weir. For most installations this is well below finished grade.
The maximum increase in water surface occurs when the conveyance system reaches its design
flow. Vlhen this flow occurs, the actual flow tb.rough the CDS® may be altered, with the balance
of flow passing over the diversion weir. Based on laboratory measurements and analysis, it has
been eS"LB.blished that the actual head loss under system design flow will not exceed 1.3 x y2/2g in
a well-designed diversion structure, where V is the design flow velocity in the system when the
pipe is flowing.
To assure passage of system design flow through the weir area, the unobstructed area provided
above the weir must be equal to or greater than the cross sectional area for the pipeline entering
the weir box.
In recognition of the potential that the CDS~ may fill up "Vith captured material and lose its
conveyance capacity, the hydraulic evaluation must include analysis under t1rls scenario to
understand the potential for flooding upstream.
The effects of the diversion weir prim8J.-i1y influence the rise in the water surface under the
conveyance system design flow. The actual effect can be controlled by properly designing the
weir length. and clear height above the weir to take advantage of the potential energy that can be
developed in the system v,rithout inducing flooding upstream.
CDS Teclliiolo£l es recommends that the head loss across the weir be limited to no more than 1.4
times the CDS® unit headloss at lts design flow to ensure that it continues to operate properly
during the conveyance system's peak flows.
An example of the hydraulic design process is provided under Appendix B.
STRUCTTJRAL DESIGN
All CDS@ units are designed to withstand equivalent ,fluid p-ressures that the unit may experience
during its life. The water table at the mstallation site should be known, or a conservative
estimate will be made on the maximum expected. Uriits are analyzed assuming that it is empty
and full buoyant force is acting on it.
The foundation material needs to be adequate to support the structure's weight without allowing
differential settlement.
The materials for manufacture of precast units are fully described in Appendix 0
"Product & Installation SpeCifications" of this Manual.
All cast in place concrete designs are based on using structural concrete 'With m.inllnum ultimate
strength of 4.000 'pounds per square inch (psi), -with steel reinforc'ement having a minimum
ultimate yield strength of 60(103) psi. Concrete and steel reinforcement are as noted in Appendix
D, unless otherwise specified ~o!=, site-specific condipons.
r., .,
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CDS Technologies, Inc.,
CDS MODEL DESIGNATION
CDS® 1l.Dits are identified by their process screen diameter. They are also identified by its
application with "SW" designating "Storm Water", "SU" designating "Storm Unie' "cs"
designating "Combined Sewer".
Model families are designated by the letter "P", PM, or "C", designating, ''Precast'\ Precast
M?Dhole, or "Cast" in place, along with the application letters and a pair of number designations
such as PSVlXX_XX. The first XX represents the separation screen diameter in feet; the second
_XX designates the height of the separation screen in feet (see TABLE A on page 7 for further
description ofumt designations). General manufacturing details and weights are included for the
various models under Appendix A.
CDSVARL4BLECO~ONENTS
The variable components in a CDS® unit within a model family ,are the screen height, the screen
aperture (opening), sUmp diameter and depth. and twe of cover.
Screen Height
The screen height is important within a model family because it controls the design flow that can
pass through the unit without clogging the screen. In. general, screen heights can vary between
60 to 150 percent of the screen diameter.
Screen Aperture
The standard screen for storm water applications is 4700 microns (.185 inches) for coarse
screening. A 2400 micron (0.095) is available where there is a need to separate finer sediments
than those removed by the 4700 micron screen.
The screen aperture (opening) is :important because it sets the capture parameter for settleable
pollutants_ In general. a CDS® unit with a 4700 micron screen will capture 93% of all particles
as small as 1/3 the short dimension of the screen opening. This has been detern:rined through
extensive pilot work performed by Tony Wong, PhD, Monash University .. Tony Wong's
technical paper. fully describing the hydraulic basis on which CDS® achieve effective solid
separation, is readily available.
Sump
The sump is another va..oiable that can be adjusted for si1e-specmc conditions and utility
preference. Each Model Family is equipped vvith a stand-ard sump. However, the diameter and
depth can be adjusted to meet site-specific requirements.
CDS® Covers
Covers can be provided \Vith each CDS® unit. A pedestrian traffic cover is standard with each
unit. The cover is designed 'with an inspectionlcleaneut hatch. The entire cover may be removed
to facilitate cIeanout. '
If required, a traffic bearing cover \.".ill be designed, fabricated and-furnished. If a traffic bearing
cover is desired, the utility should so advise CDS Technologies@ to include it in the quote.
;',.{ ...
4
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
.... '.
CDS Technologies, Inc.,
CDS@ SDM:P CLE..4..."NOUT
Sump clean out is a critical component of a successful CDS® operation. The sump is the
depository for all setUeable pollutants captured by CDS®" The methods for maintenance and
cleanout are generally specific, dependent on the preferences of a. given agency. The staJ;ldard
model is provided with a standard sump that cm be cleaned by methods selected by the utility.
At the utility's discretion, a unit can be cleaned using a vacuum truck or a small Clamshell
bucket, or a basket can be provided to fit a standard sump. If the utility chooses to use a basket,
it should advise CDS® Technologies so it can be included in a qllote.
CDS® M:..ijNTEN.4...~CE
CDS® maintenance can be site and drainage area specific. The unit should be inspected
periodically to asSl:1Ie its condition to handle anticipated runoff. If pollutant loadings are knO\7i"D,
then a preventive maintenance schedule can be developed based on runoff volumes processed.
Unfortunately, that is seldom the case ..
CDS Technologies® recommends the follo'Wing for Storm .Water Applications:
New Installation -Check fue condition of the unit ~~er every runoff event ~or the first 30 days.
Checking includes a visual inspection to ascertain that the unit is functioning properly and
measuring the amount of deposition that has occurred in the unit. This can be done "With a "dip
stick:: that is calibrated so the depth of deposition can be '!racked. Based on the behavior of the
unit relative to storm events, inspections can be scheduled on projections using storm events vs .
pollutant buildup.
OnErOID!:!: Ooeration -During the wet season, the unit should be inspected at least once every
thirty days. The floatables should be removed and the sump cleaned when the sump is above
85% full. At least once a year, the unit should be pumped do"WD. and the screen carefully
inspected for damage and to ensure that it is properly fastened. Ideally, the screen should be-
power washed for the inspection.
Maintenance Cvcle -The staridard maintenance cycle for a CDS de~ice is a minimum of once a
year. Maintenance may be required more frequently depending on the pollutant load in the
drainage. However, if the actual pollutant load is properly estimated, the sump capacity can be
. adjusted to hold an ·annual pollutant load.
The CDS@ unit is a confined space. Properly trained people equipped with required safety gear
Will be required to enter the unit to perform the detailed inspection.
.. ,
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE A
MODEL PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY
.MODEL
NUMBER
DESIGN FLOW RATE REFERENCE
PAGE
I
I ~I
::1:
L:J Z ::; It o
I:,MIU29..,.1 ~
PMSU20_15_4
PMSU20_15
PMSU20_20
PMSU20_25
PMSU30_20
PMSU30_30
PSWC30_30
PSWC40_40
PSWC56_40 .... -._ .. -. . .....
PSWC56_53
PSWC56_68 ..........
PSWC56_78
PSW30_30 -PSW50_42
PSW50_50
PSW70_70
PSW100_60
PSWiOO_80
PSW100_100
CSW150_134
CSW200_164
CSW240_160
I
CFS
0.7
0.7 -0.7
I 1.1
_.0
-I
'
I ;.~ . 1
'1 ..."-'" I 3.0
-.1 ... ~:~.~ .. ~]
6.0 I
.. ,1 3.0 I
6.0
_ I ~.O... I I 14 I '1 .. -19 . I
'
1-;~o 1"
9.0
I 11 I
I ~~ I
I 64
148
270
300
MGD
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.7
1.0
1.3
1.9
3.0
3.9
1.9
3.9
5.8
9.0
12 ..
16
1.9
5.8
7.1
17
19
32
41
95
174
194 .
.. (5/sec I
.02 I
-.02' -. II
.02
I. .03. I ~II_ ~--~~~ -.1 .. _ .... -~{~_ .. _. I
. I. .. . ~ ;7---
I .08
.17
.25
I
.1.. I .40
.-.. ,1." .54
.71
1,-.08
.25
j
I
! J
.31
.74
.85
1..4
1.8
4.2
7.6
8.5
I
.. ..1 . I
-I
I I
I I I I
9
10
11
12
Conversion: i ers ~ 0.0283 cubic meters per s~cond, or 1 M:5 /sec ~ 35.31 crs
1 cis ~ 0.64512 MGD or 1 MGD ~ 1.55 cfs
MODEL DESIGNATIONS
PMSU= Precast Manhole Storm Water Unit --,
PSWC= Precast Storm Waier Concentric
PSW = Precast Storm Water
CSW = Cast in Place Storm Water
I Screen Diameter
1 I Screen Height
~ ~,
X X _ X X (L or .R)*
Feet J I .\ L Tenths of a Foot
Tenths ~f a Foot :.J ! Feet
.:;: L or R designates the location of the. ,C.DS when looklng downstream.
(L)eft represents being 'placed on the. Left side of the .. st.ormdroin,
(R)ight is 'placed on the right side.'· , .,
6
I
II
I GENERAL DESCRIP-IION OF UNIT
I
I
-
I
I
I'
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGH FLOW
8YPASS~
CONVEYANCE
CONDUIT
SEPARATION
SCREEN--
I-<:>--WEIR BOX:---<=-l
r--INLET
I DIVERSION
WEIR
CONVEYANCE
CONDUIT
OUTLET CONTROL WEIR
CDS OUTLET
PLAN VIEW
(RIGHT HAND UNIT)
7 :,
I
I
I GENERAL DESCRIP-IION OF UNIT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INLET DIVERSION WEIR
EXISTlNG GRADE---..
ACCESS
COVER
CONVEYANCE ~~~ CONVEYANCE
CONDUIT ~~-~~rF:=::::::~~~~~~'" ~ CONDUIT
FLEVA-IION
.8
;., .:; ....
! .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
60" 1.0. CONC.
MH RISER, 6"
THICK WAUS
. (TYP.)
ELEVATION'VIEW
(SEE SHEET 3)
£ I FLOW
TYPICAL / GENERIC
INSTALLA T1 ON
OIL 8AFFl.E.
MODEL A FOR PIPES TO 18"\6
MODEL B FOR PIPES TO 30"¢
NOTE:
24"1'1 MH COVERS &
FRAMES (2)-OTHER
HATCHES AVAILABLE
ELEVATION VIEW
(SEE SHEET 3)
~
THE INTERNAL COM!?ONENTS ARE SHOWN IN iHE RIGHT-HAND
CONFIGURATlON-iHESE COMPONENTS MAY BE FURNISHED 1t'J THE'
MIRROR IMAGE 'TO THAT SHOWN (LEFT-HAND CONFIGURAllON).
CDS MODEL PMSU20_15, 0.7 CFS CAPACITY
STORM WATER TREATlvIENT UNIT
DAlE 12/3/01 SCALE
1"=2'
PROJECT NAME DRAWN J.S.F. SHEET
CITY, STATE 2 A?PROV.
I. 1. .i. .....
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .. '
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TYPICAL / GENERIC
INSTALLATION
SHOWN IN RIGHT-RAND
CONFIGURATION
CENTER OF ACCESS RISER,
5'-0" 1.0.
r--___ hiH RISER
SECilONS
ATIACH SIDE AND BOTTOM
FLANGES TO WALL OF MH
RISER USING ANCHOR BOLTS
(6 MIN), SUPPUED BY CDS.
ATTACH SCRE-CON TO SLAB
USING 4 ANCHOR 80lTS.
SUPPUED 8Y CDS.----J
25~¢ SEPARATION SCREEN, __ ~
SEE NOTE #2
NOTES:
Oil BAFFLE .
(OPTIONAL)
OPENINGS PROVIDED .DURING
PRECASTlNG FOR
PIPE INl.Ef AND OUTLET
CENTER OF SCREEN,
21'~ SUMP OPENING
STAlNLESS STEEL
SEPARATION PLATE
1. THE INTERNAL COMPONEN1S ARE SHOWN IN THE RIGHT-HAND
CONFIGURATION-THESE-COMPONENTS MAY BE FURNISHED IN 'THE
MIRROR .IM.A.GE TO THAT.-SHOWN (Ll:.-rr-HAND CONFIGURATION).
2. FOR PROPER INSTALLATION, GREEN FLANGE ON SCREEN FACES UP
FOR RIGHT-HAND INSTALLATION, RED FLAt'-lGE UP FOR LEFT-HAND
ORIENTED UNITS.
CDS MODEL PMSU20_15 1 0.7. CFS CAPACITY
STORM WATER TREATMENT UNIT
DATE: 12/3/01 SCA1.E
'"=2'
7M PROJECT NA..'M:E DRAWN SHEEi J.S.F. CITY-, .. STATE 3 APPROV.
I , .;
I-
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FINISHED GRADE:
EL= XX.XX':!:
I--
I t
SECTION
CUT (SEE: 5HEEi 2)
lIN EL=XX.XX'
SUMP EXTERIOR
lIN EL=XX.XX'±
TY-PICAL / GENERIC
INSTALLATION
24-I! COVE?.5 & FRAMES (2),
It RISER SECTIONS
! £. SEPARATION iY? -OiHER HATCH S'l"SmIS:,\
REA.Dll.'l" AVAlLA8L.E. \ I! SECTIONS
VARIES
II
I I
II
II II
5'_oD
I
I
F19ERGLASS
SEPARATION CYLINDER &: INLEr
. ' .... '.'
+---\.t:.=::~-r--r=-:--::-1
5'-,"±
DEPTH aaow
PIPE
INVER
-I
vv" J-1'\1'\ ,
XX"¢
CORE -t
2'-6"
6"
. I
1-----6'-0· ----I
-"I
I
t
SECTION
CUT
(SEE: SHEEi 2)
11 GA. SiAINlESS STEEL
SEPARATION PLATE
PLI\N VJ:EW
SCALE: 1"=2'
CDS MODEL PMSU20_15., .0.7 .CFS CAPACITY
STORM WATER TREATMENT UNIT
DAiE 12/3/01 SCALE:
1~=2.5'
PROJECT NAME DRAWN J.S.f. SHEET
CITY; .. STAT~: -
PPPROV. 4· : ...... . . ,
I
I
I .' .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ct SEPARATION
&: RISER I SECTIONS I
® \ I ~===F, ==~I ~~~~~~~-'~--~--
" I
. I I
F19ERGLJ.SS
SEPAAA110N
C'fI.lNDER ~ INLEi --~---I
. ' .~. ','
VARIES
\..t::.=.:~r-~-r--t----~=~---
It-m ---6'_0" ----1.1
5'-''" ±
DEPTH
BELOW
PIPE
INVERT
(TYPICAL)
• APPLY sum MASTIC ANDIOR GROUT TO SEAL JOINTS OF MANHOLE STRUCTURE. APPLY LOAD TO MASTIC SEAL IN
JOINTS OF MH SECTIONS TO COMPRESS SEAl.ANT IF NECESSARY. UNIT MUST BE WATER i1GHT, HOLDING WATER UP
TO FLOWUNE IN'rt..RT (MINIMUM).
2. IF' SEPARATION SLAB IS NON-INTEGRAL TO T.HE SEPAP-ATION SECTION OF 11-IE UNIT, SET AND VERIF'f TOP ELEVATION
BEFORE PLACING MORE PRECAST COMPONENTS OR BACKFlWNG. ENSURE 24" FROM TOP OF. SEPARATION SLAB
TO PIPE INVERT.
GROUT PIPE CONNECTIONS TO SEAL JOINT.
SET, BOTTOM OF OIL B/lFFLE H" ABOVE SEPARATION SLAB FLOOR; DRILL AND INSERT A MINIMUM OF TEN (iO)
3/8" x 3 3/4" SS EXPANSION BOLTS e 12" D.C. EQUALLY SPACED TO SECURE FIBERG1.ASS OIL BAFFlE Fl.ANGE
TO RISER WALL-(HARDWARE SUPPUED BY CDS TECHNOLOGIES). ,
1 1 5. FASI~ FIBERGLASS CYLlNDER/INLEr TO SCREEN ASSEMBLY USING FOUR (4) sm OF I" x 1 2" SS HEX HEAD
BOLTS W/ NUTS AND WASHERS-(HARDWARE SUPPUED BY CDS TECHNOLOGIES). IN THE LEFT-HANDED
CONFIGURATION iHE "RED' COLORED FLANGE ON THE SCREEN 'CYUNDER SHALL FACE UP. IN THE RIGHT -HANDED
CONFIGURATION, THE "GREEN" COLORED FLANGE SHAll. FACE UP.
6. CENTER SCREEN ASSEMBLY OVER SUMP OPENING AND PosmON FIBERGLASS INLET AGAINST RISER WALL; DRILL AND
INSERT A MINIMUM OF SIX (6) 3/S" x 3 3/4" S5 EXPANSION BOLTS EQUALLY SPACED TO SECURE FIBERGlASS
INL~ FLANGE TO RISER Y1ALL-(HARDWARE SUPPUED BY CDS TECHNOLOGIES). '
7. VERIF'f THAi SCREEN ASSEMBLY IS CENlt:.RED OVER SUMP ACCESS HOLE AND AOJUSr IF NECESSARY; DRILL AND
INSERT FOUR (4) 3/S" x 3 3/4" S5 EXPANSION BOLTS TO FASTEN .SCREEN ASSEMBLY 10 SEPAP-ATJON SLAB-
(HARDWARE SUPPUED BY CDS TECHNOLOGIES).
BLOCK AND GROUT SEAL TO MATCH GRADE AS REQUIRED.
DATE
12/3/01
SCALE
PMSU20_15 N.T.S.
CONSTRUCTION DRAWN J.S.F. SHEET
" NO'TES 5 A??ROV.
:0, .,,"
I
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fiberglass
Oil Baffle
It Separation Screen'
&: Sump Access
It. MH Riser steck
~~~~~~~ . Top Cap .... . ~ Appro):. wt. = 3550 f
....--5·~ Manh~le Riser Sections
Apprcx. 'Wi. =
. 1950 I (1.5 ft. riser sectian)
2600 :# (2.0 ft. riser. section)
3250 {I (2.5 ft. riser section)
3900 # (3.0 ft.. riser section)
/Fiberglass Inlet
Separation -Chamber Component
/Approx, WI. = 3900 f .(typ,)
Inlet Pipe
/
Separation Chomber Component
Approx. WI:. =
1950 # (1.5 ft. riser section)
2600 f. (2..0 ft. riser section)
3250 # (2.5 ft. riser section)
3900 # (3.0 ft. riser section)
Separation Slab, ~ Approx. Wt. = 2150 #.
Sump, ~ Sase ~ Approx. wt., = 4800 #
LEFT-HANDED UNn SHOWN HERE:
SECTION SIZES MAY YAp.:( ACCORDING·
TO LOCAL PRECASTERS SPECIFICATIONS. ,.-~.~
PATENTED
CDS 110DEL PMSU20
TYPICAL· ASSEMBLY
£0\ .<\.
DATE
DRAWN
,A.??ROV.
01/10/02.
J.S.F.
R. HOWARD
SCAl..E
N.T.S.
SHEEr
1
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
60" I.D. CONCa
MH RISER, 6"---,
THICK (TYP.)
ELEVATION
PIPE INLEi
FIBERGLASS INLET
AND CYLINDER
TYPICAL / GENERIC
INSTALLATION
ELEVATION
VIEW
(SEE SHEET 3)
-i PIPE & A
-MH RISER I
24"~ MH COVERS de
FRAMES (2)-OTHER
HATCHES AVAILABLE
I
-. THE INTERNAL COMPONENTS ARE SHOWN IN THE RIGHT-HAND
CONFIGURATlON"':THESE-COMPONENTS MAY 'SE FURNISHED' IN THE
MIRROR IMAGE TO THAT SHOWN (LEFT-HAND CONFIGURATION) ,
,
CDS MODEL PMSU20_20, 1.1 CFS CAPACITY
STORM WATER TREATMENT ·UNIT
DAlE 12/3/01 SCALE:
PROJECT NAME 1D=Z'
~I~, STAT~ ORf,WN J.S.F. SHEEi
2 APPROV. R. HOWARD : \ .:;.0 .....
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ACCESS RISER,
5'-0" 1.0.
ATtACH SIDE AND BOTTOM
FlANGES TO WIill.. OF MH
RISER USING ANCHOR BOLTS
(6 MIN), SUPPUED BY CDS.
xx"¢
PIPE INLEi
FLOW -
TYPICAL / GENERIC
INSTALLATION
CENTER OF
r-___ MH RISER
SECTIONS
ROTO-HAMMER OR SAW
CUT OPENINGS FOR
PIPE INLET AND OUTI.ET
/IS NECESSARY
~~ __ . ,-l(-It FLOW -
CENTER OF SCREEN.
2.,"\iS SUMP OPENING
25"~ SEPARATION SCREEN, __ ___ STAINLESS STEEL
SEPARATION PLATE SEE NOTE #2 BELOW
NOTES:
,. THE INTERNAL COMPONENTS ARE SHOWN IN THE RIGHT-RAND
CONAGURATION-THESE COMPONENTS MAY BE FURNISHED IN THE
MIRROR IMAGE TO THA1 SHOWN (LEFT-HAND CONFlGUP.ATlON): . .'
2. FOR PROPER INSTALLATION. GREEN FLANGE ON SCREEN FACES UP
FOR RIGHT-HAND INSTALLATION, RED FLANGE FACES UP FOR LEFT-
HAND ORIENTED UNITS.
CDS MODEL PMSU20_20, 1.1 GFS. CAPACITY '
STORM WATER TREATMENT UNIT
OA1E 12/3/01 SCALE:
PROJECT . NAME '"=2'
CITY, STATE OAAWN J.S.F. SHEET
,. l>i'PROV. R. HOWARD :5
: .' .. ;," .~ ..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TYPICAL / GENERIC
INSTALLATION
t. SEPARATION
24" ¢ COV-t:.RS &: FP..AMES (2), I SECTION
TiP. -OTHER HATCH SYSTEMS~ I <t RISER
READILY AVAILABLE. \ II SECTIONS
RIM EL=XX.X': .~ J"I I; It-.~--:-" :-:-....,.:-:-J-:--------1
~ R 11 ~
I--
I I
, DEPTH
SECTION VARIES
CUT·
(SEE SHEET 3)
INV EL=XX.X'± L
5'-8n
lYPICA:v ' J
AA ,
XX"¢
CORE
SUMP EXTERIOR
INY EL=XX.X':
J :
10" r+-/ -----11-+-1 --f-I,' ,-:-----,
t I .. I ~------~On.------~
g"
1 22"
MIN. ~
_II 0
1
I
F18ERG~S
SEPARATION
CYUNDER &:
INLEi
SEPARATION
SCREEN
I I
I i II
I .
-!
I
18"
I
'~ I SEE INSEr FOR PLATe: OEl'All..
SUMP
I . .
I
I
I
'i2" = I
--I
I ,
SECTION
CUT
(SEE SHEEi 3)
INTERNAl..
SEPARATION
SLAB
24"¢
15"16
PLAN VIEW
SCALE: 1 "=2'
, CDS MODEL PMSU20_20, 1.1 CFS CAPACITy
STORM WATER TREATMENT UNIT
DATE 12/3/01 SCAl.£
PROJECT NAME 1"=2'
9IT~, STAT~ DRAWN J.S.F. SHEEi
APPROV. R. HOWARD 4-: \ .·f •.. ......
I
I-
1--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
COllSTRUCTJON NOTES:
G RISER
.. SECTIONS
~ SEPARATION .. SECTION
~==:----:---
HT. VARIES
5'-S·
DEPTH BELOW
PIPE IJIMRi
(TYPICAL)
1. APPLY BUTYL t.-lASiIC AND/OR GROUT TO SEAL JOINTS OF MANHOLE SiRUCTURE. APPLY LOAD TO ),IAS'ilC SEAl. IN
JOINTS OF MH SECTIONS TO COMPRESS SEALANT IF NECESSARY. UNIT MUST BE WATER TIGHT, HOLDING WATER UP
TO FLOWUNE INVERT (MINIMUM). -
2. IF SEPARATION SlAB IS NON-INTEGRAL TO THE SEPAi~ATlON SECTION OF THE UNIT. SEi AND VERIPI' TOP ELEVATION
BEFORE PLACING MORE PRECAST COMPONENiS OR BACKFILUNG. ENSURE 31 D FROM TOP OF SEPARATION SLb.B
TO PIPE INVERT.
3. ROTO-HAMMER OR SAW-CUT OPENINGS FOR PIPE INI.£I' AND OUTLET PS NECESSARY; GROUT PIPE CONNECTIONS TO
SEAL JOINT.
4. SEi BOTTOM OF OIL 8AFFI..E 18" ABOVE SEPARATION SLAB FLOOR; DRILL AND INSERT A MINIMUM OF'TEN (10)
3/B-::: 3 3/4" 5S EXPANSION BOLTS @ '2" O.C. EQUALLY SPACED TO SECURE FIBERGlASS ·OIL BAFFI..E FLANGE
TO RISER WALL-(HAROWARE SUPPUED 8Y CDS TECHNOLOGIES).
5. FASTEN FI8ERGLASS CYUNDER/INLEi TO SCREEN ASSEMBLY USING' FOUR (4) SETS OF -2" x 1 i-SS HEX HEAD
BOLTS W/ NUTS AND WASHERS-(HARDWARE SUPPUEO 8Y CDS TECHNOLOGIES). IN THE LEFT-HANDED
CONFIGURATION TH~ "RED" COLORED FlANGE ON THE SCREEN CYUNDER SHALL FACE UP. IN THE RIGHT-HANDED
CONFIGURATION, THE "GREEW COLORED FLANGE SHALL FACE UP.
6. C8-ITER SCREEN ASSEMBLY OVER SUMP OPENING AND POSmON-FIBERGLASS INLEi AGAlNSi RISER WALL: L>R!LL AND
INSERT A MINIMUM OF SIX (6) i" ::: :3 ;" SS EXPANSION BOLTS EQUALLY SPACED TO SECURE fIBERGlASS INLET
FLANGE TO RISER WALL-(HARDWARE SUPPUED BY CDS TECHNOLOGIES). \
7. VERIFY THAT SCREEN ASSEMBLY IS CENTERED OYER SUMP ACCESS HOLE AND ADJUST IF NECESSARY; FASTEN
SCREEN TO SEPARATION SlAB USING FOUR (4) gD x :3 #D 5S EXPANSION 80LTS-(HARDVlA.=tE SUPPUED BY" CDS
TECHNOLOGIES).
8. BLOCK AND GROUT SEbJ.. TO MATCH GRADE AS REQUIRED.
PMSU20_20 DATE
12/3/01 SCAI.E
N.T.S. 'l"M CONSTRUCTION DRAWN SHEET J.S.F.
N.OTES . -APPROY • R. HOWARD 5 :, .z:; .....
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
TREATMENT OF STORM WATER RUNOFF
Structural Pollution Control Measures
SUMMARY OVERVIEW
The rollowing is an overview of the enclosed information about CDS Technologies' Continuous
Deflective Separation (CDS), non-blocking screening process. This packet will enable storm water
managers to evaluate CDS's storm water treatment on an objective basis using third party field
performance evaluations and laboratory test restJlts of this innovative Best Management Practices
(BMP) Structural Storm Water Quality Control Measure. In compliance with the objectives of
Phase II Storm Water Quality Regulations or EPA's Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy,
CDS Technologies provides a Best Available Technology un-matched in its effectiveness and
simplicity. A separate informational packet is' available on the application of CDS's non-blocking
screening technology to treat Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) and Sanitary Sewer Overflows
(SSOs).
The CDS technology features a patented non-blocking, indirect screening technique developed in
Australia in 1992 to remove pollutants from storm water runoff. The technology was introduced in
the United States in 1996 and has gained rapid acceptance. This technology successfully
captures total suspended solids (TSS), sediments, oils and greases and trash and debris (including
floatables, neutrally buoyant, and negatively buoyant debris) under very high flow rate conditions.
Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) is an innQvative technology that separates solids from
liquids and is an accepted Best Management Practice (BMP) well suited to treat a large range of
storm water flows and conditions. The components of a CDS unit'consist of a sump, separation
chamber (which contains a stationary screen cylinder), inlet/outlet and diversion weir. Treatment
flows are diverted into the CDS separation chamber through either the installation of a diversion
structure situated within the alignment of the storm drain/channel ("Inline Units"), or immediately off
the storm drain/channel alignment ("Offline Units").
The CDS Technology employs multiple primary clarification treatment processes to remove
pollutants from storm flows in a very small footprint: Deflective Screening/Filtration, Swirl
ConcentrationNortexing, Diffusion Settlement and 8afiling. A detailed review of the treatment flow
path shows the application of each of thes~ primary clarification processes. Treatment flows are
introduced tangentially along the stainless steel screen by the CDS unit's intak~ structure located
above the cylindrical screen. A balanced set of hydraulics is produced in the separation chamber.
These balanced hydraulics provide washing flows across the stainless steel screen surface, which
prevent any clogging of the apertures as well as establish the hydrauUo; regiment necessary to
separate solids through deflective separation / swirl concentration / vortex separation.
Vortex separation produces a low energy, quiescent zone in the middle of the swirl that enables
effective settlement of fines through a much wider range of f10wrates than could otherwise be
achieved using a simple set"Jing tank in the same footprint. Particles within the diverted treatment
flow are retained by the deflective screen and are maintained in a circular motion, forcing them to
the center of the separation chamber, creating an enhanced swirl concentration of solids (Vortex,
separation), until they settle into the sump. Additionally, the hydraulic boundary, layer and
1 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
deflective force that exist at the stainless steel screen face enhance the separation efficiency of the
va rtexing , swirl concentration of solids beyond that which could be achieved by a basic ,smooth
cylinder walled vortex chamber. The pollutants captured in the sump located below the swirl
concentration/vortexing screening chamber are isolated from high velocity bypass flows through
the unit preventing the scouring loss 'of trapped pollutants. Scouring losses occur in those
structural BMP's that are designeq such that the deposition zone of settled material is integral to
the treatment flow path.
Treated water flows across the entire face of the screen cylinder surface area. This creates the
lowest exit velocity rate (under-f1owrare) from the CDS separation chamber of any vortexing
separator available to date. This low underflow rate greatly enhances the separation capacity of
the vortexing solids separation process beyond that of a basic smooth cylinder walled vortexing
unit. Besides the quiescence zone in the middle of the swirl separation chamber, the lowest flow
rate velocities occur in the annular and volute spaces behind the screen. The flow passing through
the stainless steel separation screen is dispersed I diffused into the annular space behind the
screen at ex'"Lfemely low v,~locities so that straight settling occurs as the flow goes benea~h the oil
baffle and then exits the unit. In short there is no other piece of the equipment that brings this
multitude of primary clarification processes together in one treatment system. No other single
system can approach the capabilities and capacities of a GDS unit.
A unique advantage of the CDS Technology is the' ability to treat a wide range of flows from 20
liters per second (I/s) to 8498-l/s [0.7 to 300 cubic feet per second (cfs)] which allows large
drainage basins to be treated by a few strategically located facilities, thereby reducing overall. life
cycle costs of the treatment system. In addition to reducing the capital and maintenance costs this
innovative equipment requires a small footprint for installation using minimal real estate, saving this
valuable resource for other uses.
MULTIPLE CDS UNIT CONFIGURATIONS
CDS units are available in 3 different types of configurations and can have either an internal or
external diversion weir: Orr-line (PSW, PSWC & CSW), In-line (PMSU), and Drop-Inlet (PMIU).
Figure 1, provides an illustration of a typical Offline PSW, PSWC & CSW model CDS unit, Figure 2
is an illustration of our Inline PMSU model unit and Figure 3 shows our Drop-Inlet storm water
treatment units.
2 of 16
I.
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
Figure 1
Storm DiYersion Weir
-<ti!-----
Outlet·
Catchment Sump With
Clean out Basket
Schematic of an Offline CDS Unit
Off-line Units: CDS off-line units are available in precast (PSW & PSWC prefix models) and
cast-in-place (CSW prefix models) reinforced concrete structures. These Offline units can also be
installed in parallel or series. The precast PSW & PSWC models are standard units, designed to
treat flows up to 1813-l/s (64-cfs). The cast-in-place, CSW prefix models, can be constructed to
treat flows up to 8.4-m3/s (300-cfs). The diversion weir box structure can be designed to
accommodate multiple inlet pipes and bypass very large flood flows. For applications requiring
larger flow processing, units are designed complete with construction specifications for cast-in-
place construction.
3 of 16
1
I.
I.
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
Inlet
Storm Drain
Separation
Screen
Figure 2
Schematic of an lnline CDS Unit
Oil Baffle
Catchment Sump
In-line Units: CDS In-line (PMSU prefix model) units are smaller pre-manufactured systems
configured inside standard precast manhole structures. These In line, pMsu, units are sized to
process flows of 20 to 171-l/s (0.7 -6-cf5) from new and existing urban developments .. The CDS
unit can be placed within new or retrofitted into existing storm water collection systems. Its
remarkably small footprint takes little space and requires no supporting infrastructure. These
smaller PMSU units are ideal for treating the runoff from parking lots and vehicle maintenance
yards.
40f16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
Inlet Grate
~
Separation
Screen
Catchment Sump
Figure 3
Schematic of a Drop-In CDS Unit
Oil Baffle .
Drop-Inlet Unit: this pre-manufactured drop-inlet, (PMIU prefix) unit is designed to process flows
of O.7-cfs (20-lfs) or less and is ideal for small drainage areas such as parking lots. This unit is
configured inside a small diameter precast· manhole that enables the PMIU unit to function as a
typical drop-inlet and would be installed in lieu of a catch basin or st~rm drain inlet
50f16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treaiment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
MAJOR STORM WATER POLLUTION CONTROL APPLICATIONS
CDS Technologies storm water treatment systems are appropriate structural BMPs, to treat the
storm water-runoff from:
o
o
o
o
o
o
8
o
D
Retail, Commercial, Industrial and Residential Developments
Parking Lots, Vehicle Maintenance Yards
Road Improve'ment Projects
Inter-modal Transportation Facilities
Solid Waste Management Facilities and Tral'lsrer $tations
Pre-Treatment to Wetlands and p~t~ntion, and Retention Ponds '
Pretreatment I Screening of Storm Water Pump ~ta~ions
Combined Sewage Overflows
Sanitary Sewer Overflows
CDS Technologies offers solid separation units to treat storm water runoff from the ,catchment
areas subject to the land use activities listed above as well as the runoff from vehicle parking and
other areas subject to the buildup of oil, grease, sediment, trash and debris. CDS units can also
treat the effluent from vehicle maintenance yards and wash racks.
CDS effectively captures the following list of storm water pollutants of concern.
o Suspended Solids
D Fine, Medium and Coarse Sediments
o Oil & Grease
o Trash. Debris. Vegetation
D Floatab\es
o Neutrally Buoyant Material
o Nutrients (Total Phosphorus)
FIELD PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS AND LASORA TORY REPORTS
Total Suspended Solids, Sediment & Phosphorus
TSS is generally understood to be sediments and other fine solids that are small enough to be
suspended in the water column while water is flowing. TSS is usually made up of many different
sized particles of varying density.
6 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
The primary study "Particle Removal Using Continuous Deflection Separation" that establishes
. CDS TSS removal efficiencies was performed by Professor Scott Wells. Portland State University.
The Portland State University study used multiple test runs to establish CDS removal efficiencies
using a particle size distribution (PSD) that ranged from 0 to 600-microns (I.Im). (0.0 to D.6
millimeters] in size on CDS units operating at varying flow rates up to and including the CDS's low
flow treatment capacity. The results of the test runs are presented in the following tables.
Table 1.
TSS Removal Efficiencies -2400-l-lm Screen, 20_15 Series
(Portland State University)
Processed Flowrate as a % I % TSS I
Test Run -TSS I Sediment Sample Of CDS Low Flo:", Treatmen, Removal Capacity
87.52 I F-110 188 I Sediment
47.7 99.47 I #17 TS8 I Sediment
93.50 I TSS Removal Average at 47.7 % of CDS's
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
83.14 I F-110 TSS I Sediment
63.7 99.54 I #17 TSS I Sediment
91.34 I TSS Removal Average at 63.7 % of CDS's
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
"?1.1S\ F-110 TSS I Sediment
79.6 98.23/ #17 I S8 I Sediment
84.705 1 TSS Removal Average at 79.6 % of CDS's
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
68.32 \ F-110 TS8 I Sediment
95.5 ·95.59 I #17 TSS I Sediment
I I 81.96 I TSS Removal Average at 95.5 % of CDS's
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
7 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
Table 2
TSS Removal Efficiencies -4700-l.Im Screen, 20_15 Series
(Portland State University)
Processed Flowrate as a % 01 ail TSS I
CDS Low Flow. Treatment R:mov I Capacity a
Test RUn -TSS I Sediment Sample
I 86.45 I F-110 TSS I Sediment S
47.7 I 99.61 I #17 TSS I Sediment
93.03 I TSS Removal Average at 47.7 % of CDS=s
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
63.7 78.12 I F-110 TSS I Sadiment
I 98.62 I #17 TSS I Sediment
I 88.37 I TSS Removal Average at 63.7 % of CDS1s
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
74.7 I F-110 TSS I Sediment
79.6 97.4 I #17 TSS I Sediment
I 86.05 I TSS Removal Average at 79.6 % of CDS's
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
63.47 I F-110 TSS I Sediment
95.5 94.42 I #17 TSS I Sediment
I 78.95 I TSS Removal Average at 95.5 % of CDS's
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
Table 3.
TSS Removal Efficiencies -2400-l.Im Screen, 20_20 Series
(Portland State Universi
Processed Flowrate as a % I o/c TSS I
Of CDS Low Flow Treatment R a V 1 Test Run -TSS I Sediment Sample Capaci emo a !
83.16 I F-110 TSS I Sediment
40.5 98.13 I #17 TSS I Sediment
90.65 I TSS Removal Average at 40.5 % of CDS's I
I Low Flow Treatment Capacity I
I I 71.71 F-110 TSS I Sediment !
96.10 I. #17 TSS I Sediment I I I
83.91 I TSS Removal Average at SO.8 % of CDS's I
Low Flow Treatment Capacity
60.B
61.14 I F-110 TSS I Sediment I
92.26 I #17 TSS I Sediment I
7S.70 I TSS Removal Average at 81.0 % of CDS's I
Low Flow Treatment Ca acl '
81.0
, ,1,56.32 I F-110 TSS I Sediment
85.13 I #17 TSS I Sediment I 70.73 I TSS Removal Average at 101.3 % of
CDS's Low Flow Treatment Capacity
101.3
8 of 16
I I
i !
I
I
I
I.
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
Figure 4 shows a graphical performance curve for the total TSS removal efficiencies for each test
shown in Tables 1 thru 3.
~ ..
~ (,) c Cl)
:§ .... w
~ :> 0 S ~
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
-.. ~ ---...--.
::....,~ ~ -=::::::::;;
20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
% of CDS's Units Low Flow Treatment
Capacity
:--2400·MICRON F110
.. iSS I Sediment.
20_15 Series
i -:>-2400 MICRON #1i
TSS1'Sedimenl
• 20_15 Series
!-r-4700 Micron F110
i TSS ISedimenl i 20_15 Seri~.
! -:-:-4700 Micron #1i i TSS ISedimenL
i 20 15 Series
1--24oo.MlCRON F110 .
1 • TSS ISedimenl . i 20.,20 Series
:--24001.U:RON#1i i TSS ISe:iimenL i 20_20 Series
Figure 4 -Total TSS Removal Efficiencies -Portland State
The results can be summarized by stating that CDS units operating at 100% of their treatment .
capacity were demonstrated to remove, on average, 80% of the TSS. At f10wrates less than the
low flow treatment capacity of a given CDS unit, TSS removal efficiency increases. During any
given wet season a typical CDS storm water treatment unit is expected to be operating for the
majority of the time in a range between 10 to 70% of its low flow hydraulic treatment capacity. A
properly sized CDS unit is capable of removing more than 80% of the TSS. 80% average annual
removal performance forecast satisfies most project specifications. The particle size distribution of
the TSS I Sediment to be removed represents the most significant factor in determining weather a
structural BMP will achieve the removal goal~ for a given project.
9 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
Figure 5 provides the PSD or the F-110 TSS I Sediment & the #17 TSS I Sediment samples use in
the Portland State University Study.
~ ; : :
. i:'
, -§-F-110 TSS1Sediment-2400
Series 20_20
! --l1i1-#17 TSS/Sediment-AII Series
I
i ~F-110TSS/Sediment-2400 ~ Series 20_15 +------~~------------~---+~~------~ i _ I! I I +---~",,;,,--------'-..,.n."":"~-I-~-+--"":"---': ~-A\'araged Sub 100-micron Batch 1
I. ! i .. , : : +---------------------~----~~~~----~'~; ~. ,
1. !
lO
: !: ;:' :: I: ~ . : : :.
, ,
: . ; J.
:1
=' d
! . ~ i.
lGO:CC:
Figure 5 -Particle Size Distribution of TSS I Sediment Used in Portland State Test
When the Particle Size Distribution Curves of the TSS I Sediment used in the Portland State study
are plotted along with 23 field evaluations of Particle Size Distributions of Solids Found on Streets
and Suspended in Road Runoff. Walker. et a/.. one can readily see that the PSD used in the
Portland State University study compares favorably with the TSS and sediment found in our urban
catchments. Comparing the results of the Portland State performance evaluation against the 23
field evaluations provides the basis of reasonable forecasts.
100f16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
. r ,
:i .j
I j / l
r :
---:"=,~
~ ! i
II " .
!·-:...,~'5tt::Is-:. j:
:;-_ •• ..;r:;x:
:: :4-___ ~QQ,!'~~c L)
.: -w.:~~I;a:. -Taa-.sr-in !::: !! -!=I:'~I'3£ -t.=rc,s~,: i :. ~
:: : . '-¥-*i-'-...:....,..---+~.: -<_""_ __,.,......= ~ ~ ~ ;
;.:;.' -W-Ibr__ ---.s.:q.rI3::. !::. : J: : :. __ -a_us -:.r ....... =.!So :: . ;; -I:Hf''---'---~~; _="''''~ _ ........ ,..... ; ~ .. ~
:~ -:.n-c,::a::. -+-="'-I:=-i' . 1
,?-_' _:..;,.:.;,., ':-' _~.~ ~p.t:.:=-......... ~F-n:-=-.... i:· i ::
:: . :.::==-=~\S ~= j S ~; -=---=:r:~..rvt _-;-~,-c_'-<r..""""" . ....: ... -_-_~ il.: ~! i; .• ,: 1!:, . Ii: ::_~:=~ _ . .-~ 'Pk---!-: -.--""':i-=-~:.::::a::r.!:= I •
i.' I ': :{; ;;f ~ ; . , . . ':
Ill)
Panids Sa (rriQ'ttl)
Figure 6. Particle Size Distribution of Solids Found on Street and Suspended in
Road Runoff
Previous independent studies and evaluations of first generation CDS separators also showed
TSS removal capacity. The CRC report entitled "REMOVAL OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS AND
ASSOCIATED POLLUTANTS BY A CDS GROSS POLLUTANT TRAP~ describes an extensive
independent monitoring program performed by the CRC, of a CDS unit installed at Coburg, an
inner suburb of Melbourne, Australia. This field evaluation included monitoring performance of the
CDS unit for removal of total suspended solids (TSS) , total phosphorus and total nitrogen. This
report provides additional information regarding nutrients and fine sediments transportation in
storm water and the ability of CDS units to effect their removal. In the case of TSS, the CDS unit
effectively reduced concentration levels below 75-mg/L in effluent from the CDS with a mean
removal efficiency of approximately 70%. Particulate phosphorus removal was measured at 30%.
The TSS removal efficiencies mentioned above are a fu~ction of flow rate, TSS concentration and
particle size distribution. Laboratory results show CDS capture efficiencies of as much as 60% of
75-J..Im size particles. Field evaluations show that CDS units capture particles smallerthap 34-jJm.
CDS Technologies is uniquely suited to meet the challenge of effectively removing total suspended
solids (TSS) and the associated pollutants in storm water runoff. The most effective proof of this
capability can be found by analyzing the material that is trapped in the sump of a CDS unit. Eight
separate studies involving 15 separate "cleanouts" of the CDS sump have been conducted to
analyze the physical characteristics and chemical composition of the sediments.
11 of 16
ltCo:D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
The results of two independently conducted studies involving five separate sump "cleanoutr. events
are shown in the following figure. The other studies have found similar results.
':: ~~~~~~~~~==~~====~===~===============i"="",-=.-""~--_'..,..7.~----,,=.~-::·~/(""~I_/~ ____ A __ ..... : / .171/
aQ~----------------------------~--j~----IHt~t~'------------~ -•• .J" ,I .. / ~ iO ____________________________ ~----~.~--~r+/~;~~------------
~ . . j~.r 1./;1 /
3 50~;-----------------------~.~-J~~--~/./~~.~----------------~ $O~~--------------------------~"-;~.!~~--~~~u-·~~.~-r-i~:~ .. ~--------------g ./1 /1>/ .~ .Q~--------~--------~~i~!/7·~-~~~J~e:~/~==============~ ~ j.t ... ~.~. -+-Issaquah. 1I410~
Uoa 30: ;;~ ! :.m. . -::.-lssaquah.7/2/01
::;:.z::::o:t./ -.!:-Brisbane City Kalinga Park. 4/17199 , .~ J_
,.~/~ 'O~;-------~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~-~-~.-----,-.--------~ ~Brisbane City Kalinga Park. 5/17/99
------=~-~~--~~----------~.~.~------~~~~~====~~~~~~ 0·,-,. ,
-Brisbane City Kalinga Park. 6/Sige
10 100 1aOD IDOOO
Particle Size (Microns)
Figure 7. Particle Size Distribution of Sediment Captured in CDS
The study conducted at Issaquah, Washington involved the two "cleanoutsn reported the rollowing
results.
Table 4. Particle Size Distribution of Sediment Found in CDS Sumps
Sampling Sump Material Particle Size
Period Mean I Median I % I % I % (mm) (mm) Gravel1 Sand2 Silt/Cla'f
Fall Period (1) 1 0.14 1 0.12 I 0.00 I 67.84 I 32.16
Fall Period (2) I 0.17 1 0.17 I 0.00 I 74.50 I 25.50
Winter/Spring Period (1) I .0.09 '1 0.10 I 0.00 I 60.90 I 39.10 I
\Ninter/Spring Period (2) I 0.06 I 0.06 I 0.00 I 39.46 I 60.54
1 Particles between Z and 64 mm in size considered gravel
2 Particles between 0.075 and 1 mm in size are considered sand
3 Particles < O.07S·mm in size are considered silt/clay \
The study conducted by Brisbane City involved three "clean outs" and found .that 27.% of th~
material trapped in the CDS sump was silt/clay sized, 50% was sand sized and 23% was classified
as grave!. The TSS removal efficiencies mentioned above are a function of flow rate, TSS
concentration, PSD and the characteristics of those particles.
12 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
These field evaluations show CDS units capturing particles as small as 34-microns. Laboratory
results show CDS capture efficiencies of as much as 60% of 75-micron size particles.
Brevard County, Florida completed an 18-month study entitled uTHE USE OF A CDS UNIT F·OR
SEDIMENT CONTROL IN BREVARD COUNTY" that included detailed monitoring and analysis of
5 storm events. The CDS unit designed for 9 cfs using a 4700-micron screen achieved effective
removals of 52% TSS and 31% phosphorus. This is noteworthy in that the CDS was placed
downstream of a "grassy swale". Fortunately, for our evaluation purposes, the grassy swale didn't
work very well.
If you would like to .see these reports, CDS Technologies can provide copies of any or all six. The
report titles are:
1. FROM ROADS TO RIVERS -GROSS POLLUTANT REMOVAL FROM URBAN·
WATERWAYS
2. STORMWATER GROSS POLLUTANTS, INDUSTRY REPORT
3. A DECISION-SUPPORT-SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING EFFECTIVE TRAPPING
STRATEGIES FOR GROSS POLLUTANTS
4. REMOVAL OF SUSPENDED SOLlDS AND ASSOCIATED POLLUTANTS BY A CDS GROSS
POLLUTANT TRAP
5. MANAGEING URBAN STORMWATER USING CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS
6. THE USE OF A CDS UNIT FOR SEDIMENT CONTROL IN BREVARD COUNTY
For more information on the CRe for Catchment Hydrology visit their website!
vNlw.catchment.crc.oro.au. The full Brevard County report is available on: www.stormwater-
resources.com/. You can also visit our website. www.cdstech.com. to obtain more
information on the above-mentioned reports.
Oil &. Grease Removal
Given that oil and grease and other total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) are primary water quality
constituents of concern from many catchment areas such as vehicle parking areas, it should be
understood that a CDS unit can effectively and efficiently control TPH pollutants as they are
transported through the storm drain system during dry weather (gross spills) and wet weather
flows. CDS devices can capture 80% of fee oil and grease coming,· into the unit without the use of
oil sorbent materials.
CDS units are equipped with an oil baffle to capture and retain oil and grease. Laboratory tests
performed by Professor Wells from the Portland State University, Portland Oregon (2003), have
shown that the CDS unit, without the use of sorbent materials, was capable of capturing up to 80%
offree oil and grease from storm water.
CDS units can also accommodate the addition of oil sorbents within their separation chambers.
The addition of the oil sorbents can ensure the permanent removal of up to 90% of the free oil and
grease from the storm water runoff. Effluent concentrations of 1 to 3-ppm can be expected from a
13 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
CDS unit using sorbent material in its separation chamber. It needs to be emphasized that the
addition of sorbents is not a requirement for CDS units to effectively control oil and grease from
storm water. The conventional oil baffle within a unit assures satisfactory oil and grease removal.
The addition of sorbents is a unique enhancement capability special to CDS units, enabling
increased oil and grease capture efficiencies beyond that obtainable by conventional oil baffle
systems. Once in contact with the sorbent media, the oil and grease cannot escape the CDS unit.
The oil sorbent material is non-leaching and essentially solidifies the oil and grease. The addition
of sorbents can be done at anytime after installation when there are land use activities within the
catchment area that merit the consideration of this additional control measure. Specifications for
the application of oil sorbent material and an engineer's value estimate for the conservative
application of sorbent on pounds per acre of impervious area per year basis are readily available
upon request.
As the oil and grease in storm water are pollutants of concern, a general understanding should be
developed on how oil and grease are transported in storm water if their effective removal is to be
achieved. Oil and grease are transported in storm water and wash rack effluent.iIJ four different
ways:
1.
2.
Attached to trash and debris such as styrofoam and leaves
Attached to coarse and fine sediments
3. Free or floating oil and grease
4. Suspended and emulsified within the storm water flow
The CDS 'unit is effective at removing oil transported by the first three methods. Researchers
studying the quality of storm water runoff have advised that 50 to 80% of the total oil and grease
within storm water are attached to sediments. A CDS unit will capture and retain the sediments
containing the attached oil and greases in its sump until removed through routine m<;lintenance
operations. These sediments have been estimated to contain 50-90% of the total amount of oil
and grease in storm water runoff.
Oil Spill Test
In addition to the regular capture test performed to measure the removal of free oil and grease
from storm water, Professor Wells also performed an oil spill test
The unit performed extremely well in the oil 'spill test, with the peak oil concentration in the efrluent
occurring right as the addition of oil to the unit stopped. This showed a capture rate of more than
99.75% of the oil dumped into the unit (82,000 mglL). This would be a very effective me;3ns of
containing an oil spill. An oil storage capacity chart for the C:JS unit IS available on request.
For further information on oil and grease and CDS performance also available is "CDS 'Capability
of Capturing Hydrocarbones" This paper covers extensively the origin of oil and grease in
stormwater and the performance of CDS technology in that ,regard.
14 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
Gross Pollutants
Regardless of the size of the storm event being treated CDS storm water treatment units will
ensure the permanent removal of 100% of f10atables as well as 100% of the solids equal to or
larger than the 4.7 mm or 2.4-mm screen openings for flows up to and including their full hydraulic
treatment capacities.
CDS units are the only storm water treatment devices available that can guarantee 100% removal
of any particles equal to or larger than the screen aperture dimension (screen apertures used for
storm water are either 4700 or 2400 microns) regardless of the specific gravity of those particles.
In contrast, BMP's that depend on bafiles and detention time are not effective at removal of debris
that does not float or sink well (neutrally buoyant) especially during high flow events where
turbulence results in most debris behaving as if it were neutrally buoyant. In a CDS unit, because
debris is retained by a physical screening process, material previously captured cannot wash out
during high flow and the CDS unit will retain 100% of the material it has captured.
The Cooperative Research Centre (CRG) for Catchment Hydrology, Monash University,
Melbourne, Australia has completed an extensive i8-month field study and documented their
findings in three (3) separate reports. This field study focused on determining transportation of
pollutants in storm water and the trapping efficiency of various storm water treatment systems
under real service conditions. The results of the evaluated storm water treatment systems were
compared in detail. The results achieved by the CDS technology, in these field evaluations are
very positive. For example, on p. 63 of the FROM ROADS TO RIVERS. GROSS POLLUTANT·
REMOVAL FROM URBAN WATERWAYS, the CDS unit was described as 99% efficient over a 12
-month period. The focus of these reports looked at the means to effect the removal of gross
pollutants from storm water flows.
Though the initial application of CDS units was used to capture gross pollutants, the continuous
deflective separation process is provir.g to be effective in .a variety of storm water, wastewater. and
industrial applications calling for the efficient separation of suspended and fine solids from liquids ..
A CDS unit makes an ideal pretreatment for oil/water separators, preventing the concentration of
solids within the storm water runoff or efiluent from wash racks from overwhelming and clogging
conventional oil/water separators.
15 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
Storm Water Treatment Performance Review
-Revised June 2004
CDS Technologies is presently working with a number of cities to enhance the effectiveness of
installed oillwater separators. It appears to be quite common for installed oil/water separators,
consisting of coalescing plate modules, or corrugated plate packs to become ineffective, because
of the Significant vegetation, sediment and debris loading that interferes with the coalescing of oil
and grease globules. Many of these oil/water separator installations represent significant ,capital
improvement projects that never achieve their design performance due to the solids content of the
storm water runoff or wash Tack effluent. The additional expendifure for the installation of a CDS
unit as a pre-treatment to these oil/water separators usually represents a small percentage of the
project cost and will assure the efficient performance of the oil water separator.
In conclusion, we hope you find this information useful in selecting the, best post construction storm
water treatment BMP for this project and we look forward to discussing potential applications for
CDS units to treat your storm water runoff. We welcome the opportunity to arrange an educational
presentation of the CDS storm water treatment technology, covering plannirig. design, construction
and maintenance issues. We have a working tabletop model of a CDS unit that replicates the
performance offull size CDS units. For more information, please phone toll free (888) 535·7559 or
go to our website at WW\v.cdstech.com or e-mail usatcds@cdstech.com. and we will be happy
to assist you.
16 of 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Vortex Separator
Description
Vortex separators: (alternatively, swirl concentrators) are gravity
separators, and:in pr:inciple are essentially wet vaults. The
difference from wet vaults, however, is tbatthe vortex separator
is round, rather than rectangular, and the water moves :in a
centrifugal fashion before exiting. By having the water move in a
circular fashion, rather than a straight l:ine as is the case with a
standard wet vault, it is possible to obtain significant removal of
suspended sediments and attached pollutants with less space.
Vortex separators were originally developed for comb:ined sewer
overflows (CSOs), where it is used primarily to remove coarse
:inorganic solids. Vortex separation has been adapted to
stormwater treatment by several manufacturers.
California Experience
There are currently about 100 :installations :in California.
Advantages
• May provide the desired performance :in less space and
therefore less cost.
• May be more cost-effective pre-treatment devices than
traditional wet or dry basins.
• Mosquito control may be less of an issue than with traditional
wet bas:ins.
Limitations
• As some of the systems have standing water tbatremains
betvveen storms, there is concern about mosquito breeding.
• It is likely that vortex separators are not as effective as wet
vaults at removing fine sediments, on the order 50 to 100
microns :in diameter and less.
• The area served is limited by the capacity of the largest
models.
• As the products come in standard sizes, the facilities will be
oversized:in many cases relative to the design treatment
storm, :increasing the cost.
• The non-steady flows of stormwater decreases the efficiency
of vortex separators from what may be estimated or
determined from testing under constant flow.
• Do not remove dissolved pollutants.
January 2003 Califomia Stormwater BMP Handbook
New Development and Redevelopment
www.cabmphandbooks.com
MP-51
Design Considerations
• Service Area
• Selliing Velocity
• Appropriate Sizing
• Inlet Pipe Diameter
Ta rgeted Constituents
0 Sediment £
0 Nutrients • 0 Trash
0 Metals •
Bacteria
0 Oil and Grease
0 Organics
Legend (Removal Effectiveness)
• Low • High
£. Medium
=...:\t.L'"4 •• JR..:"'t·".. :;.~\.ar.:.1"'~·A:~ '.::::t.: :\ L: 1"-; .;:-:.::-:1 "::r:::-:.
lofS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MP-51 Vortex Separator
• A loss of dissolved pollutants may occur as accumulated organic matter (e.g., leaves)
decomposes in the units.
Design and Sizing Guidelines
The stormwater enters, typically below the effluent line, tangentially into the basin, thereby
imparting a circular motion in the system. Due to centrifugal forces created by the circular
motion, the suspended particles move to the center of the device where they settle to the bottom.
There are uvo general types of vortex separation: free vortex and dampened (or impeded)
vortex. Free vortex separation becomes dampened vortex separation by the placement of radial
baffles on the weir-plate that impede the free vortex-flow pattern
I t has been stated with respect to CSOs that the practical lower limit of vortex separation is a
particle with a settling velocity of 12 to 16.5 feet per hour (0.10 to 0.14 cm/s). As such, the focus
for vortex separation in CSOs has been with settleable solids generally 200 microns and larger,
given the presence of the lighter organic solids. For inorganic sediment, the above settling
velocity range represents a particle diameter of 50 to 100 microns. Head loss is a function of the
size of the target particle. At 200 microns it is normally minor but increases significantly if the
goal is to remove smaller particles.
The commercial separators applied to stormwater treatment vary considerably With respect to
geometry, and the inclusion of radial baffles and internal circular chambers. At one exireme is
the inclusion of a chamber within the round concentrator. Water flows initially around the
perimeter between the inner and outer chambers, and then into the inner chamber, giving rise
to a sudden change in velocity that purportedly enhances removal efficiency. The opposite
extreme is to introduce the water tangentially into a round manhole with no internal parts of
any kind except for an outlet hood. Whether the inclusion of chambers and baffles gives better
performance is unknown. Some contend that free vortex, also identified as swirl concentration,
creates less turbulence thereby increasing removal efficiency. One product is unique in that it
includes a static separator screen.
• Sized is based on the peak flow of the design treatment event as specified by local
government.
• If an in-line facility, the design peak flow is four times the peak of the design treatment
event
• If an off-line facility, the design peak flow is equal to the peak of the design treatment event.
• Headloss differs with the product and the model but is generally on the .order of one foot or
less in most cases.
C011s':ructiol1jIllspectioll COl1siileratiolls
No special considerations.
Performance
Manufacturer's differ with respect to performance claims, but a general statement is that the
manufacturer's design and rated capacity (cfs) for each model is based on and believed to
achieve an aggregate reduction of 90% of all particles with a specific gravity of 2.65 (glacial
sand) down to 150 microns, and to capture the floatables, and oil and grease. Laboratory tests of
2of5 California Stormwater BMP Handbook
New Development and Redevelopment
www.cabmphandbooks.com
January 2003
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Vortex Separator MP-51
two products support this claim. The stated perlormance e~"Pectation therefore implies that a
lesser removal efficiency is obtained with particles less than 150 microns, and the lighter,
organic settleables. Laboratory tests of one of the products found about 60% removal of 50
micron sand at the e~"Pected average operating flow rate
Experience vnth the use of vortex separators for treating combined sewer overflows (CSOs), the
original application of this technology, suggests that the lower practical limit for particle
removal are particles with a settling velocity of 12 feet per hour (Sullivan, 1982), which
represents a particle diameter of 100 to 200 microns, depending on the specific gravity of the
particle. the CSO experience therefore seems consistent with the limited experience with
treating stormwater, summarized above
Traditional treatment technologies such as wet ponds and extended detention basins are
generally believed to be more effective at removing very small particles, down to the range of 10
to 20 microns. Hence, it is intuitively expected that vortex separators do not perlorm as well as
the traditional wet and dry basins, and filters. Whether this matters depends on the particle size
distribution of the sediments in stormwater. If the distribution leans towards small material,
there should be a marked difference between vortex separators and, say, traditional wet vaults.
There are little data to support this conj ecture
In comparison to other treatment technologies, such as wet ponq,s and grass swales, there are
few studies of vortex separators. Only two of manufactured products currently available have
been field tested Two field studies have been conducted Both achieved in excess of 80%
removal ofTSS. However, the test was conducted in the Northeast (New York state and Maine)
where it is possible the stormwater contained significant quantities of deicing sand.
Consequently, the influent TSS concentrations and particle size are both likely considerably
higher than is found in California stormwater. These data suggest that if the stormwater
particles are for the most part fine (Le., less than 50 microns), vortex separators will not be as
efficient as traditional treatment BMPs such as wet ponds and swales, if the latter are sized
according to the recommendations of this handbook.
There are no equations that provide a straightforward determination of efficiency as a function
of unit configuration and size. Design specifications of commercial separators are derived from
empirical equations that are unique and proprietary to each manufacturer. However, 'some
general relationships between performance and the geometry of a separator have been
developed CSO studies have found that the primary determinants of perlormance of vortex
separators are the diameters of the inlet pipe and chamber with all other geometry proportional
to these two.
Sullivan et al. (1982) found that perlormance is related to the ratios of chamber to inlet
diameters, D2/D1, and height b~tween the inlet and outlet and the inlet diameter, H1jDl, shown
in Figure 3. The relationships are: as D2jDl approaches one, the efficiency decreases; and, as
the HljD1 ratio decreases, the efficiency decreases. These relationships may allow qualitative
comparisons of the alternative designs of manufacturers. Engineers who wish to apply these
concepts should review relevant publications presented in the References.
Siting Criteria
There are no particularly unique siting criteria. ,The size of the drainage area that can be served
by vortex separators is directly related to the capacities of the largest models'.
January 2003 Califomia Stormwater BMP Handbook
New Development and Redevelopment
www.cabmphandbooks.com
30f5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MP-Sl Vortex Separator
Additional Design Guidelines
Vortex separators have two capacities if positioned as in-line facilities, a treatment capacity and
a hydraulic capaci:ty. Failure to recognize the difference betvveen the two may lead to significant
under sizing; i.e., too small a model is selected. This observation is relevant to three of the five
products. These three technologies all are designed to experience a unit flow rate ot' about 24
gallons jsquare foot of separator footprint at the peak of the design treatment event This is the
horizontal area of the separator zone within the container, not the total footprint of the unit. At'
this unit flow rate, laboratory tests by these manufacturers have established that the
performance will meet the general claims previously described However, the units are sized to
handle 100 gallons/square foot at the peak of the hydraulic event Hence, in selecting a
particular model the design engineer must be certain to match the peak flow of the design event
to the stated treatment capacity, not the hydraulic capacity. The former is one-fourth the latter.
If the unit is positioned as an off-line facility, the model selected is based on the capacity equal
to the peak of the design treatment event. .
Maintenance
Maintenance consists of the removal of accumulated material with an eductor truck It may be
necessary to remove and dispose the floatables separately due to the presence of petroleum
product.
Maintenance Requirements .
Remove all accumulated sediment, and litter and other floatables, annually, unless experience
indicates the need for more or less frequent maintenance.' .
Cost
Manufacturers provide costs for the units including delivery. Installation costs are generally on
the order of 50 to 100 % of the manufacturer's cost. For mo.st sites the units are cleaned.
annually.
Cost Considerations
The different geometry of the several manufactured separators suggests that when comparing
the costs of these systems to each other, that local conditions (e.g., groundwater levels) may
affect the relative cost-effectiveness.
References and Sources of Additional Information
Field, R., 1972, The swirl concentrator as a combined sewer overflow regulator facility, EPAjR2-
72-008, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
Field, R., D. Averill, T.P. O'Connor, and P. Steel, 1997, Vortex separation technology, Water
Qual. Res. J. Canada... 32,1, 185
Manufacturers technical materials
Sullivan, R.H., et al., 1982, Design manual-swirl and helical bend pollution control devices,
EPA-600/8-82/013, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
Sullivan, R.H., M.M. Cohn, J.E. Ure, F.F. Parkinson, and G. Caliana, 1974, Relationship between
diameter and height for the design of a svvirl concentrator as a combined sewer overflow
regulator, EP A 670/2-74-039, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washirigton, D.C.
4of5 California Stormwater BMP Handbook
New Development and Redevelopment
www.cabmphandbooks.com
January 2003
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Vortex Separator MP-51
S.ullivan, R.H., M.M. Cohn, J.E. Ure, F.F. Parkinson, and G. Caliana, 1974, The swirl
concentrator as a grit separator device, EPA670/2-74-026, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C.
Sullivan, R.H., M.M. Cohn, J.E. Ure, F.F. Parkinson, andG. Caliana, 1978, Swirl primary
separator device and pilot demonstration, EPA6oo/2-78-126, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. . .
January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook
New Development and Redevelopment
www.cabmphandbooks.com
S ofS
I:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I VI·
I
·1
I,
I'
·1
I
I
I
I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
CHAPTER 6 -SOURCE CONTROL
6.1 -Landscaping
Manufactured slopes shall be landscaped with suitable ground cover or installed with
an erosion control system. Homeowners will be educated as to the proper routine
maintenance to landscaped areas including trimming, pruning, weeding, mowing,
replacement or substitution of vegetation in ornamental and required landscapes.
Per the RWQCB Order, the following landscaping activities are deemed unlawful
and are thus prohibited:
Discharges of sediment
Discharges of pet waste
Discharges of vegetative clippings
Discharges of other landscaping or construction-related wastes.
During landscaping operations both during and after construction, landscape
maintenance should be completed proactively. When these operations are in
progress, bare or disturbed areas should be re-seeded/re-vegetated as quickly as
possible to ensure that erosion is minimized. In addition, when landscape
maintenance operations require the stockpiling of materials for longer than a period
of one day, these stockpiles should be covered to minimize the opportunity for
rainfall to come in contact with the material.
6.2 -Urban Housekeeping
Fertilizer applied by homeowners, in addition to organic matter such as leaves and
lawn clippings, all result in nutrients in storm water runoff. Consumer use of
excessive herbicide or pesticide contributes toxic chemicals to runoff. Homeowners
will be educated as to the proper application of fertilizers and herbicides to lawns
and gardens.
The average household contains a wide variety of toxins such as oil/grease,
antifreeze, paint, household cleaners and solvents. Homeowners will be educated
as to the proper use, storage, and disposal of these potential storm water runoff
contaminants.
Per the RWQCB Order, the following housekeeping activities are deemed unlawful
and are thus prohibited:
Discharges of wash water from the cleaning or hosing of impervious surfaces
including parking lots, streets, sidewalks, driveways, patios, plazas, and
. outdoor eating and drinking areas (landscape irrigation and lawn watering, as
well as non-commercial washing of vehicles in residential zones, is exempt
from this restriction).
DE:djg h:lreportsI2352l176\sWmp-fe-02.doC
w.o. 2352·178 719120rtT 2:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
Discharges of pool or fountain water containing chloride, biocides, or other
chemicals
Discharges or runoff from material storage areas containing chemicals,
fuels, grease, oil, or other hazardous materials
Discharges of food-related wastes (grease, food processing, trash bin
wash water, etc.).
6.3 -Automobile Use
Urban pollutants resulting from automobile use include oil, grease, antifreeze,
hydraulic fluids, copper from brakes, and various fuels. Homeowners will be
educated as to the proper use, storage, and disposal of these potential storm water
contaminants.
Per the RWQCB Order, the following automobile use activities are deemed unlawful
and are thus prohibited: .
Discharges of wash water from the hosing or cleaning of gas stations,
auto repair garages, or other types of automotive service facilities.
Discharges resulting from the cleaning, repair, or maintenance of any type
of equipment, machinery, or facility including motor vehicles, ·cement-
related equipment, port-a-potty servicing, etc.
Discharges of wash water from mobile operations such as mobile
automobile washing, steam cleaning, power washing, and carpet c1eC:ming.
The Homeowners Association will make all homeowners aware of the
aforementioned RWQCB regulations through a homeowners' education program
(note: examples are from the City of Carlsbad). Homeowners should be notified via
HOA newsletter prior to the rainy season (Oct. 1st) of storm water requirements.·
6.4 -Integrated Pest Management (lPM) Principles
Integrated pest management (I PM) is an ecosystem-based pollution prevention
strategy that focuses on long-term prevention of pests or their damage through a
combination of techniques such as biological control, habitation manipulation,
modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant plant varieties. Pesticides are
used only after monitoring indicates they are needed according to established .
guidelines. Pest control materials are selected and applied in a manner that
minimizes risks to human health, beneficial and non-target organisms, and the
environment. More information may be obtained at the UC Davis website
(http://www.ipn.ucdavis.eduIWATERlU/index.html). .
oe:djg n:\reporlSI23S2\1781swmp-re-02.doc
w.o.2352-178 7/91201J7 2:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
IPM is achieved via the following:
Common Areas:
'.
-Eliminate and/or reduce the need for pesticide use in the project design by:
(1) Plant pest resistant or well-adapted plant varieties such as native plants.
(2) Discouraging pests by modifying the site and landscape design.
Home Owners:
Educate homeowners on applicable pest resistant plants and native species
and also encouraging onsite landscaping design.
Pollution prevention is the primary "first line of defense" because pollutants
that are never used do not have to be controlled or treated (methods which
are inherently less efficient).
-Distribute IPM educational materials to future site residents/tenants.
Minimally, educational materials must address the following topics:
(1) Keeping pests out of buildings and landscaping using barriers, screens
and caulking.
(2) Physical pest elimination techniques, such as, weeding, squashing,
trapping, washing, or pruning out pests.
(3) Relying on natural enemies to eat pests.
(4) Proper use of pesticides as a last line of defense.
6.5 -Storm Water Conveyance Systems Stenciling and Signage
The proposed development will incorporate concrete stamping, or equivalent, of all
storm water conveyance system inlets and catch basins within the project area with
prohibitive language (e.g., "No Dumping -I Live in «name receiving water»"),
satisfactory to the City Engineer. Stamping may also be required in Spanish ..
6.6 -Efficient Irrigation Practices
All Home Owners' Association (HOA) maintained landscaped areas will include rain
shutoff devices to prevent irrigation during and after precipitation. Flow reducers
and shutoff valves triggered by pressure drop will be used to control water loss from
broken sprinkler heads or lines.
6.7 -Pet Ownership Responsibility
All open space areas will feature signage and pet waste collection bags to insure
that pet waste is collected, preventing any sources of potential bacterial pollutants.
DE:djg h:\reportsl23521178\,swmp-fe-02.doc
w.o.2352·178 7!9aOO72:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I"
I:
I'
I
I'
I
I
I
I VII
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
Chapter 7 -SITE DESIGN BMPS
7.1 -Site Design BMPs
Priority projects, such as the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 development,
shall be designed to minimize, to the maximum extent practicable the introduction of
. pollutants and conditions of concern that may result in significant impact, generated
from site runoff to the storm water conveyance system. Site design components can
significantly reduce the impact of a project on the environment.
7.2 -Minimize Impervious' Footprint
The following methods have been used to minimize impervious footprint:
Construct streets, sidewalks, and parking lots to. the minimum widths
necessary to be in accordance with standards set forth by the City of
Carlsbad. .
-Minimizing the number of residential street cul-de-sacs and, incorporate
landscaped areas to reduce their impervious cover.
Incorporating landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets.
7.3 -Conserve Natural Areas
The proposed La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 has been mass-graded 'per
the "Mass Graded and Erosion Control Plans for La Costa Oaks North
Neighborhood 3.6 & .7" by Hunsaker & Associates, dated February 2006. As such,
there is no natural area to conserve in ultimate developed conditions.
7.4 -Permeable Pavements
Site design BMP alternatives such as pervious pavements were also considered for
use Within the La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 project site. However, the
use of pervious pavements has several disadvantages such as:
Many pavement engineers and contractors lack expertise with this
technology. .' . '.
Porous pavement has a tendency to become clogged if improperly
installed or maintained. .
. Porous pavement has a high rate of failure.
Anaerobic conditions may develop in underlying soils if the soil is
unable to dry out between storm events. This may impede
microbiological decomposition.
DE:djg h:1rePCIISI235211781s'Mnp-fe-02.doc
w.o.2352·178 7/9120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
These factors listed influenced the decision to not include pervious pavements within
the site design.
7.5 -Minimize Directly Connected Impervious Areas
Methods of accomplishing this goal include:
Draining rooftops into adjacent landscaping prior to discharging to
the storm drain.
Draining roads, sidewalks and impervious trails into adjacent
landscaping.
The discharging roof drains to receiving swales will be implemented within all .
residential project lots. Rooftop runoff will be discharged to vegetated landscaped
areas on each residential lot, draining overland via the vegetated landscaping to the
receiving curb and gutter. This conveyance through the natural landscaping
provides passive treatment for these treatment flows.
7.6 -Protect Slopes & Channels
Methods of accomplishing this goal include:
Use of natural drainage systems to the maximum extent practicable.
Stabilize permanent channel crossings.
Planting native or drought tolerant vegetation on slopes.
Energy dissipaters, such as riprap, at the outlets of new storm drains,
culverts, conduits, or channels that enter unlined channels.
All slopes will be stabilized by erosion control measures. All outfalls will be equipped
with an energy dissipation device and/or a riprap pad to prevent erosion.
7.7 -Residential Driveways & Guest Parking
Runoff from all residential driveways is intercepted via the proposed curb and gutter
system, draining flows to the proposed 8MP 'Treatment Train" consisting of FloGard
Curb Inlet Filter units and CDS treatment units.
7.8 -Maximize Canopy Interception & Water Conservation.
Landscaping on site will incorporate the planting of native, drought tolerant
vegetation to meet this requirement.
DE:djg h:\repCJrtsl23521178\swmp-Ie-02.doc
w.o.2352-178 7/9120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
7.9 -Trash Storage Areas
Trash storage areas could be sources of bacteria pollutants. As such, all outdoor
trash container areas shall meet the following requirements. A "trash containment
area" refers to an area where a trash receptacle or receptacles are located for use
as a repository for solid wastes. Design for such areas will include:
-Paved with an impervious surface, designed not to allow run-on from
adjoining areas, screened or walled to prevent off-site transport of trash.
-Provide attached lids on all trash containers that exclude rain, roof or
awning to minimize direct precipitation.
It should be noted that no trash storage areas will be located on the La Costa Oaks
North Neighborhood 3.7 project site. _Each individual resident is to store trash in
their respective garage until weekly collection.
OE:djg h:1reportsl2352117B1swmp-fe-q2.doc
w,o.2352·178 71MOO72:21 PM
- - - - - - - - --. -... -. ........ - - - -
,:,',' • .1 .~. ~
::~. :'
:.' ','
:?';;;: .
:.~: :
" I'~ '.
f ...
.. ':
'.,,,
'" "
-;o'~
I~:";" ;
r(~'~ .. ;
'~~'."" .
NOT connected to sanitary sewer
systems and treatment plants? The
primary purpose of storm drains is to
carry rainwater away from developed
areas to prevent flooding. Untreated
storm water and the pollutants it
carries flow directly into creeks,
lagoons and the ocean.
In recent years, sources of water
pollution like industrial waters Tom
factories have been greatly reduced.
However, now the majority of water
pollution occurs from things like cars
leaking oil, fertilizers from farms and
gardens, failing septic tanks, pet waste
and residential car washing into the
storm drains and into the ocean and
waterways.
;,:i:,t·:·: All these sources add up ·to a pollution ... 1 ., :[.~;:<" ' .. problem! But each of us can do our
~~::>: . part to help clean up our water and
ott ,. :::i:':(.:,~. that adds up to a pollution solution!
~~;S~(:~·
;:;;~\i!t:' .' .
'II
l'~_" ,
! •••
State
Ecology, Kin
the cities of ... J"'.'.'."',v,.' ...... ' I$' "'rr.:cG1f~l-·i<.l"~_1 Seattle and
.:':'
- - ---
s no problem with washing your
,Most soap contains phosphates and
chemicals that harm fish and
quality. The soap, together with
r car, flows into nearby storm
which run directly into lakes,
excess algae to grow. Algae
{bad, smell bad, and harm water
. As algae de~ay, the process
up oxygen in the water that fish
o 0
o
o '?
-----------
ng a clean environment
of primary importance for
,'/)\.11\"::(11 1 waterways provide
opportunities,
rOl"ro~ti"n fish habitat and
our ocean, creeks and
ns clean by applying
tips:
se a hose nozzle with a trigger to
using engine and wheel
,.lo~norC! or degreasers.
Take your car to a commercial car
especially if you plan to clean
the engine or the bottom of YQur car .
Most car washes reuse wash water
several times before sending it t~ the
sewer system for treatment.
. .
. • Hire only mobile detail operators
that will c;apture wash water and
chemicals .. It is unlawful for
commercial veh~c~e washing'
operators to ~lIow wash water to
enter the storm drain system.
_ .. _---------
In the City of Carlsbad, storm drai"ns flow
directly into local creeks, lagoons and the
ocean without treatment. Storm water
pollution is a serious problem for our
natural environment and for people who
live near streams or wetlands. Storm
water poll ution comes from a variety of
sources including oil, fuel, and fluids,
from vehicles and heavy equipments,
, ,pesticide runoff from landscaping, and
from materials such as concrete and
mortar from construction activities. The
City of Carlsbad is committed to
improving water quality and reducing the
amount of poll utants tliat enter our
precious waterways.
A Clean Environment is
Important to AU of Usl
(il, ~;,' . City of Carlsbad
'~E~> 1635 Faraday Avenue
, "' Carlsbad, CA 92008
, Storm Water HOTline: 760-602-2799
stormwater@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
March 2003
- --.-- - - - - - - - - - - - -_.-
Pollution Prevention 'is up
to' YOU!
Did you know that storm drains are NOT
connected to sanitary sewer systems or
treatment plants? The primary purpose of
storm drains is to carry rainwater away
from developed areas to prevent flooding.
Untreated pollutants
such as concrete and
mortar flow directly
into creeks, lagoons
and the ocean and
are toxic to fish,
wildlife, and the,
. aquatic environment.
Disposing of these materials into storm
drains causes serious ecological
problems-and is PROHIBITED by law.
Do the job Right!
This brochure was' designed for do-it-
yourself remodelers, homeowners, masons
and bricklayers, contractors, and anyone
else who uses concrete or mortar to
complete a construction project. Keep
storm water protection in mind whenever
you or people you hire wqrk on your house
or propel1y. .
Best Management Practices
Best Management Practices
or BMPs are procedures and
practices that help to prevent
pollutants such as chemicals,
concrete, mortar, pesticides,
waste, paint, and other
hazardous materials from entering our storm
drains. All these sources add up to a
pollution problem. But each of us can do
our part to keep storm water clean. These
efforts add up to a pollution solution!
What YOU Can Do:
• Set up and operate small mixers on tarps
or heavy plastic drop cloths.
• Don't mix up more fresh concrete or
mortar than you will need for a project.
• Protect appl ications of fresh concrete
and mortar from rainfall and runoff until
the material has dried.
• Always store both dry and wet materials
under cover, protected from rainfall and
runoff and away from storm drains or
waterways.
• Protect dry materials from wind. Secure
bags of cQncrete mix and mortar after
they are open. Don't allow dry products
to blow into driveways, sidewalks,
streets, gutters, or storm drains.
• Keep all construction debris away from
the street, gutter and storm drains.
•
•
•
Never dispose of washout into the
street, storm drains, landscape drains, ..
drainage ditches, or streams. Empty
mixing containers and wash out chutes
onto dirt areas that do not flow to
streets, drains or waterways, or anow
material:to dry and dispose of properly.
Never wash excess material from
bricklaying, patio, driveway or sidewalk
construction into a street or storm drain ..
Sweep up and dispose of small amounts·
of excess dry concrete, grout, and
mortar in the trash.
Wash concrete or brick areas only'
when the wash water can 'flow onto a
.dirt area without further runoff or drain
onto a surface which has been be.rmed '.
so that the water and sol ids can be '
pumped off or vacuumed up for proper
disposal.' : .
•. Do not place fill material, soil or
compost piles on the sidewalk or street.
• .If you or y~ur contractor keep a
dumpster at your site, be sure it is
securely covered with a lid or tarp
when not in use.
• During cleanup, check the street and
.gutters for sediment, refuse, or debris.
. look around the corner or down the
street and clean up any materials that
may have already traveled away from
your property.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - --' - - - -
Did you know that storm drains are
NOT connected to sanitary sewer
systems and treatment plants? The
primary purpose of storm ,drains is to
carry rainwater away from developed
areas to prevent flooding.' Untreated
storm water and the pollutants it
carries, flow directly into creeks,
lagoons and the ocean.
In recent years, sources of water
pollution like industrial waters from
factories have been greatly reduced.
However now, the majority of water
pollution occurs from things like cars
leaking oil, fertilizers from farms, lawns
and gardens, failing septic tanks, pet
waste and residential car washing into
the'storm drains and into the ocean
and waterways.
All thesesou~ces add up to a pollution
problem! But each of us can do small,
things t9, help clean up our water and '
, that adds up to a pollution solution!
;!:~(~i'
Motor oil photo is used
courtesy of the Water
Quality Consortium, a
cooperative venture
hetween the Washington
State Department of
Ecology, King County and
the cities of Bellevue,
Seattle and Tacoma.
Only Rain in the Storm Drain!
City of Carlsbad
Storm Water Protection
Program
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad CA92008
Storm Water HOTline:
760-602-2799
Funded by a g'rant
from the California
Integrated Waste
It I~ c: Y C L 1\ Management ,Board
LJ S I', n 0 1 I.
l.~printed on recycled paper
Motor Oil
:Only Rain in the Storm Drain!
·'e. i'C:ity 'of 'CarlstJ~d"":';;';\:'i"
, .. , ' , '. ' , <,:.'~':,~.I,il,!;:'::,' ,.,,:t 0 rrp'~,~t'7rp rot e ~.t i () n"'~.i:,I~~t,\t .' '.,' .. " ..... ' .... ": ... ,", Program."!":,,,. . [' ,-(. "i:: ,-. :-. > I"',, ,i"':"',' 0' ,; ,,'''~.:'' ,": " ".:'··I.",r-~' Ii
Storm Water HOTline:
760-602~799
- - - - - - - - - --.-- - - - - - -
,
:.i
'.,
"!.'"....W'''·''·1;1''''''~I' .. WI''' •. ~'''·'.,,;;;.\?'"'..,.'.· .• '', ... ·"'I""""" . 'J"'".'''",,,,,,".\, '.l'lii .. !!li .. ~.",,?' "'t<;"".: ... ,~I".;,:,,,,. J'W.:' .. l .. '~~;;!;(I~' :"'... :"'I:_~~~ ,;mo..):.",." '~fr1t .. ~fYl t\~~,~l'" t "'. ;~t, ":'c~'l!.(,:'~" V~~ .• '. ' .•. ' ... ' .. \; .... ,r ..... . ,~\~'!t)[;W h'at.~s·~!tH:e?'pra 15 Ie m .W it h·~i~;''<r: ~'~10i~iim otor:o i I?'.:~i;'l:gi~;·::.i.;j\;/',·:: ·.i·,:·;,i" ", t,;1ii:1~.~t.,., "_,,,-,.,. ,,:,.,).'."h .,'" )iI\··,e."""jj.',\dk"t';\.o\'''!·"\~!'~·''\<'''I'f.·!·' ',-"",·-., .• ~ .. ,.,{,·.\.,'1·: '11~,:y,?!-,fii;("t !\-.!:~,t\'~!6;'.1!.'(!r~'.'!I~!:(;':r{-;~~Jr)\:;i!l~"''':~·;.:.o;~~;:).;,.~! ... il,~)" :"1 .' ,:. ,"'I;' " :f! -f-:' "-,' .. :' ~-.~~/j .. ,
Oil does not dissolve in water. It
lasts a long time and sticks to
everything from beach sand to bird
feathers. Oil and other petroleum
products are toxic to people, wildlife
and plants.
On~ pint of oil can make a slick
larger than a football field. Oil that
leaks from our cars onto roads and
driveways is washed into storm
drains, and then usually flows
directly to a creek or lagoon and
finally to the ocean.
Used motor oil is the largest single
source of oil pollution in our ocean,
creeks and lagoons. Americans spill
180 million gallons of used oil each
year into our waters.
This is 16 times the
amount spilled by the ~
EXxon Valdez in
Alaska.
, '
.' How can YOlJ help keep our environment clean?
. Having a clean environment
is of primary importance for
our health and economy.
Clean waterways provide
commercial opportunities,
recreation, fish habitat and
add beauty to our
landscape. YOU can help
keep our ocean, creeks and
lagoons clean by applying
the following tips:
• Stop drips. Check for oil
leaks regularly and fix them
promptly. Keep your ca~ tuned to
reduce oil use.
• Use ground cloths or drip pans
beneath your vehicle if you have leaks
or are doing engine work.
• Clean up spills immediately.
Collect all used oil in containers with
tight fitting lids. Do not mix different
engine fluids.
• When you change your oil,
dispose of it properly. Never dispose ..
of oil or other engine fluids down the
storm drain, on the ground or into a
ditch.
. • Recycle used motor oil. There
are several locations in Carlsbad that
accept used motor oil. 'For hours and
locations, call 760-434-2980.
• Buy recycled ("refined") motor oil
to use in your car.
- ---- -
, ,
.~ ,
Did you know that storm drains are
NOT connected to sanitary sewer
systems and treatment plants? The
primary purpose of storm drains is to
carry rainwater away from developed
,"" I areas to prevent flooding. Untreated
:/,::':' .'-".;:: . storm water and the pollutants it
carries, flow directly into creeks,
;.:;'::, ",'" lagoons and the ocean.
r-~: ;'~": , ,':, .,'
Ii;:,:' :",'~::::,,;,< In recent' years, sources of water
<':,'~: >.::~.:.:.: '"
;(!;' ;i:;;'~ '.':~":, ;, pollution like industrial waters from
!~:.,,:':",I".:'::'<::: ',)'.. '-" ;',::'~\~:\.factories have been greatly reduced . ...... .
J..!f\\A'C\/cr now, the 'majority of water
,:, pollution occurs from things like cars
" '
:.':-: :,Ie.aking oil,· fertilizers from farms and
>ga,rdens, failing septic tanks, pet waste
residential car washing into the
drains and into the ocean and
fill'tI'\CCC sources add l!P to a p'ollution
m! But each of us can do small
.... jngs to help clean up our water and
at adds up to a pollution solution!
- -----
Pet waste photo is used courtesy
of the Water Quality Consortium,
a cooperative venture between
the Was'hington State Department
of Ecology, King County and the
cities of Bellevue, Seattle and
Tacoma.
.", \(\ the SJ. .... \\' (0 q;.u 1'"'1)
~ ~lfl1' '. .A c:r "" I "1. o .-:, J.~~'
(f) '~ .'M' ,I i ---2.. .-,,( ,~~ 9.. 'It ,\,w; E ~ , g
% f. , Q.~
('~rp , ~, roteC\\o
-Ti?!~~~&t;}·····
Storm Water HOTline: 760-602--2799 .
stormwater@>ci.carlsbad.ca.us
www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
1,\ .
t.~ 0(;..,\ Printed on recycled paper
/,:\:~:~:,'\~::~
-~; :":"!'~;;/}?;~:::" ; .. ::::>,:~::' " -
- ---
te is a health risk to pets and
especially children. It's a
in our neighborhoods. Pet
is full of bacteria that can make
into the storm drain and ends
r creeks, lagoons and ocean.
.' a ends up in shellfish living
:water bodies. People who
shellfish may get very sick.
~,ry. studies show that dog and
. can contribute up to 25% of
I bacteria found in our local
._nsible and clean up after .
It's as easy as 1-2-3!
nrnnorhl in toilet or
----------
a clean environment
primary importance for
, '
"Health and economy.
.'
opportunities,
, fish habitat and
ty to our
. YOU can help
r'creeks, lagoons
.clean by
following tips:
a plastic bag when
'pets and be sure to pick up
up pet waste in your yard
after your pets before
patios, driveways and
. surfaced areas. Never
waste into the street or
The best way to dispose of pet waste
is to fll,Jsh it down the toilet because
it getsjreated by a sewage treatment
plant. .
. Other disposal methods for pet ' .
. waste include sealing it in a bag and
placing in trash or burying small
quantities in your 'yard to
decompose. Be sure to keep it away
from v~getable gardens;
---.---------A Clean Environment is
Important to A'II ofUsJ
In the City of Carlsbad, storm
drains flow directly into local
creeks, lagoons and the ocean
without treatment. Storm water
pollution is a serious problem for
our natural environment and for
people who, live near streams or
wetlands.
St(;)rm water pollution comes from
ci variety of sources including oil,
fuel, and fluids, from vehicles and
heavy equipment, pesticide runoff
from landscaping, and from
materials such as concrete,
mortar and soil from construction
activities.
The City of Carlsbad is committed
to improving water quality and
~educing the amount of pollutants
that enter 'our precious
waterways.
E
Storm Water Protection Program
stormwater@ci.carlsbad.ca.,us
760-602-2799
City of Carlsbad
16,35 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
l ~ Printed all recycled paper
-------------------
'It's All Just Water I
Isn't It?
Although we enjoy the fun and relaxing times
ih them, the water used in swimming pools
and spas can cause problems for our creeks,
lagoons and the
, ocean if not
disposed of
properly: When
you drain your
swimming pool,
fountain or spa
'to the street, the high concentrations of
chlorine and other chemicals found in the
water flows directly to our storm drains.
Did you know that these storm drains are
NOT connected to sanitary sewer systems
and treatment plants? The primary purpose
of storm drains is to carry rainwater away
from developed areas to prevent flooding.
Improperly disposing of swimm,i!19 pool and
spa water into storm drains may be harmful
to the environment.
Best Management Practices
Best Management Practices or BMPs are
procedures that ~elp to prevent pollutants
like chlorine and sediment from entering our
storm drains. Each of us can do our part to
keep storm water clean. Using BMPs adds up
to ,a pollution solution!
How Do I Get Rid of Chlorine?
Pool and spa water may be discharged to the
storm drain if it has been properly
dechlorinated and doesn't contain other
chemicals. The good news is that chlorine
naturally dissipates over time. Monitor and
test for chlorine levels in the pool over a
period of 3 to 5 days. Drain the water
before algae starts to grow.
Consider hiring a professional pool service
company to clean your pool, fountain, or spa
and make sure they dispose of the water and
solids properly. For more information about
discharging wastewater to the sanitary
sewer, please
contact the
Encina
Wastewater
Authority at
(760) 438-
3941.
Before you discharge your swimming pool
or spa water to the storm drain, the
water:
• Must not contain chlorine, hydrogen
peroxide, acid, or, any other chemicals.
• Can not carry debris or vegetation.
• Should have an acceptable pH of 7-8.
• Can not contain algae or harmful bacteria
(no "green" present). -
• Flow must be controlled so that it does
not cause erosion problems.
Pool Filters
Clean filters over a lawn or other landscaped
area where the discharge can be absorbed.
Collect materials on filter cloth and dispose into
the trash. Diatomaceous earth cannot be
discharged into the street or storm drain
systems. Dry it out as much as possible, bag it
in plastic and dispose into the trash.
Acid Washing ,
Acid cleaning wash w,ater is NOT allowed into
the storm drains. Make sure acid washing is
done in a proper and safe manner that is not
harmful to people or the environment. It may be
discharged into the sanitary sewer through a
legal sewer connection after the pH has been
adjusted to no lower than 5.5 and no higher
than 11.
Do the Job Rightl
• Use the water for irrigation. Try draining
de-chlorinated pooJ water gradually o,nto a
landscaped area: Water discharged to
landscape must not cross propertY lines and
must ,not produce runoff.
• Do not' ~se copper-based algaecides.
, Control algae with chlorine or-other
. a,Iter-natives to-c.opper-bas~d pool chemicals.
Copper is' harmful fo the aquatic
environment.
• During pool construction, contain ALL
" materials and dispose of properly.
Materials such as cement, Gunite, mortar,
and sediment must not be discharged into
-the sto~m drains.
- -- -
r'~l'nnnected to sanitary sewer
and treatment plants?
purpose of stor.m drains
rainwater away from
areas to prevent flooding.
storm water and the
it carries, flow directly into
years, sources of water
like industrial waters from
have been greatly reduced.
now, the majority of water
occurs from things like cars
oil, fertilizers from farms and
failing septic tanks, pet
residential car washing into
sources add up to a pollution
But each of us can do small
help clean up our water aDd
up to a pollution solution!
- - ---
What's the problem with fertilizers
and pesticides?
Fertilizer isn't a problem-IF it's used
carefully. If you use too much
fertilizer or apply it at the wrong time,
it can easily wash off your lawn or
garden into storm drains and then
flow untreated into lakes or streams.
Just like in your garden, fertilizer in
lagoons and streams makes plants
grow. In water bodies, extra i:lrtilizer
can mean extra algae and aquatic
plant growth. Too much algae harms
water quality and makes boating,
fishing and swimming unpleasant. As
algae decay, they use up oxygen in
the water that fish and other wildlife
need.
- - ---
Fertilizer photo is used courtesy
of the Water Quality Consortium.
a cooperative venture between
the Washington State Department
of Ecology, King County and the
cities of Bellevue, Seattle and
Tacoma.
... \(\ tne Sf, ~'" Or.
.o<1? " ,/J) () 8 ~', i/J ~.
(J) ~,' ?.. '0 :~,,; E ~ g ~ Q,o?
I"l."r • :(\ ProteC\\O,
Storm Water HOTline: 760-602-2799
stormwater@ei.carlsbad.ca.us
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad CA 92008
www.ei.carlsbad.ca.us
i~~ Prinled on recycled paper
- ----
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --.-
opportunities, recreation,
and add beauty to our
YOU can help keep our
lagoons and ocean clean by
the following tips:
blow or rake leaves and other
waste into·the street or gutter.
yard waste or start your own
pile.
irrin~tion, soaker hoses or micro-
system and water early in the
consider adjusting your.
:'AI!ltoring method to a cycle and
Instead of watering for 15 .
'minutes straight, break up the . .
session into 5 minute intervals
allowing water to soak in before the
next application.
• Keep irrigation systems well-
maintained and water only when
needed to save money and prevent
over-watering.
• Use fertilizers and pesticides
sparingly.
• Have your soil tested to determine
the nutrients needed to maintain a
healthy lawn.
• . Consider using organic fertilizers-
they release nutrients more slowly.
• Leave mulched grass clippings on
the lawn to act as a natural fertilizer.
• Use pesticides only when absolutely
necessary. Use the least toxic
product intended to target a specific
pest, such as insecticidal soaps,
boric acid, etc. Always read the label
and use only as directed.
• Use predatory insects to control
harmful pests when possible.
• Properly dispose of unwanted
pesticides and fertilizers at
Household Hazardous Waste
collection facilities.
For more information on
landscape irrigation, please .
call 760-438-2722.
Master Gardeners
San Diego County has a
Master Gardener program
through the University of
California Cooperative
Extension. Master
Gardeners can provide good
about dealing with specific pests .
plants. You may call the Master :-.:
Gardener Hotline at 858-694-2860'
check out their website at
I
I
I
I
I'
I.
I
I
I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
vm
I··
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I····
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
CHAPTER 8 -OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE PLAN·
8.1 -Maintenance Requirements
Maintenance of the site BMPs will be 'the responsibility of the Home Owners
Association for La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7. A maintenance plan will be
developed and will include the following information:
Specification of routine and non-routine maintenance activities to be
performed
A schedule for maintenance activities
Name, qualifications, and contact information for the parties responsible for
maintaining the BMPs
For proper maintenance to be performed, the storm water treatment facility must be
accessible to both maintenance personnel and their equipment and materials.
8.1.1 CDS Treatment Units
Flow-based storm water treatment devices should be inspected periodically to
assure their condition to treat anticipated runoff. Maintenance of the proposed CDS
units includes inspection and maintenance 1 to 4 times per year.
Maintenance of the CDS units involves the use of a "vactor truck", which clears the
grit chamber of the treatment unit by vacuuming all the grit, oil and grease, and
water from the sump. Typically a 3-man crew is required to perform the
maintenance of the treatment unit.
Proper inspection includes a visual observation to ascertain whether the unit is
functioning properly and measuring the amount of deposition in the unit. Floatables
should be removed and sumps cleaned when the sump storage exceeds 85 percent
of capacity specifically, or when the sediment depth has accumulated within 6 inches
of the drY-weather water level. The rate at which the system collects pollutants will
depend more heavily on site activities than the size of the unit.
The operational and maintenance needs of a CDS unit include:
Inspection of structural integrity and screen for damage.
Animal and vector control.
Periodic sediment removal to optimize performance.
Scheduled trash., debris and sediment removal to prevent obstruction.
The facility will be inspected regularly and inspection visits will be completely
documented.
OE:djg h:ltepotlsl2352\1781swmp.fe-02.doe
w.o.2352·178 7/9120012:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
Preventive maintenance activities to be instituted at a CDS are:
Trash and Debris Removal -trash and debris accumulation will be monitored
during both the dry and wet season and after every large storm event (rainfall
events in excess of 1 inch). Trash and debris will be removed from the CDS
unit annually (a~ the end of the wet season). Trash and debris will also be
removed when material accumulates to 85% of CDS unit's sump capacity, or
when the floating debris is 12 inches deep (whichever occurs first).
Sediment Removal -sediment accumulation will be monitored during both the
wet and dry season, and after every large storm (1.0 inch). Sediment will be
removed from the CDS unit annually (at the end of the wet season).
Sediment will also be removed when material accumulates to 85% of CDS
unit's sump capacity, or when the floating debris is 12 inches deep (whichever
occurs first). Disposal of sediment will comply with applicable local, county,
state or federal requirements.
Corrective maintenance is required on an emergency or non-routine basis to correct
problems and to restore the intended operation and safe function of a CDS unit.
Corrective maintenance activities include:
Structural Repairs -Once deemed necessary, repairs to structural
components of a CDS unit will be completed within 30 working days.
Qualified individuals (Le., the manufacturer representatives) will conduct
repairs where structural damage has occurred.
8.2 -Schedule of Maintenance Activities
8.2.1 -CDS Treatment Units
Target Maintenance Dates -June 15th and August 15th, Bimonthly Inspections
June through September (Dry Season Inspections)
Maintenance Activity -Regular inspection to ensure that unit is functioning
properly, has not become clogged, and does not need to be cleared out.
Target Maintenance Dates -15th of each month; Monthly inspections October
through May (Rainy Season Inspections)
Maintenance Activity -Regular inspection to ensure that unit is functioning
properly, has not become clogged, and does not need to be cleared out. Creck unit
within 24 hours of rainfall event.
Target Maintenance Date -May 15th
Maintenance Activity -Annual inspection and cleanout, clear grit chamber unit with
vactor truck, perform visual inspection, and remove f1oatables.
For proper maintenance to be performed, the storm water treatment facility must be
accessible to both maintenance personnel and their equipment and materials.
DE:djg h:\repOrt51235211781swmp-Ie-ll2.doc
w.o.2352·178 71fJ120072:21 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan'
8.3 -Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs
The following costs are intended only to .provide a magnitude of the costs involved in
maintaining BMPs. Funding shall be provided by the HOA for the La Costa Oaks
North Neighborhood 3.7 development.
8.3.1 -CDS Treatment Units
-Periodic Inspection, Maintenance and Monitoring = $800 x 2
-Annual Clean out Cost = $1,000 x 2
CDS Subtotal = $3,600
10% Contingency = $360
Approximate Total Annual Maintenance Costs = $3,960
TOTAL BMP ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COSTS = $3,960
..
OE:djg h:\reportsl235211781swmp-Ie-02.doc
w.o.2352·178 7/9120072:21 PM
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
I
I'
1
1
1
1 IX
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
Storm Water Management Plan
Chapter 9 -FISCAL RESOURCES
9.1 -Agreements (Mechanisms to Assure Maintenance)
There are multiple flow-based 8MP treatment units within the proposed La Costa
Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 development for storm water quality treatment.
Funding for the water quality treatment devices will be provided by the La Costa
Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7 HOA. The La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7
HOA will be responsible to perform the maintenance activities and to ensure
adequate funding.
The City of Carlsbad Watershed Protection, Stormwater Management, and
Discharge Control Ordinance require ongoing maintenance of BMPs (see City of
Carlsbad BMP Maintenance agreement) to ensure the proper function and operation
of theses BMPs. The treatment unit will require maintenance activities as outlined in
Section 8 of this report.
DE:dJQ h:\teports123SZl17B1swmpofe-02.doc
w.o.2352·178 7/10120074:24 PM
50 0 50 IDa 150 ~~~S:CA~L~E 1~1'·-5~0~' _~I ~~~~I
" "
LEGEND
WATERSHED
FLOWLINE
NODES
, ",
BROW DITCH
''''
-----..
(
BOUNDARY
NODES
/
/
'>('-.
---:,:>~ <
-
.-/
,
/
.-.-
1
I 596,B I
2
I 59B,O I
;-,--
" /
3
1599.31
LOT
1602,01
4
'j600'61
"
, , , ,
!,' ,
,'/ , ,
5
1601,B I
1.9 ACRES
/ ; ,
/ / , , '
/
6
1602,BI 7
8
1605,BI
. ~-, ,", -,
-'-,. , ~ '<.:-' ~-.. ---.,,~,
. " ---:';', .. -'.
"
.-
.-
,16
1623-8 I
15
14
1622,91
1622-41
H&A 7!9I'2007
, , ,
/
/
/
)
,
!
" '
17 18
1624,91
-.......;..~-
-... ------
21
1622.91
22
1622,51
, 23
"1622.11
-----'---
/
, , <---:: .'
" ')
, '\ ' ,,,
19
49
/
'.
32
1641.51'
31
164051
49
ADA 'OPEN -SPACE
'3.9, ACRES
/
37
1639.91
38
1639.51
--A-2 FIRE"
, PROTE:CT1()N"
ZONE"" '"
--"
, "49'
HO/J,.OPEN
.-J.9ACRES
/
/
VICINITY MAP
/
" "
-"''', ;~ ':::; -' ..... ,-
",
/
!
!
/
NTS
/
/
, ' . ,
, . ..
/
/ /
/ / /
/
! / /
/
/
/
~ " ."' ~-~ ....
/ '/ ~';"
,
/
:
PREPARED BY: DEVELOPED CONDITIONS HYDROLOGY MAP
PlANNING
ENGINEERING
SURVEYING
HUNSAKER
& ASSOCIATES
SAN DIEGO, INC
10179 Huenneken5 Street
San Diego, Ca 92121
PH(S58)5584S00· FX(858)558-1414
FOR ' ,
LA COSTA OAKS NORTH
NEIGHBORHOOD '3.7'
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
Ro'\0712\&'Hycl\ 712$H04-DEV -FINAL.dwg[ 1275JJul-09-2007,15,36
r